Wikipedia:Teahouse

jmcgnh, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

New to Wiki - How do I know if I've edited correctly?

I understand that this is a volunteer-based, collaborative website, and as an editor for many ESL students at my university I understand the need for proper grammar. However, how do I know if the small contributions I've made are acceptable? I'd hate to undo someone's hard work because I believe I know best on a certain grammatical matter. Any thoughts? Thanks! :) - NewbieNatalie Natalie2492 (talk) 02:55, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! I've reviewed your contributions, and you seem to be doing a great job! Phrasing improvements are always helpful. Let us know if you have any other questions. Happy editing! Go Phightins! 03:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Picture Copying

Am I allowed to copy a picture from the internet that is not found on the Wikimedia Commons page? Could I just copy its URL to the article I would like it to be on? Morgana987 (talk) 00:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Morgana987, and welcome! No, unfortunately you can't do that (and it won't work anyway). As a Junior Wrangler here at the Teahouse, the approach I most often recommend is to find out who owns the original image, and then ask them to fill out the form at WP:CONSENT. If they are willing to do so, the image can then be uploaded at Commons. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Info box picture

Hello, What's the process for changing a photo in an info box? I remember that Wikipedia has some kind of photo bank. Sofiabrampton (talk) 22:05, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Most photos are on Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org). Only fair use photos are generally kept on the English Wikipedia, as they cannot be shared with all WMF projects. To mak ethe change just change the name of the image in the infobox. (image = foo.jpg). Why do you want to change the image? Rich Farmbrough, 22:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC).

Hello Sofiabrampton, welcome to the Teahouse. Be aware that changing the image in an infobox can sometimes be a controversial move. If your bold replacement is reverted, be sure and start a discussion on the talk page by placing your proposed image along with the older image to gain a consensus for whish picture to use. Happy editing.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of my edits

Hello, I have concerns about vandalism on article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lizura . My edits have been repeatedly deleted by deliberately misleading users. Since the article's creation, edits appear to have been made by a series of users who have specific knowledge of the subject, but contribute to no other articles. In removing my edits, one user claimed to be "investigating my IP address," and now an account named "Mediator4001" was created minutes before making a single revision, deleting my edits. Thank you for your help Scarpled (talk) 19:34, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Accounts like this (known as "single purpose accounts") are not unusual. It appears the two Teahouse regulars have resolved the current issues. If they recur consider asking for the article to be "semi-protected" this prevents brand new editors for editing it. Rich Farmbrough, 22:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC).

How do I post a picture?

I have been trying to make changes by adding pictures to articles that need them. When I try to add a picture, a message comes up and says that Wikipedia would not allow me to upload any photos because I was not permitted. How do I go about getting permission to add photos to articles? Thank you

Fossvane (talk) 18:50, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Fossvane, and welcome to the Teahouse! The reason that you are not permitted is because you are not yet an autoconfirmed user. The permission to upload files is granted after your account has at least 10 edits and is at least 4 days old. However, if you wish to upload an image, you may request confirmed status or use files for upload. If adding the image is the only reason you want to be confirmed, I recommend the latter. FrigidNinja 19:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, if you created the image and/or it is available under a free copyright license, you can upload it over at our sister project Commons and then use it here. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 20:32, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Question about translating

what should i do when I meet some Chinese proper noun (do I just transliterate it into English with Chinese pinyin?)Orangeeeeeee.L (talk) 18:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I would have thought that is perfectly acceptable, except where there is a standard Anglicization of the name. Rich Farmbrough, 22:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC).

BLP help

Hey there. So two members have argued that my additions to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey_Academy should be deleted. I worked to make it well sourced, nuetral, informative and contains information critical to the full picture of John Dewey Academy. While I have asked them to help in directing and helping me to make sure the article remains factual and truthful they have only refered me to the BLP page, the page concerning non-profits and offered no input themselves. I read the links they gave me which as I read them, my posts follow them to the T. But they still seem to disagree. What advice could you guys give me? Thanks a lot!!! Troutbum898 (talk) 18:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Troutbum98, and welcome! As a Junior Wrangler here at the Teahouse, I monitor this question page for issues that may be covered by Wikipedia's Biographies of Living Persons policy. As I have noted on my talk page, you added to the article the text "A former teacher and therapist raped a participant" sourced to a news item which actually says that the teacher "has not been charged with any criminal wrongdoing". I do not consider this to be "well sourced, nuetral, informative". Other Teahouse participants will be able to give you advice on the best way to deal with these difficulties. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, well if that is the only problem I think we have found a place we can agree on. Please look at my final edit and I think you will see I worded everything perfectly and cited it all accordingly. If you look at my final edit which was also deleted, all I said was that a pregancy occured between a therapist and a student. And the reader can then determine on his or her own what they consider 'sexual relationships' between a vulnerable teenager and a therapist in a power position and in control of every aspect of that students life is for themselves. I would consider that rape. Since no qualm was raised here about the founder and him being found guilty in the American court system twice of abuse towards minors and the delineation of what model of therapy they use at the school I will add it back tonight. I think we can all agree that simply stating what type of therapy the school uses as its backbone at a self-described theraputic school is appropiate to merely mention. And as far as that is concerned I cited two books that two different faculty members have published which go into great detail about the Attack and Confrontation therapy they use at JDA. Troutbum898 (talk) 20:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Here is a link to the final edit in case you had difficulty finding it. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Dewey_Academy&oldid=546059427 Thanks for all your help! Troutbum898 (talk) 20:31, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Troutbum, I really suggest that you discuss this further on the article's talk page, not here before making any more edits to the article. Wikipedia works on consensus and you don't currently have that with the editors who disagreed with your edits. While your last edit might be factually correct, you're not setting it in any context, for example, how did the school respond to Bratter's convictions? Was any action taken against the other member of the faculty? Quoting facts is one thing but context is the second and equally important, that's why policies like WP:UNDUE are being quoted at you. If there is a body of references about inappropriate behaviour between staff and students at the school that makes such behaviour what the school is notable for then yes it deserves to be mentioned but if it's not it really has to have the context specified in detail and not left to the reader to make their own interpretation. NtheP (talk) 21:10, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good, I was told to come here by another editor, but I will once again stop in a productive dialoge and start again back on another page ( I think the DMV has the Wiki world beat in efficiency, lol). I will answer you however to make the flipping back and forth to find answers easier. Three instances of sexual abuse have occured at a school with 10 kids on average that are stone cold proveable by citing online sources like we must(Sometimes they have as few as half a dozen students, I personally have never heard of the 25 kids they claim to have, but that is besides the point). Last night we had a dozen survivors of this place, who all have expierienced abuse their all rejoicing that we may finally be able to take baby steps towards exposing the truth of cult-like institutions like this. So yes, I would say three abuses at a incredibly small, unique in its use of "Attack Therapy" school is plenty to set a tone for the overall picture of that school. In fact, even a single count of abuse towards minors at a school like this should be talked about. They did nothing to Bratter after both guilty convictions even though he was ordered to never to be alone with a participant and continued teaching. He also privately owned the school at the time, so yes, he didn't fire himself if thats what your asking. He did fire the other therapist. What does that have to do with anything? Does that negate the crimes? Does that negate the abuse? Does that negate the shattered lives of the many he left trampled? If anything the fact that a man found guilty of abuse twice was allowed to continue teaching is frankly horrific. It seems the people who disagree all share an archaic understanding of rape culture, abuse culture, victim blaming culture and how to present the truth simply in a way that empowers the reader by giving them a more accurate picture of JDA. If anyone needs help with finding resources or counseling concerning rape, abuse or victim blaming please contact me and I would be gladly to help you find it. All across this country their is a network of people fighting against rape culture and victim blaming culture so it would be easy to find resources near you. This process has proven to be incredibly slow which I didnt expect but am glad that we seem to be inching towards an answer. Us victims of abuse are used to being brushed under the table and not listened to at all and at least it seems that forward movement is happening with those who are disagreeing with exposing JDA. Thanks again and hope we all can agree one day! Troutbum898 (talk) 21:47, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi again Troutbum, let me thank you for your offer to find counselling or resources for us! I am super excited to learn about this offer, and I am sure that it will empower many people. I will mention briefly that Wikipedia editors (and teahouse inhabitants, be they Guests or Hosts or even just junior wranglers like myself) come from all over the world, so you may need to broaden your thoughts from just "all across this country" to something a little wider. Good luck with your fight against blaming! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! The fight against victim-blaming is important, and you are right I didn't think about the worldwide reach. I can lead to sources who would love to do everything they can to help find people resources from local chapters to therapists. Many are willing to counsel for free across the world and help people come to terms with ideas like rape is rape, abuse is abuse and that we should stop brushing these under the rug. Though my personal spectrum of knowledge is greatly lowered in a world-wide spectrum, there are plenty of resources out there! Though Wiki has shot us down, and another institution will continue doing what they do with little accountability to the public for their crimes, we will tirelessly fight to stop this culture. The rape/abuse/victim-blaming culture is used to this and we will continue our fight of exposing evil. I appreciate your support and wish you the best! Troutbum898 (talk) 04:16, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikibreak enforcer script

I would like to use Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/WikiBreak Enforcer to enforce my wikibreak (if any). However, I have a few concerns. If I use this script/ask an admin to block me, will it be recorded in my block log? And, if I use the script, for "var time", should I put my local time (UTC+8) or UTC time? Cheers, Arctic Kangaroo 16:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. If you use the script it won't be recorded in your block log. But if you ask an admin to block you then surely it will be logged in your block log. In the documentation of the WikiBreak Enforcer it says that you have to use the local time. I'm not sure. I will try it right now. --Ushau97 ^talk 16:48, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I just tried it as you can see I used my system's time not the UTC time. Cheers! --Ushau97 ^talk 16:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, so must use the time zone that we set in our Preferences. Arctic Kangaroo 16:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

No or yes. I think you should use your computer's time since the script looks at your computer system's time not the one you set in your Wikipedia account's preferences. Of course, if you have set your preferences time to your local time then it would be a yes. Regards. Ushau97 ^talk 17:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

OK. Thanks a lot. Arctic Kangaroo 17:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Templates

I was looking for some page that shows the different templates around here i Wikipedia- for musical themes- (Artist, Song, Single, Album, etc). An easier way to access. Miss Bono (talk) 15:27, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Miss Bono, hi. I think you are looking for templates like {{Infobox musical artist}}, {{Infobox song}}, {{Infobox single}} and {{Infobox album}}. You can find all these and others in Category:Music infobox templates. NtheP (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

Could you be a little more specific in what you want? Just an example template of the kind of templates you want to search for. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was looking for all the templates related to Musical themes, because like i said before, I'm interested in adding information to articles related to U2, and there are a few ones that aren't created. So I just wanted a page where I can find them easily. Regards. 16:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Please log in to your account --Ushau97 ^talk 16:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. Miss Bono (talk) 16:39, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Your IP have been deleted from revision history to protect your privacy. Always remember to log in to your account. --Ushau97 ^talk 17:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Trouble with a sports template

Dear editors: I was trying to fix up a page User:Safandor/sandbox which had damaged infoboxes and templates. I managed to fix the infoboxes, but the template has me stymied. I have looked at the template description page, and aside from the fact that some of the names of players haven't been put in yet, I can't find out why it seems to break down in the middle of the list of outfielders. Can someone help? This is an article for creation, so I don't want to leave it half fixed. —Anne Delong (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Anne, have a look at the code for the line about Angeline Quiocho {{MLBplayer}}|8|[[Angeline Quiocho]]}} See the }} after MLBplayer - that's what causes the problem. They close the MLBplayer template making the }} at the end of the line the close for the MiLB roster template. Everything after that isn't recognised as part of the template. NtheP (talk) 16:10, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again. Funny how you can be looking right at something and not see it. —Anne Delong (talk) 16:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

How is the scope of a list defined?

Hi, I am working on a project creating articles for newspapers published in Australia. The list of newspapers List_of_newspapers_in_Australia uses divisions / definitions for 'community newspaper', 'regional newspaper' while missing things like newspapers published in Australia in languages other than English. Is there some further information available about lists like this for generic topics that will help me to understand what is in scope and what is out of scope for a list? Aliaretiree (talk) 11:35, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to Wikipedia an Teahouse! You can see Category:Lists of newspapers by country and see how other editors are working on similar articles, and we have this Manual of Style guidelines for lists Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists. I do not know more than this! --Tito Dutta (contact) 15:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I would think that the scope of the list is defined by its title. If the creator wanted only English newspapers, the title would be "List of English language newspapers in Australia". I would add the newspaper to the appropriate area of the list according to the current organization, and then note the language of publication afterward. Another idea would be to create a special section for these newspapers if there were several of them. —Anne Delong (talk) 16:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

House of Gold & Bones

Dear editors: I cam across this disambiguation page: House of Gold & Bones. All of the items are related to one person, Corey Taylor. It seems to me that these items should be part "See also" items on the Corey Taylor page, and the "House of Gold & Bones" article could redirect there. Is there a reason that I'm not seeing for keeping these items (and accompanying artistic jargon) on a separate page? —Anne Delong (talk) 02:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• I can not understand this question. That's a disambiguation page and looks fine (other than they should remove punctuations from the end of the descriptors)! --Tito Dutta (contact) 02:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

If you think it is fine I will leave it alone. My concern was that they are not really independent items, and one is an idea about which even its originator hasn't made up his mind about. —Anne Delong (talk) 02:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• (ignore if you already knew it) Reading from Help:Disambiguation Disambiguation pages on Wikipedia are used as a process of resolving conflicts in article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic, making that term likely to be the natural title for more than one article. In other words, disambiguations are paths leading to different articles which could, in principle, have the same title.

Now, "House of Gold & Bones" may refer to a) Part 1 b) part 2 and c) the comics. So, there should be a disambiguation page. See another disambiguation page Bengali. Though I feel, unlike Bengali, it is an unimportant disambiguation page! --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

(e/c) I thought it was far from fine. The problem as I saw it wasn't that all the items related to one person. Since the page had three entries with distinct articles, each with "House of Gold & Bones" in the title, there is a possible need for disambiguation. I say this qualifiedly because the album appears to be the primary topic and this might be fixable just with hatnotes). Anyway, that speaks to the the purpose of a dab page – to differentiate between various entries with articles that might be ambiguous with one another so that a person can find the entry they are looking for. What was distinctly a problem was the gushing content. The page read as just shy of blatant spam. A dab page should be a simple index with just the facts: "V term, may refer to X, Y and Z". I have removed all the fluff and the red link and left a spare entry.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. As usual, a good solution was found. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Videos

How do you upload videos on wikipedia articles? anybody tell me how? Thanks, I hope to recieve an answer soon.Disney fan 71 (talk) 02:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to Teahouse. Wikipedia allows to upload files of selected formats only. You can upload OGV format videos. But, you must own the copyright or the license should follow Wikipedia's standard licenses. What kind of video you want to upload? --Tito Dutta (contact) 02:45, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

One of David Scott's first steps on the Moon (Apollo 15) from apolloarchive.com. Disney fan 71 (talk) 20:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

reference problem

I am getting a ref error when I corrected an entry. I began with the "ref" added the website and then ended with "/ref" (using the appropriate <>).

But I got: Cite error: A set of ref tags are missing the closing ref

Any help would be appreciated

Mgsko (talk) 23:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mgsko. In addition to properly placing the ref tags in your citation, you added to the very top of the page two sets of empty ref tags ("<ref</ref><ref</ref>"). You can see what you did by viewing the diff of your edits: here. I'm guessing this was a result of the editing window feature that allows automatic insertion of characters – somewhere along the line while using the insert for <ref></ref> you invoked it twice while your cursor was lollygagging at the top of the screen. Anyway, all fixed. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:08, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Awesome and thanks. I feel like such a tard for editing this page, but hey, it was wrong! Thanks again!

Mgsko (talk) 00:47, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

How to tell an editor from a contributor in changes made

How can you learn what the reason for a revision was, and whether the revision was made by a contributor or an editor? Thanks.Robyn42 (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Robyn42. Every article (and almost all other pages including this one) has a page history. Using it, you can see, among other things, what each editor actually changed or added using "diffs" (derived from differences) and the edit summary they left when they made the edit, which is intended to be used by editors to summarize what they did on an edit and often why. Between these, you should be able to suss out the reason for any particular revision. Sometimes editors make it hard by not leaving any edit summary, not providing a transparent one, or by doing neither coupled with a change that is far from self-explanatory. Nevertheless, between looking at diffs and the edit summary, the reason is usually fairly clear. If still not though, you could always hit the editor up on their talk page for an explanation.

I confess I do not understand what you mean in your question when you appear to make a distinction between "contributors" and "editors"; there is no such distinction I am aware of. Though you didn't ask directly, given the context of your question I thought you might get some use out of the WikiBlame tool. It allows you to find which editor was responsible for the addition of a particular portion of text in an article with a large page history that would be difficult to find otherwise. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• I think the OP was referring to persons who added new content as contributors and persons who did less glamourous (typo fixing, for example) work as editors, but I may be mistaken. In that case, I believe Recent Changes shows the size of the edit in bytes. If it's a large number in green, then it's likely addition of content. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:31, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

We call everyone who contributes to Wikipedia pages an "editor" whether they write articles, fix typos, write policy, tinker with templates or do anything else! Rich Farmbrough, 22:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC).

Image licensing

Hi, all -

I'm working with a library to put an image of an object from their collection up on Wikipedia. They created the image and want to publish it under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license. I uploaded the image and added attribution info - but now, how do I show evidence of the licensing agreement, as requested by the uploader? Do I need to go to the Creative Commons site and get some sort of documentation? Czarinanc (talk) 19:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The author of the photograph must verify permissions via an OTRS ticket. It looks as if that has begun. Am I mistaken?--Amadscientist (talk) 19:49, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

The image page that was created when I uploaded it and selected our license indicates that an email w/details for file permissions has been sent to OTRS, but I am honestly not sure what that entails or what I need to be doing on my end. Czarinanc (talk) 20:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

You, or the library, need to send the email, details are on Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries, including a template for the text to send. Provided the OTRS team are happy, that's it, the file will be move to http://commons.wikmedia.org. Rich Farmbrough, 21:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

Perfect! Just what we were looking for. Thanks! Czarinanc (talk) 22:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

There is also a community page called Wikipedia:GLAM for Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums. They deal with this use case very often. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

How do I highlight the three items in the text that will take a reader to other relevant Wikipedia items.

In the Wikipedia items that I have looked at in the past, certain words that have relevance to the subject matter are highlighted in blue and the reader can click on them and taken to another Wikipedia entry that elaborates. In the entry that I'm working on there are three such items. How do I highlight them? Jckplanner (talk) 18:20, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

It is rather simple, just type [[articlename]], but please see the linking guidelines before doing so. Cheers. TBrandley 18:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Fixing up edit summaries

Dear editors: I've been trying to be good and fill in my edit summaries. Sometimes, though, I forget, or I type something quickly that has spelling errors in it. When I come across these errors later, is there any way to fix them up? —Anne Delong (talk) 18:00, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome! After you save the page, you cannot change the edit summary, so be careful with it, particularly if you are in a heated content dispute.

If you make an important omission or error in an edit summary, you can correct this by making a dummy edit (an edit with no changes), and adding further information in its own edit summary. --Ushau97 ^talk 18:09, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Good suggestion. Thanks for the information. Occasionally I have accidentally pressed the enter key when I wasn't finished typing. Also, I found a check-box in my preferences which won't allow saving with a blank edit summary. It is annoying, but effective. —Anne Delong (talk) 18:19, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

In your preferences you can select an option to get a warning when you try to save an edit with a blank summary, it's third from the bottom in the "Advanced options" section on this page. It helped me get into the habit. Roger (talk) 18:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Page Ilona Harima removed to main namespace. Help needed

Hello, I have just moved my user-sandbox article on Ilona Harima to main namespace. Please check, there's something wrong, also in the category-section. I cannot find the article still in the public Wiki either, what's wrong! Marjarau (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I've done a few fixes. It takes a while for the indexing system to add a new article, it will get there soon. Roger (talk) 18:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Roger, Many thanks for the fixing of this article and doing the final steps on its way to public wiki ! One matter still needs correcting: In the categories Ilona Harima is under her Christian name Ilona but shoud be under H, Harima, her familyname. Originally there was also a link to her Finnish wikipage, I wonder where it hides? Anyhow, I'm gratefull for your help Marjarau (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

The "sort order" is fixed by setting "DEFAULTSORT" to the required value - {{DEFAULTSORT:Harima, Ilona}}. I'll get back on the Finnish link. Rich Farmbrough, 21:09, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

OK the Finnish link is there in the normal place. I made a few other minor fixes to Ilona Harima. Rich Farmbrough, 21:17, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

Rich where is 'the normal place'? I don't see a link to Finnish wikipedia on the Ilona Harima article. This is something I've been trying to do as well, to link interlanguage articles but to get it to work so far, to get stuff like link to the Ilona Harima article in Finnish I have to resort to things like [[:fi:Ilona Harima|link to the Ilona Harima article in Finnish]]. What am I missing? Thanks. Penguin2006 (talk) 21:49, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

The normal place for interlanguage links is at the foot of the left-hand menus. Looking at Ilona Harima it has Languages: Suomi, and the latter is the Finnish link. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:25, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I need to change an image on a page.

Hi, My employer wants a new image on his page to replace an older photo. I am having difficulty finding the instructions to do this. I am going to keep looking, but would appreciate some tips. Thanks! DaveUplinkdave (talk) 16:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Dave! Welcome to the Teahouse. Just some things to consider before uploading your new image:

• First, and perhaps most importantly, the image must be properly licensed. That means that the image needs to be released under the cc-by-sa and GFDL licenses by the copyright holder (this is usually the photographer, not the subject, so be sure the correct person gives permission). If the image has been previously published (for example, on a website) then the prior publication would need to clearly note that it is under the correct licenses. If it has never been published before, then the photographer themselves would either need to upload it themselves, or email permission to Wikipedia. Instructions for doing so are at WP:IOWN. Please note that these licenses allow redistribution of the work, and are irrevocable, so make sure the copyright holder understands that before uploading.
• Second, upload the photograph. The best place to do this is at Wikimedia Commons, which will allow the photograph to be used on ALL wikimedia sites (not just English Wikipedia). Commons has a much easier-to-use upload system than Wikipedia does; it's actually quite easy to use it. You can find commons at commons.wikimedia.org and once you register an account there, you can upload the photograph. Once you have logged in to Commons, there's a link on the left that says "Upload file"; once you select that link there's a great utility that will walk you through uploading, describing, licensing, and categorizing the image.
• Third, once the image is uploaded, you add it to the articles you want to use it at by replacing the filename of the old image with one of the new image; that should be pretty straightforward to do; if you want to use it in other places you can do so by formatting it using the instructions at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial or Wikipedia:Extended image syntax.

Does that work? Is there any other question you have? --Jayron32 16:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

please help...also, can someone make it a bit easier to get started?

wow...finally found a spot to type something in. *sigh* i wanted to contribute to wiki since around 2003, but it was too intimidating for someone who doesn't have a ton of time to learn. thanks to the sandbox, it wasn't as much that i would mess up...it was that there was just too much to know in order to just get started and to do it properly. in the last year or two, there have been several solicitations for people to edit, so i was motivated to now give it a try.

please be kind--i'm a total novice here.

i ran into a problem when i wanted to do something as simple as leave a comment in the 'talk' section about what i had edited. i found all sorts of info and guidelines about what to say and how to say it, but i couldn't find any instructions on where to start--where to type in the text.

then, i came to the help section, and had the exact same problem...i clicked on the 'teahouse' link, and after going through several pages, i eventually found this one with a button that allowed me to enter text. whew!

maybe it's done for a reason, maybe i'm just slow and missed it, or maybe this is an oversight. well...here i am, and the main thing i need to know first is how to type text into the talk page.

another question i have... is there a tutorial specific to footnotes? obviously, footnotes are a core element for any post--no matter how short or long--but there isn't an overt footnote information guide as part of a beginner's introduction to editing. plenty of instructions about the importance of footnotes, but nothing 'in our face' about how to code it. i haven't done an extensive search, but then again, given that it's a key part of all entries, it would really help to not have to go searching--but to have that in a very visible place. maybe, again, i'm blind and it was right there, but every time i saw something about footnotes, it wasn't related to the technical aspect of how to insert and code them.

last question...is it allowed to just start a page on a subject that needs to be covered--as a means of encouraging others who have the knowledge to flesh it out?

any help with these issues would be greatly appreciated.

p.s.- i don't understand how these tildes work, so please forgive if i get it wrong...

Number.6.freeman (talk) 15:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Number.6 (but then you're not a number are you, you're a free man!). Welcome to the Teahouse. The first bit of good news is that you got the four tildes bit right first time, so you've no worries on that score. There's a lot to answer above, so I'll try to break it down ito easy points:

• To enter text on Wikipedia - on any page - go to the Edit tab at the top. If you want to leave message on a Talk page, the process is the same. Go to the Talk tab, then the Edit tab, then scroll to the bottom of the page and leave your message. You'll also see, after every header on a page, a little (edit) link - clicking that will allow you to edit just that section. There is also a "New section" tab at the top of talkpages that you can use to start a new thread.
• For the technical aspect of references (what I presume you mean by "footnotes") see if this essay is any help; I wrote it for people in exactly your position.
• You can certainly start an article on a subject in the hopes that others will expand it - I did so myself only this morning. Such pages are called stubs, and whilst they aren't perfect, they're certainly preferable to nothing at all.

I hope that helps clear a few things up; if you need more help please do feel free to leave me a message, or ask here for further clarification. It does get easier, I promise! Yunshui 雲‍水 15:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• oh, i just know i'm going to do something wrong here, but here we go...

• first, thank you so much for the warm welcome. very helpful and very professional--even better than what i could imagine. altho, i kept wondering if it was just a hallucination and i would wake up in the 'village' (inside joke re your comment about freeman). having gone back to the talk page, i see it should be simple. but now one other question...is there a protocol for posting more recent comments first or last? i see both, but if there is an assumed protocol, i would like to follow it.
• as to the tutorial--yes, Yunshui--perfect! i actually did my first 2 citations and thanks to your page, it was basically painless. that should be a front-page link for all newbies.
• re the stubs...yes, i am aware of those. but, the impression i have gotten when seeing those is that they are 'frowned on.' i'm glad they are acceptable for the reasons you gave. thank you, again.

Number.6.freeman (talk) 00:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hello and Welcome to the Wikipedia!

I suggest that you get started by reading up on the Tutorial. Just click on the blue link to the left, and follow the instructions there. It explains a lot of simple things on Wikipedia! The first video on the right of this Video Tutorials page might also help.

Feel free to browse through any of them, and do ask another Question if you have a doubt!

Cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hello TheOriginalSoni-- yet another kind 'voice' -- thank you too. i thought i had gone through most of the basic tutorial info, but i don't recall a video, so i don't know if i looked at that page or not. i will now. and i saw that i also now have your info on my talk page for future questions (hopefully i can find my way back here, too, if i need to lol).

Number.6.freeman (talk) 00:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jayron 32,

Thanks for the info, It was just what I needed! DaveUplinkdave (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

One more thing; when you have finished adding text, don't forget to click on the "Save page" button!

Top or bottom
Apart from this page always post a new section of a talk page at the bottom. Top posting is done here to make it easier for beginners. Not wholly sure that's a good idea - I even got a bank statement that was top-posted recently, causing a large error... but it's how we do it. Rich Farmbrough, 23:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC).

Company Notability

Hi community I work in PR and have been asked to submit a Notability page to WP. The company has gained significant press exposure and independent reviews. I found an entry to a company that is very similar to the one we wish to submit in terms of information the page had to establish its notability. Would you advise we create the page as a sub page and then submit to the community for comments to establish if the company is notable enough? What is the best way to do this? With thanks for your advice.DinghyR (talk) 14:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi DinghyR. The best process to follow in such circumstances would be Articles for creation - build your article there using the Article Wizard and it will be checked and reviewed before going "live". You should also make sure you read the guide for contributors with a conflict of interest, since most of the advice there will apply to you. Another alternatice would be to create the page in your sandbox and ask another, more experienced editor to review it - personally, though, I'd strongly recommend AFC. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

TAFI needs an uninvolved admin

Hello,

If any admin is reading this, can they please come around and help us there at Today's articles for improvement? We need an involved admin who would be able to help us edit the main page to add TAFI as a new section there (As per several hundred lines of discussion already).

So can anyone please help there? Also, all are free and welcome to contribute there.

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

For anyone interested, the discussion can be found here Chamal ^T•C 14:45, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

URLs

Should online refs be accompanied by a URL? Is there any guideline/policy regarding this? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:38, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Surprisingly this section does not mention URL, but it is good to give, as you know! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:42, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

It's sort of like not mentioning "water" in your ingredients list for boiled potatoes because it's so tacit, but I added "the URL" to that section anyway.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:24, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Waiting for the review of article

Hi, I wrote this article - as suggested by someone when I was adding info in Madhubala article. Madhubala article was one-sided and as I am doing a thesis on 'Unauthorised biographies' I tought that I'd add the data and info from another, more popular biography, written by Mohan Deep. It turned out that he had written 3 unauthorised biographies and a few books. More important, I learnt that returning from sabbatical, he has written a new novel ("The Five Foolish Virgins") I also plan to write an article about unauthorised biographers in India which will be about all the people who have written unofficial biographies in India. The situation in India is such that any such book and writer is hounded out if the subject has connections. There was a book on the life of Dhirubhai Ambani. It was not allowed to hit the stands. A books on the life of Shivaji has been banned. There is some much info that can be in this article. But, in the meanwhile, I want to see my article on Mohan Deep reviewed soon. How can I go about it? There seems a backlog of over 2000 articles. F.Balsara (talk) 11:27, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Welcome to Teahouse! You are talking about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mohan Deep. You can not quicken the process. You need to wait, hopefully someone'll pick it soon! I sometimes do review at AFC, if you want, I can review it now! But, sorry to say, I don't think the article is ready. So, you can guess what my answer will be! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:35, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I have reviewed the nomination! Let us know if yo need help to solve the issues mentioned at the nomination page! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I see Tito Dutta has reviewed your article... and I agree with him. Most of the sources seem to be images on Deep's blog - it will be far better if you can explain what they are, then create inline citations for them, rather than the embedded images. Secondly your article seems very one-sided. If looks like Deep has been criticised for his writing. You are not writing from a neutral point of view when you say (for example) Deep "shut their mouth" or "writing the unauthorized biography... earned Mohan Deep a reputation for his unafraid and bold approach". Words like "interestingly" are unnecessary - we can decide for ourselves whether something is interesting. As you are a serious student, you will know you should write encyclopedia articles objectively. Sionk (talk) 12:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Ask to be temporarily blocked

This is prbably the most unorthodox question I've asked and I don't mind if you call me crazy. I am addicted to Wikipedia and this weekend, I want to take a break. Is there any way to ask an administrator to temporarily suspend my access to Wikipedia for 3 days? Thanks. JHUbal27•Talk•E-mail 10:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I can relate... Some admins frown on such blocks, but I'll do it for you if you wish. However, you might want to speak to Writ Keeper first; I believe I saw him using some sort of wikibreak-enforcing script on his recent sabbatical, which might be a more appropriate route for you to take. I don't know the details, unfortunately, you'll have to ask him. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Generally such requests are rejected, see WP:BLOCKME, but you can try self-block Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/WikiBreak Enforcer. --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:00, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• And Self Block (using that script) is better from another aspect, it'll not be logged in your block log, otherwise you may face questions related to that block in your "request for adminship"! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

That's the one I was thinking of, cheers Tito! Yunshui 雲‍水 11:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Yunshui and all the other answerers. I think I'll use that self-block script. I just have one question. Can I undo the block? Thanks. JHUbal27•Talk•E-mail 11:34, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you can. Since it's a piece of Javascript, you can get around it by temporarily disabling your browser's Javascript. The way to do that depends on your browser. Any admin can undo it for you, as well, so if you have someone's email address, you can ask them via email. I can send you my email address if you want to do it that way. Writ Keeper (t + c) 12:25, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• It is not the body that restrains the mind, but the mind that restrains the body. (Or something like that. :P) Point is, I don't believe that you yourself cannot enforce your own break. Exercise some self-control. Self determination! Nevertheless, if you really must, you can ask around here. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• I was checking that page, check the conditions given here User:Reaper Eternal/Block Requests, specially point 4 and 5. --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Recently, I tried to take a wikibreak, but then on the next day, i still logged in and make edits. So, I gave up on the wikibreak. Arctic Kangaroo 11:18, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Ha ha! And from first week of January this year, I have been trying to take a WikiBreak "in next one week" (there is a banner at my talk page too)! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:22, 21 March 2013 (UTC) 11:49, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hehe... Arctic Kangaroo 11:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• And I have been retired from Wikipedia (twice) for the past 3 months. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

Template:Contains Indic text It's in bengali. I'm translating this.

স্যার জাদেজা

রবীন্দ্র জাদেজা কে? ভারতীয় অলরাউন্ডার বলবেন তো? কিন্তু উইকিপিডিয়া যে কাল জাদেজা পরিচয় দিল মানবপ্রেমী, জনহিতৈষী, নোবেল বিজয়ী, দুবারের লরিয়াস বর্ষসেরা ক্রীড়াবিদ এবং বিশ্বের সবচেয়ে ক্ষমতাধর ব্যক্তি! নিশ্চয়ই চোখ কপালে তুলছেন। তবে জাদেজার ক্যারিয়ারের অনুসারী হলে অবাক হওয়ার কথা নয়। টানা ব্যর্থতার পরও বারবার সুযোগ পাওয়ায় কয়েক বছর ধরে জাদেজা মানেই ক্রিকেট কৌতুকের অফুরন্ত খোরাক। ‘রবীন্দ্র জাদেজা জোকস’ নামে আলাদা ওয়েব পাতাও আছে, অনেকে মজা করে ডাকেন ‘স্যার জাদেজা!’ চলতি অস্ট্রেলিয়া সিরিজে ভালো করায় অবশ্য কমেছে এসব। তার পরও কাল জাদেজার উইকি পাতায় কে যেন ওসব লিখে রেখেছিলেন। একটু পরই অবশ্য সংশোধন করা হয়েছে। ওয়েবসাইট।

Sir Jadeja Who is Ravindra Jadeja? Is he Indian all-rounder? But yesterday Wikipedia, identified him as human-lover, human's helper, nobel prize winner, two times lorias winner and worl's most powerful person. Surely you're finding this confusing! But if you're Jadeja's career's consequent then you'll not be confused. After his consecutive failure he was getting chances. for this reason he is a fun guy in India. There's a web page called Ravindra Jadeja Jokes. Many people call him Sir Jadeja by fun. But his good performance at ongoing Australia series reduced these. But still yesterday someone written them(human-lover, human's helper, nobel prize winner, two times lorias winner and worl's most powerful person) in Jadeja's Wiki page. But after sometimes it was corrected.

It's a topic from Prothom Alo the most popular news paper in Bangladesh. Here's the link Prothom Alo. Don't think it at a different sense. I'm just sharing a news. But my word is Wikipedia's vandalism shouldn't be in News Paper. It can reduce the reputation of WP.--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 04:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm confused. Is there a question in there somewhere?.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

No. I said I was sharing a news. I didn't find a place to show this to the community. For this reason I wrote it here.--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 05:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Many newspapers worldwide will occasionally report on some controversy on Wikipedia. In my experience, when they mention something outlandish on a Wikipedia page, they rarely report how long the outlandish thing lasted, even if it was only seconds or minutes. They rarely report on the work of the legions of volunteers, and the sophisticated bots, that fight vandalism 24/7/365, and they almost never report on how effective our anti-vandalism efforts are. That, after all, would make their stories less interesting to the average reader. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:22, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Oh well...as we all know, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit...even jokesters and vandals. Looks like this is a continual bit of vandalism (Nobel prize-winner, etc) that's being deleted (sometimes really quickly) from the article and then added back in. Shearonink (talk) 05:34, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• It has been handled (twice). In brief, first time, I had this page semi protected and pending changes protected also submitted a complaint at SPI. The article was semi-protected again recently! I can see their "Montobyo din" Post comment text without any option to add comment! --Tito Dutta (contact) 05:42, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
• One more in Sify! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

External links in an article

Dear editors: I was reading an article This Week in Libraries about a podcast series with many episodes. In one section of the article there are a lot of external links to specific episodes in the series. Since there is a link to the series web site at the end of the article, should I remove these links in the middle of the article? They aren't references. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:01, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hi,, Wikipedia:External links suggests should not normally be used in the body of an article, hence all these links should be removed from there! --Tito Dutta (contact) 04:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thought so - I'll do it now. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hi, this is my first time in the Teahouse and it was me that created the This Week in Libraries article. It's useful to know why the links were edited out. Thanks Aliaretiree (talk) 04:36, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia at Facebook

I was reading Wikipedia's wall posts at Facebook. Do you know who manage these (also Twiter etc) pages? Wikipedia volunteers or WMF exmployees? --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Tito! I asked around, and yep, I think it's WMF employees, at least for Facebook. Writ Keeper (t + c) 04:34, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

How do you like those posts (link above)? After seeing first few posts I felt, that was a tiny version of "On This Day"! That should be planned and prepared as we do for DYK, Signpost etc. And they should include us (volunteers) in the list (like OTRS members there might be Social networking handlers)! A village pump proposal? --Tito Dutta (contact) 05:51, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of Facebook, to be honest. Writ Keeper (t + c) 12:28, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Cos TWITTER is in the house! Hehe. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:37, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Two accounts, merge or delete one?

I am a newbie. I accidently created two accounts. How can I merge the the two accounts? Or how can I delete one of the accounts? Adirondack BlurLiner (talk) 02:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Adirondack, welcome to the Teahouse! It's actually impossible to either merge or delete accounts. Just choose the one you want and use it; leaving the other alone is enough. :) Writ Keeper (t + c) 02:49, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, Adirondack BlurLiner and welcome to the Teahouse! You can't merge or delete accounts on Wikipedia (it used to be possible but not anymore due to attribution issues, but that's another story). What you could do instead is select one of the accounts to edit with and discontinue using the other one. You could mention that you have also used the other account on your userpage, so that other editors know that both accounts are the same person. Chamal ^T•C 02:53, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt and clear answers. I will follow your suggestions 97.103.25.103 (talk) 08:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

How to link Wikimedia commons categories and Wikipedia articles with the same name

How do I get that little Wikimedia logo to appear in the bottom right of articles? The one that says 'Wikimedia Commons has media related to ...' I thought it would appear automatically if there was a category for the article title on Wikimedia Commons, but apparently not. Here is one example: Musgrave Park, Belfast and on Wikimedia Musgrave Park, Belfast. Or another example: St Killian's College and St Killian's College.

How do I get them to link?

Thanks. Penguin2006 (talk) 23:11, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Uh....I don't see what you are talking about.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Penguin. Please see {{Commons}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Also {{Commons category}}.

Rich Farmbrough, 23:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Question from a host: What are we talking about?--Amadscientist (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Fuhghett, exactly what I was looking for. And thanks Rich too. Cheers Amad, thanks for the quick reply. Penguin2006 (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Things like this

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Moustaches.

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Moustaches.

Rich Farmbrough, 23:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

I am familiar with those...but I didn't (and still don't) see them on the examples. Were those examples of where the editor wanted to place the template?--Amadscientist (talk) 23:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Amadscientist, if you look at the bottom right of St Killian's College you'll see there's now a similar little logo for that subject - I just put it there by adding a {{Commons}} tag at the end of the article. Really simple after all, I knew it would be! Penguin2006 (talk) 23:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Aha, I see what you mean now. I should have provided an example of one that was there instead of two that weren't. Sorry for being so confusing. Penguin2006 (talk) 00:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh thank god. I thought I was losing it there for a minute. LOL!--Amadscientist (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Ha ha sorry, and everyone else saying they saw this non-existent thing... you must have been rubbing your eyes. Penguin2006 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:19, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I spotted an error in an article. How do I point it out to an editor?

I don't feel qualified to edit the article. It looks like an artifact from a previous edit. Thanks, I hope I am in the right place to post this question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Browne

First lines under the Biography section:

The son of a silk merchant from Upton, Cheshire, he was born in the parish of St Michael, Cheapside, in London on 19 October 1605. was born on 19 November 1708 between the hours of 5:05 and 6:23 a.m.

PAULADEANIEMEANIE (talk) 19:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! If you see something wrong with an article, go ahead and change it! We even have a policy that condones this: Wikipedia:Be bold. Make sure, though, that you provide reliable sources when changing or adding something. Happy editing! Go Phightins! 19:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

OK Thanks. I appreciate the boost.

PAULADEANIEMEANIE (talk) 20:51, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

FrigidNinja fixed it. So much better now. Thanks.

PAULADEANIEMEANIE (talk) 20:58, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I was actually responding to your question just as Go Phightins responded, and was left with an edit conflict. FrigidNinja 22:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Finding infobox template

How do I locate an infobox template for a clergyman? Maineshepp (talk) 19:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm no expert on infoboxes, but I think Template:Infobox clergy is what you want. ^King Jakob _C2 19:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. That's exactly it. I tried searching but couldn't get it right.Maineshepp (talk) 19:59, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• Google has been very helpful for me to find appropriate infoboxes. I generally search with "Wikipedia Infobox Word", for your question, see the search result page --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:19, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. What an excellent suggestion.Maineshepp (talk) 03:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Can I correct a link to / citation of my website in the `Distinguishable Interfaces' article?

I'm trying to correct a link that someone made to my website in the `Distinguishable Interfaces' article on Wikipedia, and the edit triggered a spam-filter ("Your edit has triggered a filter designed to warn editors, organisations and companies against usin Wikipedia as an advertising medium.").

The link in question is a bullet in the "External links" section at the bottom of the page, currently reading:

       "VisualIDs for Nautilus Reference implementation of VisualIDs
        for the Linux Nautilus file browser, by J. Rosen",

... and it links to a section of my weblog.

The issues here are:

• my project is actually called "libvisualid", and it's just a

'reference implementation of VisualIDs', not specifically something for Nautilus or Linux (and, if you follow the link as it stands, you land on a page that doesn't really say anything about Nautilus or file-management but does say things about other applications)

• I'm pretty sure the link should actually go either to

the actual project website or a specific blog-post, not to whatever happens to be the latest blog-post.

• "J. Rosen" is not the way I'm normally referenced;

my name is "Joshua Judson Rosen", that's how everyone knows me, and that's how I'm usually cited

Should I (can I?) just ignore the warning and proceed? Or should I find someone else to go make the edit for me to avoid any possible appearance of impropriety (though I'd think the before-and-after content of the change would make it clear that I didn't add the link or citation, or change it to add bias, I just fixed it)? Or...?

Rozzin (talk) 17:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Joshua (can I call you Joshua?) and welcome to the Teahouse! Based on what you've told us, your edit seems to be fine. Remember, however, to leave a clear edit summary summarizing your edit, so other editors don't think it's spam. Thanks, FrigidNinja 19:25, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I corrected my name in that article, along with making a couple of other edits that seemed sufficiently obviously-nonconflicted. For the link to my website, though..., after reading through the guidelines on COI and apparent COI, it does seem like it'd be preferable for someone else to make a decision about what form that link should actually take and fix it; so I just left a note on the article's Talk page requesting that someone else fix it.

Rozzin (talk) 00:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Can we help US Counties....please

Hey All- I have a question, what can I do to get the US county template fololowed or at least looked at before ANYONE starts editing a US County page here in Wikipedia. I took the current template and added comments [here. I an starting to get edits that are way beyond the pale. Notable persons who have the profound gift of fogging a mirror and replicating their own DNA.... Entire sections about the new theme park and the delightful people who want to sell you fudge, WITH A SMILE! Wikivoyage can have this data and I have tried to point that out. OR, how about the local government section with names, phone numbers, e mails, and hateful comments about their personal lives, Can anyone help this along?? Please??Coal town guy (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Coal town guy. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, even without studying our policies and guidelines, there is no practical way to make people edit the way you want. Simply remove non-encyclopedic material, explaining in your edit summary. Hateful comments about people should be removed immediately, per our strict policy against personal attacks. Lists of top county officials are appropriate. A brief referenced mention of an amusement park may be OK. Cut the part about fudge sales. And assume good faith. This type of editor is trying in their own way to improve the encyclopedia, and may, with a bit of experience and study, go on to be a productive, long term editor. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

This is not about what I want. This is about going to an encyclopedia and not reading about how someone got 5 days out of a 3 day foot pad or even better, how Cindy at the stop and go has a really BIG set of eyes....I am asking if all of us think , it would be a good idea, yes, or no, to comment on the currently agreed upon template for a US county. That way, all of us could have a place to say, WOW, great content, or WHOAH, thats horrible. BONUS, we could then have this curious agreed upon standard/consensus. The new person and the experienced person could have a place to see a guideline with explanatory comments..Its called building a consensus. I provided a link to the commented template. I would be delighted, in fact, every moment would be a huzzah and a handspring if a person had their own input. Bring it on, hot dam, lets do this! We already do this for featured articles and content. BUT doing nothing OR the current status quo, does not seem to be slicing it. UNLESS you think that the breathtaking Walmart with a parking lot, is an encyclopedic observationCoal town guy (talk) 20:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Coal town guy, I guess you are referring to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U.S._counties#A_proposed_county_template - I have added a few suggestions. Presumably we do have all county pages, I 'm pretty sure I remember working on the disambig pages for them about 5 years ago. Rich Farmbrough, 23:23, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Many thanks for the reply, its nice to see all perspectives on the topic. When I first started editing a year ago, it was at times very frustrating to receive an edit or reply with no real explanation. A template with mutually agreed upon comments from the community is the correct tool to use for all WikipediansCoal town guy (talk) 00:25, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Respectfully, I beg to differ. I have been editing Wikipedia for nearly four years, have close to 19,000 edits, and have written or expanded hundreds of articles. 99% of my work here has nothing whatsoever to do with templates. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:53, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I differ as well, but thats fine. If you want numbers, thats fine. In 1 year I have created over 2,300 articles, helped get one promoted to FL status, started a category and identified 900+ articles that fall into it. I have also performed nearly 7,000 edits, thats 1 year. And that means exactly, JACK SQUAT.I did that because admins, fellow wiki folk etc etc helped me with the formatting of what we do here. I received help, someone tried. I am not promoting a hive mentality here. I am not promoting anything. The fact that you disagree is great, because you care enough to have an opinion. BUT per guidlines here at Wiki, I am uninvolving myself with the county template issue in totum. The template had not been looked at in at least 2 years really. An agreed upon collaboration for change is needed in any system. A system that does not change, becomes static, withers and dies, its a fact. My apologies if my sense of trying to create a cooperative effort on a template that does not work offendsCoal town guy (talk) 13:25, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

How to deal with disruptive editors?

Please glance at this change in prostate cancer-diet and lifestyle: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prostate_cancer&diff=545612994&oldid=545537182

It looks like Jmh649 simply effectively reverted the text back to before my additions / corrections. His edit summaries are not factual.

Jmh649's attempted text does not reflect the reference, and he has deleted information from two high quality secondary sources that meet the needs of this article section without cause.

How does Wikipedia police disruptive editors like, in my opinion, Jmh649?32cllou (talk) 15:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, 32cllou, and welcome to the Teahouse. This doesn't look "disruptive" to me but rather a routine disagreement about how to present the conclusions of a medical study on diet and prostate cancer. This matter should be discussed on the article's talk page, with that other editor and with any other editors with an active interest in the article. I encourage you to assume good faith, namely that the other editor is here to improve the encyclopedia, as you are. Discuss it, and work toward a consensus agreement on the best wording. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Please also note that the other editor is a physician with nearly 75,000 edits, and knows our standards for reporting medical research well. He has explained his reasoning on the talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Having dealt with him before, in my opinion, Jmh has a severe conflict of interest. He is probably a paid editor. Please monitor and help our in our Talk and actions in "prostate cancer".32cllou (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

PS I know the standards of scholarly work, having written extensively in technical fields. Please glance at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23219353 and compare my text with Jmh's.32cllou (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Problem with incorrect Reflist

While writing an article for Wikipedia, I included a reference from Pubmed via its Pubmed ID. This worked fine and Wikipedia automatically extracted all facts about the publication. However, the spelling of some authors' names is incorrect; German umlauts and French accent symbols are not properly displayed. I would therefore like to manually correct the citation, but do not know how I can do that. Your help is really appreciated.Andreas Dräger (talk) 14:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Andreas. I don't think you can do it using the {{cite pmid}} template - what you'd need to do is re-enter those references using {{cite journal}} instead, which is a rather more time-consuming business (but affords you more scope to adjust the information). You can access umlauts, etc. via the Special characters menu at the top of the edit window. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi! You can find the data in the page Template:Cite pmid/number (one you've used the appropriate Cite pmid) - example Template:Cite pmid/12122621. This can then be cut and pasted to your article and fixed up. I believe that if you try to change the template Citation Bot might well "Fix" your fixes, effectively reverting you, unless you put a {{Nobots}} template in there - which my casue problems off its own. Rich Farmbrough, 20:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Do entries under the same title have to be identical in different languages?

Hello,

We are looking into providing an English version to a French entry and I was wondering if what we need to do has to be a direct translation of the original entry or can we provide an extended version in English? Many thanks, Kasia Kasialuther (talk) 12:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there! It can definitely be extended! As long as it follows the normal English Wikipeia rules about notability, verifiability and so forth. I look forward to seeing the article! Rich Farmbrough, 12:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Uploading a logo

I am working on editing an article for an organization that changed their logo this year. I uploaded a non-free work and that got tagged for deletion. I then found their logo on their flickr page and based on their permissions, thought it was okay to use this, but this also got tagged. How can a I get a logo that I am allowed to use? Should I simply write to the company? Please help!!Hyppolyta (talk) 08:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The easiest way to accomplish this is to copy the rationale from the old logo[1] when you upload the new one as fair use. However...I am not sure that is really a change in the logo to be honest. It just looks like a slightly different version of the same one but you probably know more than I about that.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:07, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

To be fair even minor changes to logos are often considered important (and can be very expensive). The website seems to have a single coloured logo rather than the two-coloured logo on file. The best place to check would be the Austrian equivalent of Companies House. Rich Farmbrough, 09:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Hi, the new logo will only be valid fair use if it is relatively low resolution and used on a page (note http://www.flickr.com/photos/salzburgglobal/8571778938/in/photostream says "some rights reserved"). The image on Flikr also seems to be the reverse of the image on the company website - most brand consultants will provide a variety of implementations of the logo, at different sizes and for different purposes. Rich Farmbrough, 09:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

I am not an expert in files, but the image on flickr is not compatible with Wikipedia. WP:COMPLIC states that CC-By-NC-ND licenses are not allowed in Wikipedia. And the license that is used in File:Salzburg Global Seminar Logo.jpg is CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 which cannot be used in Wikipedia. I am sorry but you cannot use the image on Wikipedia and I have tagged it for deletion. Instead you could use, probably not what you want, File:Logo - Salzburg Global Seminar.JPG, which have been retained in Wikipedia. Be bold and make some great edits to the article. Cheers --Ushau97 ^talk 09:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

You might want to refrain from giving advice on files if you don't know the polices, but thank you for trying to help.

Rich added an important detail, be sure you upload a low resolution version if using fair use. See the current logo for the appropriate size to upload.--Amadscientist (talk) 10:24, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

CC-BY-NC-ND 2.0 is not a free licence, so the logo can only be used on Wikipedia in accordance with the policy WP:NFCC. In particular, WP:NFCC#9 tells that you can't use the logo on the page User:Hyppolyta/sandbox because the page isn't an article yet. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Stefan2- I have uploaded the image to the Salzburg Global Seminar wikipage, which was my intent all along, I was just drafting changes in my sandbox. I don't know what I need to do to get this logo up! As someone inexperienced with Wikipedia, please suggest the additional steps I need to take (in non-technical language). Thanks in advanceHyppolyta (talk) 14:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that there is a policy which says that you may not use that image in your sandbox. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

So is the problem solved by uploading it to the Salzburg Global Seminar page, and not having it in my Sandbox?Hyppolyta (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, probably . We are, if anything, a little too strict over "fair use", but its best to go with the flow. Rich Farmbrough, 20:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Use ISBN-10 or ISBN-13 in refs?

When I'm filling in the ISBN number in the "ISBN = " section of the reference template, should I use the ISBN-10 or the ISBN-13 number? Many books give both of these. Many thanks! EMP (talk 23:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi EMP! Welcome to the Teahouse! As far as I'm aware, either is fine. If you are using one of the referencing templates, the ISBN will automatically be linked to a special page which allows the reader to look the book up at WorldCat and other places. I believe both formats work just fine for this. Hope this helps, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hi EMP! As Espresso pointed out above, either is fine. However, our guidelines suggest that 13-digit ISBNs should be used where available. Even books that don't have a 13-digit ISBN on the cover can have their 10-digit ISBN converted, using this. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

A note of caution for that, meaning when converting 10 to 13....if the book is an older book, issued before an ISBN and not printed often, that can be tricky and not work. I think the best way is to stay with what is available, 10 or 13...Just my thoughtsCoal town guy (talk) 00:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• For particularly old books I generally just use the OCLC, especially since several of mine don't have dates. For example, at Oerip Soemohardjo both of the main sources have been out of print for nearly 30 years; they use the OCLC number. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Use ISBN 13, please, please. (Do not convert an ISBN 10 to ISBN 13 by just adding 978- the last digit has to be recalculated using a tool such as that suggested by Crisco1492 above.) ISBN 13 start with 978 or 979, but almost all of them start with 978. At some point mistakes are going to be made with 978/979 prefixes and 10 digit ISBNs, we have enough invalid ISBNs already, by trying to use 13 wherever possible we can help to standardise and reduce the opportunity for extra errors creeping in. Rich Farmbrough, 06:00, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

• The OP was directed towards a site specifically for the use of converting ISBNs properly. I don't think anyone suggested just adding 978. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes I saw, I will change my comment to the slightly longer version I considered. Rich Farmbrough, 12:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Much appreciate the most helpful info. Exactly what I needed. I will use the ISBN 13 if available, and if not, use the tool suggested by Crisco. (In the process, you have also alerted me to the WorldCat site, which I also appreciate!) Many thanks. EMP (talk 17:37, 20 March 2013 (UTC) 17:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

How to change the "Main Article" link on a Wikipedia page section

On the Wikipedia Page: "Electric field" at the section: "Energy in the electric field", I found that the "Main article" link links to a wrong page: "Electric energy", Instead I think it should link to: "Electric potential energy". But I have not been able to change it. How this should be done? Thanks Ciro.Landolfi (talk) 22:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse. For linking "Main" article, we use Template:Main, which works like this:

{{Main|Article title}}

If you want to link Example, the code should be {{Main|Example}} which will result

Main article: Example

Now, which article/article's section you want to link there? --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The current link links to the page "Electric energy", Instead I think it should link to: "Electric potential energy" (Ciro.Landolfi (talk) 23:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC))

• Do you want to do it yourself? Use this code {{Main|Electric potential energy}}! (don't copy that "nowiki" thingy!). Let me know if you need help! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I have done it, It appears to work. Many Thanks Ciro.Landolfi (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Quite often the template {{Detail}} is useful: {{Detail|Electrical energy}}

Further information: Electrical energy

Rich Farmbrough, 06:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Adding references for first person accounts or personal experiences

Hello, I working on my first entry about selecting brazilian rosewood for guitar making. I've been in this field buying and selling tonewoods for 20 years and have a great deal of hands on knowledge, first person "teachings" from masters and other sound sources The trouble is I can't find many in print references to support my writings. Nearly everything out there is written by other luthiers/wood dealers like myself. Do they quality as references? RobertGower (talk) 19:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You are probably familiar with the journals and trade publications for luthiers, and books written on the topic. Those are the sort of sources that you can cite. The sources need not be online, but be sure to give a full, detailed citation with title, author, publisher, page number, date and so on. Ideally, select from the most respected publications in your field. As an aside, avoid writing in the style of a "how to manual". Good luck, and thanks for helping improve the encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:48, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

It's very difficult to cite personal communication in Wikipedia, because of our insistence on verifiability. Despite a project in 2011 (Oral Citations) we still generally (almost always) need to be assured that there is a reliable source out there somewhere, which is at least in theory accessible to anyone. However it is not always necessary to have a source for something if you a sufficiently convinced that a reliable source exists, and that the information is not likely to be challenged. I hope that is some help. Rich Farmbrough, 21:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

A "Further Reading" section with one odd citation

Hello all - near the bottom of the article "World_War_III" is a section titled "Further Reading" which lists one book and its ISBN number. Is this a legitimate resource to be left alone, or a plug to be deleted as advertising/spam? Thanks for your guidance. dstone66 (talk) 18:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Greetings dstone66, and welcome to the Teahouse!

Re: ISBN 9789381411513

A brief check seems to find no reviews or citations to the book, so it seems to be non-notable.  However, that is not necessarily a requirement for inclusion into a 'Further reading' section.  After checking Wikipedia: Manual of Style/Layout #Further reading, it is somewhat ambivalent as to what is acceptable.  (But I did notice that the 'Further reading' section is in the wrong place, so I moved it.)  More detailed guidelines can be found at: Wikipedia: Further reading.  I would be tempted to assume good faith and leave it there, since the topic is obviously related.  Perhaps other editors have other suggestions, as well.

~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 19:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC) [modified:20:09, 19 March 2013 (UTC)]

Question about Political Threat Reporting

I recently ran into an edit with a threat against US President Barack Obama. I know that threats are never tolerated, and I followed protocol for rolling back his edit while reporting it as a BLP violation (which it also was) to the administrator's to hide the edit. However, I also went ahead and reported it using Wikimedia's emergency e-mail, as I don't know what the procedure is for implausible political threats. Obviously, the edit was almost certainly banter that cannot be backed up, but what is the official policy? WMF did follow up, but I'm not sure if I'm wasting their time. Jackson Peebles (talk) 18:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I believe you did the right thing. Overt threats should always be reported, and will be taken very seriously when directed against politicians. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Add multiple pages to watchlist at once

Hi everyone, I was curious if there was a way to add multiple pages to your watchlist at once using a script or something? Thanks. TBrandley 05:21, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, TBrandley! If you go to your watchlist, you'll notice that under it there are three options in parentheses. The one farthest to the right is "Edit raw watchlist". It will show you a little box with everything on your watchlist. You can add as many article names as you need to it and press "Update watchlist". Then everything will added and if you go back it will be alphabetized as well. Happy editing! öBrambleberry of RiverClan 20:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

No, I meant all pages from a category, for instance. Thanks for your assistance, however. TBrandley 20:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You could achieve this using (for example) WP:AWB to create the list of articles, then pasting it in your watchlist per Brambleberry. If you wanted something more sophisticated, a custom script would probably be the way to go. Rich Farmbrough, 06:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Are my Sandbox Notes available to researchers/writers/editors? Hope so.

In my sandbox, I am assembling more references for a biography of a living person, sculptor, Valerie Maynard. Can others access my notes, and thus further the research/writing/editing process? Sistanance (talk) 17:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Good question! Yes they can. See for example my Sandbox which you can view and edit: User:Ukexpat/sandbox.--ukexpat (talk) 18:28, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I should note that unless you link to the page, it is unlikely that anybody will find it. Google does not index user pages, and it most people will not bother trying to access your sandbox directly. Include the link to it in your user page or post it to other users' talk pages if you want to get the word out. —Strachkvas (talk) 21:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Well written drafts on not so popular subjects get indexed by search engines. A __NOINDEX__ magic word can be used, which'll prevent it from getting indexed by search engines. Another similar option is Template:Userspace draft --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing Bio of living person

I have been trying to update the bio of my friend Brooke Medicine Eagle. Her work is controversial in some circles but the bio revision that keeps getting placed on the page is completely negative has incorrect factual information and my revision that I have offered in good faith - placed on talk pages and asked for help anyway I can find gets wiped out. I am new but I have been trying as best as I know how to meet the criteria of Biography of Living Persons. What do I do from here? she has 35 years of work as an author, recording artist, workshop presenter and spiritual teacher that is being negated by controversy much of it from the 1980's. I have not removed the criticism but am trying to add Biographical facts. I am very confused as to what to do now. Rickgmt (talk) 16:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I took a look at some of your edits on Brooke Medicine Eagle's page as well as your own talk page. It appears as though User:Dougweller replied to some of your concerns, and it is worth noting that he is an administrator and is more qualified than myself to help. Though I noticed some of your discourse between one another may not appear to be extremely friendly, he really is genuinely interested in the wellbeing of the encyclopedia. Coming to the Teahouse is a good indication that you are, too, and that this is a simple misunderstanding.

I strongly recommend making sure that all of your edits are referenced properly and thoroughly. In order to follow BLP rules, this is of the utmost importance. Furthermore, you may consider discussing proposed changes on the article's talk page in advance to establish consensus and get others' ideas and input as well as credibility. Make sure to include all viewpoints, even those you may not agree with, especially if they're sourced credibly. Finally, bear in mind that, simply due to the nature of your relationship with the subject of the article, it may be advisable, though it is not required, that you avoid the article simply due to a Conflict of Interest. I've run into this problem myself, and it's quite frustrating, but sometimes it's best to give input but let others make the changes to make sure they're fair.

I hope that this helps, and please let me know if you need any other assistance. Please also bear in mind that the administrators are always approachable, and if you have a conflict with an administrator or any editor, legal threats are not a good approach (quite frankly, you're lucky you weren't banned - it was a good move taking back what you said about slander) - rather, I would recommend approaching another administrator or bureaucrat as a mediator or simply calmly speaking with the administrator in question once the situation dies down. Best of luck! Jackson Peebles (talk) 18:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Rickgmt, and welcome to the Teahouse! As Jackson Peebles writes, references are absolutely key to developing Wikipedia articles, especially those on living people. References need to be reliable (eg newspapers and books) and preferably independent of the subject. I've found it can be tricky to develop articles about people I know because it's difficult to avoid the temptation to add material that I know to be true, but just can't reference. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:43, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

hi there, question about new submission

Hi there,

Currently we have a declined submission of quite an interesting product, unique in the world...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fedsearchuser/Easy_federated_search

Is it possible to get this approved somehow, or is it lost time.

Fedsearchuser (talk) 14:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You need to read what it says in the grey box at the top of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Easy federated search. Follow the useful links that have been given to you there. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

ok will do. thanks.

Fedsearchuser (talk) 14:42, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Neither uniqueness nor being interesting in some individual's estimation is enough to justify a Wikipedia article: we require that the subject is notable in a specific sense, that multiple reliable sources, independent of the subject have written about the subject. If this has happened, they need to be cited in the article; if it has not yet happened, then Wikipedia cannot accept an article. --ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Should even know what Rollback means???

Hi Teahosts, Teaguests and other TeaHousers... So there I was looking up on a user's edit on his contributions when I found two links by the name [Rollback} and something else I don't remember... Curiosity kills the cat, but I'm no cat so I beat my urge to click on it... Should I know what it means or should I just lay off... And can I please become a Guest at Teahouse?? I'm very enthu about it and have loads of Questions to ask... Thanks for all your answers and advice that I'll recieve soon!! The Wikimon (talk) 13:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back, The Wikimon. Mm, "Roolbacking" [sic] is basically just reverting the previous edit. If you rollback this, it will be back to the second-to-most recent revision. I.e. your answer only, and without my answer. Hope this helps! Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey, not fair, I was just about to correct the spelling mistake!! Ok got it annd looked up on the page as well!!! :) Thank You!! Before I forget, congrats on an insanely funny user page.. All that it misses is a link to The Joker (Batman)!!!! The Wikimon (talk) 14:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wikimon, actually rollback is a user access level that has to be granted by an administrator. Your account doesn't have this. The links you saw were probably from a tool such as Twinkle that you may be using. The function is basically the same, but technically different. Either way, such features should only be used against vandalism and other deliberately disruptive edits. Chamal ^T•C 14:15, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

And to add to that, rollback is a requested user right. If you have a good record of editing an admin may well give you the user right on request. I just asked for it the other day and was granted it. It was my first request for any user tools on Wikipedia and I am hoping I can help fight off vandals.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed it should say "undo", saying "Rollback" is confusing and misleading. Rich Farmbrough, 08:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Is my article still at WP:AFC in the queue?

Hi, yes I'm a newbie and I 'ahem', edited some code while creating an article. Is there anyway anyone can tell me if its still queuing acceptance? In getting to understand the sandbox I've moved it around and done all kinds of things to it, some of which may have been detrimental. ( ahem ).

Thanks in advance and stay classy! ThatChapSean (talk) 11:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

No, you decided to remove your AFC from the queue with this edit. If you want to put it back on the queue, undo that edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to the Teahouse! The submission has to have the {{AFC submission}} to the top of the article to be pending review. However, there's a huge backlog at AFC (over 2000!) so it may be easier just to create the article yourself.^King Jakob _C2 11:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sean, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you mean Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sean Carswell, ( Director of Photography ), then no it is not currently submitted for review. You can submit it for review by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of it.

However, as far as I can see, at the moment it has no references. Article submissions need references to source that are independent of the subject. Newspaper or magazine articles that discuss Sean Carswell in detail would be ideal. Would books like histories of cinematography mention him in detail? These are the sorts of references you would use to prove notability so that the article can be accepted. If you're unsure how to add inline citations to references, there's a good simple guide at WP:REFB. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 11:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks David for your swift reply. I thought that may have been the case, hopefully I've rectified the situation

Best ThatChapSean (talk) 12:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, would it be better served by placing it here? WP:SELFPUB. And if so how do I correctly go about that as its, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons?

Thx yet again ThatChapSean (talk) 12:10, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi! WP:SELFPUB is a guidance page - wouldn't want to put it there. Or here on this page. Lets take a look and see if we can find some references. Rich Farmbrough, 21:17, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

OK, the issue with this article is likely to be demonstrating notability. Ideally you need to find at least two independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the subject. I have only found passing mentions, crowd sourced content and self-published material so far. Rich Farmbrough, 22:37, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Possible wikilinks suggestion

I somewhere saw a tool which suggest the possible wikilinks of an article. It is especially helpful for the newly created articles! But, (I can not remember) what/where was the tool? --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tito. Maybe mw:Extension:Mw(Ubiquity Script)? Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

• No, no! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:14, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

How do you upload a media file jpeg image?

Hello,

How do you upload a media file jpeg image onto your Wikipedia article?

Thanks, User0300 (talk) 02:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a fairly complex subject, as the answer depends upon the exact image in question. If the image is one that is in the public domain, then it may be uploaded to our free image repository, Wikimedia Commons. However, most images that you might have found on the Internet are not in the public domain, and they can only be uploaded here under very tight constraints. If you could tell us more details about the image you want to upload, and the article in which you want to use it, we can give you more specific advice. Powers ^T 02:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

HI, the short anser is, provided you are happy about copyright issues, "Toolbox" "upload". Rich Farmbrough, 09:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

can you make a bibliography of this website for me?

can you make a bibliography of this website for me?131.191.110.127 (talk) 01:43, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you mean the whole website, or just a specific article? Articles have lists of their references at the bottom of the page... Go Phightins! 01:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm guessing that our correspondent intends to cite Wikipedia within a report or paper, thus needing the bibliographical formatting needed to cite a Wikipedia article. Information on that topic can be found at Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Powers ^T 02:06, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

In which case it's also worth pointing out the "permanent link" tool in the toolbox, that links to the given version of a page. Rich Farmbrough, 08:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

dealing with multiple spellings for page title

I have created a page titled Kahal B'raira. If one searches for Kahal Braira, one wouldn't find the page. Is there some way to create a way to find a page with different title spellings?76.19.168.156 (talk) 20:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 76.19.168.156! The easy way to do this would be to create a redirect, which means that when people search for that term, they find the page. You would do this by creating the page Kahal Braira and putting in #REDIRECT [[Kahal B'raira]]. Now when people look up "Kahal Braira" they will go to Kahal B'raira. Happy editing! öBrambleberry of RiverClan 20:49, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. It worked great!Basilevine (talk) 21:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Article for creation - Olympic results index

I have written an article that I wish to call Olympic results index. Currently it has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Olympic results index (on 04 March 2013). I have been waiting patiently for some news but apparently the backlog is huge. Do you think it would be OK for me to move it to article space myself? If I did what other considerations should I bear in mind? Jodosma (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jodosma, I see you've been busy! On the surface of things your page makes sense but I somehow think it won't be so straightforward. You were right to bring it here for advice, because I doubt AfC reviewers will be expecting something like an Olympics results index.

Because you are autocomfirmed you will be able to move the page directly to main article space. But it may be a good idea to raise a question at the WikiProject Olympics because they will have a better idea about what is already available. Normally this sort of navigation is carried out using 'Templates', for example like the one at the bottom of the Summer Olympic Games page. Maybe your page could be created as a 'List' article and called something like 'List of Olympic results'. A second or third opinion would be good! Sionk (talk) 21:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there! I would say this is essentially OK as a list article, we have many such lists. I would be cautious about the name, maybe something like "List of Olympic results articles" or "List of Olympic results articles by sport" (to allow the complementary ""List of Olympic results articles by year". Rich Farmbrough, 11:58, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Watchlist question

I have 7 articles on my watchlist, and I have email enabled. But I've noticed that I've been getting email notifications of changes on only one of the articles, not the others. I don't see anything wrong with my settings. Anyone have any insight of what might be causing this? Thanks, K828 (talk) 17:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi K828 and welcome! Have there been edits made to all 7 of the articles? If so, check your preferences' settings. Perhaps you only have it set to send you emails when your talk page is changed? If not, I too am baffled. Go Phightins! 19:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Actually, of the 7 articles, 4 have had changes since I put them on my watchlist. But I've only been notified by email for one of them. In my preferences, this is checked "Email me when a page or file on my watchlist is changed." K828 (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

It may well be that you only get one mail, until you use the site, to avoid spamming. Some other features work like this. Rich Farmbrough, 13:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

I didn't know where in the list of categories to put "Category:Asian popes"

There's a category for the three African popes, but there wasn't one for the eight popes who were born on what is now considered the continent of Asia. The existing categorizations by nationality and country were not what was wanted for two reasons: First, they gave popes a nationality by other criteria than where they were born; second, they didn't say what continent they were born on, leaving the reader to figure it out by reading the article to find the birthplace, then either knowing what continent that country was on, or in some cases having to use an atlas to see what continent the birth-city was on (because some nations have parts on two continents). So I went to the pages about those eight popes and added "Category:Asian popes" to the list of categories. But here's my problem; I don't know that I put it in the right order among the categories. I know I should consider both the alphabetical order of the categories' names and the relative importance of the category. But I don't really know how to judge that. Would some more-experienced editor check them out and see whether that line "Category:Asian popes" should be moved up or down in the list of categories at the end of each of those eight articles? Thank you. And if you want me to do the work myself so I can learn, instead of doing it for me, answer this question and tell me how please? Thanks. Eldin raigmore (talk) 21:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC) BTW a reference is [Geographic travels: map of the non-European popes|http://www.geographictravels.com/2013/02/map-of-non-european-popes.html] Eldin raigmore (talk) 21:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Eldin raigmore! Welcome to the Teahouse! A category for Asian popes sounds like a good idea. As far as I know, there isn't a firm convention on ordering of categories. For articles about people, usually birth and death dates are placed first. Then come other categories in broad order of importance or size of category. It's often helpful to cluster categories about similar topics (such as nationality or education). If categories are similar in importance and topic, then alphabetical ordering can be used, but it's not that important. So in this case, taking Pope John V as an example:

686 deaths - Popes - Asian popes - Syrian popes - 7th-century Italian people - 7th-century Byzantine people - 7th-century archbishops - Byzantine Papacy - 635 births

...the position of Asian popes looks fine. The only one I'd consider moving is the 635 births. Hope this is of assistance, Espresso Addict (talk) 00:09, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Espresso Addict. I didn't think of using category size as an ordering principle, but that makes sense. I tried to put it near other categories with similar topics. BTW do you (or anyone else) think a robot could be made that would order the categories appropriately? Or at least correct the most egregious deviations? Eldin raigmore (talk) 18:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it would be fairly simple under that principle, or any other clear definition. Rich Farmbrough, 13:05, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Suicide in Greenland

Can someone add Suicide in Greenland in Template:Suicide by country? And also mention, how did you add it! Thanks! --Tito Dutta (contact) 20:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, done. It's part of a neat set of templates that work off {{World topic}} so the change that was needed was to add Greenland to the World topic template. After that any article ABC in Greenland will appear in the appropriate template which has as it's indexing prefix ABC in. NtheP (talk) 22:44, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

• Excellent work! --Tito Dutta (contact) 22:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

This is sort of a side note, but I think having a template work like this, except where actually necessary, is a bad idea. The fact this question needed to be asked is itself good evidence of the problem. The template's workings are highly cryptic and many people who might want to edit it for the most obvious reason—to add to its content—will be stymied. They can click on the link provided to edit but it is essentially non-functioning unless you're tweaking the code and not the content. Of course, documentation can be added to the template to provide an explanation but it should be reformed to remove the barriers to ease of editing that most templates of the same ilk provide.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I know what you mean but I think it's a good idea badly explained and one of the things I would prefer to see is better documentation to support templates like these. It's one of those areas where making an update to (or even creating) the documentation ought to be almost mandatory if you modify the template and grounds for removing the update to the template, if the document set isn't updated as well. NtheP (talk) 00:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

We're certainly in agreement documentation would make it much better (or less worse depending on your perspective). But I don't see any benefit this esoteric setup provides over the regular.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

My opinion stands that such a template provides huge advantages over the regular. Maintainance of all the templates is way easier, and they become auto-updated, rather than having to be done manually, which will obsolete all the templates the moment any article is added/deleted. The only drawback is the lack of a documentation, and the possibility of newer countries being added (like for Greenland). TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

The other slight drawback is that the "#ifexists:" parser function is considered "expensive" and page are only allowed to have about (I think) 500 of them before the MediaWiki software refuses to render them. Rich Farmbrough, 12:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Is there a problem with that? I am not sure how the MediaWiki software works with templates, and so I fail to see how any page could exceed 500 reasonably. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Every country uses an "#ifexists:" calling "World topic" can consume 204 of these (or more - there are 204 more or less sovereign states and many other territories) - 3 calls would break the 500 limit. Similarly {{Lang}} uses it once, and there are (or were) pages with over 500 calls. Rich Farmbrough, 20:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

Just so i am clear on this, the code on every template is called every single time any page uses it? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:00, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

It's called when the page is rendered - i.e. converted to HTML on the servers. Effectively this happens whenever the page is edited, after any transcluded template is changed (though that is queued) and on various other occasions depending on the way the page caching works. So you are correct for a particular value of "uses". Rich Farmbrough, 21:29, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

That clears a lot of questions. Thanks.

On a related note, if I wanted to crash MediaWiki, I would just need to locate the longest time-consuming template which has been used everywhere the most, and simply make a minor alteration to it? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

IMDb

Why does IMDb is not a reliable source for adding information to an article?Miss Bono (talk) 13:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Miss Bono and welcome to the Teahouse! Like Wikipedia, IMDB relies on user submitted content. This means, however, that there is very little in the way of verifying whether or not this information is true. If the IMDB page includes sources to verify the content, it would just be better to use that source. Livewireo (talk) 19:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Note that we often link to IMDb from the External links section. Rich Farmbrough, 21:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

Ring Neck Dove

This is the first year we have seen this particular species in Las Vegas, Nv. We have had quite a number of them here feeding in our back garden. They are just lovely. One has actually come to the glass door and sat there and stayed until I loaded the feeder. Thought you might like to know they ar this far West.

M. Marles, Las Vegas, Nv — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.226.103 (talk) 21:30, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for the tip. Indeed our article on Ring-necked Doves has noted that they were sighted in Colorado and Kansas last year as well. Have you considered joining the birding community at ebird.org? It is a service provided by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, and your information will be more immediately valuable for their researchers. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 03:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

You might also be interested in WP:WikiProject Birds which co-ordinates all articles about ornithology on the English Wikipedia. Roger (talk) 11:50, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

U2 by U2

I want to add some references from this book -U2 by U2- but I don't know how to cite them. Can anybody help me? Miss Bono (talk) 13:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, it's not too hard. Use the {{Cite book}} template. Eg. {{Cite book|title=U2 by U2|publisher=HarperCollins|date=|ISBN=978-0-06-077674-9|author=Edge, Adam Clayton, Larry Mullen Jr.}} gives Edge, Adam Clayton, Larry Mullen Jr. U2 by U2. HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0-06-077674-9.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link). Now just put "ref" tags around it <ref name="U2 by U2">{{Cite book|title=U2 by U2|publisher=HarperCollins|date=|ISBN=978-0-06-077674-9|author=Edge, Adam Clayton, Larry Mullen Jr.}}</ref> and you can use it as a footnote. To reuse it simply use the <ref name="U2 by U2" /> with the closing " /".

References

All the best. Rich Farmbrough, 22:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

I stumbled across a rather wonderful tool recently for Google books:

This user used the Wikipedia Citation Tool for Google Books before it broke in July 2021.

--Amadscientist (talk) 19:53, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Making a Wikiproject Active Again

I want to activate again the Wikiproject: U2. I've been asking around and no one could give me an answer. I'd like to know what to do. Miss Bono (talk) 18:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Which other editors are interested? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

That's the other question, I was wondering where should i start to looking for interested editors. Miss Bono (talk) 19:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Miss Bono, I will give you some tips on your talk page.--Amadscientist (talk) 19:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hello Miss Bono and Welcome to the Teahouse

Making a Project active again is no big deal. Just find people who would be interested in helping around, and start collaborating. You are free to mark any Project to be active, if you think you can make it active.

As to where to look for new editors, I suggest you start by marking it as active in the first place. Then you can send out invites to other people and projects to join in. A good place to start would be to ask the 6 other members, and other related WikiProjects and their active members.

Another place to start will be to check this watchlist and see who are the most frequent/currently active editors on U2 related articles.

Finally, I would also try and do a quick search on all the images in those userboxes you have added to your page. For example, this image is from your "This user knows that you look so beautiful tonight" userbox. if you look at the bottom of the link I gave you, you'll see about 12-13 users also using the same file. My guess then would be that they are using the same userbox as you, and I would try and contact them to see if they would be interested.

Hope this helped. All the best in your efforts to get the project back

Cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Looking For Sources

I need sources related to this "Eve Hewson talks exclusively to Chrissie Russell" so I'll be able to add information at Eve Hewson's Wikipedia's Article. Miss Bono (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Miss Bono and welcome again to the Teahouse. A quick google search showed this page to be relevant. I believe the source is permissible too.

Hope this helped.

Cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Finding Pictures

I was looking for a picture of Eve Hewson and Ali Hewson to add in their articles, but I don't have full Internet access. Can anybody tell me if there are any of these two people's picture? Miss Bono (talk) 18:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Any picture would need to be "freely licensed". I could find nothing on commons, but maybe I did not look very hard. I have added image requests. Rich Farmbrough, 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC).

Sources Again

Need some reliable source that says another Bono's alias, like: The Sonic Leprauchaun, The Sunglasses' Imelda Marco... etc. Because I've posted some of them ("B-Man", "B") but they were deleted for not having a reliable source. Anyway, I just read that Ali herself calls him "B", but I can't remember were I saw it. I need help, please. Miss Bono (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• Sonic Leprechaun - U2: A Musical Biography By David Kootnikoff, page xi (First page of Introduction) [Do a quick search in Google Books for that book]
• The Sunglasses' Imelda Marco - Rolling Stone magazine, No. 986 (3 November 2005)

• Also, Independant in Ireland.

• B Man - This site is the closest I can get. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:50, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion Log

Why deletion log should be kept in article history after article deletion e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_Management_Company. When I open a red linked page, the page redirected to deletion log. Why is it so? 182.189.103.193 (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hello 182 and welcome to the Teahouse.

To answer your question, there are several reasons -

1. Wikipedia is transparent in almost everything that is done. Nearly every edit is visible to anyone who wants to see it. To put deletion logs is therefore logical.
2. It reduces the possiblity of deliberate malice on the deleter's part. Anyone can see who deleted it, and is free to ask the question of "Why was it deleted"
3. It allows for better maintainance. Very often, people keep trying to make some particular page which ought not to be here. A deletion log serves as a reminder of sorts. If a page is deleted repeatedly, it would make sense not to try making it.

Hope this helped.

Cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)