From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Teahouse  (Redirected from Wikipedia:TH/Q)
Jump to: navigation, search

Question forum »Host profiles »Guest profiles » Welcome to the Teahouse! A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

WP teahouse logo.png

Is it fair for a Person to be allowed to be Creator/Major Contributor to his/her own article page ?[edit]

As with the case here , the page seems to be a notable person , having appeared in a couple of trusted publisher news (as passing mention?) . But the user who created this page seems to be the same person (Lokeswara Rao) and is adding down his own achievement details all by himself without supportig references. So ,my question is , If an Article is a biography of an individual , is it fair in wikipedia that the same person is writing down his own achievement in that article ? Doesnt this self-description seem to be an effort to achieve self-boosted publicity and could compromise the authenticity of an article ? Shouldn't such articles be discouraged by, in this case , being notified for discussed deletions ? Sahil 12:57, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Well Wikipedia has a policy about not making an article about yourself so it could just be someone they say their not.Mirror Freak 13:09, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I've struggled with this on a couple of occasions, where the person either creating the article or doing a vast amount of the editing is either the article's subject, or closely related to the subject (the subject's wife). In one instance, the editors simply ignored me, and I really don't know what to do in that situation, in the other, they were very responsive and became quite cautious in ensuring everything they put on the page was verified with an independent source. WP:COI (the policy MirrorFreak just mentioned) has some good information.Onel5969 (talk) 13:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
As a generalisation, the folk who create autobiographies are the "Do you know who I AM?" crowd, and no-one does. They think WIkipedia will promote their business, career, and so much else. Sadly, a good number discover that they are not notable. The thing to do is to flag the COI, and then consider the article as an article. Are they notable? If not, use one of the deletion mechanisms and let the community decide. Fiddle Faddle 13:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Inline citations[edit]


I have had an article rejected 3 times due to problems with inline citations - with this message

"The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you."

I'm struggling to get the citations right - I wonder if someone can help with specific comments on where I am going wrong.

Thanks Poppy

Poppymelzack (talk) 11:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

The answer is that you are probably on the right side of the border of the references being useful. Ignore the comment about formatting them. I have used a tool to do that, though please do learn how for the future. WP:REFLINKS will be your friend here. The dead link is a bit of a shame, though, but not fatal.
Some of your references could be viewed as being directory entries, probably created in conjunction with Riddy, but there is just about enough commentary about him to accept the article. I am inclined towards acceptance flagged with {{Refimprove}} on that basis. But the latest reviewer must have had something specific in mind. @Onel5969: you and I obviously agree that improvement is required, but your feelings seem stronger than mine. I base this on my inclination to accept and your inclination to decline. Please would you advise Poppymelzack about your stronger concerns? Fiddle Faddle 12:01, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Poppymelzack and Timtrent. My difficulty comes in the Life and career section. For such a brief section, it contains quite a few facts, only one of which is cited. There are at least 6 uncited facts in that parapgraph (I've added citation needed tags to show you). Obviously, some of those needed be included in a single citation, but those facts are simply not supported by the current citations. In the exhibition sections, there should be some notation to back up those lists of exhibitions, probably something as simple as a link to his webpage with a parenthetical note like: (Exhibitions listed were taken from the artists website,, and you could put that at the very beginning of the Exhibition section, or in each subsection. Same with the publications section. I guess my issue was that there are simply too many uncited facts in the article to simply put a {{Refimprove}} on the article, but I was merely being cautious, since I am still learning my way in this AfC process. Obviously, another editor might feel differently. Feel free to revert my edits to remove the cn tags, I merely put them there as an indicator to show what should be cited, definitely wasn't trying to be obnoxious. Anyway, hope this helps.Onel5969 (talk) 12:40, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Onel5969, I see your caution as excellent, and your explanation equally so. Sometimes I am as cautious as you are, other times not so much. Our opinions are, I think, equally valid. Fiddle Faddle 12:56, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Discussion about streamlining.[edit]

I don't really have a question but don't know where else to go to thank or apologize to people who have become involved in discussions and have referred to me. Please forgive me for making mistakes. I didn't plan to create anything for Wikipedia but found so many errors on the Philadelphia Eleven page that I finally tried to amend the article. I didn't want to disturb the original article more than necessary out of respect for all the work and time that Janus 523 had put into creating it. I did notice that there seemed an abundance of notes.

When I began to add information another editor wanted citations and references for many things that really didn't seem to require it, but I complied and added them, using a book which was already included among the references or further reading notes by the original writer. The book happened to have been written by me but when asked for references and citations, I used it because it was the only place where much source material had been documented. As far as complying with request for source citations, I simply added page numbers where applicable. Another editor removed the notes. Fine with me. I tried to eliminate redundancies, but I didn't check carefully over the text of the original writer in those areas that I hadn't written about, such as the Washington Four section. Marchjuly refers to that section particularly regarding redundancies, and also to notes of the original writer for repetitions. I didn't disturb other people's notes because I assumed that an abundance of references was required by Wikipedia since the other editors were using them liberally. I agree that the article is very long. Several of the sources heavily relied on by the original writer as authoritative were written by people who are not specialists in the subject, but generalists, and their data was not entirely accurate. Frankly, I am too busy and too tired to become involved in further work on it. It's been enormously time consuming and fatiguing, but as a writer I have a sense of responsibility to protect the integrity of real events and the people, places and dates involved in them, and when I see errors, I correct them, whether they are my own or another person's. I was asked by one of the Washington Four to correct biographical data in her section that was simply wrong in several details. If facts about a person are incorrect, it seems reasonable to respect that person's right to be represented accurately and edit accordingly. I was happy to do that.

I am grateful for the efforts of other editors to correct my errors. I hope that your ongoing discussion helps future efforts. Best wishes to all. Scholarwise (talk) 10:51, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Title of my article[edit]

Hello again friendly teahouse team! Soory, but there seems to e no end to my questions. On my user page, the article title appears as "user: Marita Dieling". Now this would need to be "AIRCA - The Association of International Research and Development Centers for Agriculture", currently in the second line looking like a sub-heading. What do I need to do? Thanks Marita Dieling (talk) 09:00, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok dear Wiki team, thanks for the "answer" to this question (which I can only see as a reply on my talk page, not as a reply here under my question to teahouse), I am officially giving up. AIRCA is a non-for-profit organization, and the article is written in quite a neutral tone I think, without advertising or telling the world how great we are. Nevertheless, many thanks to all the people who took time into getting this article along. Pity that I did not manage to finally get this article into Wikipedia. Marita Dieling (talk) 09:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
@User:Marita Dieling - I think you're giving up too easily. From the sources currently in the draft the subject seems to be notable and a quick Google delivered many more promising looking sources, problems of style and article content can be fixed by editing. I would be happy to help you to get the draft into acceptable shape. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:31, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Roger (Dodger67). Marita already asked for help in this section. I also have the feeling the subject is notable enough. The independent coverage is weak (most of the sources within the draft come from the members of the institution) but does exist and the creation of this "alliance" was announced by many websites. No coverage of its eventual activities though. I would vote for a stub (I made a suggestion in marita's first question), while waiting for a wider coverage of its action. But that's the opinion of a newbie ^^ KaptainIgloo (talk) 15:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

New article[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians. I have created an article that is a work in progress here. Can anyone help out? I have a hunch that it is not notable, and if I were to create the article, it would be AFD'ed and it would probably have a consensus to merge into Newsfix's stations' article, which is located here. Also, if I were to take a picture of the logo, would it be under fair use? Cheers! Brandon (MrWooHoo)Talk to Brandon! 02:19, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey @MrWooHoo: I made a few small copyedits to the article, but I haven't looked at its validity in terms of notability or anything like that. To answer your question about the logo, I recommend using the cleanest version of the logo from the official website, which is located here. Now typically, logos for company articles are copyrighted, and Wikipedia claims fair use to use them (and note that fair use images can only be used in live articles, not drafts). However, in the United States at least, there is the concept of threshold of originality, in which logos consisting of simple typeface and shapes aren't copyrightable and qualify as being in the public domain. These "simple" logos can be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons, and the licensing can be marked with both {{PD-logo}} and {{Trademarked}} (since the logo is assumingly trademarked). As I see it, NewsFix's logo appears to be a plain font with a bit of simple styling, so I'd imagine it would qualify as a public domain logo (if anyone wants to back me up on that or disagrees with my analysis, feel free to). Hope this helps a bit, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 03:12, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

why is my record label deemed an 'Unremarkable music label'?[edit]

why is my record label deemed an 'Unremarkable music label'? On what grounds?Fantastic cat more than human (talk) 01:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

@Fantastic cat more than human: Welcome to the Teahouse. Unremarkable in this context doesn't mean that the label is mediocre; it means that it isn't notable. Essentially, this means that there is no evidence that it's been documented by independent sources (by documented, I mean described extensively, not simply mentioned). If you can find such sources, add in the information (but not the words and sentences themselves--that is copyright infringement, an even more serious problem) and cite the sources. This essay for beginners should give you some tips. --Jakob (talk) 01:37, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks you Jakob Fantastic cat more than human (talk) 01:38, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Fantastic cat more than human. Adding to what Jakob said, Wikipedia has a guideline about notability. In order to be eligible for an article, the topic needs to have received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Our core policy on verifiability says that the reader has to be able to verify the claims made in an article.
Your article about a record label contains no references demonstrating notability and no means for a reader to verify the claims about the label. It is your obligation to comply with the relevant policies and guidelines if your article is to stay on Wikipedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:04, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

How do I upload an album cover with the correct licence?[edit]

Please help! I want to create a page for an album by a musician already in Wikipedia. I uploaded an image to Wiki Commons but got stuck over the type of licence and had to abandon it. The image was called Insight Album Cover. But now I can't upload a new file ( different name but same image) and have no idea how to licence it so I can use it. Any ideas? Thank you. MarycjamesMarycjames (talk) 20:21, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Marycjames: The Wikimedia Commons is an image repository for freely licensed images - that is, images that are licensed in a way that allows them to be used by anyone, for any purpose, with no requirements other than attribution. To use copyrighted content here on the English Wikipedia (such as a copyrighted album cover), you'll need to upload it locally here, assuming it meets our criteria for non-free content (which it presumingly does, as most album covers do). I recommend going through the File Upload Wizard to upload any pictures, which should guide you to choosing the proper fair use licensing for albums. One point to note is that fair use images should be relatively small in size; 300 x 300 px is sufficient for album covers. Another point to note is that fair use images should only be used in live articles. Since you say you plan on creating a page on the album in the future, you should first create the article, then upload the cover art once the album is live. Hope this helps! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Superhamster! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marycjames (talkcontribs) 20:41, 21 July 2014‎ (UTC)

Request an Article[edit]

I want to request and article but when I get to the choose a topic area I can't seem to find the appropriate Topic Area for the article I want written. Ggghhj123 (talk) 19:05, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Ggghhj123: Welcome to the Teahouse! I assume you're talking about listing an article at Wikipedia:Requested articles? If so, could you state the article or topic-area that you would like to request? We might be able to help you out better if we know what your topic-area is. We do also have an "other" category for requesting articles, though it's best if we can pin the article request down to a specific category. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:09, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Baba Shah Jamal[edit]

What should I do about the IP's repeated edits? He won't stop... Jwoodward48wiki (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

He did it again! What should I do? Jwoodward48wiki (talk) 19:33, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Jwoodward48wiki: Another user and I have reverted and warned the IP a couple times. Since the editor hasn't stopped spamming, I've reported them to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism.
For future reference, seeing that you are into vandal patrol, the process for dealing with spam is similar to dealing with vandals: sufficiently warn, then report. You can find all user warning templates at WP:WARN. For cases of spam, you'll probably want to use {{uw-advert1}} and {{uw-spam1}}, depending. If an editor has been sufficiently warned yet continues to spam, you can report them at WP:AIV, as you would do to typical vandals.
In cases that are a bit more complex and might not be appropriate to report to WP:AIV, you can ask for admin intervention at the administrator's noticeboards for incidents (ANI). Be sure to follow the instructions at the top of the page, which include notifying editors of discussions you start about them. Hope this helps! Thanks for bringing this issue up. ~SuperHamster [[User talk:SuperHamster|Talk]Contribs 19:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
So, I have a newbie question related to Baba Shah Jamal. Is the total absence of inline citations and the listing of only a single offline reference not a problem for this article, even one classified as a stub? or do the external links replace citations? I mean no disrespect to the subject, obviously a venerated Sufi saint, but is Wikipedia the appropriate venue for genealogical listings? Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:18, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
@Grand'mere Eugene: Yes, the article's sourcing definitely needs improvement - and coincidentally, a minute after you made this comment, Ukexpat tagged the article as needing several improvements, including better sourcing. In the case of external links vs. references, all references should be listed in the references section while the external links section should be a separate section that lists official links or further readings. The two sections may have overlapping links, but should still be distinguished. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, ~SuperHamster. I also found some information on the genealogy question at Wikipedia:WikiProject Genealogy. Learn something new every day! Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


Hey Teahouse, I'm wondering if anyone would care to adopt me. I'm extremely excited about being on Wikipedia, and would like to learn more about it. Thanks, ☻MirrorFreak☺ 13:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi ! Have you checked this list ? It might help you ;) Good luck ! KaptainIgloo (talk) 13:12, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Facebook of Wikipedia[edit]

Hey, I found this page [1] is quite interesting. Does it belong to Wikipedia also? Who are the admins of this page? Thank you! Alphama (talk) 12:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure. But as it's a "verified" page, it must have the approval of the Wikimedia Foundation. From the look of the content, it looks like it is run by Foundation staff. --LukeSurl t c 14:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
It's linked in foundation:Template:Blogbox which is displayed at and elsewhere. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:51, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Possible COI editing[edit]

There's a wiki article about my surname (Vohra), I'd like to add myself to the People section at the botton, but am worried that, outside of little cheeky, this would be a COI (conflict of interest) edit.

Any thoughts? KameelV (talk) 09:50, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kameel. Do we have an article about you? Do you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability? If so, then yes, you can add yourself to the page. However, if you do not meet these criteria, then you should not do so - Wikipedia does not want or need to list everyone in the world with a particular surname. Yunshui  09:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Article live?[edit]

Hello teahouse,

how do I make my article now go live? I think all the copyrights issues are sorted.

Many thanks in advance, Marita Marita Dieling (talk) 07:28, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately the referencing issues remain, and there is a risk of it being proposed for one of the deletion mechanisms once it is moved to the main article namespace. We require references from significant coverage about the entity, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Fiddle Faddle 09:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
sorry to interfere: I have found that article that looks like an independent and reliable source. The website seems OK and the article does include an external point of view on the institution. It is definitely not much (I haven't found any coverage of their action) but maybe a stub could still be made out of that ? Something like: "The Association of International Research and Development Centres for Agriculture (AIRCA) is an alliance of research institutions in the field of agriculture. Its goal is to act at a grass-root level to improve food security, within the context of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The alliance gathers 9 groups active in 60 countries." Or is this alliance really not notable enough ?KaptainIgloo (talk) 12:04, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Ok thanks a lot for replying so quickly, much appreciated. Let me see what else I can find in terms of, but might be difficult because we are still new. But thanks anyways.Marita Dieling (talk) 12:05, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I see KaptainIgloo's comment only now. I so much appreciated the amount of work and time you all put into this. Will rework the article as per your advice. Have a wonderful day Marita Dieling (talk) 12:09, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Notice Comment[edit]

A comment in the VxWorks article (which I recently updated) was recently inserted in the 'Notable uses' section. It asked asked contributors to modify the section to prose. However, this section was meant to be just a list organized by market segment. Being new to Wikipedia, I am not sure how/who I should contact on this to discuss, or what the etiquette is. ThanksRobpater (talk) 02:23, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

You could add an entry to the article's Talk Page, or check through the page history to find out which user added that tag, and leave a note on his/her talk page. In this case, it was User:Thumperward. Rojomoke (talk) 04:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
I've moved the tag further up, as the entire article is too heavily built on interminable lists (customers, features, platforms). Our articles should not simply be large lists of data points; these are sometimes appropriate, but not for general-purpose articles on subjects. It may be that the users section in this particular article is best formatted as a list, but it may also be that when the rest of the article is rewritten a better form can be found. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 16:01, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Article Drafts[edit]

Can users work on drafts that are being started by other users?

02:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I assume you mean that the article has not yet been published and remains in another user's sandbox. If that's the case, your best bet is to ask the drafter if they would be interested in getting your help. Otherwise, I advise waiting until the article is published, at which point you're free to edit. Keihatsu talk 02:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Designing User Pages and Articles[edit]

Hi, I just set up my own userpage and was toying around with headings and text formats. I seemed to have messed up on the heading entitled 'References' and it doesn't appear right on the screen. If you have the time could you please head on over to and check out the code and tell me what I have done wrong. Thank you very much. The help is greatly appreciated. The Free Editor Anyone Can Cite (talk) 21:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

It looks like someone came along to help already. Don't hesitate to come back to the teahouse if you have further questions, though. Keihatsu talk 02:17, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Article style advice[edit]

I need one or more experienced editors to look at an article and give some fairly specific advice as to style; i.e., precisely what kinds of things should be included and excluded. This is the kind of thing that should be addressed in article talk, but there are only two of us participating in that talk and we are having trouble reaching full agreement.

Is there a better place than Teahouse to solicit such help?

The article is here; the "Events of the incident" section is a good illustration of the question. If someone here wants to offer the advice it could be added to the existing talk section. Mandruss (talk) 20:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

@Mandruss: WP:3O is a good place to find a third opinion where you have a stalemate between two contributors. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Just what I was looking for, and good to know for the future. Thanks. Mandruss (talk) 02:06, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Requirements a movie quote[edit]


I am doing my first page. It is for the band HeadShy which has an unusual triple EP that derived it's concept from the movie Perfume. I am going to use a quote from the movie that it also used in their bio. Would stating that the quote came from the movie with a link to the movie's wiki page along with a citation (?) to and IMDB page that contains the quote suffice? Thanks so much (talk) 20:25, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I believe I located the quote to which you are referring [ (here)] and I think the bigger issue is that a quote like that would be inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. I'd recommend omitting the quote and sticking to the facts (when was the band formed, have any of their releases charted, what do major critics say, etc.). Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Userbox organization[edit]

Hey Teahouse. This is my first time asking a question so...Here goes! How can I make my Userboxes be in order on the side like this user has here Thanks! MirrorFreak (talk) 18:21, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Does anyone know what I mean?☻MirrorFreak☺ 18:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello MirrorFreak and welcome to the Teahouse. I think I know what you mean. If you just click on the "Edit" tab on my page you can copy the code from there. Just be sure to leave everything the way you found it. The code starts with {| align="right" style="border: 1px solid #CCC;" then comes the userboxes and it ends with |} The code is a way of putting a frame around the userboxes, and it also tell where you want all of it to be. If you want it on the left side you just write "left" in the code instead. Best of luck! Best, w.carter-Talk 19:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Btw, if you see anything at any users page that you want to know about, you can always ask that user on their talk page. :) We have a rule to not bite the newbies, so there is no danger. You are always welcome to ask at my talk page. See you! w.carter-Talk 19:09, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to ask,(As it seems rude) but could you do it for me? Also, do you adopt users?☻MirrorFreak☺ 19:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
I'll see you at your talk page and we'll take it from there. And, no, sorry I do not adopt, I have not been here very long either. w.carter-Talk 19:12, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Are you going to my talk page?☻MirrorFreak☺ 19:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done w.carter-Talk 19:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

created a second Wiki account (topic change) HOWTO transfer Contributions history to new account?[edit]

I created a username and used for a few years. I made small corrections in a lot of different places over the years which I presume are logged in Contributions

Now I realized that my username was too specific for one field and my making corrections outside that field are inconsistent with that username name.

So I just created a second username so now when I am going to make corrections to pages I will login to the account appropriate for the expected corrections

Now can I have all my old corrections on the 1st account transferred with the name change to the second?

Muonphysicist (talk) 04:15, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Muonphysicist. You are entitled to abandon one account and start another. And, on the user page of the second account, you can mention that it is a successor to the first account. But you can't transfer the edits from one account, active for several years, to another account. However, I have to admit that I don't understand your comment about "inconsistent with that username". An account with a name like "FlowerLover" can edit articles about pigs, mud or nuclear fusion. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

How do I create a new listing?[edit]

I'm overwhelmed. How do I simply add a new entry to Wikipedia?Voicetel23 (talk) 00:29, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Voicetel23. Unfortunately, it isn't really "simple" to write an encyclopedia article, at least one that won't be deleted. On the other hand, it isn't exactly rocket science. Start by reading the 5 Pillars of Wikipedia. Then, our Primer for beginners may be useful to you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:54, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to the teahouse Voicetel23, another thing to keep in mind is that there are a LOT of things you can do to help make Wikipedia better without creating new articles. In fact the work that most editors do is about 95% editing existing articles and 5% creating new articles. Look under the "Help Out" heading on this page: Wikipedia:Community_portal and you will see many suggestions. Starting by editing existing pages will give you experience in how to use Wiki markup, Wikipedia policies, etc. and in more manageable digestible chunks rather than jumping in and creating a brand new article. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:08, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Translating Wikipedia Artiticles[edit]

A well as recently starting a English Wikipedia Account, I also became a member of Vicipeid, the Irish language Wikipedia. Due to the low level of Irish speakers, there are a good few articles on Vicipeid which lack detail and quite a few subjects which don't have articles at all. Is there any problem with me taking an English Wikipedia article and directly translating it to Irish to make an Irish version for Vicipeid? Go raibh maith agat! (Thank you!) An Eagarthóir (talk) 22:59, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, An Eagarthóir. Translating articles from one language to another is a great service that you can perform, if you have that expertise. Please attribute the original source. Refer to WP:Translate_us for more details. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:02, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Generally speaking translating articles is completely fine so long as you follow the attribution requirements outlined on the page that Cullen linked to. Basically you just have to leave a note on the talk page of the article saying you translated it from English Wikipedia on such and such a date. Thank you so much for offering to translate articles! Zell Faze (talk) 20:37, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion cannot be contested[edit]

Hello there! I just finished a page a few days ago and it was rapidly marked for speedy deletion under the A7 (no mention of importance) and G11 (unambiguous promotion) criteria.

As far as I can see, it doesn't meet the A7 criteria for deletion, as there are references demonstrating the company's importance in the article itself, along with mention of that fact in the product section[1] (more than 10 million participants in video conversations through its flagship product). There are also other possible alternative references, including one from the earlier days when it grew to 1 million participants.[2]

Aside from the product's user base, I also had sufficient proof of notability in all of the references inserted in the Awards section of the article, in which the company has received recognition from several well-known institutions for its work. I'm not exactly sure how it is even possible for my article to have been deleted under the A7 criteria.

I'm also curious of what promotional language was used to merit a G11 criteria for unambiguous promotion.

What can I do if I don't have a button for contesting the article's speedy deletion, and how can I be guided towards making the article proper for Wikipedia's standards? Mleivagomez (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

HI Mleivagomez. Welcome to the Teahouse. The administrator reviewing the speedy will decline it if the terms of A7 or G11 are not met. Notability is normally determined at WP:Articles for deletion.Charles (talk) 22:14, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick reply! I am currently still confused, though. As far as the SD guidelines show me, it's preferable to work with the author on trying to get the article edited than to proceed with a speedy deletion. Mleivagomez (talk) 22:37, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Mleivagomez. The editor who tagged the article for speedy deletion is Solarra. Have you discussed the matter with that editor? Your use of a clearly promotional phrase such as "flagship product" indicates that you may so immersed in marketing speak that you can't distinguish between neutral language and promotional language. As for writing an article that won't be deleted, my basic advice is to rigorously avoid any promotional or advertising language. Remove it three times, and then once more. Disclose any conflict of interest that you may have, and comply with the neutral point of view rigorously. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:15, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
I've been working with the editor in my userspace to build a version not quite so promotional, so far it is looking extremely promising. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ 話 ♪ ߷ ♀ 投稿 ♀ 05:43, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Added {{reflist talk}}, so that the references appear in this section, rather than at the bottom of the page. --ColinFine (talk) 09:42, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
You all have been extremely helpful! Especially Solarra, who has worked with me on this painstaking edit. Thank you all so much! Mleivagomez (talk) 13:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

How do I indent my edits?[edit]

I know I am missing something very obvious. My question is, how can I indent my edits on a talk page? I noticed that everyone else replies to a edit under it, but indented to the right. My edits just stick to the left. Anthonyliu (talk) 20:48, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Indenting is really simple. All you have to do is put the : (colon) symbol before your text and the entire paragraph is indented. The number of colons you have determines the number of indents you have. Dathus Talk | Contribs 21:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
You can also read this. Mandruss (talk) 20:55, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Information boxes of myself[edit]

I need to add information to see the public what my current situation is. So help me to add User-Boxes. I don't like to paste from another user though. Give me tips. Thanks.Wesige putha (talk) 20:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

If you need help with userboxes, take a look at the Wikipedia Userbox Gallery and if you want to know how to create your own, look here, at the userbox guide. Dathus Talk | Contribs
21:19, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Citation within a footnote[edit]

I have some language that is important enough to include in the article, but not significant enough for the body. It calls for a footnote. However, it also needs to be sourced using two named refs.

Playing in my sandbox, I tried nesting the refs, as: ...body text.<ref group=note>note text...<ref name=refname1/>note text...<ref name=refname2/></ref>.

The entire code string was apparently discarded, with no citation number in the body, nothing added to the Notes section, and no error.

Is there a way to accomplish this? If not, the material will have to go in the body text. Mandruss (talk) 18:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The easiest way is to use the {{efn}} template for the note. Take a look at how this article does it for instance. Eric Corbett 18:17, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Perfect. ¡Muchas gracias! Mandruss (talk) 18:48, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

How can I check to see if permission has been granted for photo use?[edit]

An emailed template from a photographer giving permission for me to use "Richard Earl Thompson" portrait for his article was submitted about a week ago. Will I be notified or do I check for status somewhere?

Thank you. Jet 17:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jet1950 (talkcontribs)

Hi, Jet, welcome back to the Teahouse. Has this e-mail been sent/forwarded to If so, then you should upload it to Wikimedia Commons (do not use the Upload Wizard). In the "Permission" box, copy the {{OTRS pending|...}} code you find below it. This indicates that permission is pending confirmation. After the permission has been confirmed, the description will be updated. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 18:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

table insert[edit]

I have an article which iIwant to submit which is mainly one table.��Can I import the table without creating a table in the article template and populating it item by item��Jeremybryson (talk) 16:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jeremy, welcome to the teahouse. There's no existing automated way to do this, but there's no reason there shouldn't be.
For example if you have a table in Microsoft Word or Excel, it should be possible to export those to CSV format. And perhaps someone has made a script or macro that changes CSV format into a simple wiki format table?
Leaving this open in the hope that someone else knows of such a thing or can search for one...
--Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:36, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
There is a tool at this site. You can paste directly from Excel into the box, and it displays the source for a wiki formatted table. I've never used it here, but I have used it to create a couple of simple tables at the Japanese Wikipedia, and it worked fine there. -- Margin1522 (talk) 05:15, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Book Creation Category[edit]


I apologise for my ignorance.

I would like to create & download a Wikipedia “book.”

I've tried to create a book, by clicking on "Add this category to your book” in order to add all articles in that category to the book. The book I downloaded included the main article, but only the titles of the related articles.

Is it possible to create a book (which includes the other articles, and not only their titles) simply by adding the relevant Category?? Or do I have to add each individual Wikipedia Article to the book??

In advance, I thank you for your help. (talk) 15:08, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Due to the way Wikipedia books works, it is copying the text from the article and effectively pasting it into your book, so you would have to add each page manually if you wanted an entire category. Dathus Talk | Contribs 21:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
are you sure about that, Dathus? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:14, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
I just looked into it again and it seems that if I add a category it does create a book with all of the pages from that category. You can try it again with the category you want made into a book and see if it works this time. Dathus Talk | Contribs
09:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)


How can I go to a person's page when I can't find it? THX4,444 — Preceding unsigned comment added by THX4,444 (talkcontribs) 05:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, THX4,444. Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that you want to find the user page for an editor called "Cullen328". That would be me. All you need to do is type User:Cullen328 into the search box, and you will be taken to that editor's page (mine). Just vary the search for any other editor. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:24, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! — Preceding unsigned comment added by THX4,444 (talkcontribs) 06:36, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Moving my draft article into my sandbox[edit]

Hi, I've been working with an editor who is now on break. He suggested that my article be moved into my sandbox for safe keeping. Is that something another editor can do for me or can I do it myself? From what he said, it sounds like I need to have someone other than me move it. Also sounds like my article is ready to go, I just need to wait until the film can get some notability before it can be published. Since my film is recently released, I'm not sure how long it will take to get some independent reviews. In the meantime, I don't want my article to expire. I appreciate any help in this. Here's the link:

Thanks!! pdelich (talk) 03:31, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome pdelich to Teahouse! You could use the move option located on the top right area of the page and move it into your userspace sandbox. ///EuroCarGT 03:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm not convinced it's necessary. Your draft article won't be deleted until at least six months after you last edit it. (This is assuming it doesn't contain urgent problems like copyright violations - which would get it deleted from your sandbox too.) Are you planning to do nothing with it for six months? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 03:37, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
It's not urgent, and I hope to get some notability for our film in the next 6 months, but I have no control over that. There are no copyright issues, I'm just responding to what the last editor suggested: moving it to my sandbox. Sounds like I may be able to do that myself?

As soon as I can get some notability, I'll be on it again!!  :-)

pdelich (talk) 04:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

pdelich, since you said that this is your film, you should declare Conflict of interest (close connection) on your userpage and once your draft is finished. ///EuroCarGT 05:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
More importantly, if it will really take more than six months from the film's release for any sources to take note of it, then it's fine to allow the page to be deleted. If somehow, some independent reliable sources discuss the topic in detail after more than six months, you can then request the page be undeleted. This is a much better idea than having random sandboxes and redirects and other nonsense sitting around for years without anyone understanding why. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:12, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Melicope micrococca White Euodia photos[edit]

I have two photos of a rain forest tree, the Melicope micrococca White Euodia that would improve the reference in Wikipedia, including flowers of the tree. I am not sure how I can add these photos.ChrisMarkDrew (talk) 01:17, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. If you took the photos, ChrisMarkDrew, then you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons under a Creative Commons license. If someone else took the photos, then they are probably covered by copyright and can't be used. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Image sharing across languges[edit]

I edited an English page Nostromo Yarará and tried to move the image from the Russian language page but not sure how to reuse it. I have seen Commons images used in multiple Wiki pages but not sure if a wiki image can be shared without uploading it again.

Incidentally what is the difference between the TeaGarden and the VillagePump?

Idyllic press (talk) 20:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Idyllic press and welcome back to the Teahouse. I can't really answer your question on how to image share across languages. Some more experienced Wikipedians will probably able to help you, or you can ask at the help desk. The village pump is a place where you can share ideas about the future of Wikipedia, and you can create proposals in the idea lab,etc. The Teahouse, however, is more like a place where you can ask/answer questions on current policy. Sorry for the long reply. Cheers! Brandon (MrWooHoo)Talk to Brandon! 20:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
@Idyllic press: Unfortunately, images cannot be shared between Wikipedias. If an image is "free" (public domain or freely licensed), it could be uploaded to the Commons so all Wikipedias could use it. If an image is "non-free" (normal copyrighted image), it must be separately uploaded to each Wikipedia where it is to be used. The image to which you are referring is "non-free". To be honest, the uploading of non-free images is one of the most difficult things to do in Wikipedia. Non-free images must meet all of the criteria listed here (see the section with numbers) to be used in English Wikipedia. (All of the different Wikipedias have different policies, and some Wikipedias do a poor job of enforcing their own policies, so often images that are used in other Wikipedias are not appropriate to use here.) In my opinion, I don't think it would be appropriate to use that photo in Wikipedia, because of criterion #1 on that list. There are a number of (non-free) photos of that drone available online, as well as at least one video. A person could use those photos and video to create a free diagram or sketch of the drone from scratch. Additionally, a Wikipedian could contact the manufacturer to see if the manufacturer would be willing to release an example photo under a free license. Because there are these alternatives that would result in free images for use in the article, I don't think it would be appropriate to use the non-free photo in the English Wikipedia. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:55, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
@Idyllic press: As a follow-up, if you would like to contact the manufacturer about releasing a photo under a free license (I'd guess you have a decent chance of success given that the manufacturer is not profiting from the image and would likely enjoy the added publicity), you could use any of the request examples listed here. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

@MrWooHoo: @Calliopejen1: Thank you, I had drafted a suitable letter on the manufaturers contact form but did not send it when I remembered the picture on the Russian site and thought to try use that first, I was all ready to just link throug to the other language image if it had worked but agree that a free image would be best. I have looked at picture details before on Commons but just get the image in a viewer when clicking through on Wikipeda these days so could not check the details of the other one. I will draft a new letter to the manufacturer after looking at the samples: had a look and they are much more elaborate than I had drafted. I will send a drief enquiry first and then if they show interest I will explain the hoops that have to be jumped through, perhaps they will upload to Commons on their own :-) Idyllic press (talk) 19:14, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

@Idyllic press: BTW if you'd like to bypass the image viewer to see the image details more easily, you can click the commons logo (the circle with arrows pointing into it) in the lower right of the viewer. There is also a way to change back to the old viewer by default in your preferences, but I don't remember where off the top of my head (if you can't find it and want to change it, ask back here). Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Uploading image[edit]

Hi, I'm new and haven't quite figured out how to upload an image to a wiki article. I have become interested in updating a certain article (United States Association of Former Members of Congress) and would like to upload that organization's logo to the Info Box. How do I do this while remaining within copyright guidelines?

Thanks so much. Abroham1024 (talk) 20:01, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Abroham1024. You will find our guidelines on use of logos and other non-free images at WP:NFCI. It needs to be uploaded here on Wikipedia for use in only one main space article, with a detailed rationale explaining why its use is appropriate. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Is only a Google scholar page enough for an article to be "worthy of notice" and get around deletion ?[edit]

As in this case ,The only reliable source that i could get about the article(which is on a person from academic field) was his Google Scholar Page.Is this enough for the article to be "worthy of notice"? Should the article still be nominated as Article for deletion since no notable achievement can be found published by any trusted publishing websites ? The only links are the persons University websites and Blogs. Thanks in advance -- Sahil 08:17, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello,, Sahil. The short answer is No. "Notable" in the Wikipedia sense refers to whether other people have already thought it worth writing about the subject and published their writings in reliable places. It makes very little difference how much the subject himself has published. Part of the reason for this is that if there is little published about the subject, then there is almost no information which could be put into an article, since all information in an article is required to be backed up by reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 10:24, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, SahilSahadevan. To a large extent, the notability of a professor or a scientist depends on how often other scholars cite their work in the academic literature. That is why we have a specific notability guideline for such people, which can be found at WP:ACADEMIC. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

reliable sources[edit]

Hi, I'm trying to fill in some "citations needed" and am confused about what qualifies as a "reliable source."

In particular, I'm working on cleaning up the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation page. Citations are needed for board members and for a conference held in 2011.

Is the Institute's own website OK to use a citation for the board members?

Regarding the conference, I'm confused about what the citation is supposed to corroborate. That the conference did, in fact, take place? Who the hosts were? If so, can the hosts' websites be used as citations? The conference wasn't reported in great detail in newspapers, and the scholarly journal sources aren't accessible to people without registered accounts.

By way of background, I am new here, and have been asked by the Institute to help clean up its page. I have read the COI policy and want to abide by it. Savannah38 (talk) 20:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Savannah38. from the COI policy. "6.add reliable sources, especially when another editor has requested them (but note the advice above about the importance of using independent sources)." From a quick look over the page, the section that has the citation needed tags. Are all about primary information. Indeed of when it was held, who was there, if the person indeed joined. And the last bit about the school. You should be able to use primary sources for that without to much hassle. If that is all what you want to fix then I do not see a problem. But do not take that as gospel that is just my interpretation of the COI rules. If you want to make bigger changes to the page, it would be best to suggest things on the talk page, and then contact the relevant wiki projects for input. So that others editors can add it in NathanWubs (talk) 21:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey Savannah. There is an unfortunately common tendency on Wikipedia to conflate some of the problems that primary sources do suffer from for some sourcing purposes, with the idea that they are always unreliable, or always less reliable than secondary sources. Primary sources are the absolute best fount for certain information, e.g., a birth certificate is a fairly peerless source for a date of birth and a death certificate for a date of death. Problems arise, however, when primary sources are used for self-serving matters, opinion, and synthesis and interpretation. For simply listing something neutral like the identity of a company's members, or when a conference was held, its website is a suitable source (which is not to say that a company's own website may not becomes out of date or contain errors). But here, I would go ahead. (Of course, primary sources do not directly evidence notability, when notability is at issue.) Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks NathanWubs and Fuhghettaboutit! Very helpful.

It sounds like primary sources are OK for the specific "citations needed" issues in the article. I'm tasked with going through the whole article and updating it (last substantial edit was 2011.) I will do that via the wiki projects/talk pages etc, as you suggest.

One more question. The article is also flagged because it appears to have a "close connection to the subject." Is that because one of the previous editors appeared to be from IHME? Or is it because a number of the footnoted citations refer to articles written by IHME researchers? Savannah38 (talk) 23:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

That had mostly to do with the last editor that was editing the page. I have removed it for now, as I do not think it will be a problem again as it stands. It seems you understand the jist of it. NathanWubs (talk) 23:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your help and advice.

Savannah38 (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I would like to express a little disagreement with respected editor Fuhghettaboutit, about the statement : "Primary sources are the absolute best fount for certain information, e.g., a birth certificate is a fairly peerless source for a date of birth and a death certificate for a date of death." I will give an example. My real name is "James Heaphy" and back in the old days before the internet, I thought that it was a rare name. Thanks to Google, I now know that dozens of people share my name. So, a primary source like a death certificate in the name "James Heaphy" does not prove that I am dead. That could be another "James Heaphy". I hope this doesn't happen for a long time, but a secondary source like a newspaper article saying that "active Wikipedia editor James Heaphy died on his 106th birthday, according to his family" would be a vastly better source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:12, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Hey Cullen! I'm not sure we actually disagree. You can't use any source blindly or divorced from context. Of course it has to be true that whether the death certificate is about the person who is the topic of an article can't be itself questionable (which btw, is also sometimes true of secondary sources). That doesn't make death certificates not an ideal source for a date of death; rather, it makes it questionable whether the death certificate at issue is a source for the topic at all. If that underlying question is at play it must inform our inquiry but it's usually not because numerous details from the death certificate show us it is about the right individual and the use we are putting it is for the death date.

Specifically, and of course it varies from country to country and often in a much more local way, but death certificates often list: name of mother and father, of spouse, usual residence, type of occupation, sometimes where a person worked, aliases, birth place and other details, which can tell us without doubt whether our person is the right person. So, we have an article on Jim Heaphy (I know, it's a bit morbid since we're talking about death certificates, but following your example of using you...) and that article has all kinds of cited information; it has secondarily sources parents names, date of birth, spouse's name, occupation and identify of employer, but there's a problem with the date of death – we have multiple seemingly reliable secondary news sources, but three conflicting dates of death during the same week. A death certificate is found – indisputably of you and not someone else because it has all the matching items, parents names, spouses name and so on that we already know. We aren't using that death certificate to source whether you died, nor to settle any conflict about those corroborating details or their exactitude (that show beyond a moral certainty that it is about the right Jim Heaphy), but only the date of death.

The use and context of a source's citation is always highly important. In your post you've switched the use of the death certificate to the use of proving that the particular person that is the topic of an article has died. That's an entirely different use, and assumes that we don't have all the other details to check against so we turned to a death certificate to prove that, without any clear way to tie that Jim Heaphy death certificate to the person named Jim Heaphy. Under that context, for that use, I totally agree with you, but it's a strawman because it's not the use I invoked.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

2 Questions[edit]

1. Are the images on are free to use as on the website nowhere does it say you cannot use them ( and I looked very hard ) So can I upload them? 2. Are my recent image uploads good - were their permission accepted? Must I worry about them? Dovikap (talk) 19:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

@Dovikap: 1. No, those images are not free to use and you cannot upload them. (By default, everything on the internet is not free to use.) As a general rule, the exceptions are extremely old images (date depends by country and a number of other factors but generally ~100 years old) or freely licensed images, i.e. images where there is an explicit statement that commercial reuse and remixing is permitted. If it's a new image, and you don't see some sort of explicit permission/licensing statement like that, the image can't be used on Wikipedia. If you have any more questions like this, the media copyright board has volunteers that can help you sort out copyright issues. 2. I'm not sure what you mean by your "recent" images, so I'll just do everything.... All of the files you have ever uploaded to the English Wikipedia have been deleted (uploads 5/27/14-6/20/14), all because of copyright problems.(See your upload log here -- red links are deleted images.) For images that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, some have been deleted and some have not. (See your upload log here -- again, red links are deleted images.) Four images were deleted for copyright problems (all uploaded 7/6/14). There are three images, uploaded 6/24/14 and 7/13/14, where permission has been confirmed. These you do not need to worry about. There is also one graph that you said you created yourself (uploaded 6/27/14), which is fine. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for your help. Dovikap 16:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Deleted because no citations[edit]

I recently decided that I would start to help review new articles from first time editors to help reduce the backlog. My question is this - since I am working backwards, reviewing the oldest articles first, I noticed that there were already notes on the new article pages; a few articles had no citations at all and they were informed of this about a month ago. When does an article with sources get deleted?

bpage (talk) 20:31, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

@Bfpage: Hello there! Articles without citations and/or sources gets deleted, if tagged with proper template, as soon as a reviewing admin waves the flag. (Rovinemessage) 22:29, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Help me[edit]

Help me in this Article Rana Zubair — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yo Yo Gandoo (talkcontribs) 03:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Yo Yo Gandoo. Your attempt to create an article on Rana Zubair is here - you were working in the system Sandbox, which is a place for experimenting, and automatically gets cleared every day. If you want to create an article, I recommend you read your first article, and probably use the article wizard to create it. Looking at what you inserted in that edit, I must tell you that an article on this person has no chance whatever of being accepted: Wikipedia does not have articles on everybody, but only on people who are "notable" in Wikipedia's special sense, which means that they have already been written about in reliable sources such as major newspapers or published books.
If you are Rana Zubair, you may share some basic information about yourself on your user page User:Yo Yo Gandoo if you wish; but that will not be an encyclopaedia article, and nor may Wikipedia be used for web hosting; it is just sharing a bit about you as a Wikipedia editor. You should also read guidance for younger editors before you do so.
I hope this helps. --ColinFine (talk) 09:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


Why did the earth form ??

See History of the Earth for our coverage of the earth's formation. In the future, if you have content questions, you can ask them at the reference desk (this board is for questions about how to use Wikipedia). Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)