Wikipedia:Teahouse

Welcome to the Teahouse...                        

A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Click here to
ask a question

Tenryuu, a Teahouse host

Question forum

Host profiles

Guest profiles

Experienced editor? Become a host!

Learn more about the Teahouse

Articles to improve

Question archive

Guest archive

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.

Help

Wikipedia

Help with an Article

Hi, I've been working on the article Thomas Parry (Chennai merchant), which has several issues. For example, it needs more references, and some of of the information in it contradicts itself. There is another page on Thomas Perry in the Welsh Wikipedia, and I think that the information from each page could be used to improve the other. However, I'm rather new here and I don't understand Welsh, so I may not be the most qualified person for the job. Can anyone help? Pagesdish (talk) 16:46, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't read Welsh. however the page in Welsh is a stub,with what appears to be no information of value, the two links embedded are dead(they go nowhere).Oldperson (talk) 21:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:WEB

WP:WEB can be tricky, if a source is IN (=used on various pages) it might pass as RS, if it's OUT (not used) it generally fails as RS, a chicken or the egg issue. If a website exists for years, is "noted" by reliable independent 3rd party sources, but not (yet) used, how can the notability be checked here? I'm aware of w:de:Relevanzcheck, but w:de:Relevance is not exactly the same idea as w:en:Notability. Two cases I'm currently interested in:
The HYpocriteDEsign magazine looks good for me, it's used as source outside of enwiki (~7 pages on google:Hypocritedesign), two uses on enwiki, not counting Talk:Hypocrite (disambiguation)#HyocriteDesign.
Harder, Sara Doucette has a website hellothemushroom.com, noted by some 3rd parties,^[1][2][3][4] and one of her irregular book reviews was quoted by Amazon in an "editorial review" (NOT customer review). I'm not hot about this source, I added it, somebody else removed it after discussing the issue, fine. But I'm still curious if her site actually is notable and unreliable simultaneously, so far I thought that this is a stunt for The Sun, The Examiner, Breitbart, CNET, or similar crap, not mostly harmless living persons. –84.46.52.48 (talk) 19:37, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

The archive bot moved that to 930, but I'm actually still waiting for an answer or a better suggestion, maybe WP:RS/N? –84.46.52.44 (talk) 22:05, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

@84.46.52.44: To be honest with you, I don't entirely understand what you're asking. Based on your post to the Hypocrite talk page, I think what you're trying to ask is whether a source can be reliable while not also having a Wikipedia article about that source? If so, that's true - a site can be reliable but not necessarily be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article, as notability and reliability are two different concepts. And as you've noted website can be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article and not reliable enough to use as a citation on Wikipedia. Are you trying to create an article for HelloTheMushroom? SportingFlyer T·C 05:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

No, I tried to use a book review published by her on the The Mismade Girl redirect target. What I don't get is how a site so far not used as source on enwiki can be recognized as RS. It this like the Internet in the 90s, if you're IN you're IN, and otherwise you can't get IN? Is the only way to get IN some guerilla tactics, use a site here and there as source, and if nobody intervenes decree that it is "obviously" a RS, because it's then used as source on some pages? –84.46.52.195 (talk) 21:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

What are the notability guidelines for bus station articles?

So I randomly reached Sunshine Plaza bus station and was shocked by it's existence. So now I can literally create pages for each of my local bus stations? This is a global free-for-all online encyclopedia, but that doesn't mean we can dump in whatever seems convenient. I was considering MultiAFDing all of them under "Bus interchanges" at Template:TransLink (South East Queensland) bus stations, but asking here would be wiser. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@ImmortalWizard: On the surface, it would seem to fail WP:NPLACE. Not sure if there has been any discussion on this topic already that lets them stay. RudolfRed (talk) 21:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@ImmortalWizard: Some discussion history here: Talk:Bus transport in Queensland. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: that didn't lead to anything unfortunately. Besides, that article is vastly different than about bus stations anyways. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:18, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

@ImmortalWizard: Some editors have gone so far as thinking each darned bus stop where they live is notable. Makes me want to get on a bus and go tell them they're not. If only I knew where the nearest bus stop is. Wanders off to check, ermm, Wikipedia... Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: It's even worse on Chinese Wikipedia. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

@ImmortalWizard: A reminder to be careful if you do a MultiAFD of these bus stations. Some of them may be notable, so you will have to do the work to make sure the ones you're nominating fail WP:NPLACE, otherwise you risk a WP:TRAINWRECK. SportingFlyer T·C 05:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Two articles about the same person. This needs to be fixed.

I created an article Jennifer Yu (Chess player). And there already was an article Jenifer Yu (chess player) the only difference is the upper-case letter C in Chess. Sorry about the error. I searched for an article, but didn't find one. Mea culpa. How does an article get deleted? Should be done soon. Thanks. Bitwixen (talk) 04:14, 31 March 2019 (UTC) I have read that only administrators can perform deletions. Thanks. Bitwixen (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2019 (UTC) To be clear: The article Jennifer Yu (chess player) was published first and should remain. Bitwixen (talk) 04:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Your spelling error is a plausible misspelling (obviously, as you made it, it follows others might too), so rather than delete it, I just redirected it to the original article. Bitwixen, you could have done that too as it takes no special permissions. Take a look to see the markup and how I tagged it. Thanks for stopping by Teahouse! John from Idegon (talk) 04:50, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Just a piece of advice here. Even without it being a duplicate, that was nothing even resembling a proper encyclopedia article. Please read WP:MFA and submit your drafts for review via WP:AFC. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 04:53, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

This "was nothing even resembling a proper encyclopedia article?" Really? Could've fooled me. 78.28.54.103 (talk) 05:04, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Hear, hear. It looks like a fairly decent stub to me. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

• For future reference, Bitwixen, you can easily request deletion of articles you are the sole significant contributor of by tagging the {{db-author}} template on it. (See WP:CSD#G7) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you all.Bitwixen (talk) 13:16, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Two Articles Deleted - Even after extensive referencing

Hi everyone, I am sure this gets asks many many times.

I wrote two articles and both are being deleted. IN both cases, I added extensive references from Reputable News Sources, Newspapers, online newsites, etc. My concern, is that the reviewers who deleted are not from my area and do not recognize these sources. In both cases, it was commented that the sources were minor and 'online.'

I am sure we all agree, that the majority of newspapers are online now, so I do not know the problem. In once case, I created a page for a podcast The Night Time POdcast that has acheived over 5 Million downloads, hit number 27 on the North America iTunes charts, is played on Corus Radio (international multiple stations) has been covered by newspapers in the USA, Canada and the UK. I have no idea why this was rejected for not being 'notable'

The second, is the band Paragon Cause, who similarly have considerable news coverage both nationally and internationally.

Its very frustrating at this point as the editors do not seem to apply standards set out by wikipedia and/or interpret these standards in their own way. Jbonapar (talk) 17:34, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jbonapar. You seem to have a far more lenient definition of a reliable source than most other editors do. At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paragon Cause, for example, you argued that: "Music blogs, unpaid ones Like Comeherefloyd, Spill Magazine, New Noise Magazine should be considered quality sites as they are not for pay and in todays digital music world, they are one of the primary methods in which artist become notable." This is completely contrary to the widespread consensus that amateur blogs and other self-published sources are worthless for establishing notability. Reliable sources have professional editorial control. Bearcat, a highly experienced editor, explained things quite clearly and thoroughly to you in that debate. If you want to write new articles, then it will be important for you to improve your understanding of what constitutes a genuine reliable source and write articles that summarize only what such reliable sources say about the topic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:19, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, I am curious what your thoughts are on then of CBC National News, CBC Local News, Global News (one of Canada's largest news), The Halifax Herald (Nova Scotia's largest print newspaper),The Cape Breton Post (Nova Scotia's Second largest print newspaper). Everyone seems to focus on the blogs, but there is a combination of sources, particularly for The Night Time Podcast. I've asked this a number of times and every time I ask, editors respond by talking about 'blogs.' I'd like for once, someone to comment on these references and why they are not credible. I've also posted articles from Corus Radio, Global and iTunes charts. Why are these not credible?

As for Paragon Cause, why is CBC National News, CBC Local News and CBC national Radio not credible? Again, people are focusing on Blogs and not other sources.

I'd appreciate people comment on this as apposed to focus on 'blogs.' Its the collection of evidence, not singular sources viewed in isolation.

As I've mentioned, with all due respect, I've published over 27 peer reviewed surgical articles in major surgery journals, I've appeared on Good Morning America for my research and I am a reviewer for Major Surgical journals including The Laryngoscope, Facial Plastic Surgery, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery plus others. I know what a reliable source is, I am one just apparently not on wikipedia. Jbonapar (talk) 11:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Feedback

Hello! I am currently working on my first Wikipedia page for Create Music Group to try my hand at writing an article (after discussing at Teahouse and getting some advice on what is and isn't notable in the space). I'm early in the process but just wanted to see if I could get some feedback or articles to look at before I submit this? I'm very self conscious about my writing so anything would be appreciated. Thank you! Grimothy29 (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee and Cordless Larry: Hi guys! Just wanted to ping you here since you were extremely helpful last time I made a Teahouse entry. Thank you and enjoy your day (wherever you are from). Grimothy29 (talk) 15:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, Grimothy29. The only way to find out whether a draft will pass review is to submit it, but it looks like a reasonable start to me. Your final sentence is incomplete, so I suggest fixing that. I also wonder whether the Music Business Worldwide sources contribute to establishing notability, because they come across as though they might be based on press releases. I could be wrong about that, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:32, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: Thank you. I will further investigate the notability of Music Business Worldwide and maybe ask the Teahouse about it. You guys are all so helpful. Appreciated. Grimothy29 (talk) 00:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Just to clarify, Grimothy29, it's not whether the source is notable, but whether it is independent and therefore whether it contributes to establishing the notability of the subject, Create Music Group. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Declined article

Hi,

I submitted this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pradeo), and it got rejected for not passing the NCORP criteria. I'm wondering how I could improve that, because the sources used (I think) are independent and reliable. In addition, the person reviewing said it was "somewhat promotional". But in comparison to another company in the same industry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimperium) I can't really tell where I'm promotional.

Thanks for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blixoo (talk • contribs) 08:56, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

The terms "known for" and "solutions" strike me as somewhat promotional: it might be better to substitute more neutral terms like "makes" and "products" (or similar).

However, the main objection by the reviewer is not that the sources used are not independent and reliable, it's that their content doesn't support the subject's notability, which requires several (say, 3 or more) sources which devote at least several paragraphs to the subject – passing mentions, inclusions in lists and directories, etc., aren't sufficient. Comparison with other similar articles doesn't help because of Wikipedia:Other stuff – it may be that those articles are also inadequate. (The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 15:21, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

The really serious problem is that Pradeo simply does not meet our notability criteria. See WP:NCORP. No amount of attempts at making it less promotional are going to fix that. I would like to point something out to you though: Something you might not see as promotional, but I do, is for example: In 2013, the analysis engine "Pradeo Security" was released. All Pradeo's solutions are based on this technology. Since you haven't explained what an analysis engine is, and we don't have an article about analysis engines, it is just meaningless marketing speak. After reading this, nobody could possibly have gained a better understanding of what technology is used in the company's products, why it is different from its competitors or why anyone should care. We're building an encyclopedia, not a marketing tool. Vexations (talk) 21:04, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Please help me improve my draft submission on Jem Bendell

Hi there, I'm trying to initiate an article on Jem Bendell. I've only made minor edits in the past, not submitted whole new articles.

I am in no way related to Bendell. I became interested in his contributions as his name has started appearing in the media since the beginning of 2019. I've seen his name mentionned next to Rupert Read's. These two academics have a similar profile as far as I can tell, so I thought Bendell should equally have a page on Wikipedia.

I've looked at qualifying criteria from Wikipedia:Notability_(academics), and I think Bendell meets 3 of them:

• 1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

Criteria met: by coining the concept of Deep Adaptation, he has influenced a rethink of the discipline of sustainability management in academia (e.g. https://www.uea.ac.uk/philosophy/news-and-events/-/asset_publisher/wb9yCV6yd5EC/blog/after-the-ipcc-report-climatereality-by-rupert-read?inheritRedirect=false)

• 2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.

Criteria met: in 2012, the World Economic Forum appointed him a Young Global Leader for his work on sustainability. (https://www.cumbria.ac.uk/study/academic-staff/all-staff-members/iflas/professor-jem-bendell.php)

• 7. The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.

Criteria met: his seminal paper Deep Adaptation was widely commented by the media (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/theres-worse-climate-news-than-the-mendocino-complex-fire.html, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-26/new-climate-debate-how-to-adapt-to-the-end-of-the-world, https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/vbwpdb/the-climate-change-paper-so-depressing-its-sending-people-to-therapy), also numerous talks to global organisations e.g. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, some of them on YouTube

Could you help me improve my draft submission Draft:Jem_Bendell please?

If you wish a response, it's usually beneficial to sign your post with four of these tildes: ~ Quisqualis (talk) 21:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

I looked over your article, and the elephant in the room, beyond , is that nobody will have a clue about "Deep Adaptation". A paragraph is needed in the Career section to explain the concept and its relevance.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

OK, thank you for the guidance.

Ndaniau (talk) 08:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

How is this spam?

Hello. I need help with and because those messages apparently are spam. Is that true? You may also look at the behaviour of that user prior to that on the users' talk page. This user is me, but under a different IP because it changed a few times since those messages were posted.111.220.164.171 (talk) 11:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

It looks like spam to me. Try editing something else a bit more constructively. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

This was a while ago and you haven't explained to me why. Is it spam because the edits were bad faith in the same way good faith edits, for that reason aren't vandalism?111.220.164.171 (talk) 11:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

You're repeating the same message again, even after he reverted it. Do you really think he wants to hear it? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:25, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't think he wants to hear it. Also those links I think I posted them for the 1st time at that time. That edit was made in good faith.111.220.164.171 (talk) 11:27, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

IP editor: If you'd kept on reposting the same deleted messages on my talk page time and time again- especially after you'd just come out of a block for disruptive editing - I'd be pretty irritated and would regard those re-posts as spamming and edit warring. And I didn't even get as far back as to the original reason for your multiple repetitive identical posts on CaradhrasAiguo's talk page. Just stop please - it's bloomin' disruptive. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:28, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

This IP user came to me on my user talk page and asked why his/her message was interpreted and regarded as "spam" (see permalink to discussion and my responses). I obviously don't have any context as to the article or the disruption, so I responded with some limited and careful input and advice. The user's request for help regarding why his/her message was spam (as well as the message itself) seemed good faith to me, but there's obviously more to this story than I've bothered to look into given the responses I'm seeing above. Just adding this note to the discussion for the record. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

References

List of rooms in the White House

I am soon going to create the list List of rooms in the White House but I am afraid it might get deleted. There already is a category: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rooms_in_the_White_House) but I am not sure if that counts as a list. Even if I do create the list I will not be sure on how to start. I have only made content pages, not lists. Should I create the list or not? And please help me get started if its fine. AdrianWikiEditor (talk) 13:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:Rooms in the White House is already listed at White House#See also. What extra value would your list provide? --David Biddulph (talk) 13:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: I was kind of wanted to add a table, possibly an image or something like that. So from left to right, the table would be Name, Description, and Image. Other rooms, not yet articles could also be there. AdrianWikiEditor (talk) 13:24, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@AdrianWikiEditor: It sounds like a good idea to me. As mentioned, it would need to provide value beyond what's already in the Category and the existing White House article. Maybe you could find a reliable source for details like the size of the room, and maybe organize them by location and function. It looks to me like White House#Layout and amenities is relatively short but already has floorplans showing all the rooms. So I would think your proposed article could be linked from there using Template:Main. If you make a draft, I'd be interested in editing it as well, please let me know. Krubo (talk) 23:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Updating company page

Hello,

I am the digital manager for Maverik Lacrosse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maverik_Lacrosse

I am trying to update this page to show the following:

proposed article content hidden
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Maverik Lacrosse is a manufacturer of lacrosse equipment and apparel, based in Exeter, NH. The company was founded by professional lacrosse player John Gagliardi in 2005. With input from the game’s top players, Maverik Lacrosse is on a tireless mission to offer innovative, high performance product that helps you play your best. The original Maverik team included John Gagliardi, Kyle Sweeney, Drew Adams, Billy Bitter, Mike Springer, Johnny Christmas, JoJo Marasco, Peet Poillon, Chris Bocklet, Chris Eck, Kip Turner, and Joe Cinosky. Today, the team is composed of Jordan Wolf, Joey Sankey, Joe Walters, Nick Mariano, CJ Costabile, and Brian Karalunas. Maverik athlete, Jordan Wolf, showing us his stick of choice -- the Optik 2.0 on a Hyperlite Shaft. Maverik Lacrosse is a leading lacrosse manufacturer of heads, shafts, complete sticks, a complete line of protective gear, and accessories. With a best in class design team & input from the games top players, Maverik Lacrosse creates, tests and develops market-leading products, so athletes at all levels can play their best. As the leading provider of product across the NCAA, Maverik prides itself as being “powered by the player.” For more information, please visit www.MaverikLacrosse.com or join the conversation on Instagram @maveriklacrosse (men’s) and @maverikwlx (women’s). Some of their premier products include their Rome line of protection, along with the #1 selling custom glove in the industry, the M4. Maverik prides itself on having a great shaft line, including the carbon fiber Hyperlite, Apollo, Union, and A1 shafts. Their top selling heads include the Optik 2.0 and Kinetik for the offensive minded players. Maverik not only creates lacrosse heads for different positions, but rather by style of play, with the Havok and Tank for those that play on the defensive side of the ball. Check out the Maverik HeadFinder App to find the perfect head for your style of play. On June 3, 2010, it was announced that Maverik Lacrosse was acquired by Private Equity group Kohlberg & Co. for an undisclosed sum. Kohlberg & Co. at that time, was the parent company of Bauer Sports. In June of 2012, then Bauer Performance Sports acquired Cascade Lacrosse to form Cascade Maverik Lacrosse, LLC. Based in Liverpool, NY since 1986, Cascade Lacrosse is the #1 manufacturer of lacrosse head protection for male and female athletes at all levels of the sport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billybenz4 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

References

@Billybenz4: the text you propose does not belong in an encyclopedia article. Various people have given you advice on your talk page and at the Help desk - please take a moment to look into that. Wikipedia is not a place to promote companies or products, and Wikipedia articles should not be based on what a company has to say about itself. It might sound harsh, but it's simply not what Wikipedia is for. --bonadea contributions talk 18:01, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Quotebox Addition

Nick Moyes If I want to add a quotebox to an article and the length of the quote is just too long (nearly a paragraph), then what can I do? Also, tell me if it is even legal or not to add as much long quotes and if I can find some kind of substitute for this. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 14:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Levent Heitmeier. I'm afraid your attempt to ping me didn't work as you forgot to include my username in your original post which you signed. You then came back (at least I assume it was you?) as an IP and added it later. Users only receive notification if both their user name and the person's signature are included in the same original post. Adding it afterwards without re-signing it simply wont work. See WP:PING.

To answer your question, see Wikipedia:Quotations for general guidance and WP:LONGQUOTES for matters concerning longer ones. Obviously it depends upon the relevance or importance of the quotation, but articles shouldn't be stuffed full of quotes, or consist of one big one. (I'm sure there are some notable exceptions someone can point out.) Obviously, supplying a link to the fuller quote is one option, as is adding it as a footnote, but must always be careful not to breach copyright simply by placing someone's words as a quotation. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Nick Moyes Ah thanks! I'll find a substitute because even if those long quotes does not violate any rules, they aggravate the articles appearance in comparison to short ones. You just work too much here, it may sound a bit strange to you but I think you should try to limit your editing time here because there are more things to do in life than this and if you keep working here so often, then you can miss some really good things to do in life. You have achieved everything here so why not go and travel around the world. It is really bad for a Wikipedian to say it, but most peoples don't really care what is written here. They just visit us to see some very minute information. I said this because I think you are nearly 40-50 yrs in age. Give a thought about it. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 03:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Can I write an article about this game?

I wanna create an article for the game Thrive, by Revolutionary Games. But the only references are the Revolutionary Games website, their wiki and (possibly) the forums (where the developers write about planned features). Can I write this article?

Ready NB (talk) 15:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Ready NB, Unlikely, as the sources you have mentioned are not independent. WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

The above is correct, but lacking in detail. I would expect a new user such as Ready NB to be better-served by a link to Wikipedia:Your first article, which explains why it would be a bad idea to create an article if only non-independent sources exist. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Instagram / Twitter

Maybe a stupid question but can Instagram / Twitter links be used as citations if they are from valid journalists / third party sources? I found a citation for something that does not have a web article but is a social media posting from Billboard Magazine about Billie Eilish's album performance. Grimothy29 (talk) 15:49, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Grimothy29, and welcome to the Teahouse! And not a stupid question at all. Per WP:TWITTER, no. On occasion, we use a persons socialmedia etc to cite their birthplace/birthdate or something else uncontroversial, but you can't use them to say stuff about other people. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Then again there's WP:SELFPUBLISH which says "maybe": "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." But then the question becomes, "If it's only on some social media, is it WP:DUE to have it in an article?" Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Thank you for the information! I guess my question is if it is something like this - a reliable source with information that may not have a full article on it (for example). I am trying to find the Billie Eilish Instagram post for reference. I also had a second question if you don't mind me asking. I am currently on break so have some time to improve my Wikipedia editing and contribution. Grimothy29 (talk) 20:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

In that particular case I would search for something like this [5] instead. Try googling just "news" (or "books" depending on topic), it will often get rid of a lot of blogs and stuff we don't use anyway. Ask away, that's what this place is for. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Duly noted! Yes - my second question is I am currently taking a stab at my first article and I'd like to have someone more experienced than me help me out with it before I submit. Unless I should just go through the draft submission process? Thank you. Grimothy29 (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Grimothy29: In the future, create a new thread when you have a new question (otherwise, people might see that you got answers and skip to the next question without realising there is a new question pending).

The draft submission process is intended to give you some feedback, so reviewers will not blame you for posting a not-perfect draft. You are still free to ask for input before submitting, though.

If that is about Draft:Create_Music_Group, I would say it looks good, but there might be some debate about notability (the Forbes piece is quite decent though). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Tigraan: Thank you. Yeah I'd be totally fine working on something else I was just doing some research on music and trade publications I read frequently and came across this company. I'll see if I can maybe find something else to work on though if it might not go through. Will keep chipping at it in the meantime. Grimothy29 (talk) 19:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Copyright vs public domain

I'm looking to create articles of notable people of Quebec's founding and first settlers. The problem is there are many bios relating to these people but only a few on Wikipedia. Many of these people coexisted together or around the same time and are connected through history with prominent people of the distant past and present.

   The issue I am having is creating a profile that isn't similar to others when they are the same person. 

All the profiles you find have the same original sources, so how do I create something that isn't going to have the same information? And as you would expect they all are very much alike. Jlastowski (talk) 16:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jlastowski: I'm a little confused by your question. Are you saying you can't write a unique article about one of Quebec's founders since their background is the same as the other founders? If anyone did something notable and there's sufficient coverage, regardless of how similar their backgrounds are, they might warrant an article. I'd take a look at what's already there in the Quebec history section. If there's not enough for an entire article, a particular person who did something notable for Quebec could be mentioned there. Another option is to bring this up on the Canadian Wikipedians' notice board with others more familiar with Quebec. Good luck. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

I was struggling with the processes of creating a biography of a person without it sounding like what others have copyrighted due to the sources for the information are the same. I like you suggestions for Quebec history section and Canadian Wikipedians' notice boardJlastowski (talk) 20:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Jlastowski: Could you be a little clearer in your question, please? I don't understand what you mean by "profile". We have articles on many topics and people, both living and dead. We might call these biographies, certainly not "profiles". Users like you and me don't have "profiles" either - we have user pages containing a small amount of information about ourselves and our editing interests. I see you had a draft page speedily deleted as being a copyright infringement from the Dictionary of Canadian Biography (DCB). Whilst their listing in the DCB no doubt makes them notable as we define it, and thus worthy of an article here, there is no justification for repeating content. You should firstly consider summarising just a few of the salient points about that person in your own words and then also looking online or in reference libraries for other sources to bring together. In my experience, it's quite possible to find other books and journals that expand upon the expert entries in these national biographies - you just have to put the effort in, and that's half the fun of creating articles here. It's OK to link to a page in the DCB, but not to copy/paste chunks of it straight into Wikipedia. Does that answer your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

You are correct, I was using Profile in place of biographies. I will use highlights of the Bio and link to the page as well as others.Jlastowski (talk) 20:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jlastowski: That sounds perfect. If you do it via Articles for Creation you'll get helpful feedback, but I suspect they should go through speedily. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Archiving sections on talk page

Hello, I wanted to archive some of the sections on my talk page. Could you kindly direct me to how I can do this manually? Thank you!LorriBrown (talk) 17:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: This should help. Help:Archiving_a_talk_page TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:00, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)}.LorriBrown (talk) 19:27, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Article about myself

Is it possible to write an article about myself? I am an American singer/songwriter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ADillon1 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@ADillon1: It is strongly discouraged. Read WP:AUTO for guidance. RudolfRed (talk) 17:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@ADillon1: The question is, can you forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent reliable sources? Technically, it is possible for someone to do this, but it is rare. Also, do you meet the notability guidelines for musicians/bands written at WP:BAND? If you truly meet the relevant guidelines, someone will eventually write an article about you. Keep in mind that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. Anything that appears in an independent reliable source about you is fair game for inclusion in an article about you, be it good or bad. 331dot (talk) 18:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Funniest Wikipedia policies

Top 8 funniest Wikipedia policies:

• Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spiderman
• Wikipedia:Don't stuff beans up your nose
• Wikipedia:Deleted articles with freaky titles
• Wikipedia:List of really, really, really stupid article ideas that you really, really, really should not create
• Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars
• Wikipedia:Unusual articles
• Wikipedia:Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you
• Wikipedia:Don't delete the main page

Happy April Fools Day! Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 18:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

An editor should never get annoyed when somebody else reverts vandalism before they do!

I go on recent changes patrol and my Watchlist often to seek vandalism. I get mildly to moderately annoyed when someone gets to vandalism I planned to revert first. All I just want to do is make Wikipedia better. How can I revert vandalism faster? I don’t have tools to assist me. LPS and MLP Fan (LittlestPetShop) (MyLittlePony) 19:25, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@LPS and MLP Fan: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to make it better. Check out WP:CVUA to learn how to fight vandalism. Many vandalism edits are found by User:ClueBot_NG, which is faster than most of us will ever be. RudolfRed (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @LPS and MLP Fan: I'm sure you mean "frustrated" rather than "annoyed"? How can you be annoyed when someone else has done a good job? The really speedy editors tend to use Huggle, as far as I can see. I use WP:TWINKLE to monitor, revert and warn users about bad faith editing, or to report them to WP:AIV. If I'm monitoring Recent Changes for bad faith edits, and find someone like Shellwood (who deserves an honourable Teahouse mention for his/her efforts) is getting in before me, I actually feel relaxed and pleased that someone else is actively checking the brand new edits at the top of the list. They're the ones dealing with the screaming hordes as they charge through the dark gates of Mordor onto the innocent green fields of Wikipedialand. So then I simply move down the list of recent changes, looking for the telltale signs of bad faith edits that missed the first swing of their ant-vandal axes, and check those out instead. It's those that are lower down that are liable to stay unchallenged unless you investigate them. Clues to look for are edits that contain any of the following

• 'School' in the title (always worth doing a Ctrl-F on the word School and working through them all)
• Use of phrases like "I fixed it" "Made it better" - it surprising how many people think we'll be fooled by that!
• Use of "fixing typo" followed by tens or hundreds of bytes difference, plus or minus.
• any use of the word "typo" in an edit summary
• no edit summary
• Unexplained removal of content, or big changes with an inadequate-sounding edit summary
• Edits with (0) bytes change - always suspicious.
• Any popular topic covered in school classes, especially chemistry and history.
• Any article about a species (kids love to mess around with those for some reason)
• Edits highlighted by ORES as especially likely to be bad-faith edits.

So don't get annoyed with the folks who take the easy option at the head of the list -go get stuck in and root out vandalism that slips past these guys. Let the vandals get annoyed with you instead - then you know you're really doing a good job! Regards from Hobbiton, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:, Well, when I find out an editor got vandalism first, I would usually thank them. Also, thanks for giving me tips to find more vandalism. Also, the photo is funny. LPS and MLP Fan (LittlestPetShop) (MyLittlePony) 23:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Issue with graph in Palma de Mallorca Airport

Hello

It looks like their is an issue with the graph of Palma de Mallorca for passengers. If somebody could let me know that would be great.

What is the problem with the graph at Palma_de_Mallorca_Airport ? RudolfRed (talk) 21:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Nevermind, it looks like when you are on mobile version it doesn’t appear but when you go to the desktop version it does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsjaclybou (talk • contribs) 21:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Squidward Nose

How long does it take this article to appear on the Google Knowledge panel after it has been reviewed? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:23, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: That is completely up to Google. RudolfRed (talk) 22:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Ok. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:27, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK

Is the DYK in the main page supposed to be April Fools? If it is, isn't it supposed to be out of articles/encyclopedia pages? . Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Thegooduser and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you are right. The DYK section highlights recent work on Wikipedia. From time to time it focuses on a particular theme, and this year it did host an April Fools Day theme. You can see the discussions to arrange it at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#April Fools Day Preps (and a couple of sections that come after that). DYK cycles regularly and they are gone now, so I can't see what was there - it there something there that caused you particular concern? --Gronk Oz (talk) 00:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Well there were some sections, I didn't know if they were legit or not, because of the way they were worded... --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Question

Hello, Can you help me understand the purpose of 'Category:AfC submissions declined as an advertisement' being posted on a draft article? I hadn't noticed it before. Thanks!LorriBrown (talk) 22:49, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, LorriBrown, it's quite simple. It sounds like you've turned on "Show Hidden Categories" in Preferences and you're seeing one of many tracking categories which help us keep track of the types of draft articles we have here, and innumerable other pages, too. To see what a wide range of categories we have, see Category:Tracking categories. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: I'm not sure what type of answer you are looking for. AFC refers to Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Users can use this process to create drafts and submit them for review. If they are declined then the reviewer may add code of form {{AFC submission|D|advert|...}} where D means declined and advert is one of the possible reasons listed at Template:AFC submission/comments. The code displays a box and adds the draft to Category:AfC submissions declined as an advertisement. (talk) 00:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nick Moyes Yes indeed I did change that setting... but didn't connect the two. Now I get why I didn't see that before. :-) Thank you for explaining that! LorriBrown (talk) 01:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello @PrimeHunter: Thank you for your explanation. That helps but I am just bummed that the article got tagged with that. I had hoped to get feedback prior to submitting the article for review and was very dismayed to read that in the denial. Had I understood how to better construct an article I would hope I could have avoided that interpretation at least. Thanks again, LorriBrown (talk) 01:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: There's really no limit on how many times you can submit a draft to AfC for review. Not many drafts get accepted on there first attempt which is usually why the reveiwer leaves a note explaining why they have declined a draft. So, you can continue to work on the draft and then re-submitted once again. You only start to run into problems when (1) you keep submitting the same declined version of the draft repeatedly (see WP:DMFD), (2) you let the draft go unedited for more than six months (see WP:G13), or (3) no amount of effort will ever bring the draft upto Wikipedia's standards for articles or there are serious policy violations which need addressing (see WP:TNT). -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thank you for your reply! I appreciate the added information. LorriBrown (talk) 15:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Sushi rolls

Why are sushi rolls not a thing yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosie112233 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi. The Teahouse is for questions about Wikipedia. Thanks. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

This user has just been blocked for disruptive editing. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:21, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Notwithstanding the above appropriate block, I do notice that although several of our articles refer to sushi rolls, including the article Sushi, the term Sushi roll is nowhere explicitly defined and does not redirect. Since sushi rolls may be the only context in which some people encounter sushi, I suggest at least a redirect to the Sushi article might be appropriate. {The poster formerly known as 87.81l230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 10:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Can I get someone from Wikipedia to make my article acceptable... I do not have a clue what I am violating

Extended content

C. J. Ford used to believe that if police apprehended someone it was because they had broken the law. That is, until one day, while driving through Torrance, an officer going in the opposite direction, did a u-turn and pulled him over. The office claimed that he pulled Ford over because of the tint on Ford’s windows. Ford told the officer that he bought the car like that, however he would make the appropriate corrections to a fix it ticket that he assumed the officer was going to write, but the officer pursued a different aspect of the detention other then a mire “fix it ticket”. The officer asked to look in the trunk of Ford’s car. Ford refused. Ford told the officer that he did not have probable cause to search his trunk. The police officer asked whether Ford was hiding something…. Ford continued to refuse several attempts by the officer to search his truck. As the officer continued to argue, within minutes there were at least 5 police cars surrounding Ford and an overhead helicopter. Some of the additional officers that arrived to turns questioning Ford as to why he would not allow them to access his car trunk, or allow them to enter into his vehicle to search it. Ford continued to resist the officers demands to search his car or his trunk, even though Ford fear level was to the extreme, but the challenge to Ford’s constitutional rights were at stake. Ford’s fears were justified because previously Ford had been contacted to investigate several cases by defendants and inmates who claimed drugs had been planted in the trunks of their cars, or somewhere in their vehicles in Los Angeles. It turned out that his clients were right. Coincidentally, at the time of this detention, Ford was just returning from an interview with a defendant at Airport Courthouse who had made these claims against officers, when this event occurred. Ford held his grounds because Ford wanted to make sure that everyone who lived in the area would come out of their homes and businesses out of curiosity to why all these police officers were stopping him. Ford wanted to make sure that these officers did not plant any drugs with all of the bystanders watching this event. Later Ford would find that this was all part of what is now known as the “Rampart Scandal” in which multiple police officers were indicted for planting drugs in defendant's cars, and extorting individuals on trumped up drug offenses involving sales of narcotics. That day changed the way Ford thought about the justice system and how it was corrupted and deliberately targeted minorities and marginalized people. Ford, the founder of C. J. Ford Private Investigations started specializing in criminal and wrongful conviction cases. Ford now manages and runs one of the largest wrongful conviction programs designed to fully investigate criminal cases. These are some of the programs objectives: 1. Investigate for evidence needed for new trials for people who have been the victim of a corrupt justice system 2. Find DNA evidence or other exculpatory evidence. 3. Find missing witnesses that were were never questioned or part of the trial that may have very critical evidence. 4. Question recanting witnesses to determine if they were coerced or extorted in giving their testimony. 5. Interview rebuttal witnesses. 6. Research history of Prosecution witnesses to make sure that they testified with clean hands. 7. Research history of police or detective to see if any other complaints of misconduct were filed. 8. Try to solve the case and put the correct person in custody. 9. Look for alternative solutions such as Pardons, Clemency, unjust sentencing, and other early release prospects. Most of Ford’s wrongful conviction cases involve Prosecutorial Misconduct, Police Misconduct, and Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel. Ford works both on State and Federal cases. Ford also works on cases where the police department has even closed, rejected, or will not pursue, Ford has lived in Orange County for most of his life. At age 64, he has seen firsthand the discrimination that can take place and the ways it surfaces in the criminal justice system, especially toward black people like himself. He has been involved with criminal justice for over thirty years, beginning as a bounty hunter recovering bail bonds, then moving on to private investigations. His most well-known case, that of Kenneth Clair has been ongoing for over ten years. Ford believes that everyone has the right to a fair trial, even if it takes years to overturn a wrongful conviction sentence. Occasionally, there are guilty inmates who approach him looking to get out of prison. One inmate convicted of kidnapping, rape, brutally beating a woman, and leaving her to die sought Ford’s services. After investigating the case, Ford found that all the evidence indicated that the man was guilty. When Ford confronted the inmate, he confessed. Ford's objective is to exonerate Wrongfully Convicted People, so you do not want to have a case fully investigated if the person is guilty. Ford has compassion for people who are wrongfully convicted and are separated from their families and friends just because Prosecutors flourish and receive promotions by the numbers of people that they convict regardless of whether or not the person is actually guilty of committing the crime. Ford believes that no matter how long it takes, a person is entitled to fight for their freedom when they are wrongfully convicted. An example of how long and hard Ford will fight is his signature case, the Kenneth Clair Case. Kenneth Clair was convicted in 1987 of the murder of Linda Faye Rodgers in Santa Ana on November 15, 1984. Ford believes that Clair is innocent. In an ongoing investigation by Ford that has taken about a decade to complete because of opposition from not only the Prosecution, but Clair’s own defense representatives, Ford found the crime scene evidence that police said was destroyed. Later Ford discovered that the DNA was secretly tested, and Mr. Clair’s DNA was not found at the crime scene. However, another parties DNA was found at the crime scene. The DA refused to release the name of the person to the defense stating outlandish claims such as the person’s DNA is not relevant, that the DNA was left by a child that was too young to have committed the murder, that the DNA was eft by someone who wasn’t in the country at the time of the murder. However, the DA could not dispute that the DNA did not belong to Clair, which was Ford’s findings. The DA decided to come up with a theory that somehow Clair committed the crime, but Clair was careful not to leave DNA. This theory is preposterous because in 1984 when the crime was committed, DNA was not a standard or proven method until about the late 1990’s. Factually, Clair would not have known that DNA could be extracted from sweat, dandruff, touching paper or other surfaces, and from other trace evidence. After Ford's findings, Ford took on one of the most prolific battles in the history of Orange County, which has never exonerated a death row inmate. The DA contention is to stall as much as possible, hoping that Clair dies in custody. Ford has expressed that the DA has no ethics or morals and would allow an innocent man to die to protect their “Win at all Cost” attitude. Also, Clair can claim about $125.00 per day for 34 years he has been incarcerated, plus treble damages because he has been held maliciously. It is because of this revelation regarding the DNA not belonging to Clair’s and these other factors, made Ford’s fight for Clair’s life. One fact was a child's statements. The child actually witnessed the crime and told police detectives that it was a white man who committed the crime. Even the lead detective reported that the witness was creditable because the child’s depiction of the stab wounds, and other instruments that was used by the killer corresponded with the coroner's report. The detective tested the child using photos of different races and the child could clearly differentiate between races. The child mysteriously never testified at the trial. The fact that the child said it was a black man, the lead detectives racial test of the child was never heard from the jury. Another factor was the Prosecution's star witness. She tried to work with the police department by wearing wires on two separate occasions to try to place Clair at the crime scene and later stated that Clair showed her some jewelry that was supposedly taken during the murder. Ford came up with overwhelming evidence and statements from the girlfriend’s care givers that was irrefutable in federal court that the girlfriend has suffered an accident that literally split her skull, and had a nearly complete memory lapse which was so severe that the girlfriend could not even remember her own mother and father. Ford’s statements from the care givers and the testimony was so powerful and conclusive that the court took it into evidence unopposed. The care giver’s statement to the appellate court that the girlfriend was in their care during that period of time, the memory loss, and the fact that the girlfriend was so sedated taking so much medication for her illness, that she could not even walk without assistance was overwhelming. However, these two witnesses were never called on by the defense at the original trial, even though the defense was aware of the concise, factual, and critical evidence that they had to offer to their client’s defense. The identity of the person whose DNA does match that found at the crime scene is yet undisclosed. Ford’s petition on change.org to the district attorney to release this evidence and, by extension, exonerate Kenneth Clair got over 160,000 signatures. Ford’s decision to make his findings public and to bring more attention to Clair’s case was deliberate. Ordinarily, the DA’s office would never have responded to Ford’s investigative result claims publicly, and for the most part, ignored every effort Ford made to have the DAs office review and exonerate a Clair. So Ford started an unprecedented attack publicly on behalf of Clair on the DA’s office. Ford made sure that Clair’s case garnered attention not only on social media but also from news outlets such as the OC Register, the OC Weekly, Reason TV, and ABC. Ford pressed the DA’s office so profusely that the DA, who completely ignored Ford, now found himself in the position of having to respond to the public criticism demanding to know why the DAs office refused to give Clair a new trial or exonerate him because of the overwhelming DNA evidence that existed. The DA’s office released a seven-part series on YouTube explaining that they are refusing to allow Kenneth Clair another trial because evidence does not support it. Ford stated, “The worst mistake that the DA could’ve made was putting out that seven-part miniseries.” Ford stated that it provided him with more leads to exonerating evidence, and other evidence that the DA did not turn over according to “Brady” law, to the defense. If Ford could retire, he says that he would become a full-time activist protesting social justice corruption, wrongful convictions, and other social injustices. However, Ford thinks that his best contribution is his investigation firm taking on wrongful convictions and criminal justice issues.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjfordjr (talk • contribs) 00:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Cjfordjr: If you could tell us what all this text is about, that might help. Is it an essay, a story, a campaign article involving yourself? As it stands, it's got no resemblance to an encyclopaedia article, so it would appear to have no place here. You might be violating WP:COPYVIO if it's been pasted off of a website. But as it appears to be some sort of personal musing or rant, I'd say it violates WP:NOTWEBHOST. Enyclopaedia articles introfuce a topic, and use references to published reliable sources to support factual statements. Yours has none of this. See WP:YFA for help in creating and submitting proper articles. Hope that helps a bit. Nick Moyes (talk)|

We actually have an article on the Rampart scandal to which the first few paragraphs of the collapsed piece refers: it's possible that some parts of the information there could be added to the article if they could be cited to independent, published Reliable sources such as journalists' reports.

As a former professional editor, however, I am moved by the quality and style of the prose to ask if it is Cjfordjr's own work or is copypasted from a published piece, in which case it would be a Copyright violation and should be removed from this page, and could not of course be used directly in any article: information cited from aforementioned reliable sources still has to be rewritten in a Wikipedia contributor's own words. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 10:32, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Viewing past DYKs

Prompted by Thegooduser's question above - is there a way I can see what was featured on the front page's "Did You Know" section yesterday? I missed the April Fools material, and I hate to miss out... --Gronk Oz (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Recent_additions#1_April_2019 RudolfRed (talk) 01:01, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: - brilliant! Thank you. --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Need feedback on this article I'm cleaning up.

Hello! I am currently cleaning up the article Road signs in the United States and I have just finished the R1-Series. I did remove some state signs due to difficulty getting them to fit in more smoothly alongside with having difficulty verifying them. Though I think I made the right choice, I would like some feedback on this because I am also new, so I may be in the wrong. Alongside with that, how exactly would I cite a pdf file? Would I use the website I got it off of or? Any feedback would assist me greatly in cleaning up the article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boilermakerjustin (talk • contribs) 06:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

• @Boilermakerjustin: If the PDF you are citing is available on the web, I would use the {{cite web}} template. It has a number of different parameters available at Template:Cite web. At its most basic, you would do something along the lines of <ref>{{cite web|url=url_to_pdf.pdf|title=Title of Document|access-date=2 April 2019}}</ref>. Thanks for improving Wikipedia! SportingFlyer T·C 06:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Editing an existing Wikipedia

Hi, I am new to wikipedia and I wanted to edit an existing page on my grand Mother, Marcelle Lagesse, a Mauritian writer and I wanted to know if I can write about her without having written sources? I have kept all her archives and photographs and most of her notes on her life most of which have never been published before.

Thanks,

Pascal Lagesse Lagessepascal (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Lagessepascal: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is only interested in what published independent reliable sources state about article subjects. Personal writings would not be acceptable, nor is information based on personal knowledge, though photos might be if properly licensed. See WP:UPIMAGE for information on that. 331dot (talk) 06:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi, Lagessepascal and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, private papers cannot be used for Wikipedia references. Perhaps you could publish an article about your grandmother elsewhere, but without any published sources it is difficult to justify putting personal knowledge into the article. Perhaps you could discuss the material you wish to add by posting it on the talk page of the article. Dbfirs 06:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

my post has been deleted twice ?

Helloo

I am just wandering why my post has been removed twice. its authentic, and its a famous Chinese artist'name who we try to bring into the English world. Thank you.

Kaja

@Kaja.wa: Hello. I'd like to help you, but I can't seem to figure out what you're talking about. Mind providing a link to the old revisions containing your posts? Also, please remember to sign your comments by typing four tiles in a row. Regards, Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict]

Kaja, It's impossible to know what you are asking about because you have not properly signed your post with four tildes (i.e. ~~~~), nor have you provided a wikilink to the article (or other page) in question. However, additions to Wikipedia are often removed because they have not been Cited to an independent and published Reliable source. (I believe that the rules requiring this are much stricter here on the English Wikipedia than they are on the Chinese Wikipedia(s).) We also insist that Wikipedia is not used for promoting or publicising any subject: articles can contain neutral information and facts about a subject (provided they are all cited) but cannot be used to give subjective praise. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 11:46, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Kaja.wa tried to make a page for the painter Yan Ming but did so by overwrinting a disambiguation page. If they want to create such a page, it could be created at Yan Ming (artist) instead, and an entry for the new article can be added to Yan Ming. Vexations (talk) 11:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kaja.wa: Basically, wrong place. As a new editor WP:Your first article is good learning start. Then, you can work on a draft of the article in your Sandbox, in the process, learning how to create references. What Vexations described is because there are several existing articles about people named Yan Ming, each new article has to have additional description within ( ). Hence the proposed Yan Ming (artist). Once that becomes an article, a link is created on the disambiguation page, giving searchers a choice of where to go. David notMD (talk) 13:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Getting participation in discussions?

How do I get participation in discussions? On new articles I've written, I use the talk page but often no reply. Do I start cluttering up Wikiproject talk pages with invites to come view my article? Can I tag users who might be interested, or is that frowned upon? If it is ok, how? Thanks. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 11:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@DiamondRemley39: Wikipedia now has so many articles that it's sometimes difficult to get feedback unless you solicit it. Peer review is a formal process designed for this, but you might not get much attention there. I think the best way to find people interested in a topic is usually a WikiProject. Some of them are rather large and have lively discussions. One reason why I like working with popular culture topics is because I know that it's easy enough to find a centralized discussion forum that will have decent participation. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate, Thank you for answering my question! The Wikiprojects it is!--DiamondRemley39 (talk) 22:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

From a glance at your User page, looks like you have created at least 14 articles, most within past three months. Your topics are not high profile (most averaging fewer than five visits per day). A few have been subsequent to creation edited by other editors, but not all. Basically, there is no flag to wave over new articles (or old articles, for that matter). Visitors will find them, or not. A subset of those will be inclined to make additions or changes. And a subset of those will be moved to leave a comment at Talk if they believe their edits might be contested. Mostly, time will decide how these articles will be changed by others. David notMD (talk) 13:29, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

David notMD, thanks. I'm talking mostly about articles I've written, but now that I think about it, it probably happens more on articles that I did not create, so I should have phrased my question better.--DiamondRemley39 (talk) 22:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

List of Storage Wars episodes needs to be updated

A twelfth season of Storage Wars has premiered and 16 episodes of it have aired on A&E TV but in the Episode List section of List of Storage Wars episodes, the episodes of twelfth season are not mentioned. I request the fellow editor(s) to update the article. मन-मन्दिर (talk) 12:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

The place to request an update is at Talk:List of Storage Wars episodes, supported by published reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

What make I worng?

Dear Wikipedia-Team,

- I am the developer of the Photo Editing Software “Fotoworks XL” - I want to have my Software also on Wikipedia (Like the 50 other Photo Editing Programs on Wikipedia) - I wrote the article as NON-promotional I can (G11) - Is not a (G12) because is my own Software. I am the developer.

Here the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fotoworks_XL

- I make also the German entry years ago without problems: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/FotoWorks_XL

BUT: What is the problem now? What exact must I change or make better?

Best Regards Anton Ilg — Preceding unsigned comment added by IN MEDIAKG TI (talk • contribs) 12:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@IN MEDIAKG TI: The first thing that is obvious is that this article does not have any sources at all. The very first step in writing the article should be to gather your sources. They should be independent, reliable sources - books that have been written about the subject, journal articles that discuss it in detail, major television shows that covered it, etc. Then write the article based on what those sources say, not based on your personal knowledge. Cite all the sources using footnotes. Then it may be ready for a review.--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz:

You mean I should have references like:

• https://fotoworks-xl-2019.en.softonic.com/
• https://www.amazon.com/FotoWorks-XL-2019-Version-Software/dp/B01JA1F4FA
• https://www.softpedia.com/get/Multimedia/Graphic/Graphic-Editors/FotoWorks-XL.shtml
• https://fotoworks-xl.soft32.com/

and so on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.26.159.224 (talk) 14:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

First, you are blocked until you change your User name so that it is not your company name. See your Talk page for how-to. Second, those for links are to companies that sell your software, and thus are not considered independent sources for citations. U.S. rules different from Germany rules. David notMD (talk) 15:22, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

David notMD, I think you mean "English Wikipedia has different rules from German Wikipedia". There is no US Wikipedia.

IN MEDIAKG TI: your main problem seems to be that you are trying to use English Wikipedia for promotion. That may be allowed on de-wiki, but it is not here. En-wiki has no interest in whether you want your software to appear here or not: it is only interested in whether or not your software is notable, by its criteria not yours. --ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

I need some help with the articles that suggestionbot offers me

I asked suggestionbot for some suggestions but they are all about polish people and/or written in polish. I used to live in Poland but I dont know polish and I would also like to edit articles from other parts of the world, what can I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:381:8A62:19FF:5178:2AFB:AB78 (talk) 13:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse, and apologies for the long delay in replying. I assume that you're posting here as an Ip, but normally use a registered user account? If so, then got to this section of the User:SuggestBot/Requests page to learn how to specify the type of articles that the bot recommends to you.Although I don't use it myself, I think the default mode is to suggest articles based upon your recent edits. So perhaps you edited a few Poland-related pages recently which caused the bot to assume that's what you were interested in most of all. Hoping this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I've finished my article and I'd like it to be published.. help !!!

Hi

I've finished my article and I'm happy with the content. However, I don’t know how to publish it so it can appear on google search. Could you please assist me with this, in a clear, concise way, next by step and its duration?

Kind regards YM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yonda Music (talk • contribs) 13:25, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Yonda Music: the only page which you have edited is your user page, User:Yonda Music, which seems to be an autobiography. Autobiographies are strongly discouraged in Wikipedia because it is so very difficult to be impartial. In this case, your article is nowhere near ready to publish - it does not contain any references at all. I cannot see any indication that the subject (you?) meets the requirement for musicians to be included in Wikipedia: those are documented at WP:MUSIC. If you wish to proceed with an autobiography and believe you can be more neutral, then first read carefully the advice at WP:AUTOBIO. Then gather your sources. Independent, reliable sources - books that have been written about the subject, journal articles that discuss him in detail, major television shows that covered it, etc. Then write the article based on what those sources say, not based on your personal knowledge. Cite all the sources using footnotes. Then it may be ready to submit.--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Additionally, Yonda Music, your userpage is not the place to draft an article. See WP:UP for further information. John from Idegon (talk) 14:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Wooferendum

Does Wooferendum really doesn't satisfy WP:N? I found a number of sources online, and it already has two major marches, in October 2018 and March 2019. --B dash (talk) 13:59, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi B dash! My thought process was that there are several pressure groups that are calling for another People's Vote, most of which are not notable on their own. Usually these groups get redirected or merged into Aftermath of the 2016 United Kingdom_European Union membership referendum#Post-referendum campaigning. Bkissin (talk) 15:41, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Create a new listing and add to an existing one help

Hi, I need help to create a new listing and add to an exisiting one. I am not technical and am struggling to do this. I dont understand the "speak" and just want to put right somethings and add some otheres but I always get declined. Can you help please. Also I am not always available to work on this but I am free at the moment.thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talk • contribs) 14:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

On existing articles, you have been adding factual content but without references in support. Wikipedia requires references. See Help:Referencing for beginners. On the created article, you added material that is under copyright protection, another no-no. David notMD (talk) 15:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Lou Renwick, and welcome to the Teahouse. It may help if you reframe your intention from "create a listing" to "write an article". Wikipedia does not contain anything that I would call a "listing": it contains neutrally-written articles, which summarise what reliable independent sources say about a subject. Information which does not come from a reliable source is generally not acceptable in any Wikipedia article, and most information in an article should come from a source unconnected with the subject of the article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

My first article has been deleted. Please give me some advice.

Hi, Thank you to AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) for recommending that I ask a question here. My first article, Becoming Animal (2018 film) (April 1), has been deleted.
The reason given was: "Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia."
Could someone please tell me which content violated copyright? I cited everything I could think of but obviously I did something wrong. Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgos923 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Bgos923: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may want to ask the deleting administrator to be sure, but in quickly looking at your draft it appears that you just copied the reviews section from the film's website to Wikipedia; this is not allowed because that website appears to not have a license compatible with Wikipedia's. 331dot (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Article Got Declined - Need Help With Citing

Hi!

This is my first time submitting an article, would love some insight on how to fix it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianoisemoguls (talk • contribs) 16:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

The reviewer of Draft:Joe Laresca left comments as part of the decline. For example, you put links in the text (like this: YesJulz) in addition to referencing same. Remove all those links. Refs should not be just the URLs. Factual statements should be removed if the only possible sources are Joe's LinkedIn, IMDb or YouTube. And more, but start with that. David notMD (talk) 17:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Notability for a new organisation

I have created an article for FairBnB, including links to recent articles in both Forbes and taz that I believe to be significant, independent, reliable, and secondary. It has been proposed for deletion arguing that the coverage is too soon, but the "too soon" essay does not cover companies or organisations. When is it too soon to write an article for a new company or organisation that has received significant (but not overwhelming) press coverage? --Gerrit ^CUTEDH 16:22, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

My 2c: the three provided sources may just be sufficient to demonstrate notability, but it's borderline. None are great - the Forbes article is their usual we-will-print-anything-you-say interview style that confers little notability in itself; the TNW article is a little better but still mostly a vehicle for the proprietors to present themselves; and the TAZ article is merely a passing mention. If it came to a deletion discussion, this could go either way. - You are within your rights to remove the PROD header, but be prepared to argue the significance of the coverage in a follow-up AfD. More and better sources would certainly be desirable. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Why it takes long to being reviewed, can i move it to main article namespace ?

Here is the article that i submitted as draft, Ghanashyam_hemlata_vidya_mandir,_Puri can i move it to mainspace as i think it is complete. --Rocky 734 (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

You submitted it to Articles for Creation, as as noted in the form at the bottom, it may take as long as two months for a reviewer to act on it. The whole idea of AfC is to get guidance on what a draft needs. If you move it to mainspace yourself, it may very well be nominated for deletion. I recommend patience over precipitous action. Your draft contains many facts which have no references. David notMD (talk) 19:41, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

• WP:DUD. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Problem with an image

I'm trying to add an image to this article. I'm pretty close to certain I'm doing it correctly, but it won't show up. HalfShadow 18:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

There were some duplicate parameters in the infobox code, and the later ones were overriding yours. A preview of the offending revision showed the errors - "Warning: Numberblocks is calling Template:Infobox television with more than one value for the "image" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used." "Warning: Numberblocks is calling Template:Infobox television with more than one value for the "caption" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used." The second "image" parameter was empty, so neither it nor "caption" would be displayed. -- Begoon 18:28, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

I've never really added an image to an article before (modifying an image doesn't really count), so I didn't think there was anything that would prevent the image from showing. I wasn't getting any edit warnings myself, so I was unsure what I was doing wrong. HalfShadow 22:51, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

The warnings only showed up on a page preview, so if you didn't preview you wouldn't have seen them. -- Begoon 05:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

A page about me

Hello! Many years ago I used to have a user page that was great and showed up in google searches, but at some point it was taken down, perhaps because of vandalism, or because someone made a negative wikipedia page about me. Then a couple years ago I tried to replace it with an actual encyclopedia page, but got banned pretty quickly. What is the best way to try to have a page about me? Should I ask someone else to make one? Should I start with another user page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by E6slidefilm (talk • contribs) 21:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@E6slidefilm: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not for merely telling the world about yourself, and writing an autobiographical article is highly discouraged, see WP:AUTO. Wikipedia has articles about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability as shown with independent reliable sources(for biographies, see WP:BIO for notability criteria). Wikipedia has no interest in what an article subject wants to say about itself. If you truly meet the notability guidelines, an independent editor will write about you at some point. Keep in mind that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable, as once one exists, almost any information about you that appears in independent reliable sources can be in the article about you, be it good or bad.

As for user pages, they are meant for the user to introduce themselves to the Wikipedia community in the context of their Wikipedia editing or use; it is not meant to be a social media-type description of the user. Please see WP:USERPAGE for information about acceptable user page content. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 21:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Reference/Image Dilemma

I made a Wiki page for a small indie game that hasn't been released yet. All of the information I put on the page is from my own personal knowledge (not a ton of info) and I want to know how to type a reference. Can I link myself somehow? Also, I've been trying to put in an image, but am having trouble uploading it to Wikipedia servers to put it into the page. Here is a link to the image: https://www.gamekult.com/jeux/metal-revolution-3050880057.html (the image is the banner above the article). I do not technically have permission to upload the image, but, it's a news article? How do I put this in? I can't speak French if I actually need to contact the company.

My draft page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft%3AMetal_Revolution_(Game) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sensatai (talk • contribs) 21:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, an article like you describe will not be accepted on WP, see WP:Notability (video games). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

What you know personally is considered original research, and not allowed. And the image is considered copyright property and cannot be used. David notMD (talk) 02:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Is this website owned by the Wikimedia Foundation?

This website looks exactly like a Wikipedia. Is it owned by the Wikimedia Foundation in any way? https://incels.wiki/w/Incel_Wiki

208.54.39.183 (talk) 23:44, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@208.54.39.183: No, it is not owned by Wikimedia. The reason they look similar is because they use the same software, called MediaWiki. Many wikis run on this software. Saucy^{[talk – contribs]} 23:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

need to add image

hello, i need to add an image, i once almost activiated that function before, but now i can'r find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80stunes (talk • contribs) 00:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

he, 80stunes welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry for the long wait for a reply. Providing you have an image that you own the copyright of (i.e.that you took yourself) you may find help and guidance at this page: Wikipedia:Uploading images. Let us know if you have any specific problem in uploading, but bear in mind that Wikimedia Commons does not accept 'fair use' images and has its own policies and administrators who manage image there, and are thew arbiters of what is and is not acceptable. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Why does my article violate the rules Wikipedia ?

I have written articles about shooting games fiah game, really this topic I have not seen on Wikipedia and I want to contribute it to Wikipedia so everyone can find information more easily! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Friendzone93 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

If you think your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion".--Quisqualis (talk) 03:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

message an editor

Hello, I need to send a direct message to an editor. How do I do this please?..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vastcorp (talk • contribs) 03:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Every editor, you included, Vastcorp, has a Talk page. Go to that editor's Talk page via the Talk link next to their name in their signature, and click the tab at the page top for "New section". Don't forget to sign your post with 4 of these tildes~.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Before you embarrass yourself, consider the meaning of the phrase "reverted unsourced edits". This article should prove helpful. Your vast knowledge is not much appreciated here, nor is anybody's vast trove of knowledge. What is important in this encyclopedia project is research, reliable sources, and proper citation style. It's really not a fun activity for most people.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Want to do task on Wikipedia

Where can i found new tasks on Wikipedia? Is there some one to provide tasks or i can edit any article randomly?— Preceding unsigned comment added by LTKT (talk • contribs) 09:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

LTKT Welcome to the Teahouse. You can take either approach. One good way is to look at topics you're personally interested in and see if minor changes like spelling or grammar need fixing. Only add new factual content, though, if supported by an accompanying citation. Having found one article that's relevant o your interests, take a look right at the very bottom of that page where a number of 'Categories' are named into which that article has been put. By clicking on one of those you'll see all the other pages which are also categorised in the same way. Thus, you find a load more similar articles to look at. We also have WP:WikiProjects where editors with shared interests can work on one subject are or another. In contract, you can look at Wikipedia:Task Center which shows you the types of tasks you might be interested in, ranging from copyediting, adding references, expanding from tiny stub articles, etc etc. You might also find that Wikipedia:Community portal offers you similar types of suggestions. Any problems - just pop back and ask. Oh, and why not try out The Wikipedia Adventure for a fun tour of the basics of editing Wikipedia? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Repeated removal of content

I am an employee and I want to publish some informative content about the project I am working on, but they are declining it again and again. I have created a new user, with an individual username and published the content but they have flagged it again saying all about copyright infringement. The links they have given are owned by my project and watched by me. Can anyone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SehrishJ2019 (talk • contribs) 09:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

You declared a COI on your User page for Draft: DocEasy, but as an employee, what applies is WP:PAID. If DocEasy is really Wikipedia-worthy, then in time someone without any affiliation to it will compose an article. Also, even if the webpage you want to copy from is by the company you work for, it has its own copyright protection, which means you cannot copy that content and paste it into a Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Justin Huang

Hi, i noticed negative information was removed from the Justin Huang page, including details of his conviction for money laundering. This information was referenced with newspaper articles and court reports.

I would like to ask if it was removed by a Wikipedia editor? If so, can i discuss the reasons. Or if was not a wikipedia editor, can i ask for the deletions to be reviewed?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Before the Bang (talk • contribs)

Hello Before the Bang welcome to the Teahouse. Everyone who edits a page is called a 'Wikipedia editor' there's no hierarchy of who is and isn't a special type of editor here. Taking just a brief look at the article (and by going to the 'View History' tab) it's clear another editor removed a large amount of cited content stating that it was more relevant to another article. It looked rather overly detailed to all be relevant to this one article, rather than the company Huang ran, so that might have been justified. You should check to see whether the editor has/is going to reinsert it elsewhere. That said, I think the corruption charges and conviction are relevant to his article, so should be reinserted (I'm assuming the three cited sources are indeed reliable. They absolutely must be if the text is to remain in a WP:BLP - I've not checked them). You have the option to revert their removal and discuss on the article's talk page and how content might need to be edited, or you could keep it as it is and discuss on either the talk page or the deleting editor's own page. Personally, my 'gut reaction' would be to reinsert only the section on criminal convictions and legitimate accusation, leaving out the other stuff, and then take to the Talk page of the article to explain what you've done and seek consensus on what happens next. So, if you want to reinsert it verbatim, explain why; if you want to reinsert a cut-down version explain why; if you want to know why it has been removed, ask for reasons/consensus. (Please note I have not viewed the article in depth to assess the merits of all the content, but have simply endeavoured here to guide you as to the possible actions to take.) I hope this helps a bit. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that material was removed by Chongkian. The comment was that it belonged in an article about the miramar resort, but in fact the removed material covered a number of controversies - that was just one of them. I suggest raising the matter at the article's Talk page. --Gronk Oz (talk) 11:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I have raised the question at Talk:Justin_Huang#Controversies - please contribute your viewpoint there and keep an eye on the conversation. I pinged the editor who removed the material, so hopefully he/she will reply there to expand on the reasons.--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:20, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, i will follow those options up. Before the Bang

My draft

At the top of my draft Draft:Hulishan Fortress, there is a template called "人物保护单位". On the Chinese Wikipedia the draft is copied from (for now), the template shows a big box containing a picture of the Fortress, it's preservation status, and other statistics.

The problem, however, is that the template is in Chinese, and thus does not function on English Wikipedia. But since I've seen similar boxes (if not identical boxes) on English Wikipedia articles about similar topics, I know that the template in question most likely exists here, just having a different name. But what is that different name? I tried all the translations of the Chinese name of the template using edit preview, but nothing seems to work. Anybody know what the right template to use is? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Woshiyiweizhongguoren: That entire article seems to be written in Chinese. But this is English Wikipedia, and we only accept articles written in English. I can't tell which template you intended to use, but it could be something like {{Infobox ancient site}} or {{Infobox Military Structure}}, depending on what aspects you want to emphasize. --Gronk Oz (talk) 11:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: I know. I'm going to be translating it into English. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Woshiyiweizhongguoren: Great. Are those templates suitable, or do you need something different? --Gronk Oz (talk) 11:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Woshiyiweizhongguoren: Google translation of template name: "cultural relics protection unit". It appears to be an infobox for sites listed in the Chinese Major Historical and Cultural Site Protected at the National Level. We don't have an infobox specifically for this. Some of the other sites in Category:Major Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the National Level use {{Infobox historic site}}. You have to work with the documented parameters of templates. It is not tailored to a Chinese database like the Chinese template but it does have designation parameters to specify some database information. We have {{Infobox NRHP}} tailored to an American database but they obviously don't list Chinese sites so it cannot be used here. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Everything's fine now. Thanks. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 12:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Pasting images

I just wanted to know how to paste images. I want to know because a picture would look good on my user page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BizzareGuy (talk • contribs) 11:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

This essay explains how to use basic image syntax on Wikipedia; hope it's helpful. Yunshui ^雲_水 12:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@BizzareGuy: To add images that re already on Wikipedia, first you click the "edit" or "view source" button, then scroll to where the image is. It should be in the format "File:(image name)" with two square brackets around it. Copy all of the brackets and whatever is inside them, then paste them on your user page. That should work. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 12:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Reply templates

The "ping" and "re" templates are one and the same, right? If not, then what's the difference between them? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 12:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren: They are the same and both redirect to Template:Reply to. Notifications are caused by a link to a user page. It doesn't matter whether the link is made with some template or written directly. I wrote [[User:Woshiyiweizhongguoren|Woshiyiweizhongguoren]] here to notify you. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay, got it! Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 13:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Article title cpaitalization

If I'm creating an article about a brand or subject that is deliberately not capitalized, how can I reflect that in Wikipedia? The title always forces the first letter to a capital. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave Harig (talk • contribs) 12:53, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Dave Harig, welcome to the Teahouse. You can use {{lowercase title}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey! You can force it to display as a lowercase letter by adding the tag {{lowercase title}} at the top of the page, as per WP:NCTR. CalOtter (talk) 13:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Dave Harig, you can make things display correctly by placing {{lowercase title}} at the top of the page. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Follow-up to New post

Hello! I wonder how to publish my information. Is there anything I can do right now? Thank your for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.67.212.82 (talk) 13:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

If you are User:Mtrams, the first thing you need to do is to respond to the message User talk:Mtrams#Disclosure of employment on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

How to Redirect an Article

Hello! So I was recently trying to work on Chinese Red Army, and I came across 'Cold Weapons.' I created a new article, hyperlinked 'cold weapons,' and went onto Cold Weapon. From here, I'm having troubles. I'm attempting to redirect Cold Weapon to List of premodern combat weapons, and I'm having difficulties. Could i have assistance? Thanks! Keep in mind that I only recently went over 10 edits, so I'm one of the newest people in here. TheTeaDrinker (talk) 13:43, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Cold weapon and Cold Weapon should not redirect to List of premodern combat weapons. First List of premodern combat weapons does not mention cold weapon at all. Next not all the weapons on List of premodern combat weapons are cold weapons. There are weapons on the list that use gun powder. ~ GB fan 13:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@TheTeaDrinker: To make a redirect, type "#REDIRECT" followed by a link to the target article, with a space in between. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 13:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, TheTeaDrinker! Welcome to the Teahouse.
We do not have an article Cold Weapon, so I suppose you mean Cold weapon, which used to be an article some time ago (Special:PermanentLink/711621565) but has been cleaned as a dictionary definition.
For information about redirecting I suggest you read Wikipedia:Redirect. If you find any trouble with that page you're welcome to come back and ask for clarification. --CiaPan (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Signature

What causes my signature to look weird in this edit? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 14:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

There is an extra space causing it. If you edit the page you'll see the code is {{Teahouse talkback}} [[User:Woshiyiweizhongg... Note the space between the curly braces and the square brackets. - X201 (talk) 14:43, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Woshiyiweizhongguoren: Generally, a leading space at the start of a line causes special formatting. The output from {{Teahouse talkback}} ends with a newline so the space becomes leading. The documentation says a signature is supposed to be added as a parameter with |ts=~~~~. Also note |question title goes here. The template uses this to link directly to the section. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Is a software`s website source considered as a reliable source ?

Hello wikipedians, as my first time in here as a member i would like to understand the way the referenses and reliable sources are working on in here. I have an article about a software that takes most of the writing from this software`s website and especially from the source code of this website. Could this be reliable source / reference and what else is needed ? Can anyone on the field of software explain better to me ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vasileios V. (talk • contribs) 14:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

A source's reliability is tied to what you are trying to show with that source. What are you writing in Wikipedia and tying to the source, that is what are you trying to allow readers verify as true with that source? Specifically with self-published sources, they can be reliable, but depends on what you are trying to use the source to verify; secondary sources are more reliable, and better for most purposes, but self-published sources can be useful, though less so and sometimes not at all. --Jayron32 14:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Legacy way to mark signature?

I was reading a tutorial about formatting and found --~~~~ mentioned as wikicode for a signature with a time stamp but it seems to do the same as ~~~~?

--~~~~ Also mentioned here.

And how do I link to wiki pages like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tutorial/Formatting ? The /Formatting I can't search for in the link creator.

--~~~~ --> --DarkRandi (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

~~~~ --> DarkRandi (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

DarkRandi, Well, The ~~~~ is what actually adds the signature, the -- just adds those characters before it. As for the link, you may just have to add the /Formatting part manually to the link creator. Hope that helps! WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@DarkRandi: Doesn't [[Wikipedia:Tutorial/Formatting]] → Wikipedia:Tutorial/Formatting do what you need? --CiaPan (talk) 15:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

WelpThatWorked Should the --~~~~ be removed from the pages then? And CiaPan I tried it with the link button without typing out the code but that seems to work. Thanks! - DarkRandi (talk) 15:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@DarkRandi: The two hyphens are optional in our software. They are called sig dashes and other things. There is no recommendation whether to include them in the English Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Signatures#How to sign your posts says: "click the signature icon to add two hyphens and four tildes like this: --~~~~". The described icon does add two hyphens so this particular description should not be changed. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Well Mr. WelpThatWorked, I want to tell you something about DarkRandi because as a responsible Wikipedian i shouldn't be biased even if we are from the same country. His name is very offensive. "Randi" is a slang word which means prostitute in Indian language and I think that having names of offensive and abusive nature is strongly opposed so you might take action or find a solution towards it, if it exists. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 17:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Levent Heitmeier: I understand your perspective. However, the word in question is also a legitimate name that many people have, and the username policy indicates only to take action if there is no legitimate reason to have such a username. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 17:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I changed my signature to make it less obvious, is it good now Levent Heitmeier?

Also PrimeHunter this formatting page says that --~~~~ does "Sign talk comments (with time stamp)" and then shows the username with a time stamp but no hyphen so we should add hyphens there I guess? - DarkRandik (talk) 19:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@DarkRandi: Yes, that makes sense. I have added the hyphens.[6] PrimeHunter (talk) 19:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

DarkRandi I am nobody to decide what is obvious and what is not. What I feel is going wrong here or there gets reported to someone who is more experienced. Actually names can never be offensive unless it is Sergio Ramos. You just have to keep yourself polite enough like Nick Moyes to respond to the other guys in a good manner. Happy editing! From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 01:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Change speed of animation?

Hi. I've never done this before so my apologies if I'm in the wrong place.

While searching information on wikipedia, I came across an animation of a rotating skull that displays muscles of the face.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygomaticus_major_muscle#/media/File:Zygomaticus_major_muscle_animation_small.gif

While informative, it would be great if the publisher would slow down the speed of the animation. It's simply rotating too fast to study the muscle.

That's it. Thanks so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanleaf (talk • contribs) 15:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Urbanleaf, welcome to the Teahouse. File:Zygomaticus major muscle animation small.gif says 60 frames, 6.0 s. That matches how Firefox displays it to me: A full rotation takes 6 seconds. Does your browser animate it faster or do you think 6 seconds is too fast? It seems suitable to me. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Urbanleaf! Our article on GIF format says the animation speed is encoded into the GIF file's header:

The animation delay for each frame is specified in the GCE in hundredths of a second. (see the GIF#Animated GIF section)

I can imagine a browser could apply some multiplier to that delay and thus slow-down the animation – but I'm not aware of any browser actually having such capability. --CiaPan (talk) 08:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Autoconfirm Status

My account is 4 days old and I have made nearly 55 edits that why am I not yet autoconfirmed? If a user dies that then consider it as a reminder. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 17:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Levent Heitmeier. Your account is 3 days and 13 hours.[7] Autoconfirmation requires 4 full days. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

But when you open my user page it shows below my name that I joined Wikipedia 4 days ago which as far as I know is true. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 17:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Levent Heitmeier: I understand why you are confused. The issue is with rounding differences. On your userpage, the counter rounds to the nearest full day; the "autoconfirmed" counter always rounds down, so that when an account is between 3.5 and 4 days old (as yours is) there is a discrepancy. In 11 hours, you will be autoconfirmed. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 17:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me about that! Wish you a very nice day. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

PrimeHunter My account is now more than 4 days old but it hasn't got autoconfirmed yet. Can you please check what the problem is? From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I just checked, and you are in fact autoconfirmed. If you got to your userpage, and hit the "user rights management" link on the left hand side of the page you can see what rights you have, autoconfirmed is not one of the checkable boxes and will appear above the main list. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I think that "user rights management" is visible to admins but not to mere mortals. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You are autoconfirmed, as shown here. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that is the target of the "User rights management" link admins have on user pages (we see more on that page as hinted by Beeblebrox). You can also see your own account is autoconfirmed at Special:Preferences. @Levent Heitmeier: What makes you think you are not autoconfirmed? PrimeHunter (talk) 19:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

"known for"

Somebody on my talk page is saying that the phrase "known for" is problematic. For example, if someone became notable for starring in a reality series, I would write "Example is known for appearing on this series in 2017". I’ve seen "known for" on hundreds of articles, and have seen several heavily experienced editors say that it’s ok. Can someone clarify this query? Thanks! – DarkGlow (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

To me, "X is known for Y" is original research unless it is backed up by a reference not just to the fact that X did/was Y, but to the claim that X is known for Y", DarkGlow. --ColinFine (talk) 17:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with it myself, though. It's used throughout the website, for instance in the lede on Michael Richards. In your case, the article you're in conflict on has a light filmography other than his main role. I personally think it's fine, but also consider other ways of communicating it. SportingFlyer T·C 01:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Editing article vs editing section

Hi! Newbie here (joined earlier today and just finished TWA). I was wondering if there are any advantages or disadvantages to editing a section vs editing the entire article. In TWA, it always used the "Edit source" button at the top, which would edit the entire article, but for long articles it seems like it would be easier to just edit the section in question. Thanks and great to be here :) (Did I sign this question correctly?) Kmisal (talk) 17:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kmisal: It depends what kind of edit you want to achieve. I mainly work on transforming poorly written articles into well written articles, so it’s best for me to edit the entire article, as it’s quicker. However, if you only want to edit a particular section, do that. Also, you did sign correctly. :) – DarkGlow (talk) 17:43, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, DarkGlow. If the edit you want to make is within one section, there are several reasons to edit just that section: first, the editor will load only that section into your session, rather than the whole article: this may save you time (particularly if you have a slow connection), and will reduce the load (slightly) on the Wikipedia servers. Secondly, if somebody else is also editing the article at the same time, but edits a different section, then the edit conflict algorithm doesn't have to be applied to see if your edits are in conflict or not. Thirdly, you will have less material to scroll through in your browser to find the bit you want to edit. --ColinFine (talk) 17:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kmisal: It may be difficult for The Wikipedia Adventure to determine the right section so I can understand why it always edits the whole page. For human editors, I recommend the section if you only make changes in one section. It makes some things easier for you like finding the right place to edit, and view the result when you click "Show preview". It also makes an automatic edit summary which names and links the section you edited. See for example the grey text in the page history of this page.[8] PrimeHunter (talk) 18:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense. Thanks DarkGlow, ColinFine, and PrimeHunter! Kmisal (talk) 19:25, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

How do I make a page protected?

How can I protect a page from editing so that anonymous users cannot spread false information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garib Jilan (talk • contribs) 18:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

If there's a page that's been persistently vandalized, you can request that it be protected by an administrator at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Normally, though, misinformation (added by anyone, anonymous or otherwise) is simply removed by another editor. Eman235/talk 18:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

However, you appear to be in an edit war. Administrators will not protect your preferred version of a page just because you want them to. If you would like to make productive changes to articles, then you need to cite reliable sources and stop telling other editors that they can't edit pages. No one WP:OWNs any articles here. shoy (reactions) 18:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Permission to Use Quotations and Pictures of Frederick Douglass & Abraham Lincoln, from "Wikiquote," in Middle School History Class Handouts

I respectfully request permission to use excerpted quotes and pictures from the "Wikiquote" webpages. These excerpts are quotes and related pictures of Mr. Frederick Douglass, and President Abraham Lincoln, on the subject of slavery. This material is for inclusion in a handout for approximately 50 middle school (6th & 8th grade) students, in their regular history classes.

I have read the Wikipedia / Wikiquote / Creative Commons License Deed pages. Although it "appears" that my copying and use of the excerpts that I selected is permitted, I wanted to confirm, with you, that my use of these excerpted quotes and related pictures is permitted.

I am a volunteer, working with a concerned citizen group, to augment the teaching of history in several of our schools in St. Lucie County.

If this is permitted, I assure you that this material will acknowledge "Wikiquote" as the source and will not be used commercially or for any profit. Your reply to this email will serve as permission, if granted, for this request.

Thank you, in advance for your kind consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ATH627Gold (talk • contribs) 20:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

The Teahouse is for questions related to the English Wikipedia. Wikiquote: is a separate project, but as you will have seen by looking at the Creative Commons license pages you can use the material if you give attribution. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Nicholas S Bouquet

Hello, My Great-Grandfather Nicholas S Bouquet's last name is misspelled in Wikipedia. The title says Nicholas Boquet. Is there someone who could edit the correct spelling for me? Last Name is spelled: Bouquet

Thank you! Sandra Bouquet Carslick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scarslick (talk • contribs) 21:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

The army website uses the spelling "Boquet", but I've moved the article to your spelling on the assumption that the army got it wrong. Dbfirs 21:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Need Help with Editing Benjamin Bradley page

Hi my name is Kirstyn Prager and I am editing Benjamin Bedley's page for Dr. Vans, Early American Hist. at Cal Poly Pomona.shalor toncray is our wiki assistant. My question is that I have discovered the true name of Benjamin Bradley which is Benjamin Boardley, how should I add this other name. Should I create a new page and ink it to the Benjamin Bradley page? And if so, could you please direct me on how to do so.Or should I add the citation on the same page since so many books have been written about him with the wrong name? Thank you. Kaprager (talk) 22:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)kaprager

Hello, Kaprager. If you have a reliable published source, then you can add the information to the article Benjamin Bradley (inventor), citing the source. If the bulk of the sources used the name "Bradley", then the page should not be moved (renamed). But what you can do is to create a redirection: create an article Benjamin Boardley (that shows as red at present because the article doesn't exist) containing the text #REDIRECT [[Benjamin Bradley (inventor)]]. Then anybody that goes to the Boardley page will automatically be sent to the Bradley page.

Incidentally, Wikipedia is not interested in whether you are editing for somebody else (unless you are editing an article about that somebody else or a person or organisation that person is closely connected to: in this case, you would have a conflict of interest). It is also not interested in whether somebody is your "wiki assistant": as far as Wikipedia is concerned, both you and your wiki assistant are editing only for yourselves, and are responsible for your own edits. --ColinFine (talk) 00:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

How to use or search through a sorted table?

In this page table (or any similar table) how can I search for 2 or more things at once (e.g. Windows, Fantasy, ARPG). I currently use ctrl+f with sorting but is there a way to "remove" some platforms or subgenres just for my view? - DarkRandik (talk) 22:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, DarkRandi welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst I'm not a massive expert on Tables, I don't think there is any way to selectively remove rows from view. I was also going to say that I didn't think you could sort on two columns in a sortable table, as you might commonly do in Excel. But on researching this answer for you, I find that you can actually do that here (providing the original table has been well constructed in the first place, of course.) See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Sorting#Secondary_sortkey which says that, after sorting on one column (by clicking the top 'sort' arrow), you then go to the second column you want to sort on, press Shift whilst then clicking that column's sort icon. It certainly works in the example table you've given us. Anything fancier, and the best method might be to copy and paste the table's full contents into Excel and work on it there. Does that help you? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

That's pretty good since I can sort 2 columns and highlight the important bits in 1 more with ctrl+f. Thanks Nick Moyes - DarkRandik (talk) 08:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm pleased we could help you. And I learned something new, too! Nick Moyes (talk) 08:41, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Other Wikipedia sites with different languages

I was looking up a people from Quebec's past and found a number of people, but their in French like this one Abraham Martin. It there a way to make these available in English? I have seen George de la Tremoille has both English and French.Jlastowski (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Jlastowski. Yes, there are certainly ways to do this, although one must always bear in mind that each language Wikipedia has its own policies on important matters like Notability and Reliable Sources. There are a number of ways for you to get an article converted into English, and the obvious one is for you to attempt it yourself. If your non-English language skills are not great, I would suggest focusing solely on the key notability issues, taking advantage of all the references cited in the other language. (Whilst we like to see sources in English, it is definitely not an essential requirement.) See Wikipedia:Translation for more details on the routes available to you. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

NEED HELP

I want to get the word "Draft" out of my title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80stunes (talk • contribs) 23:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi 80stunes. If you're refering to Draft:For Real(Tom PettySong), I wouldn't advise you do that because that particular draft is not even close to being ready to be upgraded to an article and would likely end up quickly deleted if was WP:MOVED to the article namespace. So, my suggestion to you is to read some pages like Wikipedia:Your first article, Help:Referencing for beginners, Wikipedia:Notability (music) and Wikipedia:Article to get an idea as to how to write a proper article and what kinds of things are OK to write about. Once you've done that, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs for some pointers about how to write Wikipedia articles about songs; you can also ask questions on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs. You might also want to look at some Wikipedia:Featured articles about songs because these are very good examples on how to write such articles. Once you've done all of those things, try and take everything you learned and incorporate the most useful stuff into writing the draft. Good luck.-- Marchjuly (talk) 01:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Many of Tom Petty's songs are the subject of articles. See American Girl (Tom Petty song) for a long article, others are shorter. Those would be good models. David notMD (talk) 01:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I have added the {{Draft article}} template to it, which has a button to submit the article for review so it can be promoted. But please address the issues that Marchjuly describes above first, or it will just be rejected.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

A question about two editors editing the same article

Hello, is there a tool available that allows someone to cross-reference the edits of two editors to see how many articles they have both edited? and which articles they have both edited? I searched google for such a thing but got nowhere. Thank you! SteamboatPhilly (talk) 01:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@SteamboatPhilly: Yes, take a look here: Wikipedia:Tools#User interaction analysis. (There are other useful tools on that same page.) SportingFlyer T·C 01:32, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

WOW, thank you for the quick response, that is amazing. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 01:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

No worries, good luck! SportingFlyer T·C 01:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

How can this information be known to the public : Yargo De Lucca (1925-2008), painter, engraver and sculptor

Not the place for a draft

Yargo De Lucca studied in Marburg, Frankfurt, at the Stuttgart State Academy (under Willi Baumeister) and in Munich. Scholarships allowed him to travel across Europe, Africa, Asia and America. In 1951, he moved to Canada and became a Canadian citizen. From 1961, he lived and worked in his workshops in Altenrhein on Lake Constance (Switzerland) and in Lac des Deux Montagnes (Canada). In 1985, he lived in Javea, Alicante (Spain). In 1945, Yargo de Lucca received the Tima Award in Los Angeles. In 1958, he was awarded in Montreal with the Dow Prize to Canadians. The painter then became a member of the Akademie M.A.I. (Masters of Fine Art International). Four years later, De Lucca was presented in Düsseldorf with the Prince Bernhard silver medal. In 1970, he won the Venice Biennale. In 1972, the Canadian painter received the gold medal for painting in Rome. Over the next two years, he received the Certificate of Merit twice in Cambridge, England. De Lucca won in 1974 and 1975 in Monte-Carlo, the Palme d'Or Fine Arts Award. In 1975, Yargo de Lucca was named Men of Achievement from Cambridge as a graphic designer. At the Grand Prix de Lyon in 1976, he won the bronze medal. In 1977, he won the Marquis Award in Chicago, the Trofeo d'Oro at the Biennale Internazionale d'Arte in Italy and the Trofeo Calabria at the Premio della Stampa in Italy. The following year, he received a gold medal at the International Art Competition USA, an honorary gold medal member of the Italian Academy, a Premio Leone d'Oro di Firenze, and his appointment as a professor h. c. at the Accademia Italia delle Arti delle Lettere e delle Science. In 1979, he became a professor at the Accademia delle Signoria di Firenze, he obtained the key to the city of Vegas, 2nd intern, Art Exhibit in the United States and held the Premio "Lorenzo il Magnifico" di Firenze. In 1980, he received the Premio Italia for painting, he exhibited at an internal art exhibition Salsomaggiore and was appointed honorary member of the Roman Academy. In 1981, he was admitted to the Legion of Honor, Legion d'Oro, became professor h. c. University of Arti in Salsomaggiore and received the Jacob Burckhardt Award in Rome. In 1982, he received the Culture Prize of the city of Florence, Angelo d'Oro. Works by Yargo De Lucca are among the following museums and public collections: • Los Angeles County Museum of Art • Santa Barbara Museum of Art • Art Institute of Chicago • New Orleans Museum of Art • Montreal Museum of Fine Arts • National Museum of Fine Arts of Quebec • National Gallery of Canada • Museu de Arte de São Paulo • Gezira Center for Modern Art • Puschkin-Museum • Tel Aviv Museum of Art • Tate Gallery • Louisiana Museum of Modern Art • Moderna Museet • Stedelijk Museum • Folkwang Museum • Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Moderna • National Museum of Modern Art • Kunstmuseum St. Gallen • Vancouver Art Gallery • Dominion Gallery Montreal

For info : Marc M. Mignault — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.152.117 (talk) 02:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

This is not the place for a draft so I have collapsed its display. If you believe that the subject satisfies Wikipedia's definition of notability, the advice is at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:46, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Use the Article Wizard to start an article please. 185.69.145.183 (talk) 08:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

A few things:

• The proposed text is a direct translation of the German article, de:Yargo De Lucca. A new, translated article must credit the source article. See Wikipedia:Translationfor how to do that.
• The German version has no sources. English Wikipedia has different pocilies and guidelines, and the consensus here is that articles need sources. See WP:CITE for how to do that.
• The subject is very likely notable per our notability guidelines for artists WP:NARTIST because his work is represented in several museum collections.

My advice is that we can have an articleabout De Lucca once all the major claims in the article are supported by citations. I have not found much online, but it may well be that sufficient sources exist. Vexations (talk) 12:55, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Editing Tables

I notice that in some tables the far left column is shaded darker grey like the top row. When editing that far left column (i.e. titles in a discography) and create a new row, the titles get written in bold and centered, as opposed to aligned to the left and italicized (no bold). And I can't get it to change. Please advise. Also, I'm using the visual editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCanDoBetter (talk • contribs) 05:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, YouCanDoBetter welcome to the Teahouse. I've had a play around and have a solution for you. It will involve you switching to Source Editor to make one small change which I don't think you can do in Visual Editor (I appreciate you telling us which editing tool you were using - that really helps). As always, I advise testing tables in your personal sandbox, which I've just done (see here) and have copied below. I took one of the many tables from the article Johnny Cash albums discography and tried repeating what you describe using only Visual Editor. That gives the first of three new entries (Nick Moyes sings) which you see centred in bold (not what you want, and for multiple reasons!).

Still using Visual Editor, and by going to the toolbar and switching the setting from Header cell to Contents cell, I managed to insert the second of my three new 'hit' singles. But I could not find a way to reinstate the shaded background from the white one. Again, this isn't what you want.

The solution you need to follow is simple, but you'll have to use Source Editor by clicking the 'Edit source' Tab (although be aware you might have set your 'Preference' not to show this. If that's the case, you'll need to change your own personal settings.) Anyway, open in Source Editor and look over the way the wikimarkup has created the table, especially paying attention to the line showing the album titles. It looks like this:

! scope="row" |The Fabulous Johnny Cash

Notice the ! scope="row" entry before vertical pipe (|) symbol followed by the album title in italics (the pipe defines a new cell, and italics are created with double apostrophes either side of the title)

If you now copy and paste in ! scope="row" before the title of your new entry you will be adding a command which changes the appearance of the cell to the one you want. Check the last entry in the demo table below:

1950s

Title	Details	Peak positions
		US
Johnny Cash with His Hot and Blue Guitar	Release date: October 11, 1957 Label: Sun Records	1
The Fabulous Johnny Cash	Release date: November 3, 1958 Label: Columbia Records	19
Johnny Cash Sings the Songs That Made Him Famous	Release date: November 17, 1958 Label: Sun Records	1
Nick Moyes sings	Release date: 4 April 2019	4,124,292
Greatest!	Release date: January 12, 1959 Label: Sun Records	66
Nick Moyes keeps on singing (ft: BADLY)	Never released (thank goodness)	-
Songs of Our Soil	Release date: September 1, 1959 Label: Columbia Records	76
Nick Moyes gets it right by editing wiki source	Limited edition
"—" denotes releases that did not chart

If you want to learn more about formatting in Tables, just click the link in my third hit single to take you to Help:Table and do a text search for: scope="row" It's a massive and detailed help file, but you should find much there to assist you in future table editing using the Source Editor. Let me know if this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

2018-19 Australian region cyclone season

Hi, I made edits there and it didn't show up even though it says in the edit history that I made edits. 86.141.93.166 (talk) 07:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Your edits are the last edits to that article, as shown here. I see nothing that would prevent them from showing; perhaps you need to clear the cookies in your browser. Also, if you use the back button to return to that article, it may bring you to an older version of the article. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

This has happened for a while on tropical cyclone pages for a while now. 185.69.145.183 (talk) 08:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

The article is under pending changes protection. It appears the mobile version of the site does not show that. Click "Desktop" at the bottom to see the desktop version. When a page under pending changes protection is edited by an unregistered (also called IP) editor or a new user, the edit is not directly visible to the majority of Wikipedia readers, until it is reviewed and accepted by an editor with the reviewer right. The desktop page history shows your IP address has five pending changes. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Edits seem reasonable (ie not obvious vandalism), so I've reviewed them for you. They should now be visible. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. 86.141.93.166 (talk) 12:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not showing up again. 86.141.93.166 (talk) 17:55, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Same reason, same cure. Perhaps you might consider creating a username for yourself. One you've passed the trivial "new user" stage (4 days and IIRC 10 edits) you will no longer be caught in just this way. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Now I can't edit the article. WHY!? 86.141.93.166 (talk) 19:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

The article has been semi-protected. Your earlier edit had been reverted, but instead of discussing the matter on the article talk page in accordance with WP:BRD you made a similar edit again. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Why were they reverted? Well done you realised I changed it, get a gold medal. 86.141.93.166 (talk) 20:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

How can upload article

Hello sir i need some help give me some information to how can i upload article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wpnews18 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Wpnews18 Welcome to the Teahouse, but I'm afraid there is a problem with your account. You are clearly representing a news organisation (see this diff) and are editing with a promotional name which suggests multiple users. You may not have realised this, but this is regarded as a serious breach of our policies (see here), and so your account will shortly be 'soft-blocked' from editing. But don't panic. One individual person may create a new account, but they may not permit anyone else to use it. That individual may then continue to work on Draft:Maulana Shahabuddin Razvi. That article is nowhere near ready for this encyclopaedia yet; it's a mass of bad links with limited content or properly constructed references. See Wikipedia:Your first article and Articles for Creation, and WP:REFBEGIN for how to create proper references to Reliable sources. So, do come back under another username and seek further help when you need it, and we will help you with the next steps. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Capitals in a Title

How do I change the capitalization (but not spelling) of the words in the title of a Wikipedia article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeklinCaban (talk • contribs) 14:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@DeklinCaban: You would move the article to the correct title, with the proper capitalization. To move an article, see the guidance at HELP:MOVE. --Jayron32 14:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Drafting Collaboratively

Hi,

Is it possible to share my sandbox page to collaborate with another person while drafting an article?

Thanks,

Artie Artie Berns (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Ths short answer is yes. Although your sanbox is "yours" anyone can read and edit it. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

What is the preferred date format for citations?

Hi,

I'm new to this. I've seen a couple of different dates formats across pages used for citations. For example, one page had April 4th 2019 but another had 04.04.19. Does this differ from page to page? When I tried to use the 04.04.19 format on a page that had the date written out, Wikipedia flagged it up. However, the number format was definitely accepted on the other page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avalon2828 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Avalon2828 As far as I know, the preferred date format is the former one i.e. 4 April 2019. That's the format i have saw most peoples using and also that's the preferred way by Wikipedia too. See WP:REFB for the proof of it. I don't know where you saw that citation with the other format, so if you can provide the link then it can be useful for both you and me. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 15:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@Avalon2828: The full description of acceptable date formats is at Help:Citation Style 1#Dates. The other guideline to bear in mind is that when editing an existing article, you should stay consistent with whatever format is already used. It is a lot easier for the reader if the dates are all in the same format, at least within one article. Personally, I am a strong opponent of anything like 04.04.19 because it can be ambiguous, but that's just a personal view.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Don't use 04.04.19 or anything like it. Today is special, one of only twelve days in the year when the US date format looks the same as elsewhere. Normally there is confusion. Consider tomorrow. In the US it will be 4/5/19, for most of the rest of the world it will be 5/4/19. The accepted styles are given in the manual of style at MOS:DATEFORMAT. Basically always include the month in words and a four digit year unless using the ISO format 2019-04-05. HTH, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Signature issues

I'm having a problem with my talk page not linking correctly in my signature. See my signatures at User_talk:StaringAtTheStars#91,000,000; they are not linking correctly! I've checked my preferences to make sure I did link it, and I did (and it for some reason links properly there). Previewing edits will also link correctly to my talk page. Is there something wrong I did? Please see below if there's anything I'm missing on it, because I can't find it.
<span style="font-family: Century Gothic, Arial, sans-serif">'''''[[User:StaringAtTheStars|StaringAtTheStars]]'''''</span><sup>[[User_talk:StaringAtTheStars|✉Talk]]</sup>
StaringAtTheStars^✉Talk

Your signature here links OK to your user talk page. When you use it on your user talk page, it won't try to link back to itself, see WP:SIGLINK. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I see, thank you! StaringAtTheStars^✉Talk 18:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

StaringAtTheStars, if you want, you can change the link to [[User talk:StaringAtTheStars#top|✉Talk]], which will always link to the top of your user talk page, even if the link is on said page. Eman235/talk 20:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hijacking Nemenhah page

User Jmckael keeps hijacking the Nemenhah page, removing facts, and replacing them with promotional material. This is the second time I have posted about this page here. He was warned not to continue making these edits. He claims that he is restoring factual information to the page, citing first-hand knowledge no one else has any possibility of verifying. Can someone please fix it and look to prevent further destructive edits? I have neither the time nor the experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemenhah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doopwii123 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC) Edit for clarification: by my understanding, this organization deceives people into believing in their alternative medical treatments and has put the life of at least one minor at risk because of that. Wikipedia must maintain some standards of quality control when it comes to the spread of bogus medical science, otherwise it is complicit in the spread of diseases we have the technology to stop! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doopwii123 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Reverted to earlier version. Suggest extended discussion at Talk before this degenerates to an edit war. References, not emotions. David notMD (talk) 19:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I've set up alerts to watch the talk page. Doopwii123 (talk) 19:39, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

updated an image with a new version, it doesn't seem to work??

I updated File:Bayview Secondary School.PNG, but all I'm currently seeing is an elongated version of the file on both the file page and the target page. How do I fix this? The Verified Cactus 100% 18:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi The Verified Cactus. I see the new version with both image and text. Your browser may have cached the old version. Sometimes it's cached by our servers for a while so it may also be about timing. Try to bypass your cache. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:14, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, help me create a page,please

hello,help me create a page,please— Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertbruni (talk • contribs)

Hello and welcome to The Teahouse Alberbruni, please specify what you need help with. Hurricane Bunter (talk) 20:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello fellow editors

I want to create a bot to help tackle vandalism can someone help me with creating one please. Name:VandlB0t. Thanks Hurricane Bunter (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism. There are already several bots that revert vandalism. David notMD (talk) 20:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@Hurricane Bunter: Not sure what you are asking for. To learn about fighting vandalism, check out WP:VANDALISM and WP:CVUA RudolfRed (talk) 20:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Anything I can use to revert vandalism. Tell me. Is twinkle one? I want someone to work with me to make a bot to revert vandalism. Hurricane Bunter (talk) 20:24, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

See Help:Creating_a_bot. Also, WP:TWINKLE and WP:HUGGLE. RudolfRed (talk) 20:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

As you just became an editor today, I recommend you learn about the existing anti-vandalism bots and groups rather than seek to create a new bot. David notMD (talk) 20:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Userboxes

I would like some userboxes on my user page that shows how many orbits the planets have made since I joined Wikipedia. I don't have experience creating userboxes so I would like someone to create it for me. If you can find someone who is willing to make these userboxes, please direct them to this Teahouse post. Mstrojny (talk) 21:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@Userboxes: If you look at Wikipedia:Userboxes, there is a list of users who will help you create a user box. You may want to browse the existing user boxes first to see if what you want already exists. RudolfRed (talk) 22:48, 4 April 2019 (UTC)