From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Teahouse  (Redirected from Wikipedia:THQ)
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

How to do another article with another person[edit]

So basically I like working with other people and I want to know how I can do this? Chris 06:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cb808 (talkcontribs)

Is my article strong enough to publish?[edit] Logna (talk) 04:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Referencing Twice[edit]

Hi there! If I am writing an article in which I reference the same webpage multiple times spanning the article, should I footnote/reference the webpage every time I use it? Gabiravioli (talk) 03:37, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@Gabiravioli: Hi Gabiravioli. Yes, you should cite the source each time you use it, but we have a facility to cite a single source multiple times in an easy way, that does not result in the citation appearing more than once in the references section. The first time you cite it, give it a name, like so:

        <ref name="intuitive name">details about source</ref>

For all further cites to that reference, just use the first part with a forward slash like so:

        <ref name="intuitive name" />

For more about this, see Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once. I will place a visual citation guide below. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

How to deal with vandalism by several anonymous IP users?[edit]

Hello Teahouse! In a new article, currently nominated for deletion, the AfD template is continuously removed by anonymous IP users. I've warned one of these IP users and I've put back the deleted template(s) a lot of times, but other IPs keep deleting them. This is not very frustrating, because sooner or later the article will face its destiny at AfD, but I was wondering if there are good methods to prevent the deletion of the AfD template. Please note that this is an unimportant article and I don't think that it would deserve a (semi)protection. Thanks in advance for your answers! LowLevel73(talk) 17:22, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

  • LowLevel73, welcome to the Teahouse! What you consider destiny others may not. That said, it is inappropriate for anyone to remove AfD notices from articles. I must assume you are talking about the Kenscio, and based on it's edit history, I've requested the page semi-protected at RFPP. This should stop the template removal by anon IPs. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 18:01, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
@Technical 13: Thanks for your answer! Yes, I confess that "destiny" was a completely gratuitous attempt to present reality under the distorted view of my subjective beliefs. Can I ask you if, when a protection is not in place, there are other methods to minimize the negative effects of any unpleasant activity from several anonymous IP users? LowLevel73(talk) 18:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, requesting page protection is the only thing we can do to minimize such improper actions of other editors as non-administrators. Great question though. :) Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 19:57, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi LowLevel73, Welcome to the Teahouse. Have you given this user a considerable amount of warnings? If so I suggest you report him to AIV because constant removal of speedy deletion templates is considered as vandalism.--Chamith (talk) 18:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • ChamithN, I've looked over the page history, and the editor(s) who have been removing the notice are from various anonymous IP addresses and reporting to AIV would be an exercise in futility. If it was just one or two IPs or if it was a registered user, then your suggestion would surely be an appropriate course of action. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 19:57, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
@LowLevel73: Just for future reference, if the removals were tied to an identifiable account, or a seemingly static IP address, then you could use the warning template series {{uw-afd1}}, {{uw-afd2}}, {{uw-afd3}}, {{uw-afd4}}, and if after a final warning they removed again, then report for a block, as noted above, to WP:AIV (Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism). You can find this template warning series, and a host of others as well as other types of user notices at the intuitive shortcut name WP:WARN (which goes to the page, Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace, which is a bit of a mouthful). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: Thanks! Unfortunately, it didn't work for me, in this specific case. I warned one of the IP users, but after the third level of warning, that IP stopped its activities... and a new one took its place. LowLevel73(talk) 22:31, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Simon Clark (novelist)[edit]

I have done some work to - hopefully - improve the page of Simon Clark (novelist). When and how and if does this ever get reviewed to see if it has moved beyond Stub class? It also belongs to a couple of groups that also have it classified as Stub class. S.tollyfield (talk) 13:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have rated the article as Start class for all projects, as it clearly rises beyond a stub. However, I am not personally comfortable with elevating it to C class just yet, as it has some significant problems. First, the article itself seems all to be written in the lead instead of the body. Second, a comprehensive list of everything Clark ever wrote is not necessary. Third, the lengthy quotes from reviews are not appropriate, and also seem to be rather selective in emphasising praise. It is sensible to quote some reviews, but not like this. Try taking a look at an existing Wikipedia Good Article on a novelist, one of those listed at Wikipedia:Good articles/Language and literature#Writers, publishers, critics, to see how best to lay things out. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:04, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I have reorganised the materials on the page which hopefully improves this as suggested. I am reluctant to cut down the list of published works as I spent some time hunting down all the ISBNs which some of your fellow editors seem rather keen on. Thanks again.S.tollyfield (talk) 15:44, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

@S.tollyfield: Wow! You really put some hard work into it and it's paying off. I've re-graded it to C class following the guideline at WP:ASSESS. It's not quite at B class yet, but I'm sure it has potential to be one. Things that you could do next is expand the lead so that it covers the most important aspects in the article. Also, expand some sections and add more sources. Thanks,  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 21:57, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Editing Help[edit]


I need help with the following: I'm trying to combine this links ( section 3 with this links ( information. I keep on getting confused and muddling it up...

Can someone help me with this please?

( (talk) 13:59, 30 October 2014 (UTC))

Why are you trying to combine them? Theroadislong (talk) 17:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Greetings Welcome to the teahouse. When you say you are trying to combine the links I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying you are trying to merge the two articles? There is a process for doing that and you shouldn't just go ahead and do it without following the steps to notify other editors before hand. Here is the page that describes how to do that Wikipedia:Merge You need to put a template for proposing the merge onto the two articles. If that isn't what you had in mind can you clarify a bit more what you are trying to do? --MadScientistX11 (talk) 18:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
I see now that is looking to find help for an off Wikipedia project and has in fact made no edits to actual articles. Theroadislong (talk) 18:11, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello again I looked more carefully at the two articles. I see that the timeline article is actually linked to from the cosmology article. There is a separate section in the cosmology article about the cosmology timeline and then a link to the timeline article. So I think I was wrong in my guess as to what you want to do. My guess now is that you want to reconcile the two texts, the timeline described in the cosmology article is not consistent with the timeline in the cosmology timeline article. If that is what you are trying to do I can see why you want to do it. I don't think it's an easy task. BTW, it's not that unusual to find things like this in Wikipedia where there are inconsistencies between two articles that point to each other. As long as they don't directly contradict each other it's not terrible... the timeline article goes into more detail than the timeline section in the cosmology article. Anyway, if that is what you want to do the place to start is on the talk pages of the two articles: Talk:Timeline_of_cosmological_theories and Talk:Cosmology I would put something on both those talk pages describing how you think the two timelines should be reconciled. Theroadislong I typed all the above before I saw your comment. So what I said may be moot but in case he does want to do that thought I would leave the info anyway. One more point to Russel: if you are a very new Wikipedia editor I would suggest trying some simpler tasks before trying to reconcile these two articles. There are lots of science articles that need basic editing for better references, etc. If you want help finding those let us know. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
I know its not as easy task, I've muddled it up a few times, that's why I requested for help. In regards to helping amending Wikipedia articles, I'm currently learning myself a few things, if I do come through things like this or like the previous time (where I found an error [spelling mistake] in a section of an article). I'll notify. Thank you for your advice and guidance MadScientistX11 . -- ( (talk) 05:57, 31 October 2014 (UTC))

Volunteer(s) re-writer(s) required[edit]

I'm looking for a re-writer(s), someone who possesses impeccable English writing skills. Please leave me a message in my 'talk page' if you are interested.

( (talk) 14:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)) I hope that you are looking for editors to help you with Wikipedia articles and not soliciting help here for some of your off-Wikipedia projects. w.carter-Talk 14:39, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to the teahouse What do you mean my re-writers? Are you talking about editing an article for grammar and spelling? If so, you can request it at WP:GOCE/REQ where lots of friendly experienced users can help you. If you are talking about Wikipedia-unrelated things, we could not help you. Read WP:What Wikipedia is Not. If you could give a specific article, that would be better. Thanks,  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 21:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

article classes[edit]

I was just wondering how I could improve a start class article. I have read all the criteria for C-Class articles and I feel the article has met them. What else can I do and also what is the importance of rating articles? thanks Wrightie99 (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

You can change the class to C, in that case. The purpose of rating articles is to enable editors (particularly project members) to see at a glance which articles they think deserve to be, or they are capable of improving. (For example I would expect to be able to improve most stub or start class articles, but I would not be likely to attempt to improve B class American politics article. Conversely I might think that my time was well spent improving a GA class maths article, since a limited number of other people would be able to do that.)
When combined with "importance" it is even more useful. We do not want to have "importance high" and "class stub" or "start", for example.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough17:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC).
Hi @Wrightie99: and welcome to the teahouse. The advice Rich Farmbrough gave is wonderful. Just remember to WP:Be Bold. Don't stress out when changing the class of an article. It's no big deal. Don't make the class higher than a B though (even if it is really well written). Classes higher than B would have to go through a formal review before it can reach that status. Thanks,  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 21:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Oh ok thanks for the help Wrightie99 (talk) 21:51, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Running an article in the mainspace[edit]

Dear friends,

I have just created a wikipedia's page about some historic building ( which is absent in English wikipedia, but exists in Russian one. Couldn't you help me, how can I tie my article with the existing Russian variant (i.e. implement my article in the mainspace by creating the additional "dimension" in English).

Thank you, --Sterndmitri (talk) 14:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I've moved the article correctly to mainspace for you (it's now at Chamber of Facets). To link it to the Russian Wikipedia page, go to the Languages menu on the left of the article, and click on "Add link"; this will enable you to link the page to the ru-wiki version. Interesting article; thanks for your work on it! Yunshui  15:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Yunshui, thank you so much!--Sterndmitri (talk) 18:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Linking articles[edit]

Hello I have created various articles and have been individually linking them to other articles that has the article name in them. is there a quicker way of doing this? Wrightie99 (talk) 14:18, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

If there is, I don't know of it... but one trick that you may find useful is the tilde search: put your new article's title into the search bar with a single tilde in front (like this: "~My New Article") and the search engine will spit back any pages that contain the article name (rather than directing you straight to the article itself). Makes it easier to locate potentially linkable pages. Yunshui  15:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Greetings Wrightie99 Welcome to the Teahouse. If I'm understanding you correctly you area asking is there some tool that can look through articles and automatically recognize which words or phrases refer to other articles and then automatically link to them? That would actually be a very interesting and hard Artificial Intelligence problem to try and tackle. The problem isn't doing the linking, that can be automated easily but the problem is deciding which words or phrases to link to. That requires a lot of what AI people call "common sense reasoning" which is one of the hardest mostly unsolved problems in AI. For example if the text is "University of California" should you link to "University" and "California" or to the whole phrase "University of California"? Those kinds of decisions require good judgement and a lot of contextual information about the article itself so they can't be automated. Have you tried using the linking tool in the editor? That makes linking a lot easier. Look at the icon that looks like a chain link at the top of the widgets in the editor. If you use that it will automatically put the wiki code around the word and will also make it easy to make the text in the article from which you are creating the link be different than the actual name of the article you are linking to. It also supports "look ahead" so if you need to link to say a person whose name matches to a musician and a poet you can use the look ahead to select "Person X (poet)" or "Person X (musician)" --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Wrightie99 (talk) 16:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
If you get permission to use WP:AWB, you can speed this up, making each link decision a one-click. You still need to distinguish between good links and bad links per MadScientistX11. All the best: Rich Farmbrough17:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC).

Articles name[edit]

Hello, I made an article about some gov medical system (EMIAS) and made one more article about subproject of the system(Emias.Info), but the article was deleted and now every time I'm typing the name of the new article, I'm redirected to the first article. I changed the article andI need to take the name back, what should I do?IvanZuev (talk) 09:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi IvanZuev Welcome to the Teahouse. First of all EMIAS isn't deleted. It still exists on Wikipedia. And secondly your new creation about Emias.Info isn't an article, It's a draft. Which means you are still working on it, it isn't published on Wikipedia yet. When you search for EMIAS it takes you the article that exists Wikipedia, not to the draft. To access your draft go to your sandbox, because it's currently being redirected to the draft (Emias.Info) you are working on.These are some other ways to access your draft. Drafts are stored in the "Draft" namespace. They are not indexed by most search engines including Google, meaning most readers will not find them.Publishing a draft will (for now) require an editor to use the page move function to move it in the main (article) namespace. This means that registered editors who are not autoconfirmed, will need to request publication by inserting into their drafts the relevant template for page move. Editors can also optionally submit drafts for review via the articles for creation process. Hope this helps--Chamith (talk) 12:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
(e/c) @IvanZuev: Hi IvanZuev. Emias.Info was not "deleted" as we use that word here to mean the actual title and its history being deleted by someone with permission to do so, but rather was redirected. To access a redirect, when you invoke it and are redirected you will see at the top of the page you arrive at, just below the title of the page: (Redirected from If you then click on that blue name, you can access the redirect itself and its page history.

If you look at the history you'll see from the edit summary left why it was redirected: "We already have an article on Emias. We don't need one on their website also". Can you advise what you need this title for (do you just need access some of the text you wrote for it to incorporate into the EMIAS article)? If that is the reason, just click on the date in the history prior to it being redirected, click edit, and then you can copy text from it. But I also see you have a draft on the same topic. That will likely not be accepted. <snipped info covered by Chamith> In any event, it looks to me like it should remain a redirect to EMIAS, and would likely be actually deleted as an autonomous article, because of lack of reliable sources discussing the website itself, i.e., on the basis of notability.

One more issue. I see you've uploaded a whole bunch of images related to EMIAS at the Commons and stated for each that they are your own work. Did you design EMIAS logo, their website and all the other content you uploaded as your own work, and retain the copyright to them? Or did you just take screenshots of those items (which no more makes you the copyright owner than taking a photograph of a painting makes you the painter)?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Checking for previously deleted article[edit]

I noticed that there is no article about Albert Nagler, who has made great contributions to amateur astronomy (see Eyepiece#Nagler). Before I have a go myself, I would like to check whether there may have been such an article in the past which has been deleted (I have been bitten by this in the past!) Is there a way to search for deleted articles? Gronk Oz (talk) 06:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Not that I can find. Previously deleted articles will show up if you search for or try to create a page with the same title - both Albert Nagler and Al Nagler show no such prior history. I'd say go for it! Yunshui  08:44, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Great - thanks, Yunshui. I thought that perhaps there was something special I needed to do in order to find a deleted article. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

permission for using as a reference a youtube video[edit]

There is a video about the Heyerdahl Odin Theory that will help to understand the information and I would like to use it in the catalan article of Thor Heyerdahl. How can I ask for permission?

Thanks!! Immasureda (talk) 23:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Immasureda: Using YouTube videos as references is rare, but certainly possible. Check out WP:YOUTUBE for more information. You should be able to answer the following questions with a 'yes':
  • Is the video considered a reliable source (e.g. a documentary from a reliable film maker, a news broadcast, an interview, etc.)? A video made by a random guy without any editorial insight would probably not be considered reliable, and a better source probably exists.
  • Is the video legally uploaded? Most videos on YouTube are uploaded without permission. Only videos uploaded without any copyright issues should be linked to. For example, if National Geographic uploaded one of their own documentaries, that would be fine to link to. If I recorded tonight's new broadcast and uploaded it to YouTube myself, I'd have no copyright to do so, and so we would not be able to link to it (though that doesn't necessarily mean we can't cite the broadcast itself).
If you have any more questions, feel free to ask! Feel free to link to the YouTube video too, if you have questions about its validity as a source. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Welcome @Immasureda:, Catalan Wikipedia is a separate project with its own policies. If you are having a problem with permission, you should ask there. Maybe at ca:Viquipèdia:Plantejament de preguntes. —teb728 t c 23:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Advice on the best way to revise the exhibitions section of an artist's article[edit]

Hi - I have a second question. Athenaeumian and I are working on the Dale Chihuly article. One of the sections lists a number of his exhibitions, but is by no means comprehensive or representative of the exhibitions he has been a part of. Currently the list includes exhibitions from 1996 to the present, however, Dale Chihuly's work has been included in exhibitions since 1967 (this can be supported by a number of published secondary sources, including Donald Kuspit's Chihuly, 2nd ed. 1998 and William Warmus' The Essential Dale Chihuly, 2000). We'd like to revise the section to provide a more accurate picture of the exhibitions he's been a part of, but I also think that listing every one of them would be excessive and unnecessary in this space (especially since there are a number of places people can find that information, including some of the sources we would link to). We aren't sure how to approach the section - we are not Chihuly experts, and cannot say which exhibitions are the most notable or important to include. Would it be best to have a sampling from each decade of his career? Should there be a list at all? Perhaps several paragraphs about the types of exhibitions he's been a part of (including mentions of several specific exhibitions) would work better? Any advice is very welcome! Thanks extabulis (talk) and Athenaeumian (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Extabulis, Athenaeumian: I do think expanding that list greatly is not a good option. I often turn to existing featured articles to see what has been done as a model. Looking through every article at Wikipedia:Featured articles#Art, architecture, and archaeology biographies, I only see two articles with sections focused on exhibitions (albeit, many of the articles are on architects or, if on artists, of a different century): Henry Moore and Makinti Napanangka. The latter appears to contain a similar list, but it does not seem to suffer from a potential of bloat because that relatively short list appears to be all of his exhibitions. One the other hand, as indicated by the text in the prose exhibition section of the Moore article, his exhibition résumé appears be similarly situated to produce a bloated list were all included. Emulating what was done there seems like a good option. In general, long bulleted lists do not make for good readability – I agree with you that it would be excessive to list them all given the size of the existing list – and they are often nixed during a peer review and upon a FAC. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Changing an article title/merging articles[edit]

Hi - I'm wondering if The Contemporary Museum, Honolulu article title should be changed to Honolulu Museum of Art Spalding House. The Contemporary Museum merged with the Honolulu Academy of Arts in 2011 to form the Honolulu Museum of Art, and the location (and collection) of the former museum is now called the Honolulu Museum of Art Spalding House. I've also discovered that there is an article about the Spalding House (the home of this collection) - is there enough overlap to justify a merge with The Contemporary Museum, Honolulu? If The Contemporary Museum, Honolulu article is renamed Honolulu Museum of Art Spalding House, I think there will be a good chance to cover both the history of the building and the history and collection of the museum. I guess there's also the possibility to merge one or both articles with Honolulu Museum of Art, although perhaps there's enough distinct information to keep them separate? I do not have much experience with changing article names and merging articles, so I wanted to check before I do anything! I've also posted my question on The Contemporary Museum, Honolulu talk page. Thanks in advance for your advice! extabulis (talk) 18:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! After performing a web search on The Contemporary Museum, Honolulu, the top results were of the new name. The former website even redirects to the new website. So I think it should be a good idea to move the article to the new desired name, Honolulu Museum of Art Spalding House. ///EuroCarGT 21:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, @EuroCarGT:! Any thoughts about merging the new Honolulu Museum of Art Spalding House with Spalding House? extabulis (talk) 16:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

My articles were deleted.[edit]

i got invited so iam here now. 29djeg (talk) 15:50, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Glad you are here. The article that is about to be deleted has "pizza time is a pizza place in portland, maine." as its sole content. I was wondering how you considered this to be sufficient information. We need to know, for example, how it passes WP:CORP. There is a lot more to writing an article than producing nine words.. WP:TUTORIAL may help you. Fiddle Faddle 16:08, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Page Redirected from -[edit]

Hello, I created an article, but when I look for the Wikipedia page that I created I see 'Redirected from user - my name-' how can I do to find directly the page instead of

Thank you in advance! Nobili Vitelleschi Camilla (talk) 06:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Nobili Vitelleschi Camilla, Welcome to the Teahouse. You are being redirect from your userpage because you created a redirect by moving your user page to Wikipedia:Sommer Contemporary Art. Here is the link to redirect page you created. You can just blank/change the page to get rid of it. I blanked your user page assuming that you don't want to redirect. But you can revert it back if you think what I did was unnecessary. If you need to completely delete the page then you need administrator help.--Chamith (talk) 06:34, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't think you need to get admin help to delete the page now. I just noticed that someone nominated Wikipedia:Sommer Contemporary Art for speedy deletion. All you have to do is wait until it gets deleted. Which means your problem will be automatically fixed. Just wait and see. Cheers--Chamith (talk) 06:38, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm afraid the matter has become irrelevant, since the article itself has been deleted as unambiguous advertising. I suggest the WP:AFC process to enable re-creation in a controlled environment with advice, reviews and so much more besides. Fiddle Faddle 11:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way to nominate an article for deletion in a simple way?[edit]

Hello Teahouse. This article is the kind of how-to that, per WP:NOTHOWTO, should not be published on Wikipedia. There are many other issues with it, but WP:NOTHOWTO is a reason enough to delete it. A PROD by user Thebestofall007 was rejected by the article creator a few hours ago (and I've mistakenly PRODed the article a second time without realizing that a first PROD was objected. Sorry for that.)

I've tried to nominate the article for deletion using the new "curation" tool. While it works flawlessly for other kind of activities, it failed at nominating the page for deletion, for technical reasons that I'm not able to assess.

Then, I tried to nominate the page manually following the guidelines listed at How_to_nominate_a_single_page_for_deletion but they are a bit complicated and they require several passages. Here is my question:

Is there a way to nominate an article for deletion in a simpler way? Some sort of automated or even semi-automated way to follow that procedure? Thanks in advance for your answers! LowLevel73(talk) 19:20, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, LowLevel73. I would like to inform you to the tool, Twinkle. It's a GUI of nifty javascript tools for editing Wikipedia and allows for numerous functions, like: Requesting page protection, placebo rollback, nominating an article for deletion (what you're aiming for), PROD, reporting a user, and some other very useful functions. While it is powerful, you have to be careful with it, as misuse of the tool can lead to blocking. It can be enabled by going to your preferences (at the top right), and under the 'gadget' tab, under browsing, it's near the bottom, enable its checkbox and scroll to the bottom and hit save. Then, you should see a new panel called 'TW' next to the search bar. If you hover over that, and click 'XFD', you can submit the article you are currently viewing for deletion given your proposed reasoning. Once you hit 'submit query', it will automatically create the page, sort the nomination request on a given date, and notify the user. If you do not wish to use Twinkle again other than for this purpose (though I would recommend against that, it's insanely useful for other things as well), you can disable it in your preferences panel. Cheers. Tutelary (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
@Tutelary: Thanks for the suggestion, I'll give that tool a try! LowLevel73(talk) 20:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
LowLevel73 welcome to the teahouse. I took one look at that article and decided now was a good time for me to use XFD for the first time. The article was so clearly not even in the ballpark for a proper Wikipedia article, it's more a rant you would find on some blog. I've nominated it for deletion using XFD. BTW, here is the process for normal deletion of articles: wp:AFD Like a lot of this stuff it looks more complex than it is, it's pretty straight forward but the sling blade or whatever it was article was so clearly not appropriate I agree with you it needs to be gone ASAP so I think the XFD process makes more sense. If anyone disagrees, feel free to let me know, I don't have a lot of experience with this kind of administrative stuff but am gradually figuring it out. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 19:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
@MadScientistX11: Thank for the explanation! Just to see if I've understood everything correctly: is the procedure that you have followed the same that I linked in my original post (AfD, Article for Deletion)? Or is it a different one? Also, have you followed the procedure manually? LowLevel73(talk) 20:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
@LowLevel73: Yes, what I did is the same as the AFD process you linked to. To be honest when I first used Twinkle I wasn't sure that was the case but I just checked the AFD queue and the "Infinity blade glitches" article is in the queue. I was about to link to it but I see you have already added a comment so you found it. So invoking XFD via Twinkle is just a shorthand way of adding something to the AFD queue. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 21:15, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
@MadScientistX11: Wonderful, thanks for the confirmation, very appreciated! LowLevel73(talk) 21:18, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Uh, that's not exactly accurate. It does all the steps for you. It notifies the user (if default checked is left), adds it to the queue, creates the page, and adds the afd banner. It does everything for you in relation to afd. That's why I recommended it as the 'easy' way to afd an article. Tutelary (talk) 21:29, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

By the way, administrator RHaworth has deleted the "article" under criteria A10 of speedy deletion. I agree 100% with the deletion, having had a brief glance at it before it was deleted. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:18, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Since I'm trying to learn the logic followed when an action is taken, can I ask you why A10 applies to this specific case? The A10 criteria applies to an article "that does not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s) on the subject". The contents of the deleted article, while far from being anything that an encyclopedia would publish, did actually provide information about "tricks and tips" for a videogame, something that is not provided in the main article. This additional information wasn't compatible with Wikipedia policies anyway, so a "merge" wasn't possible, but why this content (albeit horrid and unacceptable) was not considered an expansion of the main article? LowLevel73(talk) 05:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
You would have to ask the deleting administrator for their specific reasoning in this case, LowLevel73. My guess is that they ignored the clearly inappropriate content, and saw nothing left that wasn't in the main article about the video game, thereby justifying the A10 deletion. Clearly inappropriate content shouldn't be considered when deciding whether to keep an article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Thanks for your clarification, Cullen. LowLevel73(talk) 06:11, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

HOW about just putting {{d}} at the top of the article?it will turn into nomination box of deletion.Userofencyclopedia (talk) 11:11, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

User Page[edit]

Hi, I just joined Wikipedia and wanted to know what kind of information I should put on my user page. Also, I am confused on how to use User Boxes. Thanks. Veritas et Aequitas 3 (talk) 18:54, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Veritas et Aequitas and thank you for coming to the Teahouse. We always like visitors. I would send you to my user page but it's pretty boring right now. Just click on some of the names of the hosts that you see answering questions here in the Teahouse. Some of these user pages are really interesting. There are so many different styles and so there is no right way or wrong way to make your user page. If you see a user box that you like, then open up the editing window for that user page.(BUT don't make any edits to the page) only copy the wiki code for the user box that you like. You can then take the wiki code to your sandbox and play with the user box there to see if it's something you want to use on your user page. That is how I got all my user boxes. Please come back to the Teahouse. If you want more information or help.
  Bfpage |leave a message  20:53, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
You can find lots of useful information here WP:UBX Theroadislong (talk) 21:01, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit article title and making the article[edit]

Hi I'm trying to make an article for a company that I'm interning for and I understand the autobiography rule, but it's very basic and just outlines what the company is and what it does. Also, how do I change the article's title? Thank you.Pearlmedia (talk) 17:54, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Pearlmedia, and thank you for visiting the Teahouse. It is a good thing that you have come here with your question because I have some concerns about you writing an article for a company that you are working for. Wikipedia strongly discourages paid advocates of a company from contributing to the page on that company. You may want to reconsider creating this article or you may risk having the article immediately deleted and/or your account being blocked. It is probably in your best interest to disclose your conflict of interest on your user page. What is the name of your company?

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Apparently the company is Pearl media. The article was speedily deleted because it gave no indication of importance of the company, and the user blocked for a promotional username. —teb728 t c 21:11, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
I understand the rationale for the deletion. But why do so many people come to the Teahouse asking for help creating or developing an article about their company? There is some kind of miscommunication because they come to the Teahouse and then find out that they're not supposed to create an article on behalf of their company which is astoundingly new information for them.
  Bfpage |leave a message  19:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I suspect they confuse Wikipedia with facebook and the like, where people are actually encouraged to write about themselves and their organizations. I don't know what more we can do to get the word out that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a social networking site. —teb728 t c 22:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

How can I create a page for someone who has the same name of another person with an already established wikipedia page?[edit]

My boss is a woman named Judith Orloff, and we would like to create a wikipedia page for her. However, there is already a different woman named Judith Orloff who has a wikipedia page. Do I just make another page with the same name, or is there a way to differentiate the two? (talk) 16:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

The common method is parenthesis, but first make sure they pass Notability Standards Francinum (Talk) (Contrib) 16:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, a suitable title would be something like "Judith Orloff (author)"; but before you go further, as you are doing this for your boss, you should read Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. JohnCD (talk) 17:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Please don't make the page at all. For some of the reasons, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Autobiography, WP:PROUD and the mandatory disclosure requirements for paid editing. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Article review progress....[edit]

Hi I put in a submission in April, just wondering whether I now need to do anything to check review progress - or to find out if it has been reviewed at all?

ClaudioZipparo (talk) 16:38, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@ClaudioZipparo: Hi Claudio. Unfortunately, you never submitted this page for review. To do so, edit it, add to the top of the page this code, {{subst:submit}}, and then save the page. However, please don't submit it yet, as it will not be accepted because the article does not cite any reliable sources in an accessible way to allow a reader to verify the information content (and also to provide evidence of the subject's notability).

The draft needs inline citations to sources that are attributed (i.e., providing what they are, such as the author, title of the work, publisher, etc.)—not just naked links—and these cited sources should appear in the text in a way so that a reader can see what material is verified by which source (not just at the end, in a general references section). Please see Help:Referencing for beginners. We require this for any topic but sourcing requirements are significantly heightened for articles on living persons, like this one. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:30, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Which is my best option for referencing sources?[edit]

Hi there – My entry (Kalamazoo54 on the topic: Jurgens Ci Caravans) was rejected due to a lack of independent sources. The only source I had to work from was a book by Jurgens themselves, which didn't qualify. I am about to conduct an in-depth search online for any references to Jurgens, but before I do, wanted to make sure that these would be acceptable. I preliminary search reveals nothing usable. Another option would be to search through 60 years' worth of caravan magazines in the hopes of picking up something useful. Your advice on the most effective way of handling this challenge would be greatly appreciated.Kalamazoo54Kalamazoo 54 (talk) 15:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kalamazoo54. In most cases, when source material is hard to find, it simply doesn't exist. If that is the case, unfortunately your subject doesn't meet our criteria for inclusion. Please do consider that that is a possibility before venturing out to other sources. Searching for source material can be a tough challenge. Magazines and special interest books often provide the best sourcing. Some libraries have searchable indexes of magazines and books that can be useful. Google book search also comes up with nice materials. Keep in mind that your sources should be 1. written by a reliable source, some magazine or publisher that has a reputation for fact checking, 2. Provide some depth of coverage, at least a couple of paragraphs about your subject itself per source, and 3. Are not affiliated (by family, business or other relations) to the subject, or are by the subject itself. Regards, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Try Find sources: "Jurgens Ci Caravans" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images modifying your search as necessary. It's often amazing what a search targeted differently can reveal. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. We can take a very few primary sources. WP:PRIMARY is useful reading. Fiddle Faddle 15:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

How to complete my edit with sources.[edit]

some sources are simple, Like the US Census, others more privately available, like an internet posted autobiography. Wi63674 (talk) 14:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Wi63674 , and welcome to the Teahouse. I hope you will find some answers here - if I can't help you, I am sure another experienced editor will be helpful. I would like to suggest one way of approaching this problem. Before inserting a statement into any article I actually find the reference first. By doing this, I avoid the possibility of my statement being challenged or removed from the article. Autobiographies are usually not considered a reliable source, but there are exceptions. Can you tell us the topic or the name of the article that you need references for?

  Bfpage |leave a message  14:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Wi63674. In general, sources should be published in reliable places (such as major newspapers, books from reputable publishers, or websites with a reputation for fact checking). Usually, they should also be independent of the subject; so an article about a person should be mostly based on published information that does not come from the subject or their friends, relatives, publishers or businesses. Sources which are not independent may be used in a limited way: generally for uncontroversial factual data. For an autobiography on the internet, there are two issues: the first is, how confident can you be that it is genuine? If it is on the person's own website, probably; but if it's on a blogsite, maybe not. Secondly, even if it is probably genuine, you could use it to source things like their place and date of birth, but not much else; and even then, independent sources are preferred if possible. I'm not sure if this answers your question or not, so please ask further if there's something not clear. --ColinFine (talk) 17:45, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Creating a new draft location for submission and review[edit]

Hi everyone, I would like to move a new page to a draft location for review and submission. Do I just 'move' the page to a 'to new title' 'Draft' with the appropriate and available name? Will this move also submit the page for review? Thank you Bjgevans (talk) 13:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Bjgevans: Hi Bjgevans. Yes, just move it to the draft namespace and use the name you think it should be ultimately situated at when in the article mainspace. Make sure that if you click the dropdown menu and select draft, that you don't then also enter into the text field "draft:..." or you will end up with a title like "Draft:Draft:name" (which happens all the time, though easily fixable by a second move). It will not be automatically submitted. When you are ready to to do so, just edit the page and place at the top {{subst:submit}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:47, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

RSN on Book of Elchasai[edit]

Please weigh in at RSN on reliability of the sources used for the Book of Elchasai, per WP:RS. Thank you. Ignocrates (talk) 12:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ignocrates. Thank you for coming to the Teahouse, I hope we can help you. The Teahouse is the place where people come and ask questions about editing. I don't think your message is inappropriate though , and I can see myself doing the same thing, and I don't mind taking a look at the discussion page for this article. Consider suggesting that other people come to the Teahouse for help with editing. I think there are other ways to ask for editor participation in these discussions.

  Bfpage |leave a message  14:22, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Ignocrates, I hope you get to see the comments I've left on the page referred to above. My comments may not be what you would have expected. But my comments are constructive and supportive to you and the others working on this article. Best wishes and Happy editing,
  Bfpage |leave a message  14:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments you left at RSN. Since the person who created the new article is also a relatively new editor, it seemed appropriate to bring it up here. The article bypassed AFC, perhaps inadvertently, and was never properly reviewed, as a new article added to mainspace should be. Ignocrates (talk) 17:13, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


hi,everyone I want to create an article 'Chiknu' but how to start?Oi kt tero chakh chikam? (talk) 06:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

You start by determining if it passes WP:GNG. Fiddle Faddle 07:25, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Oi kt tero chakh chikam? And welcome to the Teahouse. I see that you are a brand-new editor and that you have just recently registered with your new username. It's great that you want to create an article on this musical subject. Have you checked to see if the article you want to create already exists? This is probably the first step.
You have to make sure that your article has some notability. Notability means making the decision whether a given topic should have its own article. In addition, your new article must contain information that is verifiable - each statement made in your article has to be referenced to an outside source. An article cannot contain your opinion because you must maintain a neutral point of view. If you are unable to find sources for your article then it would probably get deleted.
Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below.Your new article is notable if it meets either the general notability guideline referenced here:WP:NOTABILITY. You seem pretty enthusiastic and I hope this carries over to your new article creation. Please come back to the Teahouse. If you have more questions or you needs more help creating your article.
  Bfpage |leave a message  20:33, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Finding guidelines[edit]

Seeing the current featured article, I wanted to ask about or look up the use of "an" before a pronounced "h" (as in "historic"). While I would still like to know the policy on that, I now have a bigger question or suggestion. Going to the Community Portal, I couldn't find directions to policies and guidelines. Can't we make a lead to them more visible?Kdammers (talk) 01:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kdammers. I will answer your second question first. The Community Portal is about what needs editing as opposed to how to edit including content policies and guidelines. Our help pages provide links to our most important policies and guidelines, and the link to our help pages is available on the menu on the left side of every page here, under "Interaction". There, you will find a link to Contributing to Wikipedia, a very useful information page that has the links you probably want. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
As for your initial question about the use of "an", you may find English articles useful, which states:
"Some speakers and writers use an before a word beginning with the sound /h/ in an unstressed syllable: an historical novel, an hotel. However, where the "h" is clearly pronounced, this usage is now less common, and "a" is preferred."
Wikipedia's "house style" is described in our Manual of style, which you may find interesting. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Cullen, thank You for answering, but frankly I'm lost. I've been editng Wikipedia for years, and I cannot find what You are talking about.Kdammers (talk) 08:25, 28 October 2014 UTC)
Greetings Kdammers, and thank you for coming to the Teahouse for help. I was wondering if you had a specific guideline you were looking for perhaps we could get you closer to your answer. Best regards and happy editing.
  Bfpage |leave a message  12:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
@Kdammers: Regarding "an historic" I see nothing in the MoS directly mentioning this issue so I think this becomes something of an WP:ENGVAR issue, in that it depends on your dialect. As you may know, the rule for a/an is that a precedes a word that is pronounced as starting with a consonant (regardless of whether the first letter is actually one), and an precedes a word that is pronounced as starting with a vowel (regardless of whether the first letter is actually one). There's no ambiguity with most words, but whether an "h" is pronounced in some words is. To most Americans, and certainly those in my area of the country, the "h" in historic (as well as in hysterics/hysterical/hysteria) is prominently pronounced and thus it has always looked and sounded quite wrong to me to use an "an" (cf. The Abortion: An Historical Romance 1966 by an American writer [an article I started but did very little with it]). On the other hand, there are parts of the world (I believe in many accents of British English) where the "h" is swallowed and so "an" complies with the rule and thus feels right. So, in the absence of it being directly addressed, as I said I recommend thinking of it as an ENGVAR issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Kdammers. My opinion is if there are no clear guidelines on the subject, you probably have nothing to worry about and you can make the changes you think are necessary. If you would like to include historical information on pronunciation you can do this in the article itself. I do have a small suggestion though. Make sure you have a reference to support the historical pronunciation!
  Bfpage |leave a message  14:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the various comments on a(n) house. So, I'll continue writing a hotel but not change existing an hotels. As to the larger issue: I have found it easiest to go to my contribution page to get a link to guidelines. This is because there for me no easy way to find them (or much other useful but, for me, hidden editing info. I really doubt that I am alone. to find the guidelnes now. This is what I did: Yester-day, I looked and looked but could not see a "Help" link. Today I can see it on the left. (Maybe my computer was messing with me, or maybe I just couldn't see it because of its placement or some-thing goofy with my eyes or mind). After going to Help, I really didn't see what I was looking for, so I tried "plain and simple", "contributing" and "how to edit". One of them is full of details but nothing seemingly about guidelines; the other two have -- in a box up top that I skipped over at first because they start out with "This is an information page..." -- a link to guide-lines. so, I finally found it.

I am NOT trying to be obtuse. I don't like spending time searching for guidelines and other tools. In the past, I have made suggestions for making the pages more non-nerd friendly, but my suggestions seemed mostly to have fallen on deaf ears. On the other hand, every time I have come hear to the teahouse, i have gotten a courteous and usually helpful response. Kdammers (talk) 10:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't be so hard on yourself Kdammers. You are not being obtuse. I have been continually frustrated with the amount of time that I have to spend looking up guidelines rather than creating content for an article. I have experienced the exact same thing as you have, except for the pronunciation of the article before words that begin with H. I have begun work on an article and then have found myself stalled for days, literally trying to find the guidelines that I need to follow to complete the creation of my article.
  Bfpage |leave a message  19:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Two Nominators[edit]

Can an article be nominated for GA by more than one person, like it is the case with FA? Thamizhan1994 (Appo Pesu) 00:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Thamizhan1994: Not really, as far as I know. When you nominate an article for a GA, you simply put in a request that an experienced editor come by and review the article. There's no nomination "intro" or anything of that sort. By all means, however, can multiple editors reply to the reviewer's queries and make improvements to the article if necessary. Multiple editors can also claim to have contributed to a GA if they all have significantly helped improve the article. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:11, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
It can be done. A note parameter can be added to the {{GA nominee}} template on the article talk page like this:
{{GA nominee|...|note=This is a joint nomination by ... and ... ~~~~}} Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Help to find a reliable source[edit]

Would anyone hep me find a reference for the page I'm trying to create about the British actor Dylan Barnes. I'm ready to rewrite the article but not sure what to use. The help would be most appreciated. Thanks DennisDickerDennis Dicker (talk) 18:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Find sources: "Dylan Barnes" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images will help. Modify the search as necessary. Fiddle Faddle 19:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, i can't find anything under these searches, but there is plenty of info when i type in Dylan Barnes actor into google.Would someone help by finding me a correct page, I'm really confused what to use. Thanks dennisDennis Dicker (talk) 19:21, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Dennis Dicker. If you can't find anything under those searches, then I'm afraid it's looking likely that Dylan Barnes simply does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article about him, however it is written, will be accepted. The results you find from a Google search are probably none of them to reliable sources, independent of the subjectg. Sorry. (Note: I haven't had more than a cursory glance at the results myself, so it is still possible that the sources do exist; but if you're having this much difficulty finding them, I wouldn't be too hopeful). --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism? or commercialism?[edit]

I have been working on Florida's Amendment 2 page, I wanted to add indepth info and citations as this is an area I am both educated about and interested in. I noted some edits of material I posted that seemed understandable as I am always advocating in my career I am aware that my nature is to advocate rather than complete neutrality (read: monotone). To my credit, I do however have the ability to see and argue both sides. That is a precursor (forewarning) to my inquiry.

I had some trouble figuring out the posting of a JPG, It was a self taken photo of a Florida Ballot reflecting the Amend 2 ballot measure. There was several [citation needed] sections for the fact that the ballot measure was indeed on the ballot/approved for the ballot by the FL Supreme Ct. and/or what the ballot measure actually stated …which I believed the JPG clarified and established the legitimacy of. Well, I eventually located the proper way to use wikicommons for uploading and although I inserted it several times it was either edited removed or simply never uploaded because it was wrong. First, I tried via <gallery> file name from wikicommons <gallery>, then I tried tool that uses a Link (chain) symbol with the URL, I inserted it as HTML language, then <ref> web URL as the citation reference <ref>. Now someone came after me and removed stating it didn't conform to Copyright requirements ( you can probably look for the statement in my talk box) They were citing to some copyright wikipedia requirement that refers to only those pics posted prior to 2008 grandfathering in?? and that I didn't have permission from Ballotpedia?? to post? I responded in talk regarding the Florida Sunshine Law allowing republishing of governmental materials but I'm not certain they were even really being constructive or just trying to cause mischief? I went to the user page and saw someone posted a GIF that stated user had a "high risk of vandalism". Also, the sidebar stated removed for commercial activities are these supposed to be listing past reprimands? Just trying to sort it all out! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Professor of justice (talkcontribs) 15:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@Professor of justice: hello and welcome to The Teahouse. I would suggest going to User talk:Jojalozzo as this person seems to know more about what is going on.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:40, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
You might also benefit from going to WP:MCQ.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
@Professor of justice:: Discussion posts have a dated signature. The "Ballotopedia" post you replied to at Talk:Florida Amendment 2 (2014) is from 17 December 2013 and unrelated to your edits. By the way, it was a misspelling of Ballotpedia. <gallery>...</gallery> is intended to display multiple images with a special syntax. It's described at Help:Gallery tag but there is no reason to use it for a single image. Your file code in [1] would have displayed the image and caption if <gallery>...</gallery> had simply been omitted. One of your later edits had a line with a leading space.
A line with a leading space causes odd formatting like this with text in a box. It often confuses new users.
I'm guessing your edits were partly or mainly reverted because they were misformatted and didn't actually succeed in displaying an image. I realize there are some technical details to learn for new users but please hang around. It's great to have expert editors if they aren't just here to promote a particular point of view. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:12, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
User:Jojalozzo displays Template:Vandalism information. It's about the current total vandalism level at Wikipedia and doesn't say anything about the users who choose to display the template. I don't know what you refer to with "the sidebar stated removed for commercial activities". PrimeHunter (talk) 03:20, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank YOU for the specific and targeted response Vchimpanzee and PrimeHunter wikipedia's non graphic interface is a bit complicated if you are not a IT person! Yours Truly, the Professor of Justice 17:56, 28 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Professor of justice (talkcontribs)

page deletion[edit]

Hi i recently tried to add a page to wikipedia about actor dylan barnes, i supplied his film reviews, website and imdb links and was still deleted, is there any help i can get to find the right article for this person so i can add the page. Best Wishes DennisDennis Dicker (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@Dennis Dickeri:, I saw the article you was deleted because the article was very small.11:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jojolpa (talkcontribs)

@Dennis Dickeri: Please ignore the above answer. Dylan Barnes was deleted per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#G12 as an unambiguous copyright infringement of Note that does not allow copying. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:47, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Dennis, the article Dylan Barnes was deleted as a copyright violation, you also stated a draft at Draft:Dylan Barnes - Actor which you can work on. The problem is that the sources you have used don't appear to be [[|WP:RS|reliable]] so you should look for better sources which discuss Dylan and his work. Film reviews will establish that he was in a particular role but they don't help explain why he is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia entry. Please don't be discouraged, it is a hurdle we all have to lean to to cross and the threshold isn't that high but its undertsanding that not everyone or everything meets the requirements for an article. Nthep (talk) 11:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) @Dennis Dicker: The reason for the deletion has nothing to do with the smallness of the article. The article was deleted because all the (non-list) text in it was a direct copy/paste of the actor's biography at IMDB, making it a copyright violation. It was therefore deleted in accordance with criterion G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion. However, Draft:Dylan Barnes - Actor still exists; you can try imporoving that draft (not copying from any other site but writing the information in your own words) and then resubmit it for Articles for Creation review. The draft will need references to sources other than IMDB, since that site is not considered a reliable source for the purposes of establishing notability—the information there comes from random members of the general public, just like that on Wikipedia. Deor (talk) 11:54, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

if my answer is incorrect then remove it informing me in my talk page.and sorry.BUT what do you mean by 'ignore the above answer'?Jojolpa (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

I wrote that because i have seen such answer in which it is stated that the article was deleted because of smallness of the article.Jojolpa (talk) 14:32, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

I meant that Dennis Dicker should ignore your answer because it was wrong. I doubt you have seen the word "smallness" as justification for deletion. I guess "smallness" is your own misinterpretation of the reason which was actually stated. You cannot see the deleted content of Dylan Barnes but it wasn't actually small. Maybe you were referring to Draft:Dylan Barnes - Actor but that page was not deleted, it was declined, and it wasn't declined for "smallness". You mean well but you are still a new user and I don't think you are ready to help other users. Wikipedia is a big place and there is a lot to learn. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

but i just meant that other users should be polite also,shouldn't they?he could present his opinion respecting me.Jojolpa (talk) 15:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Does "he" mean me and are you saying I didn't respect you and my correctness of your smallness claim was merely an "opinion"? Sorry if I was a little blunt but my focus was on helping the original poster by making a clear statement instead of letting the poster try to guess which answer was right. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

thank you guys, i'm struggleing to find a good reference, would this be any good, can someone help me find a reliable page for dylan. many thanks Dennis Dicker — Preceding undated comment added 18:19, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

external link[edit]

Thank you guys, i'm struggleing to find a good reference, would this be any good, can someone help me find a reliable page for dylan. many thanks dennisDennis Dicker (talk) 18:40, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dennis Dicker be extra careful when using vimeo videos as references because most of them aren't accepted as reliable resources. If you are citing a video then it shouldn't be a fan made video. Read Wikipedia:Verifiability for more details. Cheers--Chamith (talk) 16:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

How can I make an article?[edit]

I wish to make an article about the Gaffey name and its Heraldry but I don't know how to do it. can some one help me? Thepumking (talk) 10:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

HELLO thepumking,welcome to teahouse.i'm going to tell an simple way of making an article.put the name of the article (you are going to create) in [[]] in any edits and show preview of the edit.the name appears in red colour .now get into it.then Wikipedia says you 'their is not any type of the article of this name ,you can create the name you have entered '.then go ahead and create the article.for example :as you want to create Gaffey click into Gaffey cannot create the article of the name that has already existed in WIKI.happy editing!Jojolpa (talk) 10:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Thepumking and welcome to the Teahouse. You can of course try the way described above, but chances are that such an article would be the target for a speedy deletion. A better way is to create your own sandbox and start writing there. There is no risk of your article being deleted prematurely then. You can find a guide about it all here: Wikipedia:Your first article. When the article is in your sandbox you can ask other editors to take a look at it and advise you in how to improve it before it is ready for the main space. There is also a project here called Wikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology where you can ask for guidance in writing such an article. All the best, w.carter-Talk 11:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
If you were creating a nonsense page then wikipedia will have it deleted, but beware to many false pages can cause a block.Poledancer230605 (talk) 06:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I would like to help wikipedia and create my own user page. Please help![edit]

Please will someone allow me to help any users on wikipedia,or ask me anything!Poledancer230605 (talk) 06:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@Poledancer230605: hello and welcome to The Teahouse. See below (it won't be below when this is archived).— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Here is another helpful link.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
I think I understand. Someone else actually created the page, I was just adding some info. Thank you for your time and answers.

Mbirita (talk) 15:54, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I wish to add my own photos of an area where i live[edit]

What is the process of adding my own photos of a geographical area where i live to an article? There are none at the moment, i would wish to add pictures of the salient features and wildlife. I have thousands of pictures and would be happy to share a few for free. Also, is there an appropriate limit on how much information or how many pictures should be added? (talk) 05:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia! Great that you want to help by adding images. The process is quite simple, you upload the image to our servers (and give it a name while uploading). And then you add the image to a Wikipedia page using the name. To upload an image, go to the Upload Wizard (you need a Wikipedia account for this). Once it is uploaded you can find more information on how to add images to pages at the Picture tutorial. There is no set limit for the amount of images to upload, only your own common sense. I would recommend not uploading more then 20 images in a single go with the upload wizard, because it might go slower. If you have any more questions let me know. All the best, Taketa (talk) 06:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Taketa. It looked like i needed to somehow prove the images were mine and copyright free, but if it is that simple i shall move ahead by making an account and learning how to do it. Many thanks (talk) 06:23, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, this is great fun. See Wikipedia:Photograph your hometown. It's one of the biggest things I do online. Usually I send between four and ten per batch and release them all under a more permissive license than the standard one, but the standard license is okay. I live in an area that has many thousands of Wikipedia articles, and have donated a few thousand photos to illustrate local history, buildings, etc. Jim.henderson (talk) 10:40, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Correct "grammar" for vehicles no longer in production[edit]

Hello all, I've edited a few pages of automobiles which are no longer in production & I've noticed that the pages say "The (insert make) (insert model) IS a ...whatever the type may be," rather than WAS which would probably be used in everyday conversation. Is there a consensus on this? Is it the view that as there is probably an example of the make & model still existing somewhere, that the current rather than past tense is felt to be correct. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 13:10, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Eagleash:, and welcome! I looked around the manual of style for some universal rule regarding tense of discontinued products, but didn't find anything. I did however find this instruction in the Computing manual of style, which lays out an argument for using present tense to refer to software that is no longer in production. That rationale makes sense to me, and it seems like it would apply to automobiles as well. Hope that helps, - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 19:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
@Jtmorgan: Well it does seem to answer the question as far as Wiki is concerned, even if I find it grates slightly...:P. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 20:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Present tense is always correct in these cases. The make and model of the vehicle hasn't changed, so there it always will be the make and model of the vehicle, regardless of the production status of that make and model. For example, the Nissan Prince Royal will always be a Nissan Prince Royal, even though none have been made since 1967. (talk) 17:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Note: there is an ongoing discussion about "is" vs. "was" on the "policy" VP.  ;) — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 17:16, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

How many users are allowed to cancel what I post?[edit]

Also if it is practical what are their user names? Aurumdog (talk) 18:51, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

As Wikipedia is "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", theoretically about 7 billion people If you mean how many Administrators are there, who can delete your article entirely? rather than remove your additions, or revert your changes, there are only 1,386 on the English Wikipedia - but any editor can request them to act by posting in the relevant place. - Arjayay (talk) 19:11, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

hey arjay, thanks for the answer. can I further ask, of the 1,386 administrators, who is the top dog? thxs again, aurum Aurumdog (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Technically Jimbo Wales, but he rarely gets involved in disputes.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

hey Vchimpanzee, alright forget about Jimbo Wales. What about the top dog who still has his ear to the ground and will listen to the plebs? c u 8er, aurum Aurumdog (talk) 06:37, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Aurumdog, Wikipedia is not a hierarchic community in the usual sense. This article in the most recent Signpost describes it very well: Article in the Signpost. All the best, w.carter-Talk 18:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Aurumdog, I presume you're dissatisfied because someone has been reverting your edits; but if you hope to appeal the reverts to some higher authority, that's not the way it works. It may help you to read Editing policy and Dispute resolution. No one has more right to edit an article than you; you can dispute a revert on the talk page for the article and try to get a consensus among the editors in favor of your edit. However, Wikipedia has well-established Core content policies (that were also determined by consensus) as well as a manual of style and you must adhere to them. An experienced editor will be more familiar with these policies and how they are interpreted in general, so the consensus will probably be in their favor. RockMagnetist(talk) 23:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

hey rock, that is all well and good. The reason I ask may be clearer after: Rude is completely wrong: when one editor can remove the edit of another without even saying they have: it is AN ABUSE OF POWER. This just shows us how wiki has gotten away from its roots. Wiki recognizes at heart that all knowledge is evolving, changing. Whatever we now know is different, more complete than in the past, and in the future we will know more [completely] than we know now. This is true across all fields of knowledge. Wiki is the only way to meet the constant, changing nature of knowledge. If we allow wiki to be abused by those running it, what hope does it have? All a senior editor needs do when removing someone else's edit is inform them (transparency) and at the very least give them a reason (hopefully a reasonable reason) for doing so. What do you think? all the best, aurum Aurumdog

RockMagnetist As for removing the text at you could simply apologize to the editor and ask that editor to remove the text from the page or just archive that post out of sight and start over on a more friendly basis. w.carter-Talk 10:22, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Aurumdog, here are some of the issues. The two fundamental issues are, first, verifiability. Your citation, "the books of Markides, Kyriacos", doesn't give the reader adequate information to check the accuracy of your paragraph. You need to provide more information - at a minimum, the title of the book, publication date and a page number. See Citing sources for more information. But even if you fix that, your anecdote about the childhood of Stylianos Atteshlis is very far from achieving a neutral point of view. It gives undue weight to a minor incident. Encyclopedia articles also need an impartial tone, a feature missing in phrases like "As an example of his innate wisdom" and "Psychologically, this is incredibly smart ...". Finally, the language is unencyclopedic - it is full of slang and swear words. Some of these issues might be fixed, but fundamentally, the incident is too trivial to belong in an encyclopedia. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

hey vchimp, Vchimpanzee you never did get back to me: "What about the top dog who still has his ear to the ground and will listen to the plebs?" Do you know one? - aurum Aurumdog

@Aurumdog:When you ask a question at the Teahouse you can not always get an answer from a specific Teahouse host. They are volunteers here just like the rest of us. Nobody is on call all the time. This time RockMagnetist answered the question for you instead of Vchimpanzee, and did a very good job in doing so. There are no "top dogs" here, everyone is just as important to the project. But we all tend to listen to the users who have spend more time, years here, and written thousands of answers and hundreds of articles. We call such users "wise". They have seen it all. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 20:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

sorry rock RockMagnetist , Maybe, yeah, I gotta get better with citations. As to a neutral point of view -> how can you explain that this person is wise? I know in life you have to sort out wisdom from sophistry but wiki does not intended to mirror life only reference it? - aurum Aurumdog (talk) 20:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@Aurumdog: I said everything I knew on the subject because I knew that much, and others gave better answers. As for your most recent question, to "explain that this person is wise" you have to find independent reliable sources that say so. That's just how Wikipedia works.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:12, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
@Aurumdog: "Wise" is an example of a peacock term and the best approach is to find a source where someone calls him wise and quote that person. See PEACOCK for an example. RockMagnetist(talk) 22:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

hey rock&vchimp&cart, RockMagnetist Vchimpanzee w.carter I guess that is pretty clear. I figure the answer I should not of missed back up there was: "fundamentally, the incident is too trivial to belong in an encyclopedia." I don't agree to its triviality but I do get where you are coming from. So, it is up to me to get the edit right. That will take a real lot of time. I'll try some smaller things first and maybe just some practice exercises till I understand more where the long time users ("We call such users "wise"") are coming from. Any ideas on how to practice?" - aurum Aurumdog (talk) 10:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Aurumdog: An excellent place to start is to do the Wikipedia Adventure, as I wrote on your talk page. You can also read some articles related to the subject you are interested in to get a feel for the language used (which is a bit different from how we normally just talk) and how things are presented. Best, w.carter-Talk 10:30, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


Hi! And thanks for the invite. Any tips how I can link, let say my albums on the page to my references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixtra (talkcontribs) 20:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Sixtra. I assume you are talking about the article Bulletrain (band). I'm not sure quite what you mean by "link your albums on the page to your references", but I see you are struggling with how to manage references. In a Wikipedia article, pretty well every statement should be followed by a reference to a published reliable source, and in most cases, to a source which is independent of the subject of the article (so your "reference" to Wikia is almost certainly not acceptable, because most Wikis are user-editable, and so are not regarded as reliable). You create each reference by using <ref>...</ref> as you tried, but you put the actual text of the reference (including the URL, if there is one) between those elements, not a number. "References" floating at the end, as you have, are not used in Wikipedia. Please see Referencing for beginners for more information about what to reference and how to reference. --ColinFine (talk) 23:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)