Contents
- 1 WP:WEB
- 2 Unreasonable reverts
- 3 Infoboxes
- 4 UnitedMasters Stub
- 5 Why so many moths on Wikipedia?
- 6 Huggle
- 7 de:Josephine Saxton
- 8 Problems with a citation in wikitext
- 9 Username Change
- 10 Citing Podcasts from iTunes?
- 11 Getting a Page Edited Without Knowing Wiki's Code Language
- 12 Upload Question: Two documents that are from 1860's
- 13 Article declined
- 14 Bi-lingual contributors/contributions
- 15 ABP Ganga
- 16 Follow-up to The Wikipedia Adventure is irresponsive
- 17 Linking to other language article
- 18 Question about an external link
- 19 Font
- 20 How often does "What links here" get refreshed?
- 21 SSBFWU123
- 22 Review my first created business page
- 23 lack of event notability based on independent coverage by reliable sources
- 24 Why cant I update my hospital statistics?
- 25 Follow-up to Please help me improve my draft submission on Jem Bendell
- 26 Please can you help to review my proposed edits on the talk page of Talk:Dona Bertarelli and fr:Discussion:Yann Guichard
- 27 Wikimedia Foundation create account
- 28 Revert
- 29 hey
- 30 Watchlist
- 31 Wikipedia article/topic
- 32 Last edit
- 33 Inappropriate comments in an entry https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacchus
- 34 6 months
- 35 Vandalism/Spam?
- 36 Wikipedia and fonts
- 37 Help with non reliable sources
- 38 WHAT IS AN INAPPROPRIATE EDIT?
- 39 Infobox overload
- 40 What Is name of anolis
- 41 The Orchard (company)
- 42 A way in itself on how to spot a potential bad editor.
- 43 Reply to Worldbruce
- 44 Article submitted
- 45 My User Page Was Deleted
- 46 How to Protect page
- 47 Title issue
- 48 Is an article Title change required?
- 49 Help for DYK
- 50 Added an already-existing image to an article, a bot removed it, not sure why
- 51 Formatting roman numerals
- 52 Hi
- 53 How do I delete an image?
- 54 Adding content to a stub
- 55 Can someone help me please? I need an update to my site...
- 56 If i make a donation to wikipedia can you get my article published a little faster?
- 57 Disputed information in sources
- 58 Illogical lead sentence of Wikipedia:Reliable sources
- 59 This article provides insufficient context
- 60 Question about Huggle
- 61 iTunes chart
- 62 Inline citations
- 63 Guidance on Tweaks for Submission
- 64 Capitol Records session personnel lists 1950s/60s
- 65 Template
- 66 William Stark (physician)#Death and legacy Was he seen as "mad," leading to the phrase " Stark-raving mad."?
- 67 Discussion Location
- 68 Narrow focus and inaccuracies in General Motors Streetcar Conspiracy
- 69 The SPI box
- 70 Can you make your own wiki page?
- 71 Creating a page on Wikipedia
- 72 ROSALIND FULLER
- 73 Editing tables
- 74 How can I upload a Google Drive link or Facebook link where public can view it on my profile without being asked to login?
- 75 Meaning of "esp."
- 76 Ruquaiyya begam was malika-e-hindustan
- 77 Editing A Photo
Hi, I have recently created GEAPSU for Steven Benjamin Damelin, a well known academic. The article providers correct references for everything. The article is not long. It is short and factual. By looking at Damelin on the web it is clear immediately how well known he is. Myself (George Andrews) have compared my page with 100's others in academia and find Damelin's article much better in most cases. The later articles lack references in many ways. Can you erdit this articlke and accept it? Thank you very much. Geapsu (talk) 17:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
WP:WEB
WP:WEB can be tricky, if a source is IN (=used on various pages) it might pass as RS, if it's OUT (not used) it generally fails as RS, a chicken or the egg issue. If a website exists for years, is "noted" by reliable independent 3rd party sources, but not (yet) used, how can the notability be checked here? I'm aware of w:de:Relevanzcheck, but w:de:Relevance is not exactly the same idea as w:en:Notability. Two cases I'm currently interested in:
The HYpocriteDEsign magazine looks good for me, it's used as source outside of enwiki (~7 pages on google:Hypocritedesign), two uses on enwiki, not counting Talk:Hypocrite (disambiguation)#HyocriteDesign.
Harder, Sara Doucette has a website hellothemushroom.com, noted by some 3rd parties,[1][2][3][4] and one of her irregular book reviews was quoted by Amazon in an "editorial review" (NOT customer review). I'm not hot about this source, I added it, somebody else removed it after discussing the issue, fine. But I'm still curious if her site actually is notable and unreliable simultaneously, so far I thought that this is a stunt for The Sun, The Examiner, Breitbart, CNET, or similar crap, not mostly harmless living persons. –84.46.52.48 (talk) 19:37, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- The archive bot moved that to 930, but I'm actually still waiting for an answer or a better suggestion, maybe WP:RS/N? –84.46.52.44 (talk) 22:05, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- @84.46.52.44: To be honest with you, I don't entirely understand what you're asking. Based on your post to the Hypocrite talk page, I think what you're trying to ask is whether a source can be reliable while not also having a Wikipedia article about that source? If so, that's true - a site can be reliable but not necessarily be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article, as notability and reliability are two different concepts. And as you've noted website can be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article and not reliable enough to use as a citation on Wikipedia. Are you trying to create an article for HelloTheMushroom? SportingFlyer T·C 05:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- No, I tried to use a book review published by her on the The Mismade Girl redirect target. What I don't get is how a site so far not used as source on enwiki can be recognized as RS. It this like the Internet in the 90s, if you're IN you're IN, and otherwise you can't get IN? Is the only way to get IN some guerilla tactics, use a site here and there as source, and if nobody intervenes decree that it is "obviously" a RS, because it's then used as source on some pages? –84.46.52.195 (talk) 21:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- @84.46.52.195:I wanted to chime in to hopefully give you some clarity on the matter. I think your confusion rests mostly on this one statement: "WP:WEB can be tricky, if a source is IN (=used on various pages) it might pass as RS," This is false. A source's use in other Wikipedia articles is 100% unrelated to whether it is a reliable source or not. There have even been times when sources were widely used throughout Wikipedia, were declared unreliable after discussion, and then were blacklisted and removed from all instances. A source's reliability depends on how accurate it is, and you can refer to the policy (which you've already linked to) to find out what what constitutes a reliable source. Additionally, as another editor already explained, the policy WP:WEB has nothing to do with reliable sources. It is discusses whether a website is important enough to have its own article in Wikipedia. Notability guidelines differ a little from one kind of article to the next, but a subject can usually get it's own article if it's been widely talked about, written about, referenced, discussed from MAJOR third-party sources. I looked at your edits on the Sasha Grey article you mentioned, and you added a reference from Vice.com, and it's still there. I'm not sure why you said you "tried" to use a book review. Did you previously try to add a reference from a source that's been blacklisted, but couldn't save the edits? If that's the case, the site has been blacklisted after the community discovered the source is not reliable, and this is only done with particularly egregious sites.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:33, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll ignore WP:WEB+notability for my two RS questions: Hellothemushroom.com was the source added + later removed as not RS (after discussion) for her book review. I haven't tried hypocritedesign.com so far; both sites are unknown in the RS/N archives. –84.46.53.186 (talk) 11:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
- Plan B: Trial and error. –84.46.53.95 (talk) 03:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @84.46.52.195:I wanted to chime in to hopefully give you some clarity on the matter. I think your confusion rests mostly on this one statement: "WP:WEB can be tricky, if a source is IN (=used on various pages) it might pass as RS," This is false. A source's use in other Wikipedia articles is 100% unrelated to whether it is a reliable source or not. There have even been times when sources were widely used throughout Wikipedia, were declared unreliable after discussion, and then were blacklisted and removed from all instances. A source's reliability depends on how accurate it is, and you can refer to the policy (which you've already linked to) to find out what what constitutes a reliable source. Additionally, as another editor already explained, the policy WP:WEB has nothing to do with reliable sources. It is discusses whether a website is important enough to have its own article in Wikipedia. Notability guidelines differ a little from one kind of article to the next, but a subject can usually get it's own article if it's been widely talked about, written about, referenced, discussed from MAJOR third-party sources. I looked at your edits on the Sasha Grey article you mentioned, and you added a reference from Vice.com, and it's still there. I'm not sure why you said you "tried" to use a book review. Did you previously try to add a reference from a source that's been blacklisted, but couldn't save the edits? If that's the case, the site has been blacklisted after the community discovered the source is not reliable, and this is only done with particularly egregious sites.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:33, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- No, I tried to use a book review published by her on the The Mismade Girl redirect target. What I don't get is how a site so far not used as source on enwiki can be recognized as RS. It this like the Internet in the 90s, if you're IN you're IN, and otherwise you can't get IN? Is the only way to get IN some guerilla tactics, use a site here and there as source, and if nobody intervenes decree that it is "obviously" a RS, because it's then used as source on some pages? –84.46.52.195 (talk) 21:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- @84.46.52.44: To be honest with you, I don't entirely understand what you're asking. Based on your post to the Hypocrite talk page, I think what you're trying to ask is whether a source can be reliable while not also having a Wikipedia article about that source? If so, that's true - a site can be reliable but not necessarily be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article, as notability and reliability are two different concepts. And as you've noted website can be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article and not reliable enough to use as a citation on Wikipedia. Are you trying to create an article for HelloTheMushroom? SportingFlyer T·C 05:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Unreasonable reverts
On 7 April 2019, i did two edits here Special:diff/891304352 and here Special:diff/891305604. Firstly, i will be justifying my edits.
- The first one is intended to correct the english that is provided in the Gameplay section of the article. In the game, Aiden Pearce is a hacker who uses his smartphone to steal the money from others bank. But in the article, it was written that he empties others bank using his phone. Stealth is a different thing and emptying is different. He doesn't withdraws and throws the money out of the bank account, he steals it so the proposed form of english can be seen as far more appropriate. And about the second i want to say that "solving of puzzles" can mean really different things at the same time but if we explain it furthur as i have done in my second edit, then the readers can get more aware of what the game actually asks you to do and maintains WP:NPOV.
Now coming onto the main topic, an user named Cognissonance reverted both of my edits here Special:diff/891324688 and in the edit summary said "Mediocre". I'm not as much intelligent as these guys so i don't understand the reason behind my edits being rejected. And in fact, there is no reason to reject my edit (because there is no provision for reverting constructive minor edits). Can someone please tell him that Wikipedia is not the place for taking out your frustation. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 07:09, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- Levent Heitmeier. Please read WP:BRD. This is how Wikipedia works. You made some edits that you thought were improvements. Cognissonance thought they weren't, and undid them. Your next step is either to let it go, or to engage with that editor (either on the articles' talk pages, or on their user talk page) to try to reach consensus, not to appeal over that editor's head for somebody to "tell him" anything. Your opinion is of no greater weight - and no lesser weight - than any other editor. --ColinFine (talk) 08:13, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- JFTR, WP:BRD is an essay with its own #What_BRD_is_not section, and many folks supporting BRD miss the fine print: The B requires references in reliable sources, and the R requires an absence of references in reliable sources, anything else could be considered as vandalism, if there's no simultaneous D attempt. Lots of R without D removing good references is the worst side-effect of BRD. –84.46.53.95 (talk) 01:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- In this specific case what happened was BRC, as in an edit, a revert, and the person who did the edit came over here to Teahouse to complain. ColinFine's admonishment was valid. David notMD (talk) 11:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- JFTR, WP:BRD is an essay with its own #What_BRD_is_not section, and many folks supporting BRD miss the fine print: The B requires references in reliable sources, and the R requires an absence of references in reliable sources, anything else could be considered as vandalism, if there's no simultaneous D attempt. Lots of R without D removing good references is the worst side-effect of BRD. –84.46.53.95 (talk) 01:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- While having more Wikipedia experience is not a guarantee that an editor's edit is correct, be aware that Cognissonance has made more than 8,000 edits, including raising many video game articles to Good Article status. You can disagree with other editors, but a statement like "Can someone please tell him that Wikipedia is not the place for taking out your frustation." is not appropriate, in that it attacks the editor, not the edit. David notMD (talk) 10:00, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Infoboxes
Hi! I'm somewhat new to Wikipedia, and I've got a question about infoboxes.
How do you orient them on a page? For example, on this article, I want to orient the infoboxes so that the article is more visually pleasing (scroll to bottom to see them).
–Adamilo (talk) 21:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Adamilo, welcome to the Teahouse. What do you want to change? Wikipedia positions infoboxes floating to the right. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- PrimeHunter, in the "Notable recordings" section of Body and Soul (1930 song) I'd like to make the infoboxes smaller if possible so that they align with the information about them. –Adamilo (talk) 16:59, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Infoboxes are hard to alter since their present form has been endorsed by a large group of editors and can't be changed easily. The infobox template is what needs to be changed and it's doubtful that you will ever get a large group of editors to go along with that. I like your sense of design. I don't like all the templates on Wikipedia and I can't do a thing about it. I have created a number of plain vanilla templates myself and one of them exists on thousands of talk pages-I can't even alter that because other editors also work on it. Thank you for your Teahouse question. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 23:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- PrimeHunter, in the "Notable recordings" section of Body and Soul (1930 song) I'd like to make the infoboxes smaller if possible so that they align with the information about them. –Adamilo (talk) 16:59, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
UnitedMasters Stub
I've taken it upon myself to expand this stub on UnitedMasters and correct the maintenance template that is at the top of the article. Would someone be able to review my edits that I've made and maybe give me some pointers in the right direction? Hope the edits I made are okay. Grimothy29 (talk) 00:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi and thanks for visiting the Teahouse. This article reads like an advertisement. Marketing on Wikipedia will get an article deleted. The language must be neutral and include content from sources that are unaffiliated with the topic. So you can do two things. First, go back into the article and delete all the weasel words, see WP:WEASEL. I can help change the tone in the article into something neutral but I won't do it if that offends you. When it comes to articles like this, I routinely edit out the promotional language which usually results in the loss of content. It is up to you how you want to fix this. Good luck! If you want to contact me for further help on this then leave me a message on my talk page. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 22:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! Will check out WP:WEASEL per your advice. Also no worries about offending me, but I would definitely like to try this myself. I'll let you know if I have any questions. Grimothy29 (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Why so many moths on Wikipedia?
This was just something I noticed when using the random article function. I've even made a little game out of it. I'll press random until I get a page of a moth species. It seems like 1/100 or so pages are of moths. Is there a reason for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Froguy1126 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Because the lepidopterans are staggeringly diverse and constitute roughly 10% of all described species of organism. Your complaint is with evolution rather than with Wikipedia. ‑ Iridescent 06:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not complaining, I just found it interesting and was wondering if there was a reason for it. Thanks for your input! Froguy1126 (talk) 14:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse and thank you for your question. I believe that the WikiProject Beetles uses a bot to create articles on beetles. I think the estimate for the number of species of beetles on the planet is 200,000 or more. Other bots are probably doing the same thing. When you find an article during your editing that can be expanded or made longer, feel free to work on that article. I question that 1 percent of articles are about moths. I thought it was television plot summaries. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 22:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for your answer. I agree, I doubt it's 1%. I do wonder what percent it is though. Perhaps one day I could write a bot to count up the moth pages and find the actual percent, I think that'd be interesting. Froguy1126 (talk) 14:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Froguy1126: Category:Stub-Class Lepidoptera articles has 100,700 pages. Other article classes only add a few thousand. Lepidoptera includes butterflies and moths. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for your answer. I agree, I doubt it's 1%. I do wonder what percent it is though. Perhaps one day I could write a bot to count up the moth pages and find the actual percent, I think that'd be interesting. Froguy1126 (talk) 14:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Huggle
Hi greetings, when logging in to huggle which one should be used to login with normal username and password-Bot password or Legacy?--PATH SLOPU 09:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Path slopu, sorry for the late reply. I use legacy when using Huggle. Mstrojny (talk) 18:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
de:Josephine Saxton
Hi. The subject of the article above has no English-language entry on Wikipedia, so it seems to me the most efficient way to provide one would be to translate the German-language article, while retaining its (excellent) structure. Would that consitute a breach of the German author's copyright?
Thanks.
gyms — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyms (talk • contribs) 10:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- You'll frind translation advice at WP:Translation. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- When folks on dewiki translate enwiki texts to German, they often use some convoluted Special:Import process to get the complete enwiki edit history (for the credits) before they start the translation. I'm not aware of a similar procedure here, but Special:Import and Help:Transwiki exist.
Alternatively there's some talk page "translation" template to get an interwiki permalink to the original version in the talk page header, but I forgot where I saw that, sorry. –84.46.53.95 (talk) 00:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Problems with a citation in wikitext
I am having problems with a citation here. Scroll down to Ronneby Municipality. Down near the bottom is Gammelstorps kyrka, which should be under it's own heading of Sölvesborg Municipality (and is when you edit the page). I am having problems with the citation for the building dates of the church (which also doesn't show on the regular page, but does on the edit page). No matter what I do, the < ref > and < /ref > (without the spaces) tags mess up the formatting. I have copied and pasted this onto another page, where it works fine. I thought the problem might be the link, so I tried just the title of the citation, without the link, but the same thing still happens. When I take the citation completely out, the page goes missing! I also have to remove the second citation for the page to display properly. I have copied the whole text from another page (see link above), and I still have the problem. I'm missing something, but I can't see it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aurornisxui (talk • contribs)
- @Aurornisxui: Partial reply: It'll be an issue with the table above, as I see the closing curly bracket of that higher table is not being recognised. That suggests an imbalance, like a failure to close a bracket, or some other small but significant element of the table missed off, causing an imbalance. I can't spot it immediately (and have to nip off to serve family dinner now). Hopefully another editor might see it. If not, I'll look later for you. (A trick is to selectively delete elements above the problem, saving each as you go, and looking for the point where the lower table correctly displays again. Then you can revert back to full table and correct the minor typo that is causing the problem.)Nick Moyes (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: Thanks so much! I'm guessing the last church of Ronneby because everything before that was fine and there are a couple of things I wasn't sure of. Sorry about forgetting to sign my post. Aurornisxui (talk) 16:57, 8 April 2019 (UTC) ETA Got it! Unclosed ref tag above. Everything ok, now, thanks again for looking. Aurornisxui (talk) 17:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Aurornisxui: Glad to see you fixed it - a missing closing reference command, it seems. Did you use 'syntax highlighting' to help you? If you didn't, next time try the little highlighter pen symbol just left of the "Advanced" option in the tools menu which adds different colours to links, references and templates, and is extremely useful when trying to distinguish different elements of a paragraph. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes:. No, I didn't know about that! Thanks that will really come in handy. Aurornisxui (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Aurornisxui: Glad you like it. It struck me that it might be worth publicising a bit more, so I've just proposed it as a new Tip of the Day. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: Excellent, I've bookmarked that. Is there a way to vote "yes, I'd like this" ?Aurornisxui (talk) 14:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Aurornisxui: I'm very new to contributing at Tip of the Day, but I don't think any '!vote' is necessary. I think the active editors there, such as JoeHebda, The Transhumanist and others, just assess whether or not it has merit, and then tweak it to fit. At the moment, my mockup uses example text that is far too long to fit into the small TotD box. But you can easily add their tips box to your user page with one of a number of templates, such as
{{totd}}
or{{totd b}}
. They're well-worth browsing through for other neat ideas! Nick Moyes (talk) 14:19, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Aurornisxui: I'm very new to contributing at Tip of the Day, but I don't think any '!vote' is necessary. I think the active editors there, such as JoeHebda, The Transhumanist and others, just assess whether or not it has merit, and then tweak it to fit. At the moment, my mockup uses example text that is far too long to fit into the small TotD box. But you can easily add their tips box to your user page with one of a number of templates, such as
- @Nick Moyes: Excellent, I've bookmarked that. Is there a way to vote "yes, I'd like this" ?Aurornisxui (talk) 14:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Aurornisxui: Glad you like it. It struck me that it might be worth publicising a bit more, so I've just proposed it as a new Tip of the Day. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: Thanks so much! I'm guessing the last church of Ronneby because everything before that was fine and there are a couple of things I wasn't sure of. Sorry about forgetting to sign my post. Aurornisxui (talk) 16:57, 8 April 2019 (UTC) ETA Got it! Unclosed ref tag above. Everything ok, now, thanks again for looking. Aurornisxui (talk) 17:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Greetings (Aurornisxui—Nick Moyes) - In addition to Alpha list of tips mentioned above, there is here the tips library by subject. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @JoeHebda: Thanks, I'll look at that. Aurornisxui (talk) 16:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes: Thanks again! I just used this and decided to just leave it always on. It truly helps me see what is going on on the page! Aurornisxui (talk) 16:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Username Change
Do you still get notifications under your old username if you request a username change? –Adamilo (talk) 17:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Adamilo: What a good question! . I really don't know the answer, but shall we find out?
- Just reply with a ping to my old username, Parkywiki, (by including this text: {{re|Parkywiki}} and I'll let you know if I get an alert. (Don't include the 'nowiki' commands if these are visible to you - they're just to help me display the correct text here) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Parkywiki: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamilo (talk • contribs) 23:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Adamilo:That ping won't have worked, as you forgot to sign it. Let's try this: @Parkywiki: --David Biddulph (talk) 04:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Adamilo and David Biddulph: No notification received from David's mention of my old username, so it looks like the answer is 'No'. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:49, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Adamilo:That ping won't have worked, as you forgot to sign it. Let's try this: @Parkywiki: --David Biddulph (talk) 04:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Parkywiki: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamilo (talk • contribs) 23:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Citing Podcasts from iTunes?
Before I get into my question I will need to give a little background on what I'm doing. For a while now I have been working on expanding an article on the 1990 film Begotten via a separate userspace draft and recently I have come across some sources of information given in podcast interviews with the film's writer/director. The first question I have is can I use them and which template should I use for them considering the information given is at various points in the podcast interview? In one such podcast, the original link is still up but the podcast is no longer available on the link but is available on iTunes, so the question I have for that is how would I go about using that source if I am able to do so? Original Link for "dead" url: https://ultraculture.org/blog/2015/12/20/e-elias-merhige/ iTunes url (episode #40):https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/ultraculture-with-jason-louv/id1060199031?mt=2 Much help with this would be appreciated.--Paleface Jack (talk) 17:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, Paleface Jack. Welcome. Unless the website on which a podcast appears has been blacklisted, and assuming that the podcast itself can be regarded as a reliable source, you should probably use
{{cite podcast}}
. This lets you insert the times in a podcast where relevant content appears. Just click that link to go to the template page to read the full documentation. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)- Hello, Paleface Jack. Also remember that an interview with the writer/director is a primary source, so there are limits on how it may be used. --ColinFine (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
What are the limits?--Paleface Jack (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Paleface Jack: The limits are explained at WP:PRIMARY, part of which states:
"A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source."
Thus you may use the podcast by the writer/director to present simple facts such as what the writer said were his intentions for the film, or how long it took to film, but not to support statements about how society has interpreted their work - that needs secondary sources that are independent of the writer, even if the director has voice their opinion on how other have interpreted it. If in doubt, leave it out. Does that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 10:58, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. This helps me immensely! Wish me luck...--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Getting a Page Edited Without Knowing Wiki's Code Language
Hi,
My question is this: I am not savvy enough to learn the language necessary to edit Wiki pages. Is there any way to work around this problem if I see a page has inaccurate information? Is there anyone out there - whether from Wikipedia itself or elsewhere - to whom I could submit/report the inaccuracies and/or offer suggested edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1304:452:3986:3D09:8B53:ADBE (talk) 17:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yes. First, create an account and then follow the instructions at Wikipedia:VisualEditor to enable the Visual Editor. --Jayron32 17:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Also, rather than trying to edit the article, you can post your concern on the article's talk page (every article has one, though in some cases it hasn't been created yet: you can still create it). But that will still require you to do some editing, though. --ColinFine (talk) 18:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Also, when you find a mistake, correct it! That is what I do. Discussing changes to an article on the article's talk page may or may not get the attention of other editors. If no one responds in a reasonable amount of time, then go ahead and make the corrections yourself. Please don't add content to the article unless you have sources to back up the content. I am still learning the wikicoding myself after years of editing. Thanks for visiting the Teahouse. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 21:26, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Upload Question: Two documents that are from 1860's
Hi My name is Kirstyn and I wanted to know if I can upload two documents to the Benjamin Bradley article. I am working on editing it. I was e-mailed two documetns from an archivist at the Naval Academy which are 1) 1900 U.S.Census form with Benajmin's info and the other is a 1865 newspaper clipping from he "African Respository" which shares some interesting info on what he was achievng at the Naval Academy. Can I upload these ,or will there be a licensing or copyright conflict? Or a diffrerent conflict that I am unaware of? Thank youKaprager (talk) 19:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC)Kaprager
- Hi Kirsyn and thanks for your question. How did you want to upload the the image files? The can be uploaded to to: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and if you it that way, you will also be making these images available to the other language Wikipedias. Have you ever uploaded image files before? Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 21:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there ,thnk you for your response. I am not sure I asked the question correctly, I wanted to make sure that by downloading the 1900 U.S. Census and newspaper clipping from 1865 would be safe with regards to copyright licensing? Thank you, Kaprager (talk) 22:43, 8 April 2019 (UTC)kaprager
Article declined
Hi There,
I recently posted a bio on career coach and author Adele Scheele, which was declined. I was told I needed citations and reliable sources. Does this mean I just need footnotes and references to her books, quotes and career endeavors? Thank you in advance for your help! - Suzy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suzarella90210 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Suzarella90210: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. What you need are independent reliable sources that support the content of the article. Wikipedia articles are not just for telling the world about someone, they summarize what independent reliable sources state about them with indepth coverage and indicate how they are notable as defined by Wikipedia(for people, that is defined at WP:BIO). If you don't have such sources, the person would not merit an article at this time. As you have found, successfully creating an article is difficult. If you haven't already, you should read Your First Article and maybe also use the new user tutorial to better understand the process. 331dot (talk) 19:43, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Bi-lingual contributors/contributions
Hello et bonjour!
I am bi-lingual (English/French) and I find that a lot of information in the English or French version of an entry does not get translated at all in the French or English version. That is understandable, of course. But it would be much easier for people like me -- bi-lingual -- to contribute to BOTH entires in English and French if I didn't have to log OFF the English site to go to the French site.
Does this make sense?
Is there anyway to program the site so that I might be able to move from English to French and vice versa without logging off and logging on in the other language?
Or maybe I am missing something altogether and there already is a fix for this.
Thanks for your help.
Bicjic (talk) 19:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Bonsoir @Bicjic:, and welcome to the Teahouse! You should not have to log out - you can use unified login, provided the French user called Bicjic is also you. If you click on this link, your accounts should be automatically unified, if they are not already. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- GENIAL, et merci pour la reponse super vite.
I will merge the accounts. Very helpful!
Bicjic (talk) 20:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
ABP Ganga
Few days back, I have created a article, called ABP Ganga, a upcoming television channel in India, which will be launched on 15th April. I have added a authentic source here... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABP_Group But, currently the page has been deleted from here. Don't know why. If it seems, page should be needed then brings my created ABP Ganga page, I have to edit something there. Or allow me to create a new page for same topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiWiki5678 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @WikiWiki5678: The article was redirected, not deleted. [[5]] It may be WP:TOOSOON for the channel to have its own article. I'm curious - you said you created the article yet another editor shows in the editing history. Please read Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Till now, I m unable to find that article. Is that article gone or out of reach from general people? Or will I create another new page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiWiki5678 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @WikiWiki5678: The article was redirected because the TV channel is not (yet) notable enough for an individual article. Do not create another article about the channel - if and when it becomes notable, somebody who is not connected to the company will probably create an article about it. Again, are you the original creator of the article ABP Ganga? Finally, please address the issue of conflict of interest on your user talk page (there is some important information at the bottom of your talk page, which you need to read and respond to). --bonadea contributions talk 07:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
No, I am not the author of this article. So what? I found that article few days back when I was going to create. But after that, when I had needed to edit the page, I searched the page, writing ABP Ganga, but all the time, ABP Group page had come instead of ABP Ganga. Help me to find the page, I have edit there something.WikiWiki5678 (talk) 09:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @WikiWiki5678: The page you call ABP Ganga no longer exists as a separate page, but was turned into a WP:REDIRECT which now takes users to ABP Group. Follow this link to see how the page did look before it was redirected. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:48, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Is there any chance to remove this redirect link and making a way for ABP Ganga? Or ABP Ganga article is not allowed here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiWiki5678 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Do you have difficulty understanding English? Read what Bonadea told you above. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Follow-up to The Wikipedia Adventure is irresponsive
In response to the comment sent to my talk page, I'm open to the 30mins interview as a potential member of Objective Review Evaluation Source (ORES) and I'm in consonance with the use of algorithms and AI to improve Wikipedia, curbing vandalism, newcomers protectionil etc
Ohanwe Emmanuel .I. (talk) 20:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Ohanwe Emmanuel .I.: To respond and to offer to take part in the ORES interview, you will need to reply directly to Bowen on your userpage. Just make sure you include his username and that you sign your reply at the same time with four tildes (like this: ~~~~) when you publish your response. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:36, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Linking to other language article
Can you explain or describe on how to link other Wikipedia language article link with English Wikipedia ? Like for example, if there is an article in French Wikipedia of a particular person, how do we link it with English wikipedia for that article, which does not exist in English Wikipedia ? It is something like "ARTICLE (FR)" BookWorm767 (talk) 3:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Try Template:Interlanguage link. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Question about an external link
Hi, I am editing about a person and would like to link to their faculty page as their website. The link for there faculty page is as follows:
https://www1.wne.edu/law/faculty-and-staff/faculty.cfm?uid=520
Wikipedia seems to have a problem with using this as a website target. I think it is having trouble parsing it when it gets to the question mark. Is there a way I can use this as a valid target for an external link?
Here is the link to my sandbox page--this link is at the bottom of the officholder infobox in case you want to see what it is doing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Artie_Berns/sandbox
Artie Berns (talk) 22:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi there, Artie Berns The trick to solving problems like these is to find which actual template the infobox is using (i.e.
{{url}}
) and then go and read through its documentation. It reqires parameters 1= and 2= for the hyperlink and display text, which you weren't using. It certainly wasn't a problem with the url itself. I also fixed the References section and the External links section, the latter needing each line to begin with an asterisk, then have one square bracket followed immediately by the external url, then a single space, then display text followed immediately by a closing square bracket. See WP:EXTERNALLINKS for more details. Be advised that your draft shouldn't be a LinkedIn listing of every paper they've ever written. Just choose a handful, title it 'Selected publications' and it will be much more like an encyclopaedia and less like a promotional CV. If they have an online list of everything they've ever written, I advise you to put a ink to it in External links. Hope this assists. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:16, 8 April 2019 (UTC)- Having just seen your userpage, I would ask you to read and act on both WP:COI and WP:PAID. This doesn't stop you drafting an article about your boss, but you need to be very open about the fact that you are, potentially, conflicted, and you're definitely being paid, albeit indirectly as an employee of the university, though not under her direct instructions, I assume. But the requirement to make a proper declaration is still the same. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Nick Moyes, I have added a generic {{{paid}}} indicator to my user page and will add more specific indicators for articles I draft about the university as they are closer to being finished. Best, Artie Berns (talk) 16:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Font
I did something to the front on Wikipedia and now it say it’s in a different font how do I change it back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigRed606 (talk • contribs) 00:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Ps it sems to be in San Francisco font and also does not show up on any other websites nor does it show up on my computer only my mobil device. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigRed606 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- On Special:Preferences you can pick a "skin", that could change the font, but I doubt that San Francisco has anything to do with your preferences. If you're using Windows as Operating System try a reboot with the "last known good" configuration, or figure out what you (or somebody else using the same box) did and undo it. –84.46.53.95 (talk) 00:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
How often does "What links here" get refreshed?
I'm fixing up some links and I'm using Special:WhatLinksHere to see which pages are affected. However, because the data that "What links here" uses isn't refreshed in real time, I'm unable to easily verify if I've caught all the links. How often does the data behind "What links here" get refreshed? Is it possible to manually refresh the data for a particular link? I'm guessing "no" to that last question since it would probably have to check the links on every single page which would be too resource intensive to do ad-hoc. Danielklein (talk) 00:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- AFAIK WhatLinksHere is supposed to be up to date when you use it. Maybe it isn't on Wikia (FANDOM), and anything related to categories can be delayed, but if you have issues with Special:WhatLinksHere try the "normal" Help:Purge tricks. –84.46.53.95 (talk) 01:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Danielklein: When page A links to B, and you change that link so that A now links to C, and then save the A page, the data of 'What links to B' and 'What links to C' should be updated almost instantly. However, if A includes a navbox template T, and you update the T, then reports for B and C wil (almost) instantly show the difference about links from T, but it may take several hours until they reflect the change in linking from A. If this is your scenario, just wait a few hours before you proceed. Or iterate over all linking pages and WP:PURGE them or make WP:NULLEDIT on each. This will refresh indexes of links. --CiaPan (talk) 07:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @CiaPan: Yes, the edits are in templates. Today, it's gone down from just over 500 links to fix to just under 200 links to fix. So, I guess I'll just have to wait when I edit them again. Can you be any more precise than "a few hours"? Is there a cronjob that runs at a particular frequency? Danielklein (talk) 04:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Danielklein: You're right, there is such automated job. Alas I do know nothing about its configuration. What I wrote about 'several hours' is just a rough estimation from my own experience. Hopefully Help:What links here#Limitations contains details you want, or some pages linked there. --CiaPan (talk) 06:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @CiaPan: Yes, the edits are in templates. Today, it's gone down from just over 500 links to fix to just under 200 links to fix. So, I guess I'll just have to wait when I edit them again. Can you be any more precise than "a few hours"? Is there a cronjob that runs at a particular frequency? Danielklein (talk) 04:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
SSBFWU123
So... when do I start from here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SSBFWU123 (talk • contribs) 06:28, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, SSBFWU123. When do you start what? I don't understand your question, I'm afraid. If you want to get started as a Wikipedia editor, I would suggest The Wikipedia Adventure. I've put some other links on your User Talk page. (I don't know what the message on your user and talk pages is about, but I don't need to know, if you're stopping whatever it was) --ColinFine (talk) 08:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Review my first created business page
Hi! I'm AIESEC volunteer. Daily I edit on Wikipedia profiles, and I want to start to create really needed business pages or biography, to ensure our community with outstanding and reliable information, this is why I'm here as an editor. Guys, please review my first business page. I'm not sure that is created correctly. Here is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Global_Data_Intelligence_Limited. Please do not delete, only say me what I can change to have a final version. My goal is to create a minimum of 100 pages, starting with wanted articles. Thank you in advance. Best regards, Marylyn Fox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trymemore (talk • contribs) 06:29, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Trymemore. I think your article looks pretty good for a first attempt, but I don't think it cites enough sources to meet our Notability criteria for companies, WP:NCORP. It won't be deleted as it's still a draft, but you'd usually want to have at least three reliable secondary sources (like big news sites, books by a well known author or some other well edited source), independent of the company (not press releases, usually not interviews), that give the company a significant mention (a paragraph or so each will do. If there are only a few sentences, you might be able to get away with combining many more sources, but it's difficult). If you've looked at the criteria and think you pass them, you can get someone familiar with the standards to review them by putting {{subst:submit}} at the start of your article, though there are many submissions so this does take a while. Thanks for your contributions, and good luck on getting them published! Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:49, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Alpha3031 for your answer, support, and advice! I will try to find some valuable secondary sources. It's so hard to create business pages but is very interesting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trymemore (talk • contribs) 07:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, Trymemore, and welcome. It's great that you want to help improve Wikipedia's coverage. I'd just like to pick up on a few words you used above, and suggest that you think about things a little differently, to be better in line with what Wikipedia is. First, note that Wikipedia does not contain profiles. Not one. What it contains is articles about notable subjects - people, organisations, other things. These are different from profiles in that they don't necessarily tell you what the subject wants said about themselves, but what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject. Similarly, I think it would help if you use the phrase "articles about businesses" rather than "business pages". Finally, I suggest you look at that word "needed": who is it that needs the article? If it is the subject (the person or the business) that you think "needs" the article, then I would say that Wikipedia doesn't care in the least. The only needs that are relevant are Wikipedia's needs - which are that articles be well referenced from independent sources, and neutrally written. Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 08:54, 9 April 2019(UTC)
Thank you a lot for your suggestion, ColinFine!
lack of event notability based on independent coverage by reliable sources
The page I am working on is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:National_Stand_Down_to_Prevent_Falls_in_Construction, and I work with the Visual Editor.
While the draft does need some modification, I am reluctant to proceed with edits if the proposed article will still just be deleted for lack of notability. Is part of the problem that the references are from OSHA (the sponsoring organization) and the numerous partnering organizations instead of news stories? First, I would argue that government websites are reliable sources of information. If OSHA, CDC/NIOSH, the National Safety Council, the US Navy, the American Society of Safety Professionals, the National Association of Home Builders, and the National Roofing Contractors Association are considered unreliable sources, I am curious to learn what is considered acceptable.
Second, while this topic may not be as popular as the Kardashians, this safety awareness campaign is important and notable, as shown by the safety publication references and the number of people participating. In fact, I think that this topic would fit nicely under the Occupational Safety and Health WikiProject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Occupational_Safety_and_Health.
How is it best to proceed? Is it worth forging ahead or is it better to condense it to a section on the Construction Industry Page? UCIHGrad18 (talk) 06:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Why cant I update my hospital statistics?
Why cant I update my hospital statistics?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Heiwhsoanwk (talk • contribs) 07:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Heiwhsoanwk, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have successfully updated your hospital statistics. One of your earlier edits was reverted because the website link was in the wrong place. The article needs some references from WP:Reliable sources. Are you able to find publications that have written about the hospital? What is your connection with the hospital? Dbfirs 07:17, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
M intern at saidu teaching hospital I would like to either save the statistics or revert back to the old statistics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heiwhsoanwk (talk • contribs) 07:25, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- As an employee, you have a WP:Conflict of interest, and WP:Paidstatus which needs to be declared, but for basic statistics this should not be a problem. You have already made several changes to the number of beds. What is the correct number. Are there other statistics that need changing? Dbfirs 08:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Follow-up to Please help me improve my draft submission on Jem Bendell
Hello, I have submitted a draft article, which was reviewed on March 15 (status: Submission declined).
I have corrected the article extensively since, following recommendations from the review, also sought advice from the Teahouse forum, since archived.
The article has since been left in a draft state. Do I need to mark it ready for another review in some way, or will this happen by itself in time please?
Ndaniau (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- User:Matslats resubmitted it on 20 March. The brown box at the foot of the draft confirms that it is awaiting review, and says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take more than two months, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2768 pending submissions waiting for review." --David Biddulph (talk) 09:13, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Please can you help to review my proposed edits on the talk page of Talk:Dona Bertarelli and fr:Discussion:Yann Guichard
Hello dear Wikipedians,
I'm new to Wikipedia and am trying to update the pages of Dona Bertarelli and Yann Guichard, who I am employed by (see my talk page).
It's been some time since I posted on the Talk page of Dona Bertarelli's profile, October 2018, and I've contacted previous editors but the page has not been updated with any of the proposed factual corrections or additional information. I posted on the Talk page of Yann Guichard's profile in February 2019, so I'm guessing it's normal that it's not yet been updated.
I have provided sources within Wikipedia as well as in national or international media for each point.
Whom should I contact or how can I get help to get Dona Bertarelli's profile page updated?
Thanks so much for your help and advice! MiaNorcaro (talk) 09:53, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi MiaNorcaro I'm not sure there's much that anyone can do for you with respect to the article on French Wikipedia. Each Wikipedia has it's own policies and guidelines; so, you're probably going to need to ask for help on French Wikipedia about the Guichard article. Try asking at fr:Wikipédia:Forum des nouveaux. As for the English Wikipedia article, there's not much more you can do than following WP:PSCOI#Steps for engagement. You've already done Step 1, so you just need to be patient and wait until someone responds. You can add the Template:Request edit to your post at Talk:Dona Bertarelli to better let others know about your request, but it still might take a bit of time for someone to respond. If after a few days or so nobody still hasn't responded to your request, try Step 2 and so on. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:06, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Wikimedia Foundation create account
How can I create an account on the Wikimedia Foundation Governence Wiki? Harold Hutchins (talk) 10:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Harold Hutchins You'd have to ask them- but in looking at that Wiki it appears only users who have had accounts created for them(or are otherwise granted access) are allowed access. This is because that wiki is only meant to share governance materials to the public, it is not meant for the general public to edit. If you need to contact it for some reason, this page describes how. 331dot (talk) 10:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Revert
I have given a draft to rereview it, when will i get the revert? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krutika Samnani (talk • contribs) 10:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- If you are asking how long it might take for your updated draft to be reviewed, the answer is in the brown box at the foot of the draft: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take more than two months, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2791 pending submissions waiting for review." --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hey Krutika Samnani. Draft:Crave Eatables has already been declined twice by Articles for Creation volunteers, and rightly so, because the article does not include sufficient independent secondary sources to demonstrate that it meets Wikipedia's notability standards for companies. These sources generally include things like magazines, newspapers and books, and exclude things like press releases, official websites, and routine corporate listings. If these types of sources are not included, then the draft will not be accepted regardless of when, or how many times it is submitted for review. For more information on referencing, see guidance at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. GMGtalk 12:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
hey
im working on the Felly page, how can i move the table to the right. and how can i add a picture without it gettting removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inpuza (talk • contribs) 12:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Rather than the table you need to include an infobox, probably {{Infobox musical artist}}. As for pictures, you will find a number of useful links at WP:Images. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:28, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi, Inpuza, welcome to the Teahouse. Actually, don't try to move the table. Instead, please insert an Infobox which, by default gets positioned on the right. I suggest you use
{{Infobox musical artist}}
. If you click that link and read the documentation, you should be guided through each field you can enter. You can add a picture into an Infobox, assuming it is already available on Wikimedia Commons. What you can't do is just upload any old picture you find on the internet, because it'll no doubt be copyright, and we don't accept copyrighted content nor, indeed, anything that is deemed promotional in tone. Hope this makes your life easier. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Watchlist
Can other people view my watchlist? Can I view other's watch lists? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 15:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- No and no. Deor (talk) 15:17, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- See Help:Watchlist#Privacy. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:18, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia article/topic
Hello, I'm trying to create wikipedia page for our cryptocoin. Now it is just "draft" ? I already looking for in editing site every link but not found the solution for this problem. Can someone help me to get my site away from draft and get it public and also shows in "altcoins" "cryptocoins" and "scrypt-based coins" list.
Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepcb (talk • contribs) 17:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Before someone instructs you on how to submit your Draft:CoinM, be aware that none of your references are about CoinM. Unless there are independent, significant articles published about CoinM, this will not pass Articles for Creation (AfC). Only after it is an accepted article can it be added to those lists. P.S. "Sign' your comments here and at article Talk pages by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 18:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thepcb Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:GS/Crypto before you edit further. 331dot (talk) 18:04, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Last edit
Hey so I see you took down my last edit if you want proof of change i'd be more than happy to send you it because i am a member and firefighter for the shaker road loudonville fire department — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wigglygruff (talk • contribs) 17:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Wigglygruff Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You will need to provide a documented source, we can't just take your word for it. 331dot (talk) 18:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- More than that, Wigglygruff, we need a published documented source. Unpublished documents won't do it, no matter how authoritative. If a random reader in a random country next week or next month or next year has no way of checking that something is right, then it doesn't belong in Wikipedia. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Inappropriate comments in an entry https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacchus
The entry for Bacchus is littered with Neo-nazi commentary--"Sieg heil Lord Hitler," etc.
Can someone remove them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.209.225 (talk) 18:31, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- That vandalism has been reverted. Note that it was on simple:, not here on the English Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello there, yes I just reverted the vandalism there. Articles across Wikipedia and its sister projects get vandalized quite often, and you can actual revert them yourself by navigating to the page history (view history in the sidebar near the top of the page) and undoing the harmful edits. Usually vandalism gets reverted quite quickly but this time it lasted several hours. Thanks for reporting and let me know if you have any questions! Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 My talk page 18:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for helping rid all projects of vandalism, not just Wikipedia. If you like to do this regularly, why not create an account? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 13:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
6 months
If I create a draft that passes notability criteria but do not publish it for reviewing, is it typically deleted after 6 months, or will someone move it to mainspace? 79.67.90.180 (talk) 18:57, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- It is theoretically possible for somebody to move it to mainspace, but this is exceedingly unlikely. It would require somebody seeing the draft, deciding that it was worth moving to mainspace, and doing so. --ColinFine (talk) 19:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Speedy deletion criterion G13 allows the draft to be deleted 6 months after the last edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- In other words, refusing to submit your article for reviewing dooms it to deletion? 79.67.90.180 (talk) 22:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Not quite: Refusing to make any edits whatsoever to a draft for 6 months dooms it to likely deletion. Just keep working on it, albeit at a snail's pace and it'll be fine, so long as its content is not breaching any of our rules on copyright violation, promotion, etc. By way of example, here's one I've been working on for the last 18 months and am nowhere near completing it yet: Draft:National Pollinator Strategy. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- In other words, refusing to submit your article for reviewing dooms it to deletion? 79.67.90.180 (talk) 22:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Vandalism/Spam?
An IP user (216.188.197.90) has recently vandalized the moo man page (Vandalized Page). What should i do? --Sir Arthur Puddingtrousers Jr. IV Esq. (talk) 19:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Edit: They are still doing it on other pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sir Arthur Puddingtrousers Jr. IV Esq. (talk • contribs) 19:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- The place to report vandalism, once the vandal has been adequately warned, is WP:AIV. I've done that, and the IP has been blocked. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- The block is for a year, as it was only this morning that the IP came out of a 6-month block. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Alright, thank you. --Sir Arthur Puddingtrousers Jr. IV Esq. (talk) 19:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia and fonts
Did Wikipedia recently changed fonts on their Cellphone website? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigRed606 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @BigRed606: Not that I'm aware of - the mobile version looks the same to me. Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) so we know who you are. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
This is what shows up Image= File:Strange font on Wikipedia.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigRed606 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- @BigRed606: The article you screenshot-ed (is that a real verb?) is Wikipedia. I've just looked at it in both the mobile preview in desktop view, and on my iPhone in both desktop and mobile view. I see nothing different/unusual about the font. Your text in screen shot does look a lot bolder than mine, so I'm wondering if you've either changed which Wikipedia 'skin' you're using (via Special:Preferences, or have changed something in your phone's browser? I'm a great believer in "turn it off and on again" whenever I'm baffled by something, so you could always give that a go, too. Sorry I can't offer further suggestions, except to remind you to sign your posts, please. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Nick Moyes ([[User talk:Nick Moyes|talk] I tried that many times I even tried it on another browser on my phone with no prevail don’t know why it’s acting up BigRed606 ([[User talk:BigRed606 |talk]
- @BigRed606: Just for clarity, can you describe the change you're seeing (is it just a slightly bolder font?), and is it on every single Wikipedia page, and I presume you aren't seeing any difference on other websites? What browser/OS is it? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes that and I think maybe slightly different font BigRed606 ([[User talk:BigRed606 |talk]
- @BigRed606: OK thanks. Still sounds like something on your phone's browser or Wikipedia Preferences. Just to explain how to sign a post: it's weird, but extremely easy. Just type four keyboard tilde characters (like this: ~~~~) rightt at the end of the very last sentence you write, then hit publish changes. that adds everything - your username, a link to your talk page and a timestamp. Simples. Oh, and when you've finally sorted it, you might like to delete the file by nipping over to Wikimedia Commons, find the file, and on the left side of the page in desktop view, click 'Nominate for Deletion' and explain why the file can be deleted. An admin will remove it for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:57, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Help with non reliable sources
help, ive attempted to make an article on the southend local elections. I inputed 3 sources. the first one Is a guide to the 2019 local elections as a whole by the electoral commission which I believe is very reputable as it is a government agency. https://www.yourvotematters.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/254576/Mencap-and-Electoral-Commission-easy-read-guide-to-the-2019-local-elections.pdf The second was a Wikipedia article on the 2018 elections which was used to show the results of the 2018 elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Southend-on-Sea_Borough_Council_election However guessing this may be one of the problems I replaced it with a new government resource which I believe is more reputable. https://www.southend.gov.uk/info/200400/elections_and_registering_to_vote/308/election_results the last one may be where the problem comes from which is a southend echo article https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/15557250.former-labour-mayor-has-defected-to-the-tories/ However it is simply to state fact This means that the Labour party are defending 2 council seats (However the Labour councillor for the Kursaal ward Judith Mchmahon defected to the Conservatives [2] .) Can you please help I believe my sources are quite reputable. especially since he stated all the sources are unacceptable including the government source — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatguyinthedeli (talk • contribs) 22:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
- Fatguyinthedeli: You already avoided one major problem, enwiki or other wikis cannot be used as source, and wikilinks don't help for missing sources. You could add a references section at the bottom, two lines…
== References ==
{{reflist}}
- …followed by an empty line. There's no good place to add your references or your who-ended-up-where info, you could add this at the end of the lede (lead). Example for one of your three sources:
<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.southend.gov.uk/info/200400/elections_and_registering_to_vote/308/election_results |title=Election Results |year=2018 |work=[[Southend-on-Sea Borough Council]] |accessdate=11 April 2019}}</ref>
- All in one long line, split here for readability. Maybe cheat with the title, it could be also "2018 Borough Council Election", found on the source below "Election Results". –84.46.52.219 (talk) 13:23, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
WHAT IS AN INAPPROPRIATE EDIT?
What counts as an inappropriate edit? Wikipedia is ready to block me!!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80stunes (talk • contribs) 00:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi 80stunes. Trying looking a the first two "pillars" in Wikipedia:Five pillars and at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for genreal reference; then, try taking Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure for some actual practice at editing. You've only been editing for a few weeks, so it's OK to make good-faith mistakes. You won't get blocked unless you start repeating the same mistakes over and over again, especially after being advised not to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Infobox overload
Hello Teahouse. How might one go about fixing this infobox mess? Popeye. Thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 01:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Maineartists. Have you tried discussing your concerns on the article's talk page? You can find some general guidance in MOS:INFOBOX, but infoboxes can be one of those things which quickly can lead to edit warring if you try to be too bold in editing them. After scanning the article talk page (including the archives), it doesn't seem as if it's something which has been discussed before. So, maybe the concerns you raised are shared by others and a consensus will be established to change the infobox accordingly. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:42, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- It's not so much of a "concern" so much as a confirmation to affirm that the infobox is in serious need of clean-up and that much of the content does not belong and should be integrated into the article (considering categories such as "actors" / "voice actors" are not valid infobox line categories). I suppose the talk page is the place to go and state what should be done with the content / infobox. There's just not a lot of traffic re: consensus / discussion for what I was intending on editing. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 19:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
What Is name of anolis
Cristatellus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin482 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Franklin482. The Teahouse is really place for questions about editing Wikipedia or about Wikipedia's various policies and guideline. If you have a specific question or concern about the Wikipedia articles Anolis or Anolis cristatellus, you might have better luck posting at Talk:Anolis or Talk:Anolis cristatellus instead. If you just have a general question about anolis, try asking at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
The Orchard (company)
The article for The Orchard (company) has a list of places a subsidiary operates. Is this relevant information, or can it be deleted? Excerpt I'm referencing:
BalconyTV operates from locations in Dublin, Tralee, London, Hamburg, Lisboa, Porto, Tokyo, Budapest, Buenos Aires, LA, Nashville, Auckland, Poznan, New York, Tel Aviv, Kaunas, Brighton, Austin, Toronto, Paris, Prague, Zurich and Delhi, with more locations on the way.
It doesn't feel like relevant or notable information, but I may be mistaken. Thank you.
HarutoTanaka95 (talk) 03:42, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, HarutoTanaka95: looks like marketing puff to me - like much of the article. I suggest you remove it (with a suitable edit summary) and see if anybody objects. --ColinFine (talk) 16:44, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, ColinFine: Thank you, I will do that. Thank you. HarutoTanaka95 (talk) 17:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
@HarutoTanaka95 and ColinFine: MEH from the IPs in January, but at least not what I suggested on the talk page. –84.46.52.219 (talk) 12:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
A way in itself on how to spot a potential bad editor.
If you, when getting a new message or awaiting a reply somewhere, are worried you'll get a warning or something to stop you from editing non-constructively, does that mean you are a bad editor?27.32.72.17 (talk) 04:23, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi IP 27.32.72.17. I'm not sure whether you're asking are you a "bad editor" or whether someone else is a "bad editor". Generally, a "good editor" is someone who does their best to edit according to Wikipedia:Five pillars and contribute positively to improving Wikipedia, whereas a "bad editor" is somebody who put their own interests ahead of Wikipedia's or otherwise vandalizes, disrupts or generally has a really hard time editing collaboratively with others. Every editor is going to make good-faith mistakes; the good editor will try to learn from their mistakes so as to not repeat them, while the bad editor tends not to listen to what others are saying and keeps repeating the same mistakes over and over again.So far, you IP account has made only three edits and there are no notifications/warnings posted by others on the IP accounts user talk page; so, there's no reason to believe you're a "bad editor". However, if you've also been editing under a different account (and it appears that you might be just doing that), then check for notifications/warnings on that account's user talk page. If you've been previously blocked for doing something, then it seems wise to not repeat the same behavior even with a different account because you'll only end up blocked once again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- This is a question that lists characteristics any editor theoretically can have, even good editors. Did you figure I use a different IP because of the post to CaradhrasAiguo's talk page? Unfortunately it appears as though I'm a bad editor who does have that feeling at those moments as described at the top of the thread (those feelings at those moments aren't necessarily unfortunate, just, to me, a not so easily reliable way to find a bad editor from a good one). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.72.17 (talk) 08:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello IP user. I suggest you stop worrying about "bad editors" (whatever they are), and concentrate on making good edits. --ColinFine (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Reply to Worldbruce
Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Krutika Samnani. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Krutika Samnani|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}
. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
+
Hey Worldbruce, get it clear I have not received anything to post this article on wikipedia, this was my individual effort for the organisation I work for i.e. Crave Eatables is my employer organisation. As far as disclosure is concerned I have disclosed it already that I am involved with the organisation.Just tell me if I am suppose to disclose anything else.
- Hi Krutika Samnani. If you wish to reply to what Worldbruce posted at User talk:Krutika Samnani#Declare any connection, then the best place to do so is in that particular discussion thread. The Teahouse is really for asking general questions about editing, not for responding to posts left by others on your user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Disclosure
I just learnt that I need to disclose my connection with the organiztion for whom I am editing the draft. Kindly note that I am employee of this organisation i.e Crave Eatables Private Limited, Bhavnagar, Gujarat, India. Kindly guide where else I need to discose this as I respect all the terms of use of Wikipedia and would prefer to remain transparent rather than making things complicated. My previous messages disclosed this too hence making clear my intenetions. I learnt that indirect payment is also considered as my payment; so ofcourse I am paid whereas in my previous message I mentioned that I wasn't paid specifically for writing wikipedia article. But after I learnt its terms of use, I have disclosed everything I found to be disclosed.Kindly revert and tell me what else am I suppose to be disclose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krutika Samnani (talk • contribs) 05:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Please refer to WP:DISCLOSECOI for more specific details, but generally you should disclose any COI you might have with respect to a particular Wikipedia article on your user page and on the talk page of the article in question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Article submitted
I have recently published my first article. When will it become live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emotix (talk • contribs) 05:22, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- I guess you are talking about this draft? You need to submit it for review; you can do this by pressing the blue "Submit your draft for review!" button on the template I've added.
- By the way, from your username, it looks like you have a connection with this company. Please familiarize yourself with the guideline on conflicts of interests. Eman235/talk 07:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
My User Page Was Deleted
My user page content was deleted shortly after I created it. I've been correcting articles for a while. Why would someone delete my user page content?
Billcallahan331 (talk) 06:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Do you mean this? It sure looks like you blanked your user page yourself. Eman235/talk 06:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi Billcallahan331. I cannot find any record of your anyone deleting your user page or anyone other than yourself having even edited it. Perhaps you're referring to User:Billcallahan331/sandbox/Bill Callahan?There are a couple of things that new editors often misundersand about user pages and you can find out more details in Wikipedia:User pages. User pages typically only end up deleted when they either (1) are a serious violation of some Wikipedia policy or guideline (e.g. contain copyright violations or BLP violations) or (2) they run afoul of WP:UPNOT. A userpage is not the property of the user which means it needs to comply with relevant policies or guidelines. Those user pages which don't may be edited to remove problems or deleted outright if the problems are too great to overcome. Just for reference, one of the most common reasons that a user page does end up deleted is mistaking it for a social media page or a free web host. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
How to Protect page
I recently joined this forum, i want to ask question how to protect an article that is already published by some person over wikipedia? anyone protect any page or what mechanism /process to achieve this target? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AroojSMalik (talk • contribs) 07:02, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Only administrators can protect pages, and this is only done occasionally, like if there are frequent malicious edits to the article. For more information see the protection policy. Eman235/talk 07:09, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi AroojSMalik. Please see Wikipedia:Protection policy and Wikipedia:Requests for page protection for more specific details, but page protection is really only used in cases of serious disruption and needs to be done by an administrator. One last thing, Wikipedia is not really a forum per se, so you might want to take Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure to learn some more about how Wikipedia works. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Title issue
i am going to write an article but at title place i only want "Sadiq Mahmud Khurram" instead of this title "User:AroojSMalik/sandbox/Sadiq Mahmud Khurram". Article is not published yet. guide me that if i publish its title may change as "Sadiq Mahmud Khurram". — Preceding unsigned comment added by AroojSMalik (talk • contribs) 09:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- AroojSMalik, when you're ready to submit it to be published, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of your draft. If it passes the review process, it'll be moved for you by the reviewer. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- If accepted, that would create an article Sadiq Mahmud Khurram However, given that the proposed article rests on SMK being appointed a judge in late 2018, it is unlikely that this person will meet Wikipedia's definition of notability. Are the published articles about SMK other than the appointment? David notMD (talk) 11:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Is an article Title change required?
I edited the article on Elinor Jackson to correct the birth name to Eleanor Junkin rather than Elinor. I have both original letters from her parents, including some written shortly after her birth, plus documentation from the published Junkin genealogy, the biography of her father and a book on her sister Margaret Junkin Preston. See Talk:Elinor Jackson
Another editor has repeatedly reverted my edit stating that I must get the article title changed first. See the History page. On several occasions I asked that he use the Talk page, but he has not. He has not questioned the accuracy of my edit.
I accept that Stonewall Jackson biographies may commonly use "Elinor" and therefore I do not think it is appropriate to change the article title since her status as a historical figure is due to her marriage to Stonewall Jackson. However, I believe it is appropriate for the article to include the fact that she was named Eleanor and the Junkin family used that name consistently.
The question here is: do Wikipedia customs require the change in article title if her birth name entry is changed to Eleanor?--Tmdnc (talk) 12:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Tmdnc: Welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds like you have some fascinating relations and superb historical documents. Unfortunately, everything on Wikipedia has to be based upon reliable published sources, not family archives, no matter how genuine those documents may be. We title articled based up a policy available at WP:COMMONNAME, stating that pages are titled after what commonly used sources refer them as, not by what a birth certificate or other document says. I don't, for example, imagine that 'Stonewall' appears anywhere on the birth certificate of Thomas Jackson. However, if you can arrange to have your documents published by reliable historical journal or magazine, Wikipedia would happily use that secondary sources as evidence of a valid name within the article, but not the primary source itself. This might sound oxymoronic, but Wikipedia needs any user, anywhere in the world, to be able to check and verify factual statements, and papers hidden within family archives simply aren't of use. Unless I have misunderstood you concerns, you simlpy shouldn't change article content on what you, personally, know or can prove, but on what has been reliably published about that person. Yes, this can sometimes perpetuate a long-standing error, but ours is not the place to right great wrongs, rather to reflect what the world at large has said about one notable topic or another. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Nick Moyes: You have focused on my original unpublished correspondence and not on the multiple published sources I have cited on the Talk:Elinor Jackson page. I accept the point about unpublished sources. However, my question remains: what can I say to the editor who believes that I need to get the article titled moved or changed before I can insert the fact that her family spelled her name "Eleanor". I don't question that Jackson biographers have used "Elinor".Tmdnc (talk) 14:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Tmdnc: WP:COMMONNAME would apply here. Basically, what name is she most commonly referred to byin the media? Not knowing anything about the subject, I can't say in this case, but say you took a "poll" of 100 published books mentioning her. Which spelling would be more frequent? -A lad insane (Channel 2) 16:23, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Tmdnc: My apologies for focussing on your mention of family archives. If there is a high quality published source that shows a different spelling of her name, then you should have included them when you repeatedly reinserted your edit in the article's lead. Did I miss something; did you actually include some? Even if you had, placing it in the lead was wrong: it's the kind of thing that required a citation within the infobox, plus a short mention in an 'early life' section. Until you do supply such a published reference, you should not reinsert your edit. That said, you may indeed have a good case for correction. So why not place a proposal of a exact wording change on the talk page and gain consensensus for its addition? If she is widely known by her 'wrong' name, my view would be to retain the article title as it is, but create a WP:REDIRECT to it from the spelling you propose. None if these changes require administrator involvement, as we work by consensus here. You task is to bring others round to you way of thinking, and to make life easy for that to happen, offering a suggested form or words on the talk page is a good way to start. For sources not available online, you could, in your talk page discussion which you've started, include the wording from those sources to help others in their assessment of your arguments for change. Does this help at all? Nick Moyes (talk) 07:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes:Your reply was very helpful. I accept that I should have cited sources in my original edit. After the first reversion, I did provide an explanation with sources in the Talk page, but I was unable to get the other editor to move the dispute to the Talk page. I chose to stop banging my head on a wall ('warring') after his fourth(!!) reversion. I found the WP:COMMONNAME policy and the Teahouse. I will soon place a revised and improved edit on the Talk page, with an explanation of why the article title does NOT need to be moved/changed. Hopefully a discussion can occur there before making edits on the article page itself.Tmdnc (talk) 14:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Tmdnc: That sounds like an eminently sensible approach. Glad to have been of help, and sorry again if I misread your original cry for assistance. I'm going to be out of it for a week or two, but if I get a chance to log on somewhere I'll try and check how things are going and lend my support if I'm able. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:19, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes:I have posted my proposal on the Talk:Elinor Jackson page.Tmdnc (talk) 17:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Tmdnc: That sounds like an eminently sensible approach. Glad to have been of help, and sorry again if I misread your original cry for assistance. I'm going to be out of it for a week or two, but if I get a chance to log on somewhere I'll try and check how things are going and lend my support if I'm able. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:19, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes:Your reply was very helpful. I accept that I should have cited sources in my original edit. After the first reversion, I did provide an explanation with sources in the Talk page, but I was unable to get the other editor to move the dispute to the Talk page. I chose to stop banging my head on a wall ('warring') after his fourth(!!) reversion. I found the WP:COMMONNAME policy and the Teahouse. I will soon place a revised and improved edit on the Talk page, with an explanation of why the article title does NOT need to be moved/changed. Hopefully a discussion can occur there before making edits on the article page itself.Tmdnc (talk) 14:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Tmdnc: My apologies for focussing on your mention of family archives. If there is a high quality published source that shows a different spelling of her name, then you should have included them when you repeatedly reinserted your edit in the article's lead. Did I miss something; did you actually include some? Even if you had, placing it in the lead was wrong: it's the kind of thing that required a citation within the infobox, plus a short mention in an 'early life' section. Until you do supply such a published reference, you should not reinsert your edit. That said, you may indeed have a good case for correction. So why not place a proposal of a exact wording change on the talk page and gain consensensus for its addition? If she is widely known by her 'wrong' name, my view would be to retain the article title as it is, but create a WP:REDIRECT to it from the spelling you propose. None if these changes require administrator involvement, as we work by consensus here. You task is to bring others round to you way of thinking, and to make life easy for that to happen, offering a suggested form or words on the talk page is a good way to start. For sources not available online, you could, in your talk page discussion which you've started, include the wording from those sources to help others in their assessment of your arguments for change. Does this help at all? Nick Moyes (talk) 07:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Help for DYK
Hi All, as i am new to submit a DYK. This is my first DYK. Please help if i am wrong anywhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Dino_James_(Musical_artist) KPTP (talk) 12:42, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi KPTP welcome to the Teahouse. You're very brave - I remember that following the complex instructions for my first DYK was harder than creating my first article (despite what everyone tells newcomers about that particular challenge!) You might like to try following these instructions that normal human beings can understand when doing a DYK. I don't propose to assess the nomination or the article (or even its notability) at this stage, but will point out a few errors that stand out to me as far as a DYK goes.
- Firstly, you haven't actually offered a Did you know...? statement. It should have the subject article wikilinked in bold, with other elements wikilinked, but not in bold. If you only have one hook to offer, don't bother filling in ALT1 or ALT2 - they're only for use if you want to suggest an alternative approach to 'hook' people in with a different approach to your interesting, substantiated fact. You don't need to use a full citation template; just state the passage that supports your hook and include a url to the source. I suggest you follow the layout in the mockup below:
- ... that Dino James is the first Indian rapper to gain 1 million subscribers on his YouTube channel...? Source: "is the first Indian rapper to cross 1 Million subscribers on his YouTube channel. From www.indulgexpress.com
- Created/expanded by KPTP (talk). Self-nominated at 12:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC).
- I'm sure you appreciate that you must hone up the template and place it on the nomination page within seven days of the article being created, but then you can continue to work on that article for as long as you wish, ensuring that hooks are supported with valid references, and that the article conforms to all our style and formatting requirements. See WP:MOS. You do have one further step to take once you've got this template sorted out, and that's to actually move it over to the relevant part of the nomination page. Again the DYK instructions should be carefully followed, or the friendly version of instructions I've linked to above should assist you with that. Hope this helps a bit, and good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Just a note to add that when you posted here initially, your version looked like this. In future, please do your very best first to sort out your templates, and then ask for help - it saves wasting time on things you clearly are learning know how to fix yourself. But I hope nevertheless that the other suggestions I've made will still assist you. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Added an already-existing image to an article, a bot removed it, not sure why
Hi there, on the Mockumentary article, I added a picture of the movie poster for "This is Spinal Tap", as an example of a prominent early example of the genre. The same image is featured on the This Is Spinal Tap article (in fact I just copy-pasted the filename from there), so I didn't think it would be a problem. But then a bot removed it. Can anyone explain to me what I did wrong? Thank you. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 12:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- You need to read the edit summary of the bot's edit, and (if necessary) follow the links which were given. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- I did do that. I have to admit, I was very confused by the links that were given, because they all seem to deal with things that go along with the image file - and the image file is already in place, at Wikipedia Commons, and I don't think that's a problem, it's been there a while. I didn't see anything that dealt with putting that same image into an article. That's why I came here. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 13:09, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- No, it is not on Commons. It is not free of copyright (hence not suitable for Commons). It is uploaded locally on enwiki at File:Thisisspinaltapposter.jpg and it has a non-free use rationale specifically for use on the This Is Spinal Tap article. The link in the edit summary "non-free use rationale" is to a page that says "A separate, specific rationale must be provided each time the media file is used in an article. The name of the article the media file is used in must be included in the rationale." The link "WP:NFC#Implementation" in the edit summary is to a page which says "It is important to remember that a non-free rationale is needed for each use of the image on Wikipedia. If the image is used in two separate articles, two separate rationales are needed, unique for both articles." --David Biddulph (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Ah! Thank you for boiling that down for me. I apologize for my lack of reading comprehension. It was pretty intimidating. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 14:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi SteamboatPhilly. To add on to what David Biddulph posted, there are ten non-free content use criteria which need to be met for each use of a non-free file, and providing a non-free use rationale is just one of these criteria. Based on my experience with non-free files, I can't really see a way to justify the non-free use of the Spinal Tap poster in Mockumentary. Non-free movie poster art is really only allowed when it's used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the movie in question; it's really hard to try to justify the non-free use of such files in other ways or in other articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Ah! Thank you for boiling that down for me. I apologize for my lack of reading comprehension. It was pretty intimidating. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 14:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- No, it is not on Commons. It is not free of copyright (hence not suitable for Commons). It is uploaded locally on enwiki at File:Thisisspinaltapposter.jpg and it has a non-free use rationale specifically for use on the This Is Spinal Tap article. The link in the edit summary "non-free use rationale" is to a page that says "A separate, specific rationale must be provided each time the media file is used in an article. The name of the article the media file is used in must be included in the rationale." The link "WP:NFC#Implementation" in the edit summary is to a page which says "It is important to remember that a non-free rationale is needed for each use of the image on Wikipedia. If the image is used in two separate articles, two separate rationales are needed, unique for both articles." --David Biddulph (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- I did do that. I have to admit, I was very confused by the links that were given, because they all seem to deal with things that go along with the image file - and the image file is already in place, at Wikipedia Commons, and I don't think that's a problem, it's been there a while. I didn't see anything that dealt with putting that same image into an article. That's why I came here. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 13:09, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Formatting roman numerals
Hi Teahouse, should I write "Algebra 2" or "Algebra II"? I looked in the Manual of Style for formatting, but couldn't find what I was looking for. I was thinking to use the former option, as it's easier to read. — BladeRikWr 13:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- I suggest that you use whichever your references use, following the Wikipedia policy WP:Common name. If this is about Suncoast Community High School, then try to find some independent references, not just the school's website. Dbfirs 15:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi
hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by M8king (talk • contribs) 13:25, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @M8king: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place for new users to ask questions about using Wikipedia. Do you have a question? 331dot (talk) 13:28, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
How do I delete an image?
I uploaded an image of my friend, and he does not want it on Wikipedia. Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgbatty (talk • contribs) 17:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hey Tgbatty. I have nominated the photo for deletion. An administrator should come along shortly and respond to the request. GMGtalk 17:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, Tgbatty. Welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse; but I fear you may be misunderstanding what Wikipedia is about. It is an encyclopaedia, where we create articles about notable subjects. I'm sure your cat is of great interest to you and your family, but unless several people who have no connection with you have published articles about her in reliable places, I'm afraid Wikipedia is simply not interested in her. In fact, I recommend you do not try the really quite difficult task of creating a new article for a bit yet: I suggest you have a go at The Wikipedia Adventure. and work on improving some of our six million existing articles. --ColinFine (talk) 18:03, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Adding content to a stub
I am working on GeoFS. How do I add enough information so that it could not be classified as a stub. I know it is not classified as one right now, but it is very short and I have a lot of information about it. How would I go about adding information, and what information should i include? I nearly doubled its size yesterday, but I'm new, so I'd like answers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArmageddonAviation (talk • contribs) 17:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, ArmageddonAviation, and welome to the Teahouse. What GeoFS needs now, desperately, is not more information, but citations to reliably published material about it, wholly independent of its developers and publishers. Blogs are hardly ever regarded as reliable sources, and all it has at present as sources are its own website, and three blogs. In fact, unless you have reliable published mostly independent sources for the information you want to add, you shouldn't add it at all. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and unless the material in it can be checked by a reader (in any country at any time), that information is worthless. Please see WP:REFB. --ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- I just realized that there is literally no information about GeoFS anywhere on the internet. I have been managing its wiki, though, which is the only other source that shows up besides the site itself and its blog. How do I go from here? Or is this a dead-end? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArmageddonAviation (talk • contribs) 19:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- If there are no reliable sources about the subject, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. Not everything does; it is not a sleight against the subject; it just can't be told about here. There are numerous other forums that permit just telling about something. 331dot (talk) 19:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Can someone help me please? I need an update to my site...
I hope you are well and you can help. I have two very large changes to make to my Wiki site - or to add.
I have been named a 2019 Guggenheim Fellow (Non Fiction) announced today on Page A5 of the New York Times (I can also send the letter that told me I have received one) https://www.gf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/New-York-Times-Ad-2019.pdf
and I am currently also a Senior Fellow at Yale University Jackson Institute for Global Affairs
http://jackson.yale.edu/person/janine-di-giovanni/
and a 2018 Edward R. Murrow Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations
Please can you add these? My page is locked so I can not do it
Thank you so much Janine di Giovanni — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janinedigi (talk • contribs) 17:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Janinedigi: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would note that you do not have a "wiki site"; Wikipedia hosts an article that is about you. That is a very different thing. While your input is welcome as with any other editor, you have no special rights to the article and cannot exclusively control its content.(see WP:OWN) You are welcome to visit the article talk page (Talk:Janine di Giovanni) and make a formal edit request as to any changes you feel are needed. 331dot (talk) 18:02, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
If i make a donation to wikipedia can you get my article published a little faster?
Hi, Just wanted to know if I make a Donation to Wikipedia, then you can publish my article sooner? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:101E:1:9299:6425:2AD4:4D44:1897 (talk) 18:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi,
- No. --bonadea contributions talk 18:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Unlikely, as I don't think we take bribes, and the volunteers who do the reviewing would not get any of the donation. In addition, your IP has not made any other edits, so we would not know what article to review faster. Good luck! WelpThatWorked (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- More than that, the volunteers who do the reviewing have no way of knowing who has donated and who has not. Anyway, what's your hurry? There is no deadline, and we're all here to improve Wikipedia and for no other reason, aren't we? --ColinFine (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Tl;dr: No bribes, period. But you're welcome to donate if you like. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 23:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- More than that, the volunteers who do the reviewing have no way of knowing who has donated and who has not. Anyway, what's your hurry? There is no deadline, and we're all here to improve Wikipedia and for no other reason, aren't we? --ColinFine (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Disputed information in sources
I've hit a wall where there are some sources referring to the same person but have slightly different information. Some of the sources say this person was born in La Grange, Georgia, while others say they were born in Atlanta, Georgia. Some also say they had taught at public schools for 10 years prior to acting while others say they had only taught between 4 to 8 years prior to acting. How would I incorporate this into an article? By the way, all of the sources agree that this person had appeared in the same theatrical plays, radio shows and TV shows; it's just some birth and early life information they disagree on. StaringAtTheStars✉Talk 18:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- StaringAtTheStars, for me, part of it depends on the relative reliability of the sources. If the sources for La Grange and Atlanta are equally reliable, La Grange is not far from Atlanta, so that may not actually be a conflict. A lot of people from a small town will name the larger less-obscure nearby town when asked where they're from. Could 'LaGrange, near Atlanta' work? For the teaching, if those two sources are also equally reliable, can you use 'taught public school prior to acting' or does the exact timing make some other difference in writing the article? --valereee (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Either you omit the information, or you explain that there are different views and cite them. (Or, if you decide that the sources on one side are all less reliable, you omit their story). It is perfectly acceptable for an article to report that sources differ: what you must not do is to try and resolve the discrepancy (though if another independent source had tried to, you could of course report that source). --ColinFine (talk) 19:37, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you valereee and ColinFine, this is very helpful to know! StaringAtTheStars✉Talk 14:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Illogical lead sentence of Wikipedia:Reliable sources
The original sentence says about the "views that have appeared in those sources". But in my opinion, they appear in quite another place - in Wikipedia articles. I have no words for this, and feel exhausted. Please, see the article talk and help me. Vikom talk 19:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, Vikom: I disagree with your interpretation. The text is "making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered", i.e. the views that appeared in the sources are covered in the Wikipedia article. This makes complete sense to me. --ColinFine (talk) 19:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Vikom, you're approaching the question from opposite ends.
- 1. Everything in the sources must be in the article note: this is an oversimplification
- 2. Everything in the article must be in the sources
- Both of these things are required by WP policy. You're trying to turn statement of policy intended to communicate point 1 into a statement that communicates point 2.
- --valereee (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hang on, Valereee. It is absolutely not the case that "everything in the sources must be in the article". Not everything in a reliable source is necessarily encyclopaedic. Only your point 2 is policy, and as far as I can see, the sentence expresses that. --00:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
I focused on "all views", neglecting the key words inside the phrase "all majority and significant minority views". However covering all views seemed so unrealistic, that the only alternative I could find was an "illogical sentence". Now I wonder why none of you gave me a simple example like: "...otherwise we could describe Ronald Reagan only as an actor, neglecting his presidency". If I had known the reason for the rule, I would have easily understood the rule itself. Thank you both very much!
Valereee, your explanation was absolutely crucial. I was stuck, but you have pointed me in the right direction. Thanks :-) Vikom talk 03:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- ColinFine I think that's your comment above? Yes, that's why I put the small note in -- I probably should have said 'gross oversimplification.' I wanted to reduce the two pieces of policy to their simplest statements so I could show this new user what he was missing. But Vikom it's a very good point CF is making -- we absolutely don't require or even encourage that everything in sources goes into the article. Only things that are noteworthy go into articles, and it's often difficult for editors to agree on how to balance that out. :) --valereee (talk) 11:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
This article provides insufficient context
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyurethane_dispersion Can someone take a look at this article please? It has been published but I want to improve it. It says multiple issues - personal reflective style argumentative and "provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject" . I am not sure where to go from here. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRALISTAIR (talk • contribs) 20:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Question about Huggle
I'm new to Huggle. When patrolling recent changes, I would like to see the change as implemented in a Wikipedia article like I do with Twinkle. Is there a way I can do this? Mstrojny (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- I noticed that some questions that were asked after this one have already been answered. Is there a particular reason why this one is not answered yet? Mstrojny (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
iTunes chart
When adding to a discography section, does iTunes count as a recognised chart? For example, if an album reached no. 670 on iTunes, would this be included? I’m guessing not, but I want to be sure. – DarkGlow (talk) 22:39, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- DarkGlow, your hunch is correct, iTunes (and other single-vendor charts) do not count. See WP:CHART for more info signed, Rosguill talk 22:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Rosguill , that was my lucky find for today, thanks. ASSUME:NOTHING is key for everything related to Emma Blackery. –84.46.52.219 (talk) 11:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Inline citations
An article I wrote, Fort Manhassett, has been flagged for lack of inline citations.. what I can’t figure out is that it does (at least I believe) contain nothing but inline citations. Can anyone give me some guidance here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:D184:F500:D85D:E63C:3BC5:AE68 (talk) 23:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- Fort Manhassett tagged for not having enough inline citations, meaning that there are hugh sections of text with no citations at all. David notMD (talk) 00:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Guidance on Tweaks for Submission
Hi there,
Our write-up on Tavi Tequila has been deleted due to G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. I was wondering if your team could be more specific on what the problem was / point out where we need to make our edits for this. Thank you!
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Tavi_Tequila&action=edit&redlink=1 https://en.everybodywiki.com/Tavi_Tequila
Write-up can be found below:
Collapsing a tequila advertisement
|
---|
Tavi, a premium tequila brand, is noted as one of the purest brands of tequila in the world due to being made by only the best parts of blue agave plants. Tavi Tequila is owned and operated by entrepreneur and tequilero, Tavi Eggertson. Tavi Tequila is distilled in Jalisco, Mexico in the world’s highest elevated tequila distillery. This premium tequila brand produces three unique vintages: Platinum, Reposado and Añejo.[1] History Many tequilas begin with a legend, Tavi Tequila, unlike most brands, was born out of necessity. The founder, Tavi, was diagnosed as allergic to the impure alcohols of the world. He required a pure 100% Blue Weber Agave tequila to continue his exemplary lifestyle. Being a man of action, he spared no means nor ends to exploration in his search for the world’s purest tequila. And when what he found wasn’t good enough, he decided to make something even better. The year was 2008 and after finding a distillery for sale later that year in Jalisco, Mexico, he began his journey in creating a more enjoyable tequila experience. The first bottle of Tavi Tequila was produced in 2009 and made its first export shipment by 2011. Today, Tavi Tequila is sold around the United States and can be easily identified by its unique bottle design featuring the beautiful Mayahuel with her outstretched arms. Her distinct outstretched arms now symbolize the Tavi Tequila branding. COMPANY VISION Beyond his own health reasons, Tavi knew that current tequilas were seen as a negative experience for most drinkers from the strong burnt agave smell to the regretful hangover the next day. Tavi was determined to make a tequila that was an enjoyable experience for its drinkers. His mission was and still is to deliver a superior tequila that was meant to be sipped, savored and enjoyed. DISTILLATION PROCESS Tequila is made from Blue Webber Agave plants. The leaves are chopped off and the core is cooked and crushed to collect the Blue Agave juice. This juice is then fermented and distilled to make the tequila. It takes 10 blue agave Pinas to make 1 liter of Tavi Tequila. While some tequilas are made with only 51% blue agave, Tavi is made pure with 100% of the juice from Blue Agave plants. What makes Tavi Tequila unique is it is not made with any added coloring, ethanol or sugar. Only the best parts of the Blue Agave juice is collected to make Tavi Tequila. Leftover juices are then discarded or sold to other distilleries willing to use them. The distinguishable heavy agave smell that comes from ordinary tequila brands is not found in Tavi Tequila. This is due to each drop being distilled in a facility 7,000 feet above sea level.[2] This high elevation creates a clean air environment that prevents cross-contamination. The best parts of the agave plants are then roasted slower than industry standards. Once the roasting process is finished, the juices are carefully extracted at maximum quality and flavor. It is believed at Tavi Tequila that tequila is a living product that is heavily impacted by its environment. During fermentation, classical music such as Mozart and Vivaldi is played to enrich the notes and finish of each batch of Tavi Tequila. Lastly, each batch is taste tested by Tavi himself for quality before it is bottled, packaged and shipped.[3] ACCOLADES 2012- Double Gold Medals at the San Francisco Spirit Awards 2014- Triple Gold Medal winner at the MicroLiquor Spirit Awards for taste 2014- Triple Gold Medal winner at the MicroLiquor Spirit Awards for package design 2016- First bottle of tequila to the top of Mt. Kilimanjaro |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by WassIntern (talk • contribs) 00:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome to the teahouse. I read the article, and it seems like an ad for the company. Wikipedia is written in a neutral point of view (WP:NPOV), which this article doesn't appear to be. Also, writing an article about a subject that you have a conflict of interest (WP:COI) with is also strongly discouraged. Thanks! CalOtter (talk) 01:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, WassIntern. If you are paid in any way to edit on behalf of this tequila brand, then you must comply immediately with the mandatory paid editing disclosure. This is non-negotiable. Why do you refer to "our write-up"? The word "our" implies shared use of your account. Accounts are for one person only, not for groups of people or for companies. Wikipedia does not include "write-ups". It contains neutrally written encyclopedia articles that comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The text you posted is completely and thoroughly promotional and reads like advertising. It will never be accepted on Wikipedia in its current form. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- WassIntern Parts of that were copy pasted from the company website, (which is why it sounded just like an advertising brochure) and that is also never acceptable, as it breaches copyright. See WP:COPYPASTE You must put any writing into your own words. Curdle (talk) 04:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Capitol Records session personnel lists 1950s/60s
To All,
Has anyone run across a reference list on the internet of Capitol Records session personnel lists for record dates in the late 1950s - 1960s? I have found master lists for Peggy Lee, Nat King Cole Capitol sessions and several other artists but I wonder where they are coming from/compiled from.
Thanks Shelyric (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Shelyric. It sounds like you might be looking for reliable sources for articles, but not sure. If that's the case, you can try asking for help Talk:Capitol Records or maybe even Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Record Labels. If you've found some sources, but are not sure whether they a considered reliable for Wikipedia's purposes, try asking at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Finally, if your question has nothing really to do with Wikipedia at all, you might want to try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk. The Teahouse is more suited for asking questions about Wikipedia editing, etc., while the Reference Desk more for asking about things in general. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Template
Where do I get info about often-used templates like infobox and otheruses, or templates to help make buttons, charts and so on? Thanks.Losthornet (talk) 06:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Losthornet. There's some page links at Wikipedia:Templates, but most existing templates also have a documentation page where you can find information specifically related to how a certain template is to be used, etc. Some templates, like MOS:INFOBOX and WP:USERBOX are used so much that they also have their own Wikipedia pages. Wikipedia:WikiProject Template or Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) can also be good places to ask things about specific templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:03, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Losthornet Hi, Here is the list of inboxoes and their associated templates. See Template:Graph:Chart for graph template. There are many "button" templates and here are a few of them 1, 2 and 3. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. Will check out the templates there. Losthornet (talk) 07:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Losthornet: To add to the answer by CASSIOPEIA, you may also be interested in a template for fancy representation of key-press combinations and sequences, different from pushbuttons depicting. If so, please see {{Key press}}. CiaPan (talk) 08:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
William Stark (physician)#Death and legacy Was he seen as "mad," leading to the phrase " Stark-raving mad."?
I would like to insert the following in William Stark ( physician ) article . . . " His "impudent zeal" might have been seen as being "mad", leading to the saying that someone is "Stark raving mad "." From "The Nit". — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Nit (talk • contribs) 09:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Please don't. That is unsourced speculation, and unencyclopaedic. Dbfirs 10:02, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Not done From the OED: "1640 ... Did not I say he's mad, starke raving mad, away with him." so it was in use in exactly this form a century before Stark was born. The actual origins go back a further thousand years to Old English. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- +1, dictionary.com about "stark naked": 1520–30; stark + naked; replacing start-naked ( start, Middle English; Old English steort tail; cognate with Dutch staart, Old High German sterz, Old Norse stertr ) –84.46.52.219 (talk) 11:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Not done From the OED: "1640 ... Did not I say he's mad, starke raving mad, away with him." so it was in use in exactly this form a century before Stark was born. The actual origins go back a further thousand years to Old English. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) :Hello, The Nit. Welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for your question, albeit after the event. I have deleted this addition your made to the article on the grounds that it is complete speculation and totally unsourced. On what grounds did you think it was OK to add it, may I ask? We never accept guesswork or helpful random speculation here. We need sources to support stuff like that, and a few minutes of checking on Google would have shown you that your edit was nonsense, and that the use of 'stark mad' was published by John Skelton c.200 years prior to William Stark's birth (see line 50), and maybe well before that, too. Speculation that has been put forward by experts in reliable sources might be acceptable, but only if those sources are properly cited, but never, ever, guesswork. That's best kept to online question fora where anyone can ask and answer anything they like, with no editorial control of the quality of replies.
- I fear you might also have got the 'wrong end of the stick' when we ask editors to sign their posts. We do not want any editor to add their username to content added into encyclopaedia articles, as you did. However we DO need you to sign Talk page posts like this one, please. Just type four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~) at the very end of your post. Then, when you hit 'Publish changes' your username and a timestamp will be automatically added each time. This is essential on talk pages so we know who has said what, and when, but never in an article itself. Hope this helps. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Stark_(physician) /* Death and legacy */ Was he seen as "mad," leading to the phrase " Stark-raving mad. " ?
Hi, Nick, sorry to trouble you again and apologies for getting things wrong, ~ I am an old fool who struggles with today's world. I gather then that you and your team wouldn't be interested in "new" notions, like : - the Ishango bone's description in Wiki that the line containing all primes is there by "coincidence" ~ which I think is false ( of course I can not prove it, but my route makes more logical sense than just "coincidence"; or how the Babylonians ( on Plimpton 322 ) could have found a simple diagram that led them to a generalised process that could produce ALL Pythagorean Triples. I guess that you would NOT be interested in such matters ? Hey Ho, thank you for your time, cheers, Martin — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Nit (talk • contribs) 15:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Discussion Location
I made an edit on a page and it was reverted (which is fine) and they said the reason was because it was being discussed whether or not to add it and I was confused as to where this was being discussed. If I had known there was a problem with the information being added I would have not added it. Where is this discussion happening? I'm very new to this and I don't want to annoy the more seasoned people on this platform. --RaskBunzzz (talk) 12:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)RaskBunzzz
- @RaskBunzzz: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure which article you are referencing, but discussion usually takes place on the article talk page. If you are on a computer, there is a "Talk" tab at the top of every article, this is how you access the talk page. If you tell which article you are referencing I could link to the talk page directly to help you. If the discussion is not there, you should ask the editor that reverted you where the discussion is. 331dot (talk) 12:17, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Narrow focus and inaccuracies in General Motors Streetcar Conspiracy
Hi. I'm pretty sad with this article. It lacks background, such as the fact that General Motors's bus division (Yellow Truck and Coach) was a money-losing dud before GM created front company National City Lines and did the huge bus conversion on Manhattan.
In addition, GM was involved in bus conversions in Kentucky, New Jersey, Jamestown and Buffalo NY, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Canada etc.
GM engineer and exec, then consultant Marmion Mills was proud of personally performing 12 bus conversions, so certainly should be mentioned.
Finally, the automaker was involved in litigation with the antitrust division of the Dept. of Justice over its overwhelming monopoly of bus manufacturing for decades.
Overall, it's a pretty spotty article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tramfish (talk • contribs) 12:43, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- The place to discuss potential improvements to the article is Talk:General Motors streetcar conspiracy, supporting your suggestions with references to published reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
The SPI box
You know that big box on the WP:SPI page that lists all of the non-archived cases? I often find that it's out of date, even after refreshing or purging the cache. How come the box takes so long to update? Server issues, I assume? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:25, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Woshiyiweizhongguoren: You're probably better off asking this technical question at Wikipedia_talk:Sockpuppet_investigations. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 17:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Timtempleton: This user has recently been blocked. Mstrojny (talk) 18:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Mstrojny: Well, that was a train wreck. And an autoconfirmed editor as well. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:56, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Timtempleton: This user has recently been blocked. Mstrojny (talk) 18:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Can you make your own wiki page?
Anybody know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karrwilson (talk • contribs) 14:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Karrwilson: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Writing an autobiographical article(not a "wiki page") is highly discouraged, though not forbidden. Please read the guidelines on autobiographies. That would only be relevant if you meet one of the notability criteria for biographies, such as being a notable musician, artist, politician, etc. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should do that on social media. You do have a user page where you can post limited information about yourself within the context of your Wikipedia editing(see WP:USERPAGE for more information about acceptable user page content) but it is not meant to be a social media-type page. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Creating a page on Wikipedia
I beg you, help me. I am a representative of a talented actor, I’ve faced the problem of creating a page on Wikipedia, I tried in vain to figure it out and create pages, but I don’t get it, I find it difficult to figure it out on Wikipedia. I ask you to help me create a page. Earlier, I created the page but very badly. but there were attempts by several people to numerous changes to the page and eventually the page deleted and blocked me. I CONSIDER THAT WE SHOULD HELP TALENTED PEOPLE TO BE IN THE HISTORY OF WIKIPEDIA, THEN IF THERE ARE MORE CONFIRMATION TO THIS. THANK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertbruni (talk • contribs) 15:25, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- If you are currently blocked, you should not be using sockpuppetry to evade the block. You need to make an unblock request from your previous account. You also need to read about conflict of interest and about paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- The purpose of Wikipedia is not to "help talented people". You should use social media for that purpose. The actor whom you represent can not have an article here unless he or she is WP:Notable, that is, he or she has been written about in detail in independent WP:Reliable sources. If you can find such sources, then, once your block has expired or you get unblocked, you may request an article at WP:Requested articles, mentioning the sources that you have found. The article should be a summary of the content of the sources. See Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Entertainers for specific guidelines. Dbfirs 15:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
ROSALIND FULLER
My name is Bob Hind and I write all the Nostalgia columns for the Portsmouth News. I have come across a photograph circa 1906 showing Fuller's drapers in Portsmouth and a reference to his daughter Rosalind. I checked out in Wikipedia and found much information. Is this copyrighted can you tell me or may I use some of the info in my column?
Thanking you.
Robert W Hind — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.124.223 (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would first inform you that Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information, so it would probably be inadvisable to use it in your column. It would be better for you to use the sources used in the relevant Wikipedia articles. However, you may use Wikipedia content with attribution as described at WP:C; please read that carefully. 331dot (talk) 16:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- If you click on the image the media viewer will appear. There should be a bright blue button in the bottom right that will take you to the page for the image, which should have the copyright info you need. Good luck! WelpThatWorked (talk) 16:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Editing tables
I noticed that when editing an article with a table "|-" that the table should end with "|}". If it ends with "|-" the entire table becomes hidden in read mode though the information is still available in the edit mode. I'm not sure if this is a glitch or merely the intended result of the coding. You can see this in the history of the edits for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Uber.
Best, Nick — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:A410:54B0:CB6:D047:CFC4:8E00 (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- You can learn more about editing tables at Help:Introduction_to_tables_with_Wiki_Markup RudolfRed (talk) 19:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
How can I upload a Google Drive link or Facebook link where public can view it on my profile without being asked to login?
How ❓ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gautam Moitra (talk • contribs) 18:37, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Gautam Moitra, This desk is for Asking how to use Wikipedia, not using facebook or google drive. However, for google drive you can go to the share menu and click "Get shareable link" then paste the link that you receive. Good luck. WelpThatWorked (talk) 18:43, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Meaning of "esp."
I notice "esp." in the current Julian Assange article. I know it means the beginning of the partnership, but I can't figure out what specific word it's an abbreviation for, and I haven't been able to find this word by searching. Can someone please tell me what it is? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roy McCoy (talk • contribs) 18:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Roy McCoy: It stands for espoused in the Julian Assange infobox, a clunky way of saying married. Please sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~ so we know who you are. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Ruquaiyya begam was malika-e-hindustan
Why did you remove my edit of ruquaiyya sultan.she was malika-e-hindustan because she was given the title of padshah begam.Please publish it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firangim (talk • contribs) 18:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- The query refers to edits to Ruqaiya Sultan Begum, apparently made by Firangim while not logged in, as shown as additions by IP 45.116.232.46. David notMD (talk) 19:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Firangim:, your edits were removed because you provided no reliable sources to support your claims. If you can find adequate sourcing for your changes, then make certain you cite them appropriately. Also, please ensure that you proofread your edits as best as you can before submitting your edits, as there were a few spelling and grammatical errors. Thank you, caknuck ° needs to be running more often 20:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Editing A Photo
Hi! I work with some clients and we'd like to update our photos on the artist page (they're over 10 years old) but I don't have the access to do that. Are there any users on here that could help if we had cleared photos to use? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Resartistmgmt (talk • contribs) 20:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
- Hey Resartistmgmt. First, you should register a different name for your account. Accounts that represent groups or organizations are not permitted.
- Besides that, if the company wishes to release photos they own under a free license so that they may be used on Wikipedia, you can find the instructions for doing so at WP:CONSENT. GMGtalk 20:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)