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 I reference to external source?[edit]

I am not getting the formatting in proper way. The URL was not coming in the references section Can someone help (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you wikilink something in the references?[edit]

Something I've spotted a few times is that people will wikilink some word in an offline source. You can see an example of this in the Gemma J article. They're citing the tv show episode and the source is appropriately documented, but they have wikilinked the name of the show. The times I've spotted it in the past, author has clarified that they are not using the wikipedia page as a reference, it is simply a wikilink, used in the same way you'd link something in the body of the article. I don't prefer to do things this way because, inevitably, someone thinks the article is using a wikipedia page as a source and it also makes it look like it's an online source when it's not (then I've clicked a link needlessly). Are there any guidelines as to the appropriateness of this? Bali88 (talk) 04:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

First article[edit]

I am new and recently created an article which is a history of a company for which there was no entry in Wikipedia. I created the text and references in my sandbox and selected "Press your draft for review". I later found a hyperlink to an abbreviation of that company however this had no content. So I decided to add to the hyperlink. I revised the article and again selected "Press your draft for review". I think I have created two lots of content for the same topic but I don't know where to check. Thank you for your assistance. Cala Munda (talk) 02:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

?? flagged vandalism??[edit]

watched the movie "Freaks". The wiki page misquotes the freaks as chanting "Gobble-gobble, gobble-gobble". They are not turkeys, it is quite evident when watching the movie that they are chanting "Gooba-gobble, gooba-gobble". I tried to correct this and cited the movie however it was flagged as vandalism and reverted. Do not know what I did wrong, am trying to figure it out. Any help appreciated. Davrm44 (talk) 00:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Shame on whoever said that was vandalism. Seriously...SHAME. Any good faith addition is never vandalism. Period. Bad editor...bad.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:30, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
After two minutes of research I have also found that user Davrm44 is correct, made the change back and supplied a reliable source in the edit summary as plot sections no not need sources.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:15, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I've reported ClueBot's failing at User:ClueBot NG/FalsePositives. @Davrm44: please note that the "user" who performed the revision here is an automated program (a "bot") that attempts to detect vandalism. It messed up here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I gave it a little whack on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and said "Bad bot".--Mark Miller (talk) 03:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions for Editing Spam (food) Page[edit]

Hello my name is Kathy! I am a part of a project group consisting of three other members (Linda, Maggie, Tiffany). We are from Cornell University, and intend to edit the Spam (food) page as a class assignment for INFO 3460. We have proposed a list of changes to the article on the Spam (food) talk page along with a list of potential sources, we would really value your feedback and ideas. For instance, how much of the historical aspect of Spam should be discussed/added? Should a separate section in regards to production of Spam be created, and would this be different from the section regarding its history? If this is the case how should the information on International Usage be presented? Any and all constructive criticism is welcome. Thanks!KathyQX94 (talk) 21:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

There are two things tp bear in miond:
  1. Any changes you make will require consensus. There are two types, nemine contradicet (usual for uncontroversial changes) and one formed actively, usual for controversial changes. Whatever happens you must submit to the consensus, though you may seek to form and influence it, on the article's talk page, in favour of your edits
  2. Any item that you add to the article requires a reference, ideally, but not compulsorily, a citation. We require references from significant coverage about the entity, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42.
Those are, pretty much, the sole things you have to handle, and you can do that without fear. Fiddle Faddle 21:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Actually the chosen topic Spam (food) is already notable, therefore WP:42 does not apply; and uncontroversial facts about the topic do not require a reference to an independent source (they still ideally require a reference to a reliable source).
Looking a little at your questions, it's fine to go ahead and make any changes with regard to section organisation that you think are good, but of course such changes may or may not be reverted if other editors disagree. If that happens, then you discuss it with the other editors on the talk page, to reach a consensus as to what to do. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I am one of the group members mentioned above for the Spam page. So it seems like we should focus on articles that are independent (e.g. not affiliated with Hormel which produces Spam) and reliable (such as articles from scholarly sources)?

Also, can anyone speak to why Spam is a B-class article in one Wikiproject but C-class in another? --Lhe3460 (talk) 23:12, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Lhe3460. Sounds like you get the idea of what's meant by reliable and independent. Also, each Wikiproject operates independently with regards to criteria and assessing articles. In the case of the Spam article, it looks like the page has been checked by a member of Wikiproject Hawaii, but no one from WikiProject Food and drink has gotten to it yet. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 23:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
User: Howicus Thank you for your help! --Lhe3460 (talk) 23:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

create a page[edit]

I just created a wikipedia account. It was confirmed via email. I can't seem to be able to upload anything. I want to create a page about a friend who died in 2012. I keep getting a message that I'm not confirmed. Help. Britelite 002 (talk) 20:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Britelite 002. Welcome to the Teahouse.
You will have to wait four days and make any ten edits before you can upload. You will then be autoconfirmed. In the meantime I suggest you look through our guidelines on notability to see if your friend is likely to be notable for Wikipedia. Also bear in mind that you may have a conflict of interest as this was your friend and be careful to maintain a neutral point of view.Charles (talk) 20:17, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
What am I supposed to edit four times? in four days? I have nothing to edit. Or is it either/or...wait four days or make four edits.
What do you mean a conflict of interest? How would it be conflicting and to whom? What parameters do we have for a notable person? That's a very uncomfortable designation. Would one have to be uh...famous...have an obit in the NYTimes? What? Britelite 002 (talk) 20:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Britelite 002, we have many needs on Wikipedia. If you find a typographical error or a place where a comma is needed (most of my edits are of this type, and most of those are mistakes I made myself), these count. You can make create a userpage by clicking on your name and tell us about your interests as they relate to Wikipedia.
A conflict of interest means you are close to the subject you are writing about and may have trouble writing with a neutral point of view. Most people, when they try to write about a subject they are very familiar with, want to say the nicest things they can and praise the person or company. But an encyclopedia needs to be neutral. It is better if others write about the subject you are close to. Start by creating a draft in your userspace. Click User:Britelite 002/Draft and you can do that.
As for notability, if a person is famous enough to be written about in The New York Times, that person would likely qualify for an article. Notability doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as famous, but it means the person has been written about in detail in several reliable independent sources such as major newspapers or magazines, or even books.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:03, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
The blue hyperlink I put in my first reply will take you to the page which explains notabity guidelines for people.Charles (talk) 21:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Deleting a Page[edit]


I am a staff member at The History Center in Tompkins County. I realized that our museum did not have a Wikipedia page, so I decided to create one. I have begun the basic structure of it, and I'm making my way through.

My question: I noticed that another local non-profit organization has mentioned us in their opening paragraph of their article "Ithaca Discovery Trail". However, they have identified us with the incorrect name (History Center of Tompkins County - which does not use "The" in the beginning of our name, and uses "of" instead of "in"). I'm curious as to how this hyperlink can be completely deleted, and replaced with a link to the article I am currently working on (The History Center in Tompkins County)?

Thank you.

TheHistoryCenterinTompkinsCounty (talk) 17:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse TheHistoryCenterinTompkinsCounty
Wikipedia strongly recommends people not to write articles on their employer, as you have a clear conflict of interest, making it difficult for you to write from the required neutral point of view. Please read and follow the advice in WP:COI
I note that the article The History Center in Tompkins County has been nominated for deletion as a copyright violation - and you are arguing that you own the copyright - which is precisely the problem - it is copyright. As it clearly states above the edit box "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone—subject to certain terms and conditions.".
Finally, I have to tell you that your choice of username contradicts our WP:Username policy particularly WP:ORGNAME and needs to be changed. - Arjayay (talk) 18:29, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia @TheHistoryCenterinTompkinsCounty:. There's a GLAM sub-community that can be found at WP:GLAM, which may be of help. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

user messages[edit]

I received a user message and would like to reply. When I am in the Talk tab, I see the message but would like to know how that works to talk back. Thanks, R SocialNtwrker (talk) 17:39, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi SocialNtwrker. Welcome. Just click the blue "Edit" tab at the top of the page. Below the last entry start with a colon to indent your reply and at the end add four tildes ( ~ ) which signs it for you.Charles (talk) 20:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I made two submissions with the same title[edit]

hello anyone, i made two submissions with the same title, is it possible to cancel onePauljoel.akp (talk) 17:34, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Pauljoel.akp. Yes, it is. I guess you're talking about Draft:Linda Ikeji and Draft:Linda Ikeji (2)? If you edit the one you want deleted, and insert the template {{db-g7}} at the start, that is a request for an administrator to come along and delete the page. (You can only use this if you are the sole, or nearly sole, person who has contributed to a page). --ColinFine (talk) 17:49, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Needs quick solution for my articles contributed to the 'Ukulhas' Island in wikipedia.[edit]

Since I'm the creator of the 'Ukulhas' page in Wikipedia and I've been the only person who has been contributing articles to 'Ukulhas' (an island in Maldives) page in Wikipedia, I would humbly need your support and advice for the editions and further developments of the page.

In may 2012 I got the feedback about the articles which says 'This article relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources'.

Since no book has been written about the Ukulhas so far and I'm one of the few people who done the research on 'Ukulhas', It would really be a difficult task for me to provide more citations and more sources. In this case what would be the solutions for citation issues??

Secondly the feed back says 'This article is written like a travel guide rather than an encyclopedic description of the subject. For that now I've been rewriting and changing the sentence structures to encyclopedic descriptions.

I'm an automated confirmed user of Wikipedia. My Username is Rappey and my User ID is 7808376.

I would be grateful if you could help me soon.

Best Regards Ramiz Rep of Maldives (Rappey (talk) 16:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Ramiz. The absence of other sources is a big problem. For most subjects, the absence of sources besides your own book would be a block, as the subject would then fail to be notable (in Wikipedia's special sense). But WP:GEOLAND says that populated places are normally notable. Can you not find any other published material on the island? Newspapers, other books? They do not have to be in English, or available on line.
The language of Ukulhas is still a problem: every sentence oozes "travel guide". Nearly every sentence is promotional: Wikipedia articles should never say anything is "famed for its (anything)", nor should anything be described as "first ever". A community should not be described as "a warm and welcoming one" - unless perhaps this is quoted from an independent reliable source. The article goes into far too much detail for an encyclopaedia article, especially about things of interest only to people who visit. In my view, it needs a complete rewrite, and would come out at something like one quarter of the length. I suggest you contribute this draft article to something like wikivoyage, and start again with a more neutral, encyclopaedic, and non-promotional article for Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 17:45, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, I could rewrite the articles but its hard for me to find more sources about the island since no books or articles have been written so far. Rappey (talk) 18:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Ramiz. What exactly is the source for this article? The citation only says "Ramiz Ibrahim". RockMagnetist (talk) 17:53, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine. I've extracted articles relevant to travels and moved all those tho Wikivoyage and made changes to remaining contents. I've also found few citations which I've cited. Could you please help me in doing further enhancement..Once again many thanks for your feedback advice. Rappey (talk) 05:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Would anyone be willing to help me write an article ASAP?[edit]

I need an article written ASAP about Northern Soul the film. Would anyone be willing to help me do it? Emmaparkinson (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Emmaparkinson - what's the reason for the urgency? Wikipedia has no deadlines and we are generally very reluctant to entertain the deadlines of external parties. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:24, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Consensus redirect has become a page again[edit]

Hi, if someone could point me in the way of policy regarding consensus-reached page blanking redirects that have been recreated without addressing former issues, I would be grateful. Thanks Asdklf; (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

i am new here how can i great a page and a biography please? thanks[edit]

i have tried and my add has being deleted please help. thanks.Ninfican (talk) 10:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ninfican, and welcome to Wikipedia. It's important to realise that Wikipedia is not a social networking site - we don't write about ourselves because, frankly, most of us haven't done anything worth including in an encyclopedia. Unless you've been in the national news a few times, Wikipedia doesn't want or need your biography as an article.
You do have a userpage (at User:Ninfican), which you can use to tell other Wikipedia editors a bit about yourself. However, the userpage guidelines discourage excessive personal information - your userpage should tell us things that are relevant to your work here - what you're interested in and which areas you're planning to edit. Yunshui  10:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

How can I remove the {{User sandbox}} template from my draft submission?[edit]

I have submitted an article for review and now have this message in my Sandbox. How is this done?S.tollyfield (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, S.tollyfield. Simply edit it out, which I have now done. As part of the review process, Joe Decker moved the article into Draft space, so it should not have that template. Moving the article leaves a redirect, so if you go to your sandbox, you are automatically redirected to the new location. If you pick on where it says "Redirected from User:S.tollyfield/sandbox, it will take you back to your real sandbox, which you can edit to remove the redirect. Either reuse it (if you want to create another article), or leave it blank, or insert the template {{db-g7}} in it, which requests an administrator to come along and delete it.
--ColinFine (talk) 08:53, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Can I have someone look at my article before resubmitting it?[edit]

Can I have someone look at my article before resubmitting it just to make sure I am correcting the mistakes I am making? We've been working on submitting the Jerry Yarnell page for a while now.Sablanca (talk) 01:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Sablanca, Hello! You're going to have trouble with this submission on the basis that nearly all of the sources appear to be written by Yarnell himself. Can you find some sources that are written by impartial and unrelated sources? News articles? Bali88 (talk) 03:51, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I can. Is there a certain amount of sources we need to have in order for it to be accepted? Sablanca (talk) 04:48, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Sablanca, There is no set number of sources you need, but the number of secondary sources (written by someone else), needs to be greater than that of primary sources (written by him or someone close to him). It also matters how you use the sources. For instance, his birthdate, where he grew up, his diagnosis with lymphoma, and where he went to college are appropriate things to cite to his own writings. Those are not considered self-serving statements. However, things like the fact that he is "widely famous", the awards he has won, and the number of students need to be sourced to impartial sources. I'd get started here. There are a number of issues with tone in the article (at times it sounds like an advertisement for him), but it's getting closer. Get the sourcing fixed and I'll help you with fix the rest. :-) Bali88 (talk) 05:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello Sablanca. I believe that a decent article about this artist can be created. But please ponder carefully the following completely unreferenced sentences from the current version of the draft:
"In 2010, as part of a bold move and massive undertaking, Jerry began recording all new materials for his new TV Show Paint This with Jerry Yarnell™, for his portfolio of DVD instructional materials, and for his new 24/7 school Yarnell School Online. While his business name remains Yarnell Studio & School of Fine Art LLC, his new and only official teaching website is now, easily recognized by its background color which is his signature royal blue."
This is overtly promotional, advertising, spam-type language that will never be acceptable in an encyclopedia article, which must be written from the neutral point of view. You must be ruthless in your editing, eliminating these sentences, and every other sentence, phrase and word that is promotional in any way. Only then will your draft be worthy of serious consideration. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
While you're at it, also kill that trademark symbol - ™ - such symbols are not permitted in articles at all. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:21, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

When editors are personally abusive[edit]

I was recently involved in a rather strange discussion in which an editor implied that my opinion on a topic is because I am a white supremacist on the basis of a dissection of the the numbers in my screen name and that everyone else was a racist because they disagreed with the changes. I thought it was pretty funny and the editor is now blocked for other reasons (edit warring, it appears to be a spe account created solely to make these edits), but for future reference, is abusive language by other editors an actionable offense? In other words, can you get blocked just for being a jerk and calling names? Bali88 (talk) 00:00, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

@Bali88: Welcome back to the Teahouse. It's true that personal attacks are a blockable offense WP:ANI is the place to report them, but I'm not sure that that comment crosses into personal attacks (saying "You are a neo-nazi" would be considered an obvious personal attack though). Nevertheless, there's no harm in reporting them to ANI, especially if they're making other disruptive edits. --Jakob (talk) 00:07, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
@Jakec: Thanks. I'm not terribly concerned about this specific editor at this point. I was just wondering how to handle it if this continues/amplifies. I know they're harassing another editor on their own talk page. :-) Bali88 (talk) 00:24, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
In this particular case, the editor in question has now been blocked (for edit-warring, rather than personal attcks, but I don't imagine their conversational conduct helped their case). Civility is always something of a hot-button topic at ANI, so if you do ever file a report against another user there, be ready for a degree of *ahem* vibrant discussion; unless someone has directly called you something unspeakably rude, it can be difficult to get consensus on what constitutes "incivility". In theory, as Jakob points out, incivility is a blockable offence; in practice... well, it's a can of worms you may wish to leave unopened. Yunshui  14:25, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

How do I inform the public that I will become my very last artwork after my death I have Terminal Cancer[edit]

How do I inform the public that I am the first artist in history to become my last ever artwork installation by arranging now a see through tank to preserve my body soon after my death as I only have 6-9 months to live according to my specialist cancer doctor due to Terminal Cancer of the pancreasTREVOR DAVID THOMAS ARTIST (talk) 22:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Trevor David Thomas. I am sorry to hear of your diagnosis. Unfortunately your news is not encyclopedic; so there is no place for it in Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Alternative outlets for other websites; for example, you could put it on a facebook page. —teb728 t c 23:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Trevor. I am also sorry to hear of your condition, and think it a bold and challenging thing to do. I'd like to expand a little on what teb828: it's not that what you are planning to do is inherently unencyclopaedic: until something has been picked up and reported on by reliable independent sources, it is unsuitable. So if a major newspaper were to write an article about you and your intended artwork, then it could appear in Wikipedia. In short, Wikipedia is never, ever, allowed to be used to "inform the public" of something - only after secondary sources have already noted something may it appear in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 09:03, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Unifying language in an article[edit]

If I come across an article that uses inconsistent terminology (different words for the same thing, to a confusing degree), is it kosher for me to go through and make the language consistent? (talk) 19:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Greetings 152, welcome to the teahouse. It's always a good idea to give the specifics (e.g. which article) on these kinds of questions so people can take a look for themselves, because so many of these questions don't have generic answers. In general, without knowing more about the article in question making language use more consistent and coherent sounds like basic good editing. However, note that one thing that comes up sometimes is Enlish vs US spelling. Some articles have adopted English spelling (e.g. centre rather than center) and the standard is that once an article goes one way or another don't change it. So if it's using US English spelling stick with that if English English stick with that. There are often comments at the beginning of articles or on their talk pages where this has been an issue asking people not to start changing the standard. Also, using different words for the same thing isn't necessarily a bad thing, in fact I do it all the time because using the same word can be rather boring for the reader. Again it all depends on the article, for scientific topics for example it can be essential to use the same term consistently. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! It's this page, which is all over the place:

I'm working on an academic project, and while even in the field there's little consensus on which term to use, I'm thinking it would be best if the article committed to one. I'll take some time to unify it when my schedule allows.... (talk) 21:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm not skilled enough in the field of legal finance to know if words are being used correctly or incorrectly in that article, so I don't really know what you're referring to, but while you're "unifying" the article, make sure that you include all relevant terminology so that the audience knows what you're talking about. It's good for an article to be consistent, but if you change it all to American English and make no mention of other terminology, a British reader will be lost. A good strategy that some articles employ is to include all relevant alternative terms in the lead. So for instance the CCTV article...CCTV is not a common American term. We frequently use terms like video surveillance or surveillance footage, but almost never use the term CCTV. It's a lot more common in other English speaking areas. There's nothing wrong with using CCTV throughout the article, but it's definitely worth noting in the lead alternative names so readers from other dialects know what you're talking about. Make sure you aren't removing terms that might help others understand the article. :-) Bali88 (talk) 00:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
WP:WikiProject Law is also a good place to consult with other editors who have an interest in and knowledge of the topic. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:27, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Gartner Group white papers[edit]

Is it possible for me to get access to Gartner group papers via Wikipedia? This is strictly for editing Wikipedia not a back door for business stuff. If not (which I'm almost certain is the answer) I assume I can still reference Gartner white papers even though they are behind a paywall(?) I still have friends who work in the real world and have access to this stuff and I also have a store of papers I saved in electronic format from back when I had access. I know that journal articles would be preferable but for some Information Technology topics the journal articles are IMO just mostly so esoteric and not related to most of the actual issues that people in the real world deal with. FYI, the specific paper I'm interested in is this: but I've thought about this for several other articles as well. MadScientistX11 (talk) 19:17, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Might be worth asking around at the Resource Exchange; folk there can get hold of a lot of cool stuff... Someone on that project may well have Gartner access. Yunshui  20:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Great idea, I didn't even know that existed. Glad I asked. Thanks Again! (I promise this is my last question at least for today ;) --MadScientistX11 (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Posting images[edit]

Is there a step-by-step guide for posting images in Wikipedia articles? Geoff Roynon (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Dude, just find the picture you want to upload on the Commons and add it into the article.Mirror Freak 18:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The image is not in the Commons, it is an image belonging to the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Do I need to add it to the Commons first and then link to it? Geoff Roynon (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh, then yeah, here's the steps...
  1. Go to the Commons
  2. Make sure you have permission to use the picture
  3. Upload the picture
  4. Use a wikilink to add the picture. (If you can't I help you do it)Mirror Freak 18:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the help - will let you know how it works out. Geoff Roynon (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I see a problem here, GeoffRoynon. Use of imagery from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey is limited to non-commercial use only. Freely licensed images on Wikimedia Commons can be used for any purpose, including commercial uses. The licenses are not compatible. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Can you use a different source? For instance, some (but not all) Hubble images are in the Public Domain and can be used here. --Gronk Oz (talk) 00:47, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I can't use a different source - I need to use the original image from Sloan Digital Sky Survey. This shows the colour of the object of interest as blue, other images have it as green. Why do we need to add images to the Commons before using them? Can't we simply link to the original source on Sloan for the image? Geoff Roynon (talk) 08:19, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, GeoffRoynon. One of the goals of Wikipedia is that it be free to use, as well as free to edit: ideally, all material in it can be reused by anybody, for any purpose, as long as they follow the requirements on attribution and licensing. Partly for that reason, the Wikipedia does not provide a way to include images from elsewhere (except from Wikimedia commons, which is a related project). For practical reasons, there is a way of including certain copyright material (such as company logos, and scans of book and record covers), but the use of these is very narrowly limited (see non-free content criteria.
You may be able to link to a page which contains an image; but this must either be a reference supporting a statement in the article, or follow the (again narrow) constraints on using external links. But the vast majority of images on the internet, I'm afraid, simply cannot be used in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 11:20, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, I've lost interest in this now. Sloan Digital Sky Survey allows its images to be used for non-commercial purposes and Wikipedia (I assume) is non-commercial yet we can't use the images from Sloan! Geoff Roynon (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia itself is indeed non-commercial, but we want commercial entities to be able to use our content. If you put a picture from Sloan in an article, then no one would be able to take that article and use it for any commercial purpose. Powers T 21:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

How to create WikiProject for Filipino Americans[edit]

I saw the WikiProject for Tambayan Philippines which seems to be a catchall for all things related to the Philippines as well as Filipino culture. I want to create a WikiProject specifically for "Filipino Americans" to collaborate with other users on Filipino American history and clean up stubs on biography pages for Filipino Americans. I'm very new to Wikipedia editing as of this past weekend so I'd like some help maybe finding more experienced users to create this or I suppose tips on how to make sure I'm doing this right. Thanks. Dashiellsands (talk) 16:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello @Dashiellsands:, and welcome! I've never started a Wikiproject myself, but looking into it, it looks like you would go through the process at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. If you have questions about how that process works, it looks like the best place to ask is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Good luck. I hope this was helpful! --Jayron32 19:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, @Jayron32. I will check them out. It's quite a big world I jumped into so I appreciate simple "turn here" tips to get around.

--Dashiellsands (talk) 19:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


I came across the following sentence while editing random articles...Some of these images pre-dated the work the claimant had created some did not. I inserted a semi-colon. It now reads...Some of these images pre-dated the work the claimant had created; some did not. I started to wonder if a period and a new sentence.......created. Some did not. would have been better. Thoughts? Buster Seven Talk 16:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Buster Seven, and thanks for posing an interesting punctuation question for the Teahouse! I think the answer depends on context:
1. The semicolon gives equivalent weight to the two independent clauses without coming to a full stop in the flow of ideas. In other words, it maintains the flow of ideas.
2. Using a period and new sentence creates a full stop and puts more emphasis on “Some did not.” As a reader, I might expect the next sentence to further explain through examples of the images that did not predate the other images.
3. The options of using a comma and conjunction such as and or but, or a semicolon plus conjunctive adverb (however, nevertheless, additionally, etc.) plus comma give even more ways to nuance the connection between ideas.
It’s a matter of choice, depending on the meaning. Punctuation matters! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 18:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Personally I like it with the semi colon, but either works. Ryan shell (talk) 18:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the replies. I think the semicolon makes us "read" it the way it would be spoken, with a soft stop connecting two equal parts. Thanks ALL for your work at the Teahouse. ```Buster Seven Talk 18:59, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Timeline for accepted wikipedia page submission[edit]

Hi There, I've recently submitted a wikipedia page for Splice Machine. What is the time frame for getting this page accepted? Splice Machine 15:53, 16 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariela Weinberger (talkcontribs)

A few months due to the backlog.Mirror Freak 15:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Citing a movie as a reference[edit]

I hate it when this happens, I'm almost sure I've done this in the past but for some reason I can't remember and can't find the relevant documentation. I want to cite a talking head from a movie. The movie is about Margaret Mead and I want to quote at least one anthropologist. I have a draft in my sandbox btw. What I want to do is cite the specific time frame when the person is talking, something like minute = 20:02 - 25:04 but can't remember the appropriate keyword to use, minute doesn't work. Also, the video I want to reference is on Youtube. I know Youtube isn't normally a good source but in this case it's an educational video so no copyright issues, it says on the video something like "standard youtube license" and I think it adds to the verifiability if people can link directly to the actual source and watch for themselves, I assume that is OK in this situation? MadScientistX11 (talk) 13:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Without commenting on the veracity of a YouTube source (short answer: official channel, probably ok, uploaded by random unknown, probably not), you'll probably find {{Cite AV media}} is the reference template you'll need. Yunshui  13:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
(the relevant parameter being "time="). Yunshui  13:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
That's it! Have to bookmark that. I will double check, I think it's not a random user but not sure; if it is a random user this video is fairly essential to understanding the criticism of Mead's work so I can probably find some official version on Youtube or elsewhere. Thanks for the prompt reply, I've been tearing my hair (what little is left) out trying to figure that out. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 13:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

If I may add[edit]

The band is new and the person isn't all that popular in social media. What I have written is everything I can about the person.Also sorry about the spelling mistakes in my pervious post. Ashley.Cunningham (talk) 12:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello again, Ashley. I assume this is also about George Daniel (drummer)? Wikipedia doesn't care how popular a person is in social media. What it does care about, crucially, is whether reliable, independent sources (such as major newspapers, or websites with a good reputation for fact-checking) have written about the person. If they haven't yet done so, then the person is not notable, in Wikipedia's special sense of the word, and we cannot have an article about them. The point, I think, is that if the person hasn't been written about in reliable sources, then there is no information which is allowed to go in the article, so there cannot be an article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

No Wikipedia links when there are?[edit]

Im working on a page George_Daniel_(drummer) and I got a note that it has no links to any Wikipedia pages when it does. Can someone explain. I'd greatful2 appreciate it. Ashley.Cunningham (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Formatting fixes: turned the link (which wasn't even a link because there wasn't a space before it) into a wikilink, and removed the space before the signature. --ColinFine (talk) 14:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Ashley. Yobot (which is a bot, not a person) correctly spotted that the article contained no wikilinks at all. While it did in fact have links to other Wikipedia articles, they were:
  1. presented as external links, which is not recommended
  2. directed to the mobile version of Wikipedia, which is undesirable
  3. formatted as references, which they are not (references point to reliable sources which support statements made in the text; wikilinks are aids to the reader, and point to Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects - which are not reliable sources).
Fuhghettaboutit replaced these with proper wikilinks, and then replaced the message with a different one. --ColinFine (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

editing information on a brand's page - by a member of the company[edit]

I would like to make edits to the following page:

I am a representative of the company and therefore a reliable source. Is there a process I have to go through to prove this or is there somewhere I send the relevant information I want to add to the page and they edit it on my behalf etc. For example, we (Hardy Amies Ltd) have just opened a new store at No.8 Savile Row and I need to add details of this to the page. There is also information that needs deleting as it is replicated on the 'Sir Edwin Hardy Amies' page ( which is more about the brand's founder as opposed to the brand today. Thank you in advance for your help. (talk) 11:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey I don't think that being part of the company actually makes you a reliable source. With that logic, a Christian could say that because he/she's a Christian, that god is real.Mirror Freak 12:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I meant reliable as in not a random member of the public. But thank you for your help anyway (talk) 14:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
As an employee, you have a conflict of interest with Wikipedia in regards to the article about your company - you're therefore strongly advised against editing the article directly. However, you can, as you suggest, get someone without a COI to edit the page for you. Go to the article's talkpage and add a new section with your suggested changes. At the top of your comments, add the following code: {{Request edit}}. This will alert other users to the fact that an edit has been requested, and they can then evaluate your proposed changes and, if appropriate, implement them.
You will, however, need to make sure that you include actual reliable sources for any changes you want made - without sources, your edit request is liable to be rejected out of hand. Yunshui  14:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
That's great, thank you so much for your help Yunshui - much appreciated! (talk) 17:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
What about my help!!!!!!!!! Just kidding. hahahaMirror Freak 20:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, MirrorFreak. What this person means, by the way, is that we have no way of knowing you really are who you are, and what you say needs to be published somewhere so people wanting to do so can go back and check it later to see if it is really true. And as an employee of the company, you might want to add only positive information or promote the company.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:18, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Why my article is going to be deleted?[edit]

My page about product of company I work for is under Speedy deletion issues. But this page is very similar to other pages of products of the same category on Wikipedia. Why one articles can stay and others (like mine) shall be deleted if they are in fact similar?Jan Goldewski (talk) 09:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jan Goldewski welcome to the Tea House
I may be wrong, your article is written in promotional tone.
Also as you work for the company it is "Conflict of Interests"
May be senior editors like ColinFine will tell you more how to submit article about your company. If you scroll down this page you will see "How can I update company information inline with Wikipedia rules?" which is similar to your issue.
Aftab Banoori (Talk) 09:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

How do you create an infobox[edit]

I have been searching and asking on how to create an infobox to a certain person on a Wikipedia article but can never get a straight answer on how to. Can someone please help?

Thanks, Septinlas (Beau) Septinlas (talk) 06:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Beau, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have found two different ways to do this: an easy way and a hard way. The hard way is to follow the instructions at Template:Infobox person (actually, it's not a bad idea to scan over that anyway). The easier way is to find another article which looks similar to what you want, and copy the code from there. Just click the Edit tab, select the Infobox section, copy and then paste it into your article. Be aware that there are many different styles of infoboxes, for scientists and musicians and politicians and military people etc, so use the one which best suits your subject. Alternative templates are listed at WikiProject Biography/Infoboxes. --Gronk Oz (talk) 06:49, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you --Gronk Oz for the answer I've been waiting for!

Septinlas (talk) 07:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Septinlas. Just to add on to Gronk Oz's answer, infoboxes are neither required nor prohibited for articles according to WP:INFOBOXUSE. There are lots of featured articles which have infoboxes and lots which do not. Therefore, adding an infobox to an existing article needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis and should be discussed beforehand on the article's talk page to see if there's a consensus for adding one. Like any other edit, an infobox should improve a reader's understanding of the article in question. Whether other similar articles have one or not can be helpful as a guide, but an infobox shouldn't really be added just for the sake of adding an one. In fact, in some cases an infobox can actually be more of a "disinfobox" which serves no real purpose.
So, if you're talking about adding an infobox to a new article you're creating, then I suggest carefully considering if it is absolutely needed to improve the reader's understanding. Maybe ask at any relevant WikiProjects to see if they have any guidelines regarding infobox usage or specific advice. If you're talking about adding an infobox to an existing article, especially one that has existed for a long time with out one, then you should discuss it on the article's talk page first to see what the consensus might be. Make sure to check the talk page's archives, if there are any, because it's possible that the subject came up before and the consensus was not to add one. - Marchjuly (talk) 07:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Some is posting a ling at the top of article I posted[edit]

I started an article called Redstone Building in 2007. A person named CTF83! has posted a link to a music event in Iowa where a similar building exists at the top of the page. Shouldn't this be done elsewhere, like the "Redstone" disambiguation page? There is no full article about the other "Redstone Building" in Iowa, apparently which is where the person is from. Shouldn't they start their own Redstone Building page rather than using the top of the page in San Francisco?

Energynet (talk) 01:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Energynet: What you seen is what's known as a hatnote. Its main purpose is to direct readers from an article they may have reached by accident to an article they were trying to reach. In this case the hatnote is okay, because the other building is known as the Redstone Building and thus someone searching for it would find the article on your Redstone Building instead. --Jakob (talk) 02:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


As a relatively new contributor, I have recently created 3 articles which are currently somewhere in the review backlog; not a problem they'll get seen eventually. My question is; when should categories be added to new articles & where/how does one find a list of categories to "choose" from as it were? Eagleash (talk) 00:11, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Eagleash: Hi Eagleash. You can add categories now, but you should not make them live. There are a few ways of doing so. What I suggest is placing them, but surrounding them in nowiki tags – that is, place <nowiki> before them and </nowiki> after them, which is a way of saying to the software, "don't treat this wiki markup as meaningful". For example:


To find categories, I have always found it easiest to navigate to a few articles on similarly situated topics and see what categories are being used (well developed articles are usually more useful than less for this). For example, for the draft on David Paine, I'd look at a bunch of the articles on other Crystal Palace F.C. players and the same for Leyton Orient F.C. players. If you want to just browse, you might start at Portal:Contents/Categories. If you want to see every category ever (and be able to search that massive list alphabetically) go to Special:Categories. Note that there's a tool called Wikipedia:HotCat that some users use. I personally have not. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: Thanks; I will add a couple of basic categories using the notation you suggest & then await acceptance (or not!) before going any further with it. Eagleash (talk) 01:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I need help with my first article. Free Rider HD[edit]

Here is the Decline message that I got... What should I change?

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Dominic951Dominic951 (talk) 23:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Dominic, and thanks for coming by the Teahouse! Your draft article was rejected because it isn't written like a good encyclopedia article should be written. It includes highly promotional language, of a sort that you'd find in a video game review or an advertisement for the game (like "an addicting game" and "Thousands of tracks, challenge friends, draw a track and more!"). It includes gameplay instructions that would be better suited to a video game manual or strategy guide (like "Undo(Shift + Z): To undo the last drawn line, power-up, or goal"). And most importantly of all, it doesn't cite any reliable third-party sources, which means no one who reads your article has any way to verify the information in the article.
My suggestion would be to look at some high-quality existing video game articles. A good model might be Crayon Physics Deluxe, which is fairly basic but demonstrates appropriate tone and referencing.
If you have further questions, feel free to ask!
-- Powers T 00:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey Powers, I was wondering if you could give me a hand maybe. Change some things and tell me why you changed them. I would appreciate it. Thanks for the help anyway.

Question: What do you mean 3rd-party sources? What should I do to change this.

Thanks again, Dominic. — Preceding undated comment added 01:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, Dominic. I'm afraid I can't fix your article for you, because I don't know anything about the game, and I don't know where to find sources for it. I can tell you that a third-party source is one that is independent of the game developer (the developer is the first party, and Wikipedia is the second party), like a gaming magazine or other independent author. Powers T 14:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Isn't the link a third-party? Or a source?

Dominic951 (Talk)

I'm not sure which link you mean. I see three links in your draft article right now. Two go to the game's official website (first-party source) and one goes to Wikipedia (second-party source). You need reliable, journalistic sources that talk about the game without being affiliated with the game. Powers T 20:58, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Creating a new article while first one is waiting for review[edit]

I just created my very first article from scratch, and submitted it for review :-) Unfortunately I got a message that it could take up to a month for it to be reviewed. I'd like to work on another article now. Can I safely delete what's in my personal sandbox? Can I create a second sandbox to use for the second article? Although I've kept a copy of the edit code from the article elsewhere, I'm afraid of losing my place in the reviewing queue. How do I do it?Shandong44 (talk) 20:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

You can have as many sandboxes in your userspace as you like, so for example you could click these red links to create User:Shandong44/sandbox2, User:Shandong44/sandbox3, User:Shandong44/blue sandbox, User:Shandong44/red sandbox, and/or User:Shandong44/draft article about Purple Unicorn Theory. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Why did an image disappear after my edit?[edit]

After this edit of mine, I do not see the image (Wappen_Bistum_Utrecht.png) which was visible in the Template:Infobox former country prior to my edit. I used the .png with and without underscores in the filename. What did I do? and how do I correct it? —BoBoMisiu (talk) 19:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello BoBoMisiu and welcome to the Teahouse. The map disappeared because you removed the "_"'s in the file name for the picture. All these filenames for pictures work the same way as web addresses work: There can be no space between the words, it must all be connected. If you just replace "Wappen Bistum Utrecht.png" with "Wappen_Bistum_Utrecht.png" it will work again. Best, w.carter-Talk 20:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It was without _ prior to my edit and I added _ with this edit but I did not see it. I just added the _ but the image is still not visible. --BoBoMisiu (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It was a simple fix and someone beat me to it, but it is now corrected.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It is mis-typed in the Template:Infobox_former_country blank that I cut and pasted. --BoBoMisiu (talk) 20:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Ever fantastic ColinFine found the missing bit. :) w.carter-Talk 20:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I was going to come back and say I'd fixed it, BoBoMisiu, but Mark Miller beat me back here. I was busy putting an edit request at Template Talk:infobox former country, because I believe you simply copied the arguments from there, and the error is already in the text on that page.
Yes check.svg Done. --ColinFine (talk) 20:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. --BoBoMisiu (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

How do I center a thumbnail image?[edit]

I am trying for ...some hours now, to center an thumbnail image, because the default thumbnail is cuting the face I have to put to the biographical article of my boss. If I don't solve it until tomorrow I am fired... I thought wikipedia works as any other editing programs, but it seems it is quite rigid, because I cannot move the image in no way to center it. I am no expert in IT, but all other programs I used worked easier... What the hell dudes, can't you make something to work? Please!!! George Tiugea George.tiugea (talk) 19:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, George; I'm sorry for your frustration. Can you tell us what image you're trying to use? Our thumbnails display entire images, just at reduced size, so I'm not sure how the image is being incorrectly cropped. If you can be very specific with the problem you're having, we can take a look and try to help. Powers T 19:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It is just a regular .jpg (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I've added the image to her article. At this link you can see the change I made; hopefully it helps you add images to articles in the future.
I do have some concerns about the image you uploaded, though. Did you really take the photo yourself? And if so, did you do it as part of your official on-the-job duties? That can all affect the copyright status of the work. Powers T 19:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
And George.tiugea, if your job really does depend on updating the Wikipedia article about your boss, then I suggest you get another job as soon as possible, because you have been charged with something that is difficult if not impossible. First of all, read (and show her) our policy on conflict of interest, so that she understands that neither she nor you has any control over the page, and can only suggest changes to be made to it. --ColinFine (talk) 20:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • It appears the image was previously published off Wikipedia and will therefore require OTRS permissions or the image could be deleted as a copyright issue.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Well there you go. I didn't think to look on Wikipedia for it.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
@Powers: Thank you very much for your help! I took the picture myself and it had nothing to do with the job connection at that time, I took it as a friend, and now I added in order to SHARE it with the public.

@ColinFine, Demiurge1000: I just entered this chat looking for HELP not lecturing about presumptions of something I did not do. I simply posted an informative article, having no direct relation with my job connection. All the information can be checked on the external links and more references will be added soon. I admit I added some drama to the job issue, but that was only meant to help improve the article nothing more. The final purpose was to have better information about a subject. I thought this was a place of free speech not of harassment with all sorts of accusations... Maybe I was wrong... but only in this respectGeorge.tiugea (talk) 09:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

That's fine, the lectures are free. As a Junior Wrangler at the Teahouse, though, I must point out that neither Wikipedia nor the Teahouse are Speakers' Corner; we are not here as an unrestricted forum for "free speech". We are here to build an encyclopedia; and we hope you will join us in doing so. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Can't locate initial article I was working on last week. Said it would be available[edit]

Hello, I initiated an article last week and was told it would be saved for months. I've been searching for a "Draft" section or similar, but to no avail. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you Paulcyr (talk) 18:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Paulcyr. Is it Draft:William Xifaras: From Prison to Motion Pictures? By the way you can see all your edits here. --NeilN talk to me 18:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes it is Neil, can you tell I'm new to Wiki? Paulcyr (talk) 18:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you NeilN, much appreciated. Paulcyr (talk) 18:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
@Paulcyr: Happy to help! We were all new here once. --NeilN talk to me 18:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Okay, well thanks again, and a pleasure to meet you. Paulcyr (talk) 18:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

How to create an article for an author's novel[edit]

On editing an author's page I want to write a synopsis of one of the author's titles. I can only do this on the page itself. I cannot create another page - when I try using title it just redirects back to the author's page. How do I create a new page?S.tollyfield (talk) 16:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You could create a new article at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. However, before doing so, you should check that the book meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. If there have not been multiple full length reviews of the book in independent reliable sources like newspapers or magazines, then it is likely the book does not meet the criteria and therefore does not merit a separate Wikipedia article. Press releases or material produced by the publisher or on bookseller sites like Amazon does not count. Incidentally, the formal notability guideline for books is at Wikipedia:Notability (books). Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
If I may, I believe the problem is that the title of the book is currently a redirect to the author's article. When you search for the book's title, and are redirected to the author's article, up at the top underneath the author's name, there should be a link that says "(Redirected from _______)", with the name of the book linked. You can click on that link and it will take you to the redirect page, which you can then edit as you would any other page on the wiki. Powers T 19:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, S.tollyfield. As well as the notability issues pointed to by Arthur goes shopping, please also look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. I am concerned that you say you want to write a synopsis - the page I just linked to says " Strictly avoid creating pages consisting only of a plot summary". If there is nothing more to say about a book than to give a plot summary, then the book is almost certainly not notable (in the special Wikipedia sense referred to by Arthur goes shopping), and we should not have a separate article about it. --ColinFine (talk) 19:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I have submitted an article for review as suggested - however I do not see how I can add anything to say why the book is notable. In my view this is because there is an autobiographical element, i.e. based where the author has lived. The locations are all real and can be referenced. Also the plot relies on historical facts and genuine local myths which can also be referenced S.tollyfield (talk) 16:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello again User:S.tollyfield. The book being based on historical facts, real places and genuine events is not a problem at all. Notability would still be established by providing references to reliable sources that discuss the book, such as reviews in newspapers, magazines or literary magazines, or academic studies that mention the book or its writing. Take as an example the short article Dancer (novel) that I wrote... notability is proven by the independent references provided. The only difference is that one does not need to provide references for the Plot section... I only did so because I had not read the book, and hence my summary of the plot information was sourced from places other than the book itself. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks - I just amended Telegraph to Daily Telegraph as the link was going to totally the wrong place S.tollyfield (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Fantastic, thank you. I have just finally turned on WP:Navigation popups after remembering someone at Wikimania suggested it, so hopefully I will get slightly fewer wikilinks so wrong in the future. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:32, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

How can I update company information inline with Wikipedia rules?[edit]

Sorry if this is a common question I am a newbie here. I would like to add information to the page of the company that I work for - company size/location/history/management etc. It is in no way promotional, and is in line with information our competitors within the industry have on their pages (uk insurance and finance) How can I update this in line with the Wikipedia guidelines - what is best practice in this situation? thank youPagetta (talk) 09:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Pagetta welcome to Tea House
I suggest you reading Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before submitting your article.
As you work for the company, it is COI. Wikipedia encourages neutral point of view,
which seems difficult when one has a link.
Aftab Banoori (Talk) 11:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Pagetta. Aftab Banoori has pointed you at the right page, but hasn't directly advised you what to do. If there is material you think should be changed,
  • Find reliable published sources for the information (for uncontoversial factual information such as size, location and names of officers, the company's own website will be adequate, but for anything which has even a whiff of opinion or judgment, it needs to be a source independent of the company).
  • Post your suggested changes, with references, on the article's talk page.
  • Optionally (especially if the talk page does not get much traffic), insert the template {{Edit request}} on the talk page.
At risk of seeming to be picky, I'd like to point out that neither your company nor its competitors have a page in Wikipedia. Wikipedia has pages about them. Wikipedia is interested in having encyclopaedic pages on notable subjects, not in any aspect of the rivalry between companies (unless that rivalry has itself been written about in reliable sources). --ColinFine (talk) 15:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

How can I find an appropriate image for an article easily?[edit]

I am currently editing an article that could really benefit with an image, however I am unsure how to find and then upload an image that meets Wikipedia's strict guidelines. I have found plenty of excellent images on sites such as Flickr but am unsure whether these are acceptable.

Many thanks.

Edgeorge92 (talk) 10:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Edgeorge92
You can request for a image by placing
{{reqphoto}} template in a Talk page of the article.
This may also help you Wikipedia:Requested pictures#Posting a request
Aftab Banoori (Talk) 13:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Try looking in the appropriate sections of Wikimedia SovalValtos (talk) 14:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Edgeorge92 and welcome to the Teahouse. On Flickr, images that are acceptable for use here must have a Creative Commons license, and that license cannot be non-commercial. You can actually use Flickr's search engine to restrict your results to only those images. Once you're looking at some search results, you'll see at the top three drop-downs: "Sort", "Search", and "License". Click where it says "License: Any License", and when the list drops down, select BOTH "Commercial use allowed" and "Modifications allowed". The images that remain are most likely eligible to be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons for use on Wikipedia.
An alternative is to use Google Image Search. They also have an advanced search mode which allows to you restrict your search results to only those images that are free for commercial use and can be freely modified. Many of the results you see from Google will already be on Wikipedia, meaning you don't need to upload them!
Hope this helps! Powers T 19:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Article was rejected[edit]

I would like to know the reason for my article to get declined, so that I could rectify my mistakes.

elaangovanElaangovans (talk) 08:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Elaangovans. Welcome to the Teahouse! The decline reason was posted at the top of your sandbox. "This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research." In other words, it's more suitable for a personal blog rather than an encyclopedia. --NeilN talk to me 14:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

How to make starting lineup diagrams for association football matches.[edit]

Just wondering how to make diagrams like this. SwahiliChese (talk) 03:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello SwahiliChese and welcome to the Teahouse. The diagram you have found is not something generated by the Wikipedia code. It is a picture created by someone and uploaded to the Commons. I would have to guess that the creator of this picture, made it in Photoshop or some other image editing program. Bits of it may have been borrowed from the Category:"Template:Football kit" materials. The picture was made by Davykamanzi, maybe you could ask at his talk page. Best, w.carter-Talk 11:19, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

How to link a translated page to the original and give credit??[edit]

Sorry, I am a newbie. I've translated a page from the German Wikipedia entitled "Martin Schanz". I created the page by searching for that title in the English Wikipedia, hitting the create button, and pasting from my sandbox. Is there some simple way to link my English version to the German one and give credit to the originator. I've seen a reference to Wikidata. Do I use that somehow? Thanks for any and all help! JohnD'Alembert (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, JohnD'Alembert. Well done (for translating it: I've not reviewed the article; but on a quick look, it appears short on references). You must give the attribution; WP:translation says "Attribution in the edit summary and placing the template {{Translated page}} on the article talk page are the recommended ways to credit the source of the translation". To link to other language versions you do use Wikidata, but you hardly have to encounter it: just pick "Add links" by the "languages" header in the sidebar. --ColinFine (talk) 22:07, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply! I see that language links have magically already appeared. I'll try to add that template. Progress! JohnD'Alembert (talk) 22:14, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello JohnD'Alembert, to add to the excellent answer given by ColinFine you can look at this talk page to see how this looks at an actual article. That article contains translations from two foreign articles. Best, w.carter-Talk 22:17, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

We're in good shape now. Looks great! I've learned to use my first template and the langauge link is where it should be. Thanks especially to ColinFine and W.carter1. JohnD'Alembert (talk) 08:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Infobox Issues[edit]

Hi Everyone. Unfortunately, I've been having major problems formatting the info box for CCGS Moytel. Is anyone with more experience able to help me out?

Thanks :) Orcair (talk) 20:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Orcair and Welcome to the Teahouse, you simply forgot the closing brackets and the first part of the infobox. I've fixed it for you. More info at Template:Infobox ship career. Happy editing! w.carter-Talk 20:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you so much!

Orcair (talk) 02:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

correction for RMS Sctyhia history[edit]

The Hungarian refugees from the revolution in 1956 travelled with me on the Scythia in November 1956 when we emigrated to Canada from the UK24.108.83.90 (talk) 06:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse....I think you may be in the wrong place. Please address any concerns over content of articles on the article talk page...however, your personal experiences are not reliable for mention.--Mark Miller (talk) 08:54, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
If you can persuade a respected newspaper or magazine to interview you, that might be good enough. You can use the article as a source.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Assessment of article quality[edit]

Hello, I've always had the understanding that articles cannot be assessed by its contributors, but cannot find where I've read that.

As I've been researching this, I'm getting different information. I've seen references to project assessment teams. The Wikipedia:WikiProject New York project page, however, it says that any editor can assess an article. There's no stipulation about whether that editor contributed to the article or not.

Is there a global rule - or is it left up to each project to determine who should perform assessments?

Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse User:CaroleHenson! It depends on what the contributions are. Minor contributions such as spelling errors, fixing refs and categorisation wouldn't block people from assessing, but major contributors shouldn't be accessing their own articles' quality or importance, except to put them in the lowest possible category (class=stub/importance=low). Things like class=list are also OK, since that's not a quality assessment. I regularly create stubs and sometimes I classify them as class=stub/importance=low, but mostly I leave it to others. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, assessments are actually done by the involved participants under the project scope. It is not at all unusual. Most projects simply allow a member or other editor to give a quality assessment and importance rating. If there is a question you should ask at one of the projects involved. Some will have assessment pages to discuss the issue. GA and FA assesments are nominated by an involved contributor and the reviewed by an uninvolved editor.--Mark Miller (talk) 09:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
I completely agree with your opinion, Stuartyeates. That's the way I've approached it, too. I don't assess articles that I've made a significant contribution to... but if I happen upon an article that would benefit from some minor tweaks and assessment, then I do that.
If I'm understanding you, Mark Miller, that except for GA and FA article reviews, it's acceptable for a major contributor to assess the article. Am I understanding you correctly?
Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it is. There is no policy or guideline that limits the contributor from rating the article, however, as you go past C class it might be more reliable to ask others opinion. Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment states this:"Generally an active project will develop a consensus, though be aware that different projects may use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area, such as this. Many projects have an assessment team. If you contribute a lot of content to an article you may request an independent assessment." Anything up to a C class is a matter of size so it in uncontroversial. B class or higher may request an independent assessment. GA and FA are always from an independent assessment.--Mark Miller (talk) 22:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Excellent clarification, thanks Mark Miller!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

how can i make edits to protected items[edit]

how can i make edits to protected pages like countries pages and i wanted to know should i get some special stars to make edits to such protected pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemanth surapaneni 007 (talkcontribs) 06:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Hemanth surapaneni 007. If you want to make changes to protected pages, you need to make a request on the talk page of the relevant article. Create a new section (pick the '+' or 'new section' at the top) and explain precisely what you want to change and why, with references if you are proposing to insert material. If the page does not get a lot of traffic, you could add the template {{edit protected}} to your section, to draw people's attention to it. --ColinFine (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)



Hello, I don't know much about this, but it seems to me that it may be relevant what it is you are going to do with the information.
Nearly all the content of Wikipedia is licensed under CC-BY-SA, which means that it may be reused for any purpose as long as it is properly attributed: see WP:REUSE. The exception is certain files (nearly all of them images) which are used under Wikipedia's non-free content criteria. From the link you give, RationalWiki seems to have a similar situation, but I've no idea how frequent or pervasive is the material in it which is not so licensed.


Hello Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content would be another page to add to your reading list. It addresses directly reuse of Wikipedia material. —teb728 t c 19:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


Thank you gentlemen!

I won't be inserting any images from Wikipedia. I've also acknowledged in regards to Rationalwiki's material, it's informal and biased, despite the facts some information’s are desirable. Thank you for your clarification, for saving me from one camouflaged violation, things became clearer in regards to this matter after understanding your point of view.

Note: I am planning on to rewrite the information's and or insert it exactly as it is, with a few modifications if possible, e.g., modify/amend/delete words/sentences/paragraphs, thereafter combine it with the story to make sense of it as a whole. Any idea to whom I show the work I done along with others for corrections, whether it adhered to the Wikipedias 'terms and conditions'? It's for a book.

( (talk) 20:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC))