Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 43: Line 43:
:::::According to my uk- and us-browsers, Google displays Badenhausen only as an author, as being linked with his German wikipedia article. This form is absolutely actual (see his linked vita) because he is currently and prospectively working for the quarterly journal “Der Berner” [ISSN 1610-8191], founded by [[:de:Reinhard Schmoeckel|Reinhard Schmoeckel]], formerly Head of the German Chancellery, then Director of the Bureau of the German President Karl Carstens, to thematise and discuss Ritter-Schaumburg's Thidreks saga research. The journal is available at library networks of German universities – if someone would claim the unreliability of this journal with regard to Ritter-Schaumburg, I would be ready to quote scholarly reliable authors appearing in this magazine. Badenhausen belongs to the scholastically selected authors whose books on Nibelungen and Thidreks saga research were reviewed by the ''Kommentierte Bibliographie 1945-2010: '''Nibelungenlied und Nibelungensage''''', De Gruyter Akademie Forschung, Berlin 2012. It is obvious that these reviews of Badenhausen do not contradict Ritter-Schaumburg. Thus, according to the most relevant policy WP:NOR in this matter, there is no doubt that Badenhausen is a qualified "prominent adherent" to be referenced in the article.--[[User:Tympanus|Tympanus]] ([[User talk:Tympanus|talk]]) 14:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
:::::According to my uk- and us-browsers, Google displays Badenhausen only as an author, as being linked with his German wikipedia article. This form is absolutely actual (see his linked vita) because he is currently and prospectively working for the quarterly journal “Der Berner” [ISSN 1610-8191], founded by [[:de:Reinhard Schmoeckel|Reinhard Schmoeckel]], formerly Head of the German Chancellery, then Director of the Bureau of the German President Karl Carstens, to thematise and discuss Ritter-Schaumburg's Thidreks saga research. The journal is available at library networks of German universities – if someone would claim the unreliability of this journal with regard to Ritter-Schaumburg, I would be ready to quote scholarly reliable authors appearing in this magazine. Badenhausen belongs to the scholastically selected authors whose books on Nibelungen and Thidreks saga research were reviewed by the ''Kommentierte Bibliographie 1945-2010: '''Nibelungenlied und Nibelungensage''''', De Gruyter Akademie Forschung, Berlin 2012. It is obvious that these reviews of Badenhausen do not contradict Ritter-Schaumburg. Thus, according to the most relevant policy WP:NOR in this matter, there is no doubt that Badenhausen is a qualified "prominent adherent" to be referenced in the article.--[[User:Tympanus|Tympanus]] ([[User talk:Tympanus|talk]]) 14:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
::::::That journal is not referred to by any scholar studying the Thidrekssaga, and being the former head of the German chancery does not make you an expert on a medieval legend. Badenhausen is the equivalent of a [[9/11 Truth movement|9-11 truther]], not a scholar. EVERY book written on the Nibelungenlied is included in that bibliography (that's the definition of a bibliography).--[[User:Ermenrich|Ermenrich]] ([[User talk:Ermenrich|talk]]) 17:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
::::::That journal is not referred to by any scholar studying the Thidrekssaga, and being the former head of the German chancery does not make you an expert on a medieval legend. Badenhausen is the equivalent of a [[9/11 Truth movement|9-11 truther]], not a scholar. EVERY book written on the Nibelungenlied is included in that bibliography (that's the definition of a bibliography).--[[User:Ermenrich|Ermenrich]] ([[User talk:Ermenrich|talk]]) 17:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Blocked as an upcoming warlord, but I am not, never was, never will be, I can only reply without my user account. Ermenrich provided no evidence for his allegation that the DER BERNER is a self-publishing magazine. Rather, I received reliable information that all submitted manuscripts are subject to the editorship's evaluation for publication. Turning to the "Kommentierte Bibliografie (1945-2010)", Ermenrich's allegation is not relevant because the editorship underlines unmistakably rather the popular significance of Ritter-Schaumburg. His two best-selling books were published by Herbig, now Langen-Müller Verlag, which is accordingly known to be a non-academic publisher! It is obvious that Ritter-S. has been widely introduced by Badenhausen, albeit with some rather tentative criticism, as this can be seen in his publications. Neither his books nor his articles allow a fringe status in this matter. Furthermore, I vigorously reject Ermenrich's assumption that I could be identical with him. As already posted elsewhere here in the English wiki, I am a historian (with a past in the UK). Since 2018 my residence is in a city about 7 miles from Badenhausen's German home town. Tympanus


== How can I make WikiPedia better? How can I add more successful and accomplished women? ==
== How can I make WikiPedia better? How can I add more successful and accomplished women? ==

Revision as of 15:50, 20 January 2020

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)

History Merging

Hello new to the Teahouse here, I had a problem with creating an article named Wulong bohaiensis. I created the draft at 00:58, 16 January 2020 but the submission did not accepted. An other user created the page at 02:27, 16 January 2020. I don't want to change the already existing page, however i want to take credit for creating the page. How can I resolve this issue? Historianengineer (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See answer on your Talk page. Situation appears to be that you created a draft, but after that an editor directly created an article on the same topic, so that when your draft was considered the reply was there is an existing article. From looking at your draft it does not appear to me that the person who created the article had seen your draft, so likelt just coincidence. You should feel free to improve the article. (I see that you have more text than the article.) David notMD (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) The article doesn't use your Draft:Wulong bohaiensis, the credits are correct, and you will be a part of it when you copy parts of your draft to the article. Your draft has no inline references at all, you need reliable sources for copied statements. You have one reference in #references, that's not how it works, put the <ref>xyzzy</ref> after the period (or comma) of the relevant statement (or paragraph) for the xyzzy-source. The #references section will then be automagically populated. –84.46.53.255 (talk) 12:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As context for other readers, the subject of the draft and article is a small and very interesting dinosaur whose formal discovery paper was published on 15 January 2020 (three days ago as I write) and has been widely publicised, so it is quite understandable that more than one editor began working on an article at the same time – I considered doing so myself. It's likely that this sort of 'clash' happens quite frequently, and merely demonstrates the enthusiasm of our editing community. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.208.126 (talk) 08:39, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
…and being part of the credits is one of the many things not logged-in contributors don't need to worry about.84.46.53.192 (talk) 01:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citations referring to WP:nor, WP:npov in case of "significant minority": naming and sourcing prominent adherents

See Talk:Þiðreks_saga Is User:Ermenrich right? --Tympanus (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC) Tympanus (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added wikilinks to the above post. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tympanus: Could you re-phrase your question? The meaning is unclear (to me, at least). Is it a question about editing Wikipedia? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry – don't know why I couldn't parse it. Tympanus is asking for additional opinions regarding the reliability of a source being discussed with Ermenrich at Talk:Þiðreks saga#Badenhausen. I'd suggest posting an invitation for others to comment at the relevant WikiProjects shown on the article's talk page, like WT:WikiProject Norse history and culture, etc.. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:29, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, AlanM1. Sorry, I was obviously too short. The matter is as follows: I have mentioned the research position of Heinz Ritter-Schaumburg, a German PhD in literature, in the article Þiðreks saga because he is relevant to be mentioned according to WP:nor. Regarding a “prominent adherent” to be named in the article, so WP:nor, I have referenced an online-review on Ritter-Schaumburg's thesis and basic position by Rolf Badenhausen, a businessman, journalist and bookauthor on Ritter's research; see also talk:Þiðreks saga. But this linked article was rejected by user:Ermenrich as “unreliable “. I disagree because Badenhausen appears qualified enough as a prominent adherent in this case. --Tympanus (talk) 10:22, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Personal websites are not reliable sources, see WP:USERGENERATED. This is Rolf Badenhausen's personal website. He is not an authority on the subject, as your own description of his qualifications makes clear. When I want to find out about medieval legend, my first address is not a "businessman" with a degree in electrical engineering. Further, beyond Ritter-Schaumburg himself, I would submit that this particular theory is wp:fringe. It isn't mentioned in any of the major handbooks on Dietrich von Bern, only in some extremely negative reviews of Ritter-Schaumburg's book from the 80s/early 90s. The fact that there are groups that self-publish books in support of RS's theory attacking the academic consensus only makes it look more fringy, not less. This is not a "significant minority". There is no debate about it in academic scholarship, and we following academic sources, not just what Joe Schmoe might like to write about a figure from medieval legend.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:05, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
According to my uk- and us-browsers, Google displays Badenhausen only as an author, as being linked with his German wikipedia article. This form is absolutely actual (see his linked vita) because he is currently and prospectively working for the quarterly journal “Der Berner” [ISSN 1610-8191], founded by Reinhard Schmoeckel, formerly Head of the German Chancellery, then Director of the Bureau of the German President Karl Carstens, to thematise and discuss Ritter-Schaumburg's Thidreks saga research. The journal is available at library networks of German universities – if someone would claim the unreliability of this journal with regard to Ritter-Schaumburg, I would be ready to quote scholarly reliable authors appearing in this magazine. Badenhausen belongs to the scholastically selected authors whose books on Nibelungen and Thidreks saga research were reviewed by the Kommentierte Bibliographie 1945-2010: Nibelungenlied und Nibelungensage, De Gruyter Akademie Forschung, Berlin 2012. It is obvious that these reviews of Badenhausen do not contradict Ritter-Schaumburg. Thus, according to the most relevant policy WP:NOR in this matter, there is no doubt that Badenhausen is a qualified "prominent adherent" to be referenced in the article.--Tympanus (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That journal is not referred to by any scholar studying the Thidrekssaga, and being the former head of the German chancery does not make you an expert on a medieval legend. Badenhausen is the equivalent of a 9-11 truther, not a scholar. EVERY book written on the Nibelungenlied is included in that bibliography (that's the definition of a bibliography).--Ermenrich (talk) 17:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked as an upcoming warlord, but I am not, never was, never will be, I can only reply without my user account. Ermenrich provided no evidence for his allegation that the DER BERNER is a self-publishing magazine. Rather, I received reliable information that all submitted manuscripts are subject to the editorship's evaluation for publication. Turning to the "Kommentierte Bibliografie (1945-2010)", Ermenrich's allegation is not relevant because the editorship underlines unmistakably rather the popular significance of Ritter-Schaumburg. His two best-selling books were published by Herbig, now Langen-Müller Verlag, which is accordingly known to be a non-academic publisher! It is obvious that Ritter-S. has been widely introduced by Badenhausen, albeit with some rather tentative criticism, as this can be seen in his publications. Neither his books nor his articles allow a fringe status in this matter. Furthermore, I vigorously reject Ermenrich's assumption that I could be identical with him. As already posted elsewhere here in the English wiki, I am a historian (with a past in the UK). Since 2018 my residence is in a city about 7 miles from Badenhausen's German home town. Tympanus

How can I make WikiPedia better? How can I add more successful and accomplished women?

What to be able to set aside time each day to edit and make Wikipedia better, what's the best way to do so? Also if I wanted to add more successful and accomplished women here, that have books, are speakers, etc. what's the best way to do so and what's the criteria for me to add a person page, I saw it before but I am unable to find the qualifications.

Also, is this where I am supposed to be posting this?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by LITBeL (talkcontribs) 22:26, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LITBeL, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for wanting to help. For the specific task of adding information about notable women not currently listed on Wikipedia, you might want to read Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. The prime criterion is that such people must be notable, in the special sense in which Wikipedia uses that work (see link above). Note that creating new articles from a blank start is about the hardest task an inexperienced editor is likely to face on Wikipedia. (Taking an article to Featured status is IMO harder, but is usually attempted only by experienced editors.) Some other ways to help may be found at the Community portal, and you might be well advised to try some before tackling creating new articles. (Oh and yes, this is a fine place to have asked this question.)
LITBeL, There's a lot of great advice below, including the link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. I just wanted to second the advice to visit there. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:44, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That said, here are some steps which, if followed carefully, often lead to success in article creation:

  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a WP:COI at this article: Hershey Felder. I've left a message on the Talk Page Talk:Hershey Felder and the editor's Talk Page User talk:OGT90201; however, I believe they are not a registered user so it may have gone unnoticed. I did an overhaul on this article some time ago due to the obvious WP:resume style by the original creating and continuously editing contributor. Of course it is never 100% that one can tell if the subject is contributing; but since the editor in question started the article and has only contributed to this single article (not to mention adding content that would imply a direct connection), it would seem the connection is clear. Any advice? Maineartists (talk) 01:01, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They only have no user page, a not logged-in IPv4 user would look like this: 84.46.52.59 (talk) A strictly single purpose account since 2008, but rarely logging in. –84.46.52.59 (talk) 02:57, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OGT has recently edited the article in question. I agree that minimally, should declare what is obviously a COI, and I suspect Paid. David notMD (talk) 08:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, David notMD. Agreed. Considering the article, I would imagine "OGT" to stand for "Our Great Tchaikovsky" with perhaps their zip code? Maineartists (talk) 12:34, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OGT commented on my Talk page, denying COI or Paid. I advise OGT to make that statement on own Talk page. David notMD (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Table alignment issues

I am working on my first Wikipedia page for a military person and political candidate. I am having trouble getting the military badges to look right.   The ribbons need to be smaller, however when I reduce their size I am left with gaps. When I try to make the left most cell right align and the right most cell left align the center cell is slightly out of alignment vertically.

I will paste my code to show you what I have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FinallyGoodIT (talkcontribs)

This is about someone who is notable as a political candidate, having been a corporal in the US Army. Is all the military stuff relevant? Maproom (talk) 10:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, FinallyGoodIT. If this is what you can achieve with your second ever edit here, you've done surprisingly well. Remarkable, even. I assume you must have edited here before that? It does make me need to ask you formally whether you might have some connection with this ex-military man, now standing for election as a candidate for the Idaho State House of Representatives? If you do, you would have a clear Conflict of Interest which you should declare for openness, and, if you were in some way working on their behalf, you are obliged by our policies to make a formal declaration before you continue editing, per this obligatory policy and instructions: WP:PAID.
That all being said, those graphics are wholly unsuitable for an article on this person, so please remove them before you consider posting the page to Articles for Creation. Just cite what medals they've won - we don't need pictures.
Oh, and talking of pictures, judging from the photos you've uploaded of him to Commons, from his early days in the army, to him receiving a military award, to him standing as a candidate in middle age, you do seem to have followed Ehrlinger around rather closely. This also makes me wonder whether you actually own the copyright of those photos (as the photographer), or whether you might have made an error whilst attempting to upload them, or simply took them off the internet somewhere and didn't appreciate you aren't allowed to claim other people's work as your own. You might wish to check and clarify this too, or they are in danger of someone deleting them on copyright grounds. And if you really did follow him around that closely, you most certainly do have a WP:COI which you should declare. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:53, 18 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Oh, and I'm afraid your username is also unacceptable and is in breach of our username policy see here as being promotional in nature, as you've clearly revealed by this edit. You are very likely to be blocked from editing with that account quite soon, and would have to start afresh, using a non-promotional name. Sorry to be the bearer of not good news, but the need to acknowledge or refute COI/PAID declarations will still apply. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:03, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A home run! Blocked for using a business name as your User name, suspected copyright infringement issues on the photos, undeclared COI or PAID, and lastly, proposing an article about a person who may not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (a candidate for state political office). Bonus for creating a table of every weapon he trained with, images of all of his medals, and chunks of text about his political intentions. No, no, no, no, no, no and no. David notMD (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A home run? No. Just another sad day on the Wiki. I don't think I'm going to survive this election season. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Makes me wonder if WP:NOTLAB + WP:FACTIONS already cover WP:NOADVENTURE, or which would be the better {{R to section}} target for a 2nd or 8th redirect, cf. WT:RFD today. –84.46.53.192 (talk) 07:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Making my first article

Hello everyone! I'm a new editor on Wikipedia and I was trying to make a new article but I was having trouble uploading an image, if any of you could help I'd really appreciate it! Thank You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbaramansing (talkcontribs) 16:12, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Work on getting the draft accepted first. Right now, declined for lack of valid references. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

False Report About Me

An article about critic John Simon misquoted me. I am a playwright named Jonathan Leaf. I noted this in the article. Then I later changed the article. Wikipedia sent me a not telling me to use Teahouse to alert editors about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan I Leaf (talkcontribs) 16:56, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonathan, yes the text you added here didn't belong in the article just because we don't include editorial notes. Your next edit is fine if the content is indeed not backed up by the cited source. If someone reverts you, you can discuss this on the article's talk page. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Þjarkur and Jonathan I Leaf: I haven't reverted it, but I've a question at Talk:John Simon (critic)#Quote from article by Jonathan Leaf. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

changing and disambiguating an article title

I am trying to create a new article, which I titled "Big Brown." An editor changed the title from "Big Brown" to "William Clifford Brown" but this artist went by the name "Big Brown," was referred to by his contemporaries and by reporters as "Big Brown," and recorded an album under the name "Big Brown." Also, another Wikipedia page (Danny Fitzgerald's) refers to him as "Big Brown." Although there is a Wikipedia entry for "Big Brown," a racehorse, this could be disambiguated by changing the title of the artist's page to "Big Brown (poet)" and that of the horse to "Big Brown (horse)." As far as I can tell, the Wikipedia convention is to title articles by the recording artist's recording name (e.g. Beyoncé, Awkwafina, Snoop Dogg, etc.). I can't figure out how to "undo" the article title change or maybe it's that I am not authorized to do that? And should the actual title be "Big Brown (poet)"? Or would it be "Big Brown" and then there would be a separate disambiguation page? Thanks! I also posted this query on the page's talk page so maybe this will just automatically get checked/fixed? I'm not altogether sure of the protocol here but many thanks for your help!.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisythedog (talkcontribs) 17:10, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it to Draft:Big Brown (poet), when it is accepted it will be at Big Brown (poet). In three days you will be able to move pages yourself (although you would have been able to make this move as it is in draftspace, it's under "More → Move"). Queries you post on an article's talk page will only be noticed by the editors who have that page watchlisted, some articles here have no watchers. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!Daisythedog (talk) 15:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I am Leo and Grace, I have some questions below.

Questions To Ask You

Somehow I have posted and published lots of drafts and draft talks, but I am not able to find them on the internet. Do you know what is the problem there and how to solve it? Can you also suggest me another system instead of wizard to publish topics and articles?


Second Question

I am very interested in this TeaHouse. Can you tell me how to join it?


ConClusion

That is all the questions that I have to ask you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leo and Grace (talkcontribs) 2020-01-18T17:15:40 (UTC)

Hello, Leo and Grace, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have posted a question here: that is all you need do to become part of the Teahouse.
Your Drafts and Talk pages are available on Wikipedia - you can either search for them inside Wikipedia, or more easily pick "My contributions" from the top of the page. They are not available on the internet because, since this is an encyclopaedia, only accepted encyclopaedia articles get indexed by Google and other search engines: all the rest of the pages (talk pages, drafts, discussion pages in the Wikipedia: space etc) are only relevant to creating the encyclopaedia and should not come up in internet searches.
I can see that you are excited to be contributing to Wikipedia; but I'm afraid you haven't quite grasped what it is we do, so your drafts will never be accepted as Wikipedia articles as they stand.
An encyclopaedia summarises information which has already been published, in reliable places: it is not for writing what you think or know about a subject, but about what you have found that published sources say about a subject. Perhaps you would like to try The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about editing here. --ColinFine (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why would an article be deleted

I've created a page Jay Silver(musician) and it's been deleted multiple time even when I cited it with all possible links. What could be the issue?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newton256 (talkcontribs) 18:24, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Newton256. Draft:Jay Silver (musician) still exists. You have not shown that this musician is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:00, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your attempt to add the article to the encyclopedia was deleted as promotional and as a copyright violation. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Youtube not accepted as a reference. David notMD (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
David notMD, at the risk of being anal, it is not generally accepted as a reference. There are some rare exceptions. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh sure this has really been helpful, hope other sites like Spotify are acceptable as in the discography add up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newton256 (talkcontribs) 15:11, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question of publishing

Hi, does anyone know how can I get my article approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily Wan Jo (talkcontribs) 20:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lily Wan Jo, You can wait. You've submitted it to AfC, so it's just a matter of time and someone will review it. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 20:43, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy: draft is Draft:Imam Shah. There are always 3,000 to 4,000 drafts at AfC. It's not a queue, reviewers select drafts they want to review. That said, most reviewed within two months, and almost all within four months. Asking here and asking at the Talk page of the draft will have no effect. While waiting, you could convert your url references into proper ref format. David notMD (talk) 20:52, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jonny Abet

Hi Kylie,

It would be Fantastic if you could, guessing your nifty skills, just create a quick and easy artist bio for my musical profile.

Kind Regards and sorry for my feeble attempts,

Jonny Abet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonny Abet (talkcontribs) 20:48, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jonny Abet, No. We do not have profiles, we have articles. We are not your soapbox or platform of advertising, we will not help you build a brand. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 20:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unless other people are publishing articles about you that could be used as references, you do not yet qualify for a Wikipedia article. It's all about independent notability. David notMD (talk) 21:01, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Errm, who the heck is Kylie? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nick Moyes, my guess is User:KylieTastic. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cullen328: ah, of course. We've just been watching Kylie Minogue on TV, so I had her stuck in my mind. On another matter, I've a bone to pick with you. Might pop over to your user page later on and have it out with you! TTFN Nick Moyes (talk) 21:38, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any time, Nick. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:44, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yup was me :/ KylieTastic (talk) 00:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how to meet the musical nobility criteria ?

how to meet the musical nobility criteria ? what do i have to do so my page is listed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Studio43records (talkcontribs) 22:13, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editor has been blocked for promotional edits. On the off chance that Studio43records returns, the rules can be found at Musical notability - most of them are reasonably clear, a page just needs to meet one of them (and be able to demonstrate it) to show notability. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:37, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can we cite a thesis, if yes then how to do it?

Can we cite a thesis for an Article as a reference, if yes then how to do it. Rocky 734 (talk) 00:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can, but they are often not the best sources. See WP:SCHOLARSHIP, doctoral theses are often reliable but others less so. You can cite them the same way you would cite any other source, you can also use the specific template {{cite thesis}}. – Thjarkur (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Thjarkur:. Rocky 734 (talk) 01:21, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page for myself

I'm a modeling and tattoo artist. I want to have a page on Wikipedia https://instagram.com/inkeboy/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeidshamloo inkeboy (talkcontribs) 00:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Saeid, if you ever become notable enough, someone else will write an article about you. You should try not to worry about it, as Wikipedia is not a place to promote oneself. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hindi reference in English Wikipedia?

Can we use a Hindi reference in English Wikipedia.Rocky 734 (talk) 00:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are allowed. If an equally good English language source exists, then it is preferable to use the English one. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:54, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Thjarkur:. Rocky 734 (talk) 01:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Rocky 734. If you use a reference to a reliable source in a foreign language such as Hindi, I suggest that you translate the most relevant sentence or two, and embed that quote in the reference. Also, be sure to include complete bibliographic information about your reference. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, Rocky 734, if using a reference in any language other than English, please supply a translated version of the title, as well as the original. If you use templated citations (as I prefer when I create articles) |trans-title= is the place to put a translated title. To supply a translated quotation such as Cullen328 suggests, that can be inserted using |quote=. Happy editing. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 03:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Search menu

Over the last day or two, I have found when I click in the search box, a little menu drops down with the two items strikethrough and man-spreader. I have not previously searched for these items, and their appearance there is a mystery. Not causing any inconvenience, but it is a little disturbing. Koro Neil (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Koro Neil, I, actually, have the same question. In the drop down for me, `wife` shows up, when I have never searched that page.. I guess they might be automatic suggestions, but i'm leaning toward "a bug". MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 01:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Koro Neil: and MoonyTheDwarf: Thanks for coming to the Teahouse! I would wager it's a technical problem, if it is, you could consider asking the people here, at the technical noticeboard. Thanks again! Puddleglum 2.0 05:49, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Most likely it's your browser's autocomplete, not Wikipedia. If you have ever searched "strikethrough" on another website it is stored as a possible autocomplete value for search boxes. Google Chrome has recently stopped obeying the autocomplete="off" attribute on text inputs. – Thjarkur (talk) 01:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Razavieh Spinning Co.

Not sure if notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.37.249 (talk) 02:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to say that a search on "Razavieh Spinning Co." got to a yarn supplier in Iran. If that is what the question is - No. David notMD (talk) 02:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Translating Articles in any foreign language

Where to ask help for translating Articles in any foreign language. I want Raghunath Murmu article to be translated in as many foreign language. Rocky 734 (talk) 03:14, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a good place to start, Rocky 734--Quisqualis (talk) 04:35, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Each Wikimedia project incl. Wikipedias has its own rules, and many are proud to be not enwiki for various not always obvious reasons. Let them just decide that as they see fit, unless it is a specific project you care about, then you can ask on their idea of a pump, help desk, teahouse or whatever.
To test the procedure here find a missing enwiki article available in another Wikipedia and ask here how that is done, there are different ways to get the credits for the original article as they should be. I'm aware of an info template on the talk page, but forgot its name, and tested a transwiki request for an enwiki template on dewiki, because I needed the "admin can overrule salted + deleted target" effect.
If you are generally interested in i18n ask on metawiki:Project:Babel, they'll have better general tips for you. –84.46.53.192 (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed Draft:Martin Fayomi and declined it, and asked the author to indicate specifically which of the musical notability criteria the subject satisfies, or to indicate that the subject satisfies general notability. User:Goldie19 has replied and has asked me to re-review the draft, and has provided a dump of links on the talk page of the draft. Providing a dump of links is not as helpful as including the references in the draft, but this is a new editor. Goldie19 is asking that the draft be reviewed as to whether the subject satisfies general notability. I said that I would ask for the advice of other editors here. I suggest that Goldie19 specify three sources that establish general notability. What do other editors think of this draft? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like an interesting career, but the article's refs and what I could find online are either promotional or passing mentions. The fact is that if he and his company turned out to be a hoax, I would not be amazed. He is based in the US, yet not written about here, and barely in Nigeria. Not notable at this point.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Auto Increment in Infobox Template

Hello fellow Wikipedians! My question is with respect to Template:Infobox_India_university_ranking. I want to add new parameters to the template. But it assigns values as label19,data19 etc to parameters. So how to change all the values below, if I add a parameter in between. I tried using User:Frietjes/infoboxgap.js in console, but it didn't help. Can suggest a way to auto increment the parameters. I also read somewhere that this template structure seems to be outdated, so can someone provide an infobox template as an example to which this template can be ported. Thanks for help.Sanyam.wikime (talk) 07:48, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a frequently asked question, cf. archive 915 + 1039, if the manual is still unclear please ask on the template talk page, and if you are up to no good (spam for the 1001st irrelevant university) don't.84.46.53.192 (talk) 08:09, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
can you please clarify the meaning of "and if you are up to no good (spam for the 1001st irrelevant university) don't" --Sanyam.wikime (talk) 08:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It means that there were attempts to add spam to the template and that the template with lots of entries is ugly like hell. IIRC you asked a similar question here, check out the two archives wikilinked above to find the old answers. HTH+HAND, 84.46.53.192 (talk) 10:18, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

QUESTIONS/ REPLY TO MoonyTheDwarf & David notMD

Hi guys, thank you so much for replying. I'm not sure if I am messaging you at the right place or if you would read this, or how to reply you directly. As you can tell, I am new to Wikipedia, spent days watching tutorials and guidelines, which I still have lots more to learn. My question to David, you mentioned, "While waiting, you could convert your url references into proper ref format", how do I do that? Am I doing it wrong? Regarding the source, I spent a week searching for the all sources on the internet and I'm confident my sources are reliable as most references link to our local newspaper here in Singapore. However, there are some links provided from TV Shows Infos like this: https://tv.toggle.sg/en/tv/shows/s/s-o-s/info , and one source from a blog where the actor answered questions from the event blogger(10) at the beginning of his career. In person, I have met the actor, and he mentioned on stage of the things I wrote, or on video, but I couldn't find other written article. So how do I tell the person that review my article that it's legit and not a made up? Would appreciate if you could take a look and see if the source is consider reliable. Oh and last question (I'm really sorry), I would like to write an article about a TV star/ singer in Singapore/ Malaysia, her name is Hannah Delisha. She has a wiki in Malay language, but it's not updated: ms:Hannah_Delisha Can I write an article for her here, and if so, do I need any approval first?

Thank you again, I'm so sorry for the trouble. A reply would be greatly appreciated. Love from Sg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily Wan Jo (talkcontribs) 08:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping to the mentioned David notMD MoonyTheDwarf . CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 08:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lily Wan Jo: when you ask a question like the above, it really helps the people here if you let us know what article or draft you're asking about. I think it must be Draft:Imam Shah. As for your second question: you don't need any prior approval to create a draft; but it won't be accepted as an article unless it establishes that its subject is notable. So I would advise you to assemble some good independent references about Hannah Delisha before you start writing anything. Maproom (talk) 09:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lily Wan Jo: On your Talk page I copied your first ref as you have it and then created same ref using the format for website content. David notMD (talk) 11:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

account issue

hwo can i delete my account or if this is not can delete then how to change username — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulekh Site (talkcontribs) 09:07, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sulekh Site: Accounts can't be deleted. For accounts with small number of edits, such as yours, just create a new account with the name you want and stop using this account. RudolfRed (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
However, do not create a new account before you successfully apply for an unblock on your current account. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:59, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to save an article draft?

I'd like to be able to edit over multiple days, but I don't see how I can keep a draft of an article around to publish later, and I don't want to keep a browser tab with unsaved stuff in it around. Is there any way to create and save a draft of an article to edit and publish later? Thanks! • in vivo veritas • 09:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can keep drafts either in your userspace (User:In vivo veritas/Example article) or draftspace (Draft:Example article). If you want to work on an already existing article, you can copy the article's source over to your userspace or draftspace. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Clicking on "Publish changes" at the bottom means Save. So yes, you can have content in your Sandbox or a Draft that is saved for later. These drafts can be seen (and edited, and deleted if warranted) by other editors, because they are in a semi-public space - seen, but not found if someone searched on the term. For example, a search on Anton Hur does not find Draft:Anton Hur. David notMD (talk) 11:12, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to pin a section at a talk page and prevent bot from archiving it

I would like to know how exactly can an editor create a pinned section in a talk page which is excluded from archiving by bots. Thanks -- Kmoksha (talk) 11:31, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I originally thought you meant your own user talk page, which you are free to configure as you wish, but I see that you do not have archiving set up on User talk:Kmoksha. I saw notifications in the history that refer to archiving of Teahouse questions. If that is what you are referring to, the short answer is "you can't" (as far as I know). Archiving for this page is configured to keep the page at a manageable size by archiving threads that have ceased to be active. Currently, that seems to be threads not posted to for 48 hours. Perhaps whoever last configured it will comment, but it currently has 46 sections and many, many full-size browser pages of text. I suggest, when receiving notification that your thread was archived, you copy the link from the archive message (e.g. [1]) to a list in your userspace somewhere like User:Kmoksha/Archived discussions. Maybe there's a helper script to do this somewhere (anybody?). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 13:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AlanM1 Thanks for your response. Please assume that the Wikipedia editor wants to do things in good faith. I do not intend to be disruptive, so obviously I would not do it in TeaHouse forum. I would like to use it for my own talk page and for Article Talk page with agreement of other editors. On own talk page, I could later use an archiving bot and use this feature to exclude some sections from being archived. Similarly, there can be sections which all editors would agree for being pinned and not being archived by bot.
I saw this template - Template:Pin section but the instructions in it are not clear. It says "Place {{subst:Pin section}} or {{subst:pinsec}} at the top of a talk page section." But the "top" means above the section title ? My question is regarding formatting. -- Kmoksha (talk) 14:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry you feel I got it wrong, but I wasn't implying anything about motive. I didn't have much to go on, and explained my mind-reading. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 14:21, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As to the question, it appears to mean after the section title (before the section title would put it in the previous section). E.g., User talk:Pine#Motivations for editing Wikipedia. I've clarified the doc. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:06, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is this what you're after? {{Do not archive until}} You can set any date on it. - X201 (talk) 17:29, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Missed the bit about Pin section being a wrapper of this. - X201 (talk) 17:32, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Usage example, a pinned RFC on the reliable sources noticeboard: A fake signature by a fake user with a future timestamp in an invisible comment <!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 18:13, 4 January 2030 (UTC) --> for the bot and a {{Pin message}} for the humanoids. –84.46.53.116 (talk) 00:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Creation

i want to create an article on an author — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faisalkhanblog (talkcontribs) 12:51, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Faisalkhanblog, and welcoem to the Teahouse. Is the author notable in the special sense in which Wikipedis uses that word? See notability policy, the General notability guideline, and our guideline for the notability of authors and other creative professionals. Wikipedia only has articles about notable topics. Also, creating an article from a blank start is about the hardest challenge a new editor faces on Wikipedia. It might be wise to make smaller edits to existing articles until you have a better feel for how things work. But if you want to go ahead, or when you feel ready, here are some steps which often lead to success in creating an article, if followed carefully. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:34, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.
Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:34, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm brand new t Wikipedia

Hello everyone.

I opened an account about two weeks ago with the sole purpose of creating a page, and apart from a few minor tweaks to other pages, was thinking that may be the entire of my Wikipedia experience. My page is awaiting review. But I popped in today to see if the review was moving along, not knowing if I would see any 'progress report'. It's still the same. So my eyes wandered over previous messages, and I saw, and clicked, on the Tea House link out of fascination really. I see Wiki is looking to build up the 'underrepresented groups' amongst editors. Women being one of them. That interested me. And well here I am. Are there any ongoing projects I can maybe get involved in and see if editing is something I'd like to get more involved in. As a hobby, I self-publish books on family research, and I love it! So you never know.... Cdefm (talk) 15:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC),[reply]

@Cdefm:: Hi, and welcome to the TeaHouse! If you are interested in creating articles and helping with underrepresented groups on Wikipedia, you could definitely consider joining WikiProject Women in Red, a project that aims to make articles for women. Your article is taking long to be noticed and reviewed because currently there are about 6,000 other drafts also waiting, and because every editor here is a volunteer, it's probably going to take up to 2-3 months. Hope this helped! Puddleglum 2.0 15:47, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles about women. Not for women. --bonadea contributions talk 15:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And my reply disappeared! So here goes again. Thanks for the help. I'll follow the link you shared for 'about women'. See what happens next. It's completely understandable why reviewing takes time. But the first one, well you know, it's your baby. I've refernced to Wikipedia a lot over the years. A hearty thanks to everyone who keeps Wikipedia going! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdefm (talkcontribs) 16:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC) Cdefm (talk) 16:02, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you meant N. H. Wilson, which is now accepted as an article. Congratulations. Given that you have a conflict of interest (ancestor), you should probably say as much on your User page, and also refrain from continuing to edit the article. David notMD (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is a great-grandparent connection really a COI? To me that seems more like any major interest, sort of like living in a certain city gives you an interest in that city, or being a fan of a sports team gives you a rooting interest in it. If it were a parent, sure. Grandparent, yeah, maybe. Great-grandparent...meh. --valereee (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, makes sense. Edit away. Keep in mind however that you do not 'own' the article. Other editors can add as long as refs are good. David notMD (talk) 01:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect image

File:Segar Bastard.jpg is a wrongly attributed image because the man in the photo is C. B. Fry. I removed the image from Segar Bastard. I don't believe the image is free use because you can see it in the Getty site and they are not public domain. Evidently one of our people uploaded from a rogue site without knowing its history. How do I go about having the image deleted or renamed? Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 17:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, No Great Shaker. I see that you have nominated the image for deletion on Commons; but your nomination was faulty, as you have not given any reason. (If the image was indeed published before 1925 it is public domain whatever Getty may say). --ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Colin. Yes, I'm struggling a bit with this. What's the best thing to do here? No Great Shaker (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it depends what you are trying to do here, No Great Shaker. If you genuinely think the image should be deleted, edit the page in Commons to include the reason. If you think it is mislabelled, you can ask for a c:commons:File renaming - it would be best if you cited some evidence that it was the wrong person. --ColinFine (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My account

Hello! I'm having problems logging in in my account. Some days ago I logged off for the first time in many months and when trying to log in again it said that my username or password was wrong. I literally don't remember ever changing my password and I went on to see the saved passwords I had in Google Chrome for my Wikipedia accounts. There were three of them and all of them were the same as I remembered my password to be. After trying a few times with the same log in info, I gave up and tried the "I've forgotten my password" link which asked for my username and an email address, which I did gave. It then said an email would come with a new temporary password but it never came. I've been trying for some days the same thing and it never does. I've checked my spam messages but there's nothing in there. I'm actually one of the most active contributors in SqWiki and an admin (some admins from there can come and confirm my identity here as I've been talking with them on emails ever since this happened, actually those were the ones that told me to ask for help here) and I really don't wanna lose my account. Is there something I can do? This is my user page sq:Përdoruesi:Sadsadas. PS: I don't know if this is the right place to put this request as I haven't interacted with stewards before so if it is not, I'm sorry. Thank You - 185.212.191.85 (talk) 18:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have any edits been made from your account since you logged out(which might indicate it was hacked)? 331dot (talk) 21:12, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: No sir, the last edit is done on 15 January 2020 the day i accidentaly logged out. My edits. Thank You - 185.212.191.85 (talk) 10:28, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe others have better ideas than I, so don't consider me the final word on the subject, but the only thing I can think of is that your email address was not typed in correctly(either when you requested the email or initially when you added it to your account)- even being off by one character would mean the email address is different. If you are unable to recover your password you will need to create a new account, unfortunately. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I'm an admin and interface admin at SqWiki. One of the two admins Sadsadas was talking with on emails (he mentions me above). We're already discussing this issue on Meta on this link with some stewards. The problem is that he erroneously has removed his email from his preferences and he can't get the message with the temporary password now. If you're interested, for more information you can click on the above link. I think the discussion on Meta is the right place to have this kind of conversation and maybe you can go and close this discussion here, if you want. - Klein Muçi (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

name in wikipedia

Is it ever appropriate to create a wikipedia page about yourself? If so, what criteria are appropriate to justify a page about yourself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Volcanoman7 (talkcontribs) 19:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Volcanoman7, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. A good question actually. We strongly discourage creating autobiographies, (see a full reasoning at WP:AUTOBIO). My personal advice: never make an autobiography. If you are a notable person, someone else will write an article about you in time. If you're not notable, but create an article, it will get deleted and you'll feel sad. Also, Wiki-reviewers are pretty good at spotting autobiographies and generally treat them with the utmost scrutiny. The only time I would suggest making an article about yourself is if you are certainly notable, have solid experience writing articles, know how to disclose a conflict of interest, and are willing to take copious criticism. Otherwise, it is a fools errand. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 19:40, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Volcanoman7 I would expand on the good comment above by saying that Wikipedia has articles not mere "pages". This is a subtle but important distinction. A person merits an article on Wikipedia if they meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. There are also more specific criteria for certain career fields, like politicians, athletes, musicians, and so forth. The person must have significant coverage in independent reliable sources, sources unaffiliated with the subject.
You do have a user page(in your case, User:Volcanoman7) that you can use to introduce yourself to the Wikipedia community in the context of your activities as a Wikipedia reader or editor. It is not a place for you to tell the world about yourself and your whole life, though. Please see WP:USERPAGE for information on what acceptable user page content is.
Also please understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. Anything about you, good or bad, can appear in an article about you as long as the information is found in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. You cannot lock an article about you to the text that you might prefer, or prevent others from editing it. Just some things to keep in mind. 331dot (talk) 21:22, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Volcanoman7. Let's assume for the sake of discussion that a highly experienced Wikipedia editor later competed in the Olympics or the highest level of professional sports, or was elected to Congress or a parliament, or won a Nobel Prize, or a Pulitzer Prize or an Academy Award. Or something comparable. Let's also assume that person had no Wikipedia biography. Then that person could begin the draft of an autobiography and submit it to the Articles for Creation process, for review by experienced uninvolved editors. I am sure that review would be prompt and positive. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lonely Merge Discussion

Hi there, just after some guidance. I proposed a merge of Criticism of Second Life into the main Second Life article. Back in the heyday of Second Life, and when Wikipedia was younger too, several pages were created for this one topic. These days they are all looking a bit neglected, and I began tentatively updating them but came across the Criticism page, which has multiple issues, and really should be condensed down to a criticism section of the main article.

My problem - over a week later, no one has commented on the merge (although I only belatedly pinged some previous editors - nevertheless the article has very few if any other active editors so pinging them may not do much good). My question for the teahouse is: if I get no responses at all, would it be bad form just to go ahead and merge? At what point can I just bold merge the article? If I am the only vote, can I close the discussion at any point to say "consensus" is to merge?

Note that I fully intend to wait a few more days because of my tardy pinging, but just want to get a view on that point in case no one answers.

Thanks. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just go ahead with it. See WP:MERGECLOSE and WP:SILENCE - X201 (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thanks :) I was reading that "no discussion" wrong. I thought it was just saying that discussion had stopped. Ok that makes sense then. Thanks again. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 23:06, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page Previews: Images

Hello, I've been going through lists and noticed that not all generated Page Previews (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Previews) show images of the article, even if they are at the top of the article or included in the navbox. My question in how to force page preview to fetch the navbox image of the article as I would like this feature to work on the articles I create/edit? Zeeshka (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zeeshka: Welcome to the Teahouse. I seem to remember this issue arising before, though right now I don't have an answer for you - though someone else might. But please would you be so kind as to supply some links to the articles that do not show a Page Preview? That would be very helpful to others who might be able to answer you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: Thanks for a quick reply. Here's a link to the lis tpage I was looking Works based on Faust#Film and television

The particular page I am concern about is The Last Faust and is at the bottom of the list. Zeeshka (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zeeshka: I see the infobox image in Page Previews for The Last Faust. But in general you cannot force an image to be chosen if it isn't chosen automatically. See mw:Extension:PageImages#Image choice. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Zeeshka: Further to what Prime Hunter says, I am currently also seeing an image when I mouseover the article, either in the full link you provided, or in the short wikilink to The Last Faust. BUT, I am NOT using Page Preview; instead I find Navigation Popups much more useful to the kind of work I do. This can be enabled in Preferences>Gadgets. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Information for a Wikipedia Entry - List of Mauthausen-Gusen inmates - Giordanno Vatta dob 21 May 1921.

My father is not in the list. He spent six months in Mauthausen and was lucky to survive. 1,75 metres tall, he weighed 43 kilos when the camp was liberated in May 1945. He was in submarines in the Italian Navy and after the 1943 armistice he was recruited with others by OSS G1 (US Intelligence - became the CIA in 1956) to be sent behind German lines to spy. They were trained in Africa as parachutists and dropped behind German lines. My father was captured and sent to Mauthausen, entering in December 1944. We have his entry record from Mauthausen, but I do not know how to insert or append it.

I found his name on https://alchetron.com/List-of-Mauthausen-Gusen-inmates which refers to Wikipedia but did not find my father's name. I should try edit but may make a mess.

This all came to mind when I realised my father would have been 99 years old this year. Thank you,

Luigi Vatta — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.231.111 (talk) 01:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP 79.52.231.111. You might want to try discussing this at Talk:List of Mauthausen-Gusen inmates and see what others may think. Generally, it's quite possible there have been some specific selection criteria established over the years to determine whether someone should be added to the list. From List of Mauthausen-Gusen inmates, it look like all of the entries except one are of people who have stand-alone Wikipedia articles written about them; in other words, they are people deemed to be Wikipedia notable. If that's the case for your father as well, then perhaps adding his name to the list wouldn't be challenged by other editors; if not, then maybe it might be harder convincing others to add him since lists like this are not necessarily intended to mention every possible person who might be a member of a particular group. Please try and understand that I mean no disrespect to either you or your father here; I'm just trying to sort of explain how deciding who to add and who not to add to a Wikipedia article like this is often determined. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add an item to a tabled list?

Hi,

I'd like to add a museum to the page: List of Museums in Orange County, California. I don't know how to 'add a row' to the table, or to do whatever needs to be done to add an entry.

ThanksAvra111 (talk) 02:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Avra111. The first thing you might want to do is take a look at "Selection criteria" since this deals with the adding of individual entries to list articles or lists embedded into other articles. Looking at List of museums in Orange County, California and its corresponding talk page, there doesn't appear to be any clear-cut inclusion criteria established. Generally, the most basic common selection criteria for lists such as this is that all of the entries be Wikipedia notable in their own right (i.e. they have Wikipedia articles already written about them) or they are things in which a viable Wikipedia article is deemed possible (i.e. there's enough significant coverage that can be found about the subject to support someone writing a Wikipedia article about it someday); this, however, can be a bit too restrictive for subjects where the scope is fairly limited and there's really not a huge number of members of the group as a whole to begin with. Even in that case, however, some kind of WP:SECONDARY source should be cited which supports the mentioning of a particular entry in a list.
One thing to be careful of with list articles like this is that they are not intended to be an online directory that list all possible members of a particular group; I'm not sure how many museums there are in Orange Country, but this list article is not necessarily intended to list them all just because they do exist or did exist at one time. Since you haven't mentioned any specifics about the museum you would like to add, it's hard to really assess such a thing. Another thing about these lists is that over the years entries are often added which probably shouldn't have really been added to begin with. Since anyone can pretty much add content to a Wikipedia article at anytime, there's no real review process other than perhaps that made by editors who might be watching or trying to improve the article. So, just because there's lots of entries in a list article that doesn't mean there should be lots of entries or that more should be added. Technically, what you want to do is fairly simple, but whether it's something that should be done is another question altogether.
Anyway, it appears from this edit that you figured out how to add the entry; if, however, you want to figure out whether that museum (or any others in the article for that matter) should be mentioned, you might want to ask for opinions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Museums or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California. You might also want to look for a secondary reliable source (not any of the museum's official websites) which can be cited in support of adding the entry to the list because content which is not supported by a citation (even if the content is just one entry in list like this) can be removed at anytime per WP:UNSOURCED. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Avra111: I suggest that you read this help section; then if you don't understand it, come back here and tell us what it is that you don't understand. — Tonymec (talk) 04:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I found it by clicking "Help" in the sidebar then following what seemed to be "interesting" links. — Tonymec (talk) 04:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Creation

Can anyone create a wikipedia article for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.91.254.0 (talk) 03:09, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! What article are you looking to create? Have you tried making a draft article and submitting it to Wiki Project Articles For Creation? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 03:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. Usually when somebody asks for somebody to create an article "for me", they want an article about themselves, or something they are closely associated with (a company, or a band for example). If this is the case, I urge you to look carefully at whether the subject is notable in Wikipedia's special sense - roughly, that several people unconnected with the subject have chosen to write about it at some length and been published by a publisher with a reputation for editorial control. If your subject does not meet those criteria, then no article on it will be accepted, whoever writes it, and any effort that you or anybody else puts into it will be wasted.
If your subject does meet those criteria, then an article about it will be possible. Even then, though, I'm afraid that there is no reliable or easy way to get the article written. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and people work on what they want to work on. If you want somebody to write an article about your subject, you will need to find a way to make somebody want to invest that time. You can post a request at requested articles, but in all honesty, there is not a great take-up there. If there is a relevant WikiProject, you might ask there. Or, as Thegooduser suggests, you could try creating it yourself. But to be honest, creating an article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, and it is even harder if you have a conflict of interest, as I'm guessing you have - apologies if my assumption is wrong. Also note that if an article does get written about your subject, it will not be your article, and will not necessarily say what you want it to say.
All this adds up to - it is very hard for a new user to get an article written about a subject that they want covered. Most times when a new user wants an article on a particular subject, their purpose is to tell the world about it: this is called promotion in Wikipedia and is strictly forbidden.
All the blue words in my answer are links to pages where you can find more information. --ColinFine (talk) 10:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading Images for further Details and Info

Hi! I'm new to Wiki so I don't know how to add informations or upload images , I've noticed that on some articles which require further I can contribute by adding some verified images from books related to the topic.

For context it's about the wiki page of Afridis

Zaros Holstein (talk) 05:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Zaros Holstein[reply]

Hi Zaros Holstein. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files. Uploading an image file is technically fairly easy to do, but whether a file should be uploaded and how it can be used if it is often highly depends upon its copyright status. I'm not sure what you mean by "verified images", but Wikipedia generally only allows images which are 100% free as in "free from copyright protection" or "freely released by their copyright holders" to be uploaded and used. There are sometimes exceptions made for copyrighted content where copyright holder permission is not required, but these tend to be only for exceptional cases and there are lots of restrictions placed upon their use. Without knowing more about the specific images you want to upload and how you want to use them, it's kind of hard to give you anything but a general answer like you might find in Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts and c:Commons:Licensing. If you have a specific question about a specific image, you might want to try asking for help at Wikimedia:Media copyright questions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Page Creation

Hi, This is Dheeraj Kolla(artist) and I'm creating a wiki page but it's going to U5 deletion. So is there anyone to help me to create my wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dheeraj Kolla (talkcontribs) 06:12, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dheeraj Kolla. What do you mean by "wiki page"? Do you want to create a Wikipedia user page or a Wikipedia article?
If you're trying to create a Wikipedia article about yourself, please take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Generally, only subjects considered to be Wikipedia notable are deemed OK to create articles about; so, establishing that you're Wikipedia notable enough for an article to be written about you is the first major hurdle your going to have get over because it's going make no difference who tries to create the article or how well it's written/formatted if you are unable to meet relevant Wikipedia notability guidelines. If you are, however, considered Wikipedia notable, then probably you yourself is not the best person to try and create the article. You're not expressly prohibited from doing so, but people who try and create articles about themselves often find it difficult to do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines as explained in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Why is conflict of interest a problem? and therefore are highly discouraged from trying to do so. In such a case, you might try asking for help at Wikipedia:Requested articles or try creating a draft first and then submitting it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review, but ideally someone other than yourself should assess/review what you're trying to create to (1) see if it's something that meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines and (2) ensure it's written as much as possible with relevant Wikipedia policy and guidelines for style, sourcing, tone, etc.
Now if you're simply trying to create a user page about yourself, then you don't really need to be Wikipedia notable do that. A user page is not, however, intended to be a quasi-Wikipedia article about you or used like a personal website/social media account as explained in Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site. Editors may post some personal information on their user pages, but only stuff that falls under Wikipedia:User pages#What may I have in my user pages?; anything else like the stuff mentioned here is generally going to be considered inappropriate and subject to deletion/removal. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Three times you have created an 'article' about yourself at your User page, and three times Speedy deleted. Wrong place, and perhaps wrong idea. If you truly believe your career as an artist meets Wikipedia's definition of notable, then create a draft and submit to Articles for creation (see above on how to). Attempts at autobiography are strongly discouraged, but not absolutely forbidden. David notMD (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zooming images on mouseover

On the French Wikipedia, when I hover the mouse over an image (except in an infobox) that image temporarily zooms in. I've tried to enable the same feature by going through my enwiki preferences, but I couldn't find it. Does it exist on this wiki, and if it does, where should I look? — Tonymec (talk) 06:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't believe you enabled the feature, it may be automatic with a fr.wiki account. I visited and it did not happen for me. Never heard of it at en.wiki.--Quisqualis (talk) 08:16, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tonymec and Quisqualis: I've also just nipped over to fr.wiki and had a play around. There is an option in Preference>Gadgets (link) called "ZoomOnThumb" which works quite well, but is not offered to us on en-wiki. However, if you are desperate, read the French documentation for this gadget (here) and you will see there are instructions for installing it on other wikis. I've just tried - and failed- to load it on my account (either in vector.js or common.js), but I'm rubbish at understanding scripts, so may well have done something wrong. Let us know if you get it working! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Quisqualis: Maybe I enabled it, maybe it's an fr.wiki default, but in any case I've had it over there for a long time and forgot how to do it.
@Nick Moyes: Thanks for this very enlightening answer. So to summarize: the corresponding gadget is not preinstalled at en.wiki, but fr.wiki has a tutorial at fr:Projet:Scripts et gadgets/Notices/ZoomOnThumb about installing it on one's own account on other wikis, however you tried and failed. At least I'm not left totally in the dark (especially considering that French is my mother language). Now I'm going to do some shopping, but when I come back I'll try to enable it on one or more of my en.wiki account, my nl.wiki account and my global account — unless I have something more pressing to do. Thanks again! :-) — Tonymec (talk) 11:09, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tonymec: Only one correction to what you said: You don't need to follow instructions to install or remove it on fr.wiki - only on other wikis (it's a simple tick bock in Preferences which isn't ticked by default on French Wikipedia.) One of these days the software developers will realise how sensible it would be to premark every Preference setting to show which is and which is not activated by default. The 'Restore all Settings' button is too blunt an instrument to be of much use.  Nick Moyes (talk) 11:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Whether a gadget (not other preferences) is enabled by default can be seen on Definitions or Descriptions at the top right of Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: Yes, yes, the tutorial (or HowTo or whatever) is at fr.wiki, and to install that gadget here I follow what is said at "#Installation sur un autre wiki" of the above-mentioned fr.wiki notices page. But I guess vector.js is for the Vector skin and might not apply to my favourite CologneBlue skin (call me old-fashioned ;-) ) so I might try cologneblue.js or common.js or default.js or something.
@PrimeHunter: ah, thanks for the info. — Tonymec (talk) 13:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: that's news to me too, though my call would be for a clear and simple indication of all the defaults on the Preferences interface itself. Thanks for that. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:14, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: It worked at first try (I tested it by newly loading my user page — which has a photograph of me — from its user talk page). You can see the code (including the comments I added) at User:Tonymec/common.jsTonymec (talk) 15:45, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Hi, I made some changes to a page but when I've checked this morning the changes aren't there ? what did I do wrong? Also, how do I reference something (i.e. the changes I made referred to a physical document, how do I link the changes and the document?). Also, can I remove old inaccurate information? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nellie3008 (talkcontribs) 08:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nellie3008 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. According to the edit history, the edits you made were removed as a copyright violation. For legal reasons, you cannot simply copy and post content from other websites to here. Content must be written in your own words, with the source cited. Please read WP:COPYVIO(about copyright violations) and WP:CITE(how to cite content.
Your edits did not make it clear that you were removing 'old inaccurate information'; with this edit it seems that you removed cited content that was critical of the prison or those operating it. When you make an edit, you should provide either an edit summary(the small box below the edit window when you edit) or comment on the article talk page as to the reason for your edit. Please note that Wikipedia summarizes what appears in independent reliable sources. This means that information should not be removed just because it is 'old'. If the information has changed since then, the article can be edited to reflect that the information changed in such a way that it does not remove the old information.
If you are associated with the prison in some way(such as being a staff member or corrections official), you should review conflict of interest and possibly paid editing. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

remove orphan page, is my approach correct ?

C._S._Gangadharan is tagged as orphan page. find link tool found relevant results 1977_Kerala_Legislative_Assembly_election and 1970_Kerala_Legislative_Assembly_election. should i just update code [[C._S._Gangadharan]] on above two pages.

what should i do more ? Leela52452 (talk) 09:06, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Leela52452, and welcome to the Teahouse. Indeed, you can edit those pages to include the wikilink in that way, if it is the same person: if you use the page title with spaces [[C. S. Gangadharan]] it will look better. Once you've done so, you can also go to the original page and edit it to remove the {{orphan}} tag from the top. Make sure you give an edit summary explaining why you are removing something from it. Thank you for helping to improve Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 10:08, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox page link

Hello, I’m trying to add a wiki link to my page in which i store a list of all the userboxes I’ve made into a userbox, but it comes up as a red link even though the destination is correct. Can anyone help? Littelcat456 (talk) 10:55, 20 January 2020 (UTC) Nvm fixed the link Littelcat456 (talk) 10:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I feel I am notable enough to have an article created about me on Wikipedia. Can someone here please do that for me!

I am a Nigerian technology entrepreneur and author. I have made appearances in many reputable African media platforms, some of which I'll be sharing the links below. I'll deeply appreciate it if someone here creates an article about me on Wikipedia. My name is Maximum Fredrick.


Below is the link to the news some media platforms made about me.

https://www.sunnewsonline.com/a-call-on-young-adult-africans/

https://thesourceng.com/a-call-on-young-adult-africans/amp/

https://www.modernghana.com/news/977788/a-call-on-young-adult-africans.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredrick Maximum (talkcontribs) 11:22, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Fredrick Maximum: I'm afraid your feeling is not enough. Let others decide if you are. Meanwhile please see the policy at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, esp. parts at WP:NOTSOCIALMEDIA and WP:NOTPROMOTION. --CiaPan (talk) 11:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PROUD is also worth a read. - X201 (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Fredrick Maximum: all three of those links are to the same article, which is based on an interview with you. Please read notability: notability in Wikipedia's special sense depends on what other people, unconnected with you, have chosen to publish about you. However wonderful the things you have done, an interview with you does not contribute in any way to your notability in Wikipedia's sense: it would need several articles about you written independently of you. --ColinFine (talk) 12:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing and expanding an existing article

I want to expand the existing article on Light Rail in Bristol, giving more of the historic context. My problem is that I am the source of the material because I was the project manager for the scheme in the 1990s.I have donated the supporting documents to the Bristol City Archive. Am I in danger of falling foul on the rules on self promotion, and the lack of published references (the documents were in the public domain at the time of scheme development, and I have a full list of them)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KSWC8230 (talkcontribs) 12:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What tense should be used in a timeline?

I was editing the Wikipedia page for Citizenship Amendment Act protests (mostly grammar in the timeline) but yesterday I got a message on my talk page from DBigXray telling me to use the tense that was initially used (it was past tense and I changed it to present tense) and directed me to WP:TENSE. But there is no statement saying that the past tense should be used for timelines also, while many results including the first one on the Google search for "what tense to use in a timeline" say present tense. So, does WP:TENSE mandate past tense for timelines though it isn't mentioned? RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 12:44, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RedBulbBlueBlood9911. I’m not sure if there’s one correct tense that applies to all cases, but maybe this would something better discussed at Talk:Citizenship Amendment Act protests. I do think that the historical present is often used in English when discussing past events, particularly when writing about things in an historical context; so, maybe that’s something which might work in this case. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(responding to ping) RedBulbBlueBlood9911, MOS:TENSE and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Statements_likely_to_become_outdated cover it. The article is about a protest and the events are quickly getting outdated. The entire article is in past tense and writing some section/s in present looks out of place. Changing it to present tense and then after some time again changing all the present tense verbs to past seems like a unnecessary effort to me. (please ping me when you respond to me)--DBigXray 13:03, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same author, subject, language-Wikipedia article & informal website article for town Historical Commission

I am a member of the West Newbury Historical Commission and in that role having been writing unattributed monthly 1-page stories about the town's history. I have also written (so far one) Wikipedia article Julian Steele on the same topic that later was posted as a town Historical Committee story.

I am concerned that I may be accused of plagiarizing myself because two extremely similar articles are floating around on the internet. (Note that I have not & would never cite myself in a Wikipedia article--it's the other way around with WP cited as hyperlink in the town article.)

I tried to explain this on the Julian Steele talk page. I suppose if desired the Historical Commission could formally vote some sort of waiver or release.

An additional question is whether timing matters. Unlike the Julian Steele situation (where the Wikipedia article preceded the town article), there may be characters in prior town stories who would be appropriate subjects for a new Wikipedia article. If timing matters, how should such a situation be dealt with?

Any advice would be appreciated--

Thank you West Newbury (talk) 13:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citing a Bachelor's/Master's thesis (and similar works)

Am I allowed to (with definite permission from the author) cite information from Bachelor or Master Theses (Bachelorarbeit, Masterarbeit) if they can be accessed/read by everyone at a specific institute in a university? Cheers! --Hardtofindausername (talk) 13:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:SCHOLARSHIP and this discussion, bachelor and master theses aren't considered reliable sources, but doctoral dissertations are more often reliable. It's usually much better to check out the sources the thesis cites and to use those sources. To the other part of your question, it is fine to cite reliable sources that someone could theoretically find at some library to verify, even if the source is not easy to find. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Hardtofindausername, permission from the author is not required to cite a published source. Even if a short quote from the source is used, no permission is required. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

is Silas Ferrell House article has incorrect category, please verify

i have noticed category "Category:Articles using NRISref without a reference number" on Silas Ferrell House. however it contains NRHP reference # 87002146. i am noob. please verify. excuse if this is incorrect. Leela52452 (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The template {{NRISref}} was called without using the refnum parameter in the template. Now fixed by this change. Thanks for pointing it out. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]