Wikipedia:Teahouse

Eman235, 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 article...

I would like to see an article or create one myself for a man who has written a book. I believe the content of his book and life/career deserves an explanation and/or encyclopedic entry. His good friend, mentor and peer, has an article on Wikipedia and I think this gentleman should too.

Please advise?

Thank you! Theobc (talk) 21:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

@Theobc: hello and welcome to The Teahouse. It is not what you think but what independent reliable sources say about the man you want to write an article about. Is there significant coverage in multiple sources such as respected newspapers and magazines, which we call notability? Look at the references for the man who has an article on Wikipedia. The fact is that this other man may not be entitled to an article, but if the other article was properly written and sourced, and the man was notable by our definition, you may use that article as a model.

If you want to write the article yourself, WP:AFC is the best way since others can evaulate the article while it is a draft. In what we call article space, it would likely be quickly deleted. There is also requested articles but that is a slow process.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:22, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

subpage to live

I just finished a subpage in my user space, who do I make it go live? Samlack (talk) 18:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Morning Samlack. I reckon you should put {{subst:submit}} at the top of it, and then wait for it to be reviewed, which might take a few weeks or more. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

The draft article was on the user's main user page, and he included the "nowiki" tags round "subst:submit" so that it was ineffective; I have moved the draft to a sub-page with {{Userspace draft}} at the top, and invited him to click the green button. JohnCD (talk) 21:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

References

Hey Teahouse, How do you make it to where when you add references in an article, you don't list the same reference twice. But you still link your facts to the same reference?Amanda Smalls 18:20, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey @Amanda Smalls: WP:NAMEDREFS is what you're looking for. To put it simply, you give a reference a name the first time it is used, and then refer to the reference's name any time you use the reference thereafter. Example of the first instance of a named reference:

<ref name="name"> reference goes here </ref>

To use the reference again later on:

<ref name="name" />

Hope that helps! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:26, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to ask, but could you show me what you mean in an article? I learn better through looking at the diffs of edits.Amanda Smalls 18:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

No problem - it's actually been implemented on one of the articles you made, Scarus ghobban. Take a look at the introduction while editing the page. You can see reference "j" appearing after the list of nicknames, and then appearing again at the end of the sentence. Let me know if you need further clarification. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Amanda Smalls. Have a look at this diff for Scarus dimidiatus. I have consolidated the citations and also expanded the web link to give a full citation. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Profile formatting

Hi, all. I created a profile, but can't correct the formatting; the text won't wrap around and form a paragraph, instead forming a long, single line of copy. Tried using different browsers and loading w/plain text, w/o success. Thoughts? TheLiteratureGuy (talk) 17:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Aschmidt21: We actually don't use indents for beginning new paragraphs on Wikipedia. When you add spaces at the beginning of a new line, you end up getting that gray box that you saw. I've gone ahead and removed the indentation for you. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Reference to information from a manufacturer's technical personnel

Hi! I am new to this. I updated an article about Kobo e-Readers today, based on my own experience with their reader and a detailed discussion with their technical assistance team. I'd like to know: (1) Is this a valid reference?; and (2) If it is, how would I go about citing it?Mitspacescientist (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

No I am afraid it is not acceptable. All information must be verifiable in a reliable source - that is a reader must be able to check the facts, at any time of day or night, at any point in the future. By talking to their technical assistance team, you have been conducting original research which is also unacceptable. Many people find these rules counter-intuitive, especially when they are referring to something, like their own-life, that they think they know better than anyone else, but these basic rules are to try and prevent information being invented, misinterpreted, or used to promote someone's point of view. - Arjayay (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

"At any time of day or night" is not correct. It is acceptable for a source to exist only in, for example, a handful of published paper copies, in only a handful of university libraries, that are only accessible to chosen academics, and only open 10am to 4pm weekdays. I'm pretty sure I've added references to sources that are published but expensive technical documentation from specific companies - it's possible to obtain those sources if one tries hard enough, but it might take weeks. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

(e.c) @Mitspacescientist: Hi Mitspacescientist. No this is not a valid reference and cannot be cited. All information must be verifiable in reliable, published sources. What you have done might be great information to work from in a different context, such as if you were writing a newspaper article. The heart of journalism is original research. By contrast, an encyclopedia is at the very opposite end; it is a tertiary source reference work, that presents a survey of already already published knowledge. For that reason we have a core content policy called no original research (see also the verifiability policy), that shows why this material is unusable and unacceptable for Wikipedia because of what it is. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I understand. I thought this might be the case and it is the reason that I asked the question. I did not cite anything rather than take the chance that I was doing something inadmissible. I still think the information is very useful and anyone can actually check it by either trying it on a Kobo e-Reader or talking to the Kobo folks. I tried very hard to be completely factual in the paragraph I wrote. I can't imagine that anyone would find the entry a problem or feel a need to remove it. In the mean time, I'll see if there is a User Guide or manual somewhere on the Net that I can reference to shore it up. Thanks for the wisdom!Mitspacescientist (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Mitspacescientist. The problem is of verifiability. Because Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anybody can edit, anybody may come along after you and change the information you have added, whether by accident, in error, or maliciously. If it is referenced to a reliable published source, then a reader can in principle verify it, even if you and the technician who told you it are no longer contactable. If it is not so referenced, it is unreliable and essentially worthless. --ColinFine (talk) 21:27, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

help in editing

Hi everyone! Facing a little problem in editing. In the wikipedia article on "Conduct disorder" I have added reference number 46 but there seems to be a problem with the ???date. I am not sure of what it is. Can someone help me out?

Also, Reference number 26 on the article on "Clozapine" is asking for title. How do I resolve that?

thanks. Raysujoy8 (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings @Raysujoy8: welcome to the teahouse. First here is an article you might find helpful: wp:references for beginners What I usually use is the Cite tool that is part of the basic editing widgets. If you click "Cite" then go down to where it will say "Templates" you can pull down the Templates menu and get some common kinds of references: books, journal articles, etc. Then it will give you a form to fill out. Note there are a lot of fields in that form, most of them are optional but it's best to fill in as much data as you can. I think the date and title things you are referring to are errors from a reference missing one or more required fields. When you get a red link in a reference it usually means either that some required field was left empty or some field such as the date has a value that isn't valid. I fixed the Clozapine reference for you, I had to do it a couple times myself because I kept getting the date format wrong. Here is what the code looks like FYI:

<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Midbari|first1=Y|last2=et. al.|title=Hematological and cardiometabolic safety of clozapine in the treatment of very early onset schizophrenia: a retrospective chart review.|journal=Journal of Child Adolescent Psychopharmacology|date= 2013-10-23|pmid=24111981}}</ref>

--MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Raysujoy8, I noticed that your citations at Clozapine looked like this: {{cite journal|pmid=24111981}}</ref>. My guess is that you intended to use {{cite pmid|24111981}}</ref>, but noticed that the documentation for {{cite pmid}} says "Per consensus, this template should no longer be used. Instead, please use the {{cite journal}} template." Unfortunately, {{cite journal}} doesn't work the way you tried to use it. However, if you use the form for journals that MadScientistX11 described above, you can enter the pmid and click on the search icon beside it to fill in all the fields (MadScientistX11, that would have made your life easier too). RockMagnetist(talk) 16:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Use of a picture on WIkipedia

I want to add a picture to an article in Wikipedia. The picture was released as a publicity shot by the Country Music Association in 1967 for use by the media. I have no idea what license to claim the right to use this picture on falls under. Can anyone help me out?TD (talk) 13:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, TD. It depends what you mean by "released .. for use by the media". Unfortunately, unless it was explicitly placed in the public domain (that is, they relinquished all rights to it. The other possibility, that of licensing it under something like CC-BY-SA, wasn't available in 1967 I believe), then it cannot be used in Wikipedia, unless such use meets all the criteria in non-free content criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 16:06, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

@ColinFine and Tdillard: Actually, some other possibilities exist. See the licensing (and extensive rationale and explanation) provided for https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Monroes_Cast_1966.jpg - another publicity photo from the same era. For that era, publication without a visible copyright notification is significant. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Demiurge1000: I've never heard of that exception before. --ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

how can i make the signature icon work in IE?

The signature icon (visible above the edit) window works when using Opera 24 but not when using Internet Explorer 11. How can I make it work in IE? — Philogos (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! Do you mean the signature icon on the WikiEditor? ///EuroCarGT 02:19, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Philogos welcome again, what version of IE you're using?.If you are using Internet explorer 8 make sure that 'Compatibility View' is turned off.You also have to remove Confluence from the list of sites viewed in Compatibility View, and also uncheck the 'Display Intranet Sites in Compatibility View' check box. Hope this helps--Chamith (talk) 05:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

I am using IE version 11. In Tools\Compatibility View Settings I turned off "Compatibility View" but left on "use Microsoft compatibility list" and now, thanks, the signature icon works if I do not login : --31.49.82.106 (talk) 22:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC) but after I log in it stops working again! signing off with manual four tildes — Philogos (talk) 22:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Reference incorrect

Hello, Can anyone guide me toward removal of a false reference and a successful edit of an entry? I'm trying to edit a company entry that lists an incorrect reference. The reference is one of those purchasable listings- you know, one of those websites that hold your ability to edit your company listing for ransom. The problem is, every time I try to edit our Wikipedia History (the founding information is wrong) it is being reverted due to that reference with incorrect information. CAEdits (talk) 22:05, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for visiting the Teahouse, CAEdits. I think we need to know little more information before we can help you with this question. Can you tell us to which article you refer? I am not familiar with the term 'edit a company entry'. Are you suggesting that a company itself is editing a Wikipedia article?

  Bfpage |leave a message  22:41, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

CAEdits, it appears your account has never been used for editing before (contribs), so we can't tell by looking at it where you're having this conflict. Please link us to it. Also, please ensure only one person uses a given account, it's not allowed to have a shared "company account". Also, I will admit I'm initially skeptical because people involved with a company often have a very different slant on presenting it than do neutral parties. Not saying you, but we have a lot of companies complaining because perfectly true, albeit negative, facts make it onto the article about them. Note that an article about a company is absolutely not an article for a company. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. Thank you so much for taking the time to respond. This is the entry I've been tasked with editing since there have been so many failed attempts, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freightquote.com. There is nothing negative that we're trying to change, just the facts. You can see that reference #3 isn't exactly reputable and it appears to be the issue. I don't see another reference that denotes a 2nd founder and we can provide several 3rd party references of the correct founder info. Your guidance is so very appreciated. CAEdits (talk) 20:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

copyright

Hi, I have had an article rejected because of copyright. I am assuming this is because I cut and pasted the objectives from the website of the organisation the article is about; but who owns the copyright? I jointly wrote the original on the website, surely I have a right to cut and paste it wherever I want? Jan Bridget 31.185.146.233 (talk) 22:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, User:31.185.146.233, and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia, material that are published elsewhere, including on the Internet, are presumed to be copyrighted to the original owner unless the website explicitly states that the material has been licensed under an acceptable Creative Commons License or GFDL. If you are the copyright owner of the material, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials on licensing the material under the Wikipedia license. KJ ^Discuss? 22:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! Copyright is a serious matter on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Projects. The article you wrote was rejected/deleted due to it having a copyright violation, a user has detected . You do not have the ownership of the original content where you have cut and pasted it, the copyright is owned by the organization you are presumably writing about. It's called Plagiarism and if you want to write up something you got to ensure it is in your own words, it is backed up by the source your using and lastly you understand you will submit work that is compatible with Wikipedia's Creative Commons license and GFDL. ///EuroCarGT 22:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Jan Bridget. While I'm sure EuroCarGT's reply was intended to be helpful, I don't think the word 'plagiarism' is appropriate if you wrote the original text. But Kkj11210's reply is more to the point: we require an explicit release by the copyright owner, whether that is you or the organisation. Even if the copyright question is settled, it is unlikely to be appropriate to paste the organisation's objectives from its website into a Wikipedia article, as they probably fall outside the "uncontroversial factual information" which is all that should be sourced from a non-independent source. Anything about the organisation's objectives should be included only if a reliable source independent of the organisation has discussed them. --ColinFine (talk) 16:00, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

My sincere apologies, ColinFine & 31.185.146.233 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I've misread that as I was on my mobile phone. However if you are the original text owner, you should verify your connection by sending a permission ticket as you are donating copyrighted text materials. ///EuroCarGT 20:51, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

help with the wikipedia adventure?

Hi there, I'm just starting out in the wikipedia adventure and I'm having trouble progressing past the part where it says "Someone sent you a message! Check your messages!" I went to my talk page, but I didn't see any new messages, and no new dialogue popped up. What should I do?

Thanks! internatwave Internatwave (talk) 21:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Internatwave! Looking at the revision history for your talk page, I see that @Internatwave welcomed you to the Teahouse, deleted the welcome and restored it. Why, I don't know - but that would explain why you got a message but saw nothing new. I will post a new message on your talk page, and we'll see if that works for you. RockMagnetist(talk) 05:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Silly me - I didn't notice that you're the one who made those edits. That wouldn't account for the notification (I tested that on my own talk page). There remains my test message. RockMagnetist(talk) 16:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Is this

Unresolved

@Ocaasi: just in case it is. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Scanner

In the recent India Wikimedia conference, I was very surprised to learn that there are few Wikipedias who give financial scholarships to their best editors for printer, scanner, computer hardwares, internet bills etc. Tamil Wikipedia has a project on this (here is the lik: Ta:விக்கிப்பீடியா:உதவித்தொகை). It was a new and surprising news for me.
I have requested a scanner there (needed for my Wikip/media works), but, I don't post in their Wiki.
As I learned many new things in the India conference, I am asking here, is there any project for En Wp editors where I can ask for a scanner? --Tito☸Dutta 20:50, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! Your Wikimedia chapter could provide you with equipment for free to contributors who are active in the Wikimedia Projects. I would suggest requesting your local Wikimedia chapter for free equipment. ///EuroCarGT 21:46, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Just to add that some Wikimedia Chapters may not have the equipment you are looking for. ///EuroCarGT 21:51, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks. --Tito☸Dutta 23:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC):::

Speaking as an editor of over five years of experience, Titodutta, I would say that a scanner is a tool that I rarely use. Occasionally, I might scan an image from a book published before 1923, or an old pre-digital photo from my own collection. But that has been rare. 99.9% of my work doesn't require a scanner, and if I didn't have one, I would just go to my local business support store (operated by wonderful people from India) where I could rent the use of a scanner for half an hour at a very reasonable rate. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:34, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

• I wrote about it here Ta:விக்கிப்பீடியா:உதவித்தொகை#User:Titodutta (it is in English). Thank you. --Tito☸Dutta 07:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Request help in editing a Post-it Notes talk page dispute on how best to write the publicly known facts of who invented Post-it notes first to post on Wikipedia page

Not exactly sure how to ask this question, but was told that teahouse was the best place to ask for help in editing it. A few Wikipedia editors over the last few years have been trying to introduce some factual (public 1997 Federal Court case records - AMRON vs 3M - and settlement reached) history onto both the ALAN AMRON and POST-IT NOTE Wikipedia pages.

Seems case law filed states Amron had in fact shown his invention of Press-on Memo in 1973 to 3M executives in 1974, when 3M then claimed to have invented it themselves. Without claiming or saying anything at all, at the very least, Wikipedia should make the world aware of these historical facts about the invention of Post-it notes which came from the invention of Press-on memo. I have, as you can see from my Talk on that Post-it note and Amron pages, exhausted my efforts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Post-it_note#Amron

If teahouse could please read that Post-it Notes talk page and suggest the correct wording to post that would allow the historical facts of the case and the settlement be posted, the world will thank you.

Post-it notes has a cult like following, and any facts about its origination or leading up to its creation is important.

Wikipedia has become the place for one to find historical facts about anyone and or anything. Why not Post-it notes?

Up until today 3M has controlled and manipulated what is being said about who invented Post-it notes. Anyone else who trys gets knocked down.

14 October 2014 LeannJordan LeannJordan (talk) 20:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse LeannJordan. I hope we can get you the information that you need. I went back to the talk pages that you reference. I noticed that you did create a new article on Amron. Your disputes with other editors seems to have spanned a long period of time. Perhaps it's time to step back for a moment and read: WP:Dispute resolution. I am not going to pretend that simply reading a help article will solve all the problems. You do have the option of asking another editor to become involved to help with the resolution of the problems that you see with the article and its editing. I don't have any one I can suggest to you at this time, but perhaps you may be able to find someone by examining the articles editing history and finding someone who you believe has a level head on their shoulders and can remain impartial. I may be wrong here, but it may be that you have such an intense interest in this topic that it has become personal. Right now I am the major contributor to an article that I am working on and for some strange reason when someone else comes to make an edit I have to remind myself that I do not own the article and anyone can change, revert or question anything that I do. When this happens we have to make sure that we don't take it personally. Please come back to the Teahouse. If we have not answered your questions and comments satisfactorily. Best regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Is there a policy regarding library catalog records?

Hello,

I work at a large nationally recognized research library, and we've been discussing various ways we can both help improve Wikipedia and at the same time offer better access to some of our collections. The question of linking to things like catalog records and finding aids has come up and I haven't really seen too many on here. I guess I'm wondering if there is an explicit or unspoken policy regarding these kinds of things. My only guess is that many records and finding aids only show institutional holdings or give bibliographic information about a particular item or collection but don't link to actual content and perhaps that's frowned on? Any thoughts on this matter would be appreciated.

Thanks ADGB1750 (talk) 19:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi ADGB1750 - I think WP:GLAM, the project that deals with collaboration with Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums, is probably the best place to discuss your ideas. Welcome to Wikipedia! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for coming to the Teahouse ADGB1750. I have seen article/list pages here on Wikipedia, which sometimes amounts to a simple annotated bibliography. But it sounds like your storehouse of information encompasses a lot more than just bibliographies. Are your bibliographies and records searchable online? Wikipedia articles often link to bibliographic entries that are not necessarily easily accessed by a reader of the article. For example, an editor on Wikipedia may have access to texts of scientific journals through his or her own institutional library. The editor who has access to the entire text of a journal article may still still cite that article and its contents, but should mention in the bibliography of the article that a subscription is required to access the information. It would be a wonderful thing to see your information become accessible to everyone, editors and readers alike. Best regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:18, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

How to...

How to add a reference? I want to add it on the page Cen (surname) Dadapotato (talk) 17:18, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Dadapotato welcome to the Teahouse. Easiest way to add reference is place them in between<ref>...</ref> tags.All you have to do is place URL of your source in between <ref> tags.For example let's say you want to provide [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29570347] as a reference then all you have to do is write <ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29570347]</ref> on the specific place you need it (For more information go to this link). Hope this helps--Chamith (talk) 17:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

@Dadapotato: Welcome from me as well. ChamithN has already given you some good information. If you want more information on references, you can also check out Help:Referencing for beginners. I hope that helps as well! --Jayron32 17:31, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

@Dadapotato: Please also be aware that wherever possible you should not use "bare urls" for references, such as the example shown above, as these can lead to link rot. Use an appropriate {{citation}} template wherever possible and consider archiving the link.  Philg88 ^♦talk 06:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you to all of you Dadapotato (talk) 14:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Expansion of email features

I see it is possible for Wikipedians to email each other within this site. But is it not possible to attach photos to the mails? Because I want to send other editors photos I took of pages from a book, so that they can use the information from the photos to develop articles. 15:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kailash29792 (talk • contribs)

Hello Kailash29792 welcome to the Teahouse, (You forgot to sign your post ) You can send email to other users by clicking "Email this user" from the "toolbox" on the left of the screen, when any User or User talk page is viewed. But no, you can't send picture through Wikipedia mail. Wikipedia mail should be used if you are discussing a confidential subject,Otherwise it is usually better to leave a message on the editor's talk page. And the message is sent as plain text. Wiki markup (such as links) and HTML code will not work. Your email address will also be disclosed to the recipient.--Chamith (talk) 16:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

how to completely replace an exising article

I want to contribute a completely new article about Berkeley Divinity School. The current one has basically shrunk to one paragraph. But: I work at the school--am I allowed to write an article about it? Or is that a conflict? Also, how do I go about adding a completely new article to replace an existing one? There are a few users that have been making small corrections. Should I consult with them? I do have a Wikipedia account! Johnarmstrong4567 (talk) 14:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I believe that you should hold a full consultation with them on the article's talk page. Now, you can not force them to participate, and, had you not the WP:COI you have declared, I would suggest that you take a bold stance and rewrite the article. Unfortunately you cannot do that. Start with seeking to consult, and come back here is that fails and ask what the next step ought to be. Tread softly, yet with precision. Fiddle Faddle 17:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Here are two points for you to consider, Johnarmstrong4567. First of all, we very rarely "completely replace" an existing article. That shows disrespect for other editors who have worked on the article over the years. Instead, the proper approach, in general, is to make a series of edits to expand and improve it. This allows other editors to accept and agree to some changes, while reverting and disagreeing with other edits.

However, because you are employed by the Berkeley Divinity School, you have a clear cut conflict of interest and should not be editing the body of the article yourself. Instead, propose additions to the article on its talk page, furnishing a link to a reliable source backing up any addition that you propose. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Summer of Monuments--how do you see the photos?

Hi, I just added two photos of the house at the historic site where I work in Windsor, NC. How do you see the photos that have been added? Also, how do you note in the "still needs for NC" that you have added photos. I am still debating adding a photo of my house, which is also on the register.NCDavid33 (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @NCDavid33: and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you are talking about File:1763 King-Bazemore Exterior.jpg and File:Front of 1803 Hope Mantion.jpg which you uploaded on Wikimedia Commons. To use those files, simply put type [[File:1763 King-Bazemore Exterior.jpg]] or [[File:File:Front of 1803 Hope Mantion.jpg]]. Cheers,  ΤheQ Editor  ^Talk? 17:52, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

ADDING TO THE DISCOGRAPHY OF MUSICAL SHOWS

As a new contributor to Wikipedia, I am not aware of a method to create a > discography of shows in articles about them. One of the main points of curiosity > about rare shows such as Jerome Kern's "Oh Lady! Lady!!" is what the show sounded > like. I understand that to add links to recordings that exist is considered > advertising. However, I believe people seeking information on these musical shows > need this ability. How may this be done without violating your guidelines? 2601:4:4A80:218:217:F2FF:FE02:632C (talk) 13:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You can sometimes link to a song, but you have to be careful about copyright - see Restrictions on linking. You can include a sample of the music - see Manual of Style/Music samples. You may be able to get further help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Theatre. RockMagnetist(talk) 06:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

why my article is not being published?

i am trying to publish an article which gives the information about a newly formed company but it is not being published. i have received this message "This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject" Ahsan Aftab Ansari (talk) 13:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Ahsan Aftab Ansari, and welcome to the Teahouse. Not every company will have an entry in an encyclopedia, only the ones which meet the criteria for what Wikipedia calls "Notability". If the company you mention is just new, then it is very unlikely that it would be notable yet; that may have to wait until it has extensive coverage by a number of independent sources. You can read about the concept of Notability and how it is determined at Wikipedia:Notability. --Gronk Oz (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

no no bro, it is not that new, it was created in 2008 and it also known by many people. 39.44.146.8 (talk) 07:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

article moderation for wikipedia

How long does it usually takes for an article to get moderated and posted on Wikipedia93.85.93.86 (talk) 12:50, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Um, It can take up to weeks for it to become integrated into the Wiki. You will get a message saying it has either been declined or it has been approved.Mirror Freak My Guestbook 12:53, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

What does it depend on? Thanks!93.85.93.86 (talk) 13:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The overall article. The references you added (reliable or not), Notability of the article.Mirror Freak My Guestbook 13:06, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Clear, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.85.93.86 (talk) 13:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

How can I change the Display Title of the page I made

Hi I created a page "United Medical Informational System (UMIAS)" and I need to change it on "United Medical Information and Analytical System ("EMIAS")" . I thought I would be able to change it after I become authorized, but after 4 days and more then 10 edits, I still can't do it. What should I do?IvanZuev (talk) 07:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi IvanZuev. You certainly should be able to move the page to a new title - what process are you following to try and rename it? Yunshui ^雲_水 07:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

oh, I got it. Thanks, man.IvanZuev (talk) 08:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not convinced that the current title (EMIAS) is correct. Shouldn't the title be the common name in English, ie "United Medical Information and Analytical System of Moscow" or some variation thereof, with a redirect at EMIAS?--ukexpat (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am looking to create a new page for "Thierry Browers" who is already mentioned on wiki. but it got deleted.

I submitted a separate source article that was used for him on Wiki page: Raw Foodism, so was wondering why that wasn't adequate to keep a page on him? He is a friend and I was helping him start it, and he was going to edit it later.Thierrybrowers (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks DebbieThierrybrowers (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

For reference Thierry Browers and Raw foodism.

Hello Debbie, welcome to the Teahouse. Just to be mentioned in Wikipedia is not enough to merit an article. A subject must be notable among other things.

As your source article: as nearly as I can tell (Graham, Douglas. "The Challenges of Going on a Raw Food Diet". FoodnSport.com. Retrieved 2011-03-31.) does not mention Thierry Browers. Beside that it is a blog--not a reliable source.

As to your username: unless you are Thierry Browers, that username is problematic, for it creates the impression that you are Thierry Browers.

I am sorry to have to give you all this bad news. —teb728 t c 00:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

One more thing: Neither Thierry Browers nor you (as his friend) should be editing an article about him, for you both have a conflict of interest with regard to him. —teb728 t c 01:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

How to correct language errors reported by Xtools

I'm working on the article Animatronics to prepare it for nomination as a featured article and I'd like to fix the language errors listed by X!tools but all of the errors are false positives. Is there any thing I can do to make them not show up as errors? David Condrey (talk) 22:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@David Condrey: Hey David, thanks for your question. It looks like X!'s tools maintains a bug reporting page through github. You need to make an account to report a new issue, but this is probably the fastest way to get the issue addressed. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 00:05, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! You can ignore them if you believed that the errors are not true. The tool just suggests possible errors, the tool is not perfect. Take for example yesterday's Featured Article: Capital Loop, LanguageTool lists 6 errors which are false. Good luck on the FA! ///EuroCarGT 00:06, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

And to add what I JethroBT said you could report bugs, errors or concerns to Github or Bugzilla. LanguageTool is currently on 2.8-SNAPSHOT which is a preview mode and not a stable build. ///EuroCarGT 00:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I submitted a feature request Issue 47 and forked the project so I can check out the code later. David Condrey (talk) 00:25, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Article deleted but can it be re-written?

I have followed the guidelines so far, in seeing if I can be granted permission to re-write an article that was deleted. I went rather fast writing the article and it was not well referenced nor was in the correct format. I would like a second chance. I have written to the person who deleted the page...but where do I go from here? And is it even possible for me to re-write it or will it automatically be deleted due to the subject being the same content? Mkdpellet3 (talk) 20:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Mkdpellet3: hello and welcome to The Teahouse. If you can do a much better job following the guidelines, chances are the article won't be deleted the second time, but if you write substantially the same article, it will likely not stay around. Make sure you work on it as a draft, and remember reliable independent sources and a neutral point of view.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mkdpellet3 welcome again, like Vchimpanzee said first work on it as a draft. Then you can submit it for review. Reviewer will help you to fix mistakes in your draft. And you can always use your sandbox to do test edits.--Chamith (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! As Vchimpanzee said above, you should start of with a draft either in your sandbox, or the Draft: space. One recommendation is to use Article's for Creation a place where you could work on your article and get assistance and reviews by experience members. Best, ///EuroCarGT 22:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Need help editing a post

Hello Wiki Teahouse,

I am hopeful that you can assist me. There is a misleading statement in a posting relating to one of my company’s investigational drugs, but our internal regulations preclude me from directly making edits to any Wiki content relating to our molecules. The URL for the data is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filanesib. The problematic statement is as follows:

However, a clinical trial published in 2012 found that the drug exhibited a "relative lack of clinical activity"; the trial was therefore halted before it was scheduled to end.[6]

This sentence is in the middle of a string of sentences which are about the use of filanesib in the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, but the problematic sentence is about a study of patients with advanced myeloid leukemias (AML). The manner in which the sentence is included is misleading because it suggests that a trial in multiple myeloma was halted due to a lack of clinical activity. While it is true that an AML trial was discontinued, but no multiple myeloma trials have ever been discontinued due to a lack of clinical efficacy. I propose that the sentence should either precede or follow the content about multiple myeloma, and it should be clarified that the discontinued trial was investigating the treatment of patients with AML.

If you are able, please let me know when the edit has been made.

Many thanks,

Steve65.114.206.125 (talk) 19:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Um, are you asking us to edit it for you since you can't?Mirror Freak My Guestbook 19:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Essentially, yes. The content is inaccurate and my company won't allow me to edit the content. If you are not able to provide assistance, please let me know who can. I have to assume that Wiki is interested in correcting inaccuracies when identified65.114.206.125 (talk) 19:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you provide a reference from a reliable source? Otherwise we can't "correct" it. Thank you!Mirror Freak My Guestbook 19:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Steve. I suggest that you add Template:Request edit in the format explained, to Talk: Filanesib, along with complete details and links to reliable sources backing up your proposed change. You may want to consider opening an account so that other editors can communicate with you reliably. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The source you have listed is accurate:

Khoury, H. J.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Borthakur, G.; Kadia, T.; Foudray, M. C.; Arellano, M.; Langston, A.; Bethelmie-Bryan, B.; Rush, S.; Litwiler, K.; Karan, S.; Simmons, H.; Marcus, A. I.; Ptaszynski, M.; Kantarjian, H. (2012). "A phase 1 dose-escalation study of ARRY-520, a kinesin spindle protein inhibitor, in patients with advanced myeloid leukemias". Cancer 118 (14): 3556–3564. doi:10.1002/cncr.26664. PMID 22139909.

The problem is that the sentence neglects to point out that the study is in patients with advanced myeloid leukemias. Since the sentence is sandwiched in the middle of several sentences about filanesib treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, the reader is left with the impression that the discontinued trial pertains to multiple myeloma, not advanced myeloid leukemias. The inclusion of a reference to the patients treated would at least clarify that the discontinued study pertained to advanced myeloid leukemias, not multiple myeloma.

Thanks for your help.65.114.206.125 (talk) 19:36, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Morning Steve. The article's author has clarified the sentence by providing a reference to the patients treated, and I have moved the sentence to where it appears to fit better contextually and chronologically. As mentioned above, the article's talk page Talk:Filanesib is a good place to discuss concerns about the article with the people writing it, and to make edit requests. Your company's internal regulations should permit you to edit that talk page, which is in accordance with Wikipedia best practices for parties with a conflict of interest. If you need any more help, please let us know. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 03:02, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello! What normally goes on the User page?

Hi Teahouse Host (Rosiestep ?) Thanks for the invite to the Tea House, I'm not entirely sure what to do here yet - obviously can't drink tea (joke :-) but I'll work it out eventually. First, how do I know who is here in the Teahouse? Second, it's my second day, so i should set up a User page, what do people normally put on the User page? Is there a minimum / maximum requirement? Excuse my ignorance - this is probably obvious to you, but most people of my generation have missed out on all that social media stuff. Tennispompom (talk) 17:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

See WP:USERPAGE for guidance. You can put more or less anything on a user page as long as it is not promotional or offensive.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi ianmacm, thanks but too late! I've just created one. Could you pls have a quick look before I inadvertently offend someone? I've gone for humour, but can change it if you advise. Tennispompom (talk) 18:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The main idea, Tennispompom, Is that your user page should be about you and your goals, interests and accomplishments as a Wikipedia editor. It can be blank, brief or detailed. The choice is yours, and you can expand it as time goes by. As for who is "here", hosts come and go, keeping an eye on the Teahouse. A new question usually attracts someone's attention fairly quickly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:33, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tennispompom. I like your user page. Humor is fine outside of article space - see Silly Things. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Well Tennispompom, I love your user page. Some of them are so boring and dry. Yours is great.

  Bfpage |leave a message  19:39, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

lack of process in user:Jimfbleak's deletion of Hiren's BootCD

I am appalled at the lack of process in user:Jimfbleak's deletion of Hiren's BootCD - the deletion failed to meet the stated criteria of (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion). How do I get this reverted so that the pros and cons can be argued out? Where do I find the content of the removed Article and Talk pages? How do we prevent the heavy-handed arrogance of user:Jimfbleak and user:Ianmacm from destroying wp? And please look at my contribution history and expertise before leaping to the same careless conclusions that those two leapt to. BenevolentUncle (talk) 13:17, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Looked pretty promotional to me: glowing testimonials, lists of features; it even went so far as to provide a download URL for the software. If you're determined to argue the toss then Deletion review is the place to do it, but you'd probably be better off recreating it from scratch in a neutral form. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that I've nominated an article for deletion, because usually I believe in fixing the article as the preferred option. However, this article had major WP:G11 issues and was previously deleted for the same reason in May 2010.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Right. Step 1 of the Deletion review is to first attempt discussion with the closing administrator i.e. user:Jimfbleak, so I'll do that here. Albeit with ill grace, because Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion says that

If a page has survived its most recent deletion discussion, it should not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations and pages that meet specific uncontroversial criteria

i.e. I infer that discussion should have occurred before deletion, which did not happen. So lets first fix up the mis-process of deletion so that other wp-ians have ready access to the delete article and Talk pages before finalising a decision. I.e. revert the deletion and instead nominate it for deletion. Then I will be able to click on the Contest this speedy deletion button or follow some other appropriate process while other editors are able to have their say. btw, I don't contest that the page is dodgy, but I assert that greater care is required than relying on quick impressions. And I resent the extra work that user:Jimfbleak and user:Ianmacm are putting me through. In case you haven't figured this out, I am not a rorter, quite the opposite. Indeed, re AGF I am assuming cock-up rather than conspiracy on the part of user:Jimfbleak and user:Ianmacm, because Hiren & Co would be much better off financially if there is no readily-available wp article describing their CD's short-comings.

Once the issue of mis-process above has been dealt with, I regard the editing of this article as potentially an important test case for the future directions of wp. At the very least I regard it as essential that the world should have ready access to the article's history, even if it stays off the official wp canon - I wasted an hour trying to download Hiren's CD before I turned to wp and read its History and Talk pages (this data then let me understand the extent to which Hiren's is merely click bait vs having some dubious value reassembling and/or stealing the IP of the original authors). But the bigger issue is whether a new principle needs to be promulgated re when the rules are to be imposed; giving declining numbers of wp editors, I think that if wp fails to get such settings right then it will continue to lose contributors and then be unevenly pruned back (in the fight against increasing hordes of rorters) to an ugly stump of greatly reduced value by decreasing numbers of editors whose main talents lie in nitpicking rather than in expertly informing.

BenevolentUncle (talk) 21:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

But it did not survive its most recent deletion discussion. —teb728 t c 22:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC) Beside that you seem to be under the misconception that speedy deletion requires a deletion discussion. That is wrong: The main purpose of speedy deletion is to allow deletion of pages without discussion if they meet certain limited criteria (like being unambiguously promotional). —teb728 t c 23:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@teb728, from memory (and I am forced to rely on memory because I can't access the history!!) there was a discussion circa 2011 re deletion in the Talk pages and evident in the History but it was not deleted, so regardless of whether it was once deleted in 2010, it did survive for years after its most recent deletion discussion. Thus I was not suffering the misconception you described: I understand that speedy deletion does not require discussion; instead my complaint was that did it not qualify for speedy deletion in the first place. I am also peeved that rather than replying to my detailed Talk reply, user:Ianmacm got user:Jimfbleak to delete the article's pages along with my reply - that seems quite rude to me. Indeed, I thought user:Ianmacm's last threat to delete the article was tantamount to bullying; I ignored it in the expectation of due process, so I am appalled at due process not being followed.

Could I also point out that best wp practice cannot be adequately reviewed if the offending administrator deletes all the evidence. When I went to leave a msg on user:Jimfbleak's Talk page, I noticed it is full of other editors asking if they can get access to what was deleted. If user:Jimfbleak is so busy that he only has time to shoot first and let others ask questions later, perhaps the solution is to act in a way that encourages folk to participate in wp, instead of leave it.

BenevolentUncle (talk) 01:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

@ user:Yunshui ironically, the reason it looked so promotional was because User:Ianmacm had reverted my criticisms of it. I was trying to efficiently provide balance by breaking the rules to match the rule-breaking of the article as it existed, and he got stroppy with my rule breaking without bothering to fix the huge mass of rules already broken. Given the resulting kerfuffle, next time I am more likely to not bother. And if enough similar editors have similar experiences, then wp will (continue to?) haemorrhage. BenevolentUncle (talk) 01:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

All of this should really be on the article talk page rather than forum shopping elsewhere. The reason why Hiren's Boot CD is controversial and has so little reliable sourcing is because it contains unauthorized use of copyrighted software. Criticizing it by adding even more original research makes the article worse, not better. And using bold or italics to add personal opinions about the software to the article is silly. This is an unfixable article unless some reliable sources can be found.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:57, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree with much of this, and will copy this conversation to the Talk page once it has been restored as per my request to user:Jimfbleak on his Talk page. Then we can get back to where we should have been 1000 words ago, i.e. discussing how to fix the situation, preferably without dismissing each other's ideas as silly before having considered them. BenevolentUncle (talk) 12:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Obvious conflict of interest but also obviously (hopefully!) neutral contribution

Dear Teahouse,

I mean to do a hopefully neutral page about the company I work for. It should state the name, what it stands for (brain electrical source analysis = BESA) and that is produces software for EEG and MEG analysis. And that's it, no more. Similar open source software is on wikipedia. They are of course more notable, as more people use them to publish, still (otherwise this and other companies wouldn't exist) a lot of publications are done with commercial software too. Would that be acceptable for wikipedia? I read the documentation, and though I guess a page about or company is not desired due to my affiliation (I am assuming the notability is ok), I wanted to be sure. Thank you very much for your time. Andre Andre at besa (talk) 08:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Andre at besa: While we deprecate WP:COI we have a mechanism at WP:AFC for helping COI editors to rip away any inappropriate material. I suggest this route to you, together with patience throughout the review process. I recommend that you declare your COI expressly n the talk page of the draft itself and deploy {{Connected contributor}} at the head as well. Some authors are able to achieve good articles despite COI. With luck you are one such. Fiddle Faddle 10:27, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

You may also want to review WP:Notability and WP:Company before you begin. These pages will give you an idea of how we determine notability of an organization. It would be a shame to go through the effort of drafting a page if only to see it deleted as non-notable. Best of luck. Keihatsu ^talk 12:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi both,

thank you very much for your time. I will follow your advice and see what I can do! Cheers, 87.138.135.246 (talk) 09:40, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Ops, had forgotten to log in! Sorry!

Anyways, thank you for your help. Best Andre at besa (talk) 11:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Orphan

For Wikipedia:Orphan, how do you know if any articles are linked to an article? -- Annonymus user (talk) 06:43, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey @Annonymus user: When viewing an article (or any other page for that matter), take a look at the navigation links at the left side of the page. Under the 'Tools' section, the first link you see should be "What links here". That'll show you what pages link to the page you're viewing. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, never noticed that. -- Annonymus user (talk) 06:57, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

posted a question here yesterday.. where is it?

hi everyone. excuse my ignorance. i am a new user. i posted a question here yesterday, but i dont know where to find the answer. i can't even find the question. thank you. Homeopathicstereo (talk) 06:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Homeopathicstereo: Looking at your list of contributions, I don't see any other instances of you posting a question here. Are you sure you posted a question? Perhaps you weren't logged in when you posted. Regardless, questions are archived after three days, so your question should still be here somewhere below. Do you remember what the question was about? We might be able to better assist you.

For future reference, you can view questions that have been archived after three days of inactivity by using the search box at the upper-right of this page. This lets you search through all the hundreds of pages of archived questions and answers. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:58, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

There was a technical problem with the Teahouse question script for a couple of days, discussed on the Teahouse talk page, that prevented questions from posting properly. It was caused by an upgrade to the MediaWiki software. Apologies for the inconvenience, Homeopathicstereo, and I humbly request that you post your question again. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:06, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you all. I will repost under a new, more relevent heading. Homeopathicstereo (talk) 07:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Large edits

I made some edits to the page Laci Green. Some of them were considered biased by someone which might be true, but because of this they removed all of the changes I made instead of just removing the biased part. I am scared to edit on it again because it seems like it's a waste of time now. What should I do about it? TempletonU (talk) 05:58, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, TempletonU. Since you conceded that some of your edits may have been biased, the best advice I can give is to refrain from making biased edits. In this particular case, I suggest that you discuss your proposed unbiased edits on the article's talk page. Please read about our bold, revert, discuss cycle, which is applicable here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

But I made several edits and they were not controversial, Why did he revert them all? It should be be so much work to make such simple changed. TempletonU (talk) 06:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted with the edit summary "POV edits and undue emphasis on blogger reactions." So, your edits were controversial to the person who reverted. Discussion is ongoing on the article's talk page, and that is the proper place to reach consensus on your proposed changes. Sometimes, it takes "work" to implement changes. That is the nature of collaborative editing, TempletonU. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I looked over the talk page and given TempletonU's comment, suspected Ninja of bullying a new user who couldn't do much better. I instead found out that the affirmative consent criticism came from a self published blog, and that's the only part that was omitted. (Other than the section headers and the 'self proclaimed feminist' bit.) He even gave his assent to include those back in. Tutelary (talk) 18:17, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for coming to the Teahouse TempletonU. On Wikipedia I mostly create content in smaller chunks, to prevent someone from doing what has happened to you. Sometimes I add content just one sentence at a time. That way someone has a problem with that particular statement, that's all he will delete or change. I have the additional problem of not being able to discuss changes on the talk page because there are so few editors that are active in my area. So I do a lot of documentation of the changes.

  Bfpage |leave a message  19:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Online links on category pages

In Category:Renewable energy in Algeria I have found two direct online links to web sites. (Renewable Energy Developement Center and Renewable Energy Portal). I was under the impression that category pages were meant to contain only other categories or wikilinks to articles. Are these entries an example of spam or is this a new practice or simply an error. It doesn't look right to me so I'd like to know whether it will be in order for me to remove them. If they are of use then surely the best place for them is in an articles as references. It seems that both these links were placed there by people without Wikipedia accounts. I just thought I would check here first before I remove them. Jodosma (talk) 20:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jodosma and welcome to the Teahouse you are quite correct they have no place on the category pages, feel free to remove them. Theroadislong (talk) 21:03, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank You

It is so nice to hear from you fellow editors. Your words are so comforting to know help is available.

Yes, I understand the concern of the editor who reviewed my submission. Yes, I need to document the article further and provide more references. In fact, I do have ample documentation to list and link up the text to the references. I'm working on it will resubmit the page.

Thanks for your support.

Axshah95 — Preceding unsigned comment added by مرداد٩٣ (talk • contribs) 11:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for coming to the Teahouse. I went back to look at your contribution history and I have not found any indication that you have had an article reviewed on English Wikipedia. I did see that you have some activity on another Wikipedia, but I don't recognize the language. Unfortunately, I can't help you with the the problems that you may be having in the other Wikipedia. Something that may help the process along is to create your User page. I see that you have created a user talk page, so then on your new user page. You can tell people a little bit about yourself. Did you upload some photographs that there was a question about?

  Bfpage |leave a message  19:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Video referencing

Hello, I am currently working on the article, Thillana Mohanambal. I have posted some video references in the "Legacy" portion of the article. While searching on both Google and Wikipedia about how to post them on wikipedia, it said use "{{cite AV media...". I have used that style of referencing. Is it ok? If not can you tell me which style to use. Thank you. Thamizhan1994 (^{Appo Pesu}) 13:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

@Thamizhan1994: The format is fine. But using Youtube (and similar sites) as a reference is very rarely appropriate. Often copyright is breached there. It is also a user edited site. As a general rule you must avoid such things as references. I would expect Thillana Mohanambal to be inspected for such items and for an experienced editor to consider them carefully and probably remove them. Fiddle Faddle 08:10, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings from the Teahouse Timtrent. I was fortunate at one time to be able to find the transcript of an interview online. I did not have to refer to a YouTube video (which I never do anyway) but could instead refer to the website where anyone could see the transcript. I hope this might be the case for you.

  Bfpage |leave a message  20:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Please judge your source against WP:42, and accept my good wishes. It was, however, not my question. Fiddle Faddle 21:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

help editting a page, specifically photo insertion

Hello! I need an administrator to help me with inserting a photo and caption on someone's page. I was given permission by a recording artist/ actress to edit her page for her, since she told me she was not authorized to edit her own page. I was able to help her add some info. To her page and was sucessful. But when i try to upload her photo and caption, i do not have admin. Privileges. Can someone help me out? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlipet828 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Carlipet, welcome to the Teahouse. You can't upload images yet as your account isn't autoconfirmed. You need to make some more edits so that you have made at least 10. Once you have then your account will be confirmed and you can upload images. Nthep (talk) 16:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Calipet, Since Simone White is a living person, any photo of her on Wikipedia must be licensed under a free license. That means that you could upload it to Commons, where (unless they have changed the rules recently) you don't need to be autoconfirmed to upload a file. However, you need to understand that it is not enough for her to authorize use of the photo on Wikipedia: the copyright owner (generally the photographer) must grant permission for reuse of the photo by anyone, anywhere, for anything; that is what a free license means. Most professional photographers are not willing to grant that kind of permission. —teb728 t c 07:04, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Carlipet828. It is right that people are discouraged from editing articles about themselves; but people are also discouraged from editing articles about their friends and relatives, for the same reason: please read conflict of interest to understand the reasons, and for advice on how you, or she, should proceed. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Change

I wonder why they have changed the "Tea House" page.
Now the old questions are at the top and new ones are at the bottom,
we all were used to the old layout.
Is there any logic or reason??
Aftab Banoori ^(Talk) 15:50, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

A script is broken. See Wikipedia talk:Teahouse#Bottom posting. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear PrimeHunter

Thanks

Aftab Banoori ^(Talk) 16:44, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

invisible but searchable text

Hi Teahouse folks, I'm creating an article on an English Renaissance manuscript which uses many archaic spellings for titles of songs. I'd like to be able to preserve the archaic spellings, but would also like for users to be able to search for the titles using modern spellings (without displaying the modern version). Is this possible? kosboot (talk) 17:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! You could always redirect the modern spelling to the official original spelling article. For example the Sears Tower is the original name but the new name is the Willis Tower so I put: #REDIRECT Willis Tower on the Sears Tower page. Best, ///EuroCarGT 19:12, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello kosboot and welcome to the Teahouse. Having written some articles about persons and places with different spellings, I'm not so sure about having the alternative spellings hidden, since they may be a source for those readers who might want to search in other places/sites and they might be difficult to locate then. My advice is that you put all the alternatives in notes. This will make them searchable but not distracting the text itself. Look at article Puankhequa where ref #2 lists all the different ways to spell his name. That ref originates in the infobox where the name is spelled with Roman letters and Chinese characters. I have checked, and this way all the different spellings directs to the article when used in say a Google search. Best, w.carter-Talk 19:23, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

@Kosboot: I also took a peek at your article (nice work btw!) and in the case of that article it might be neater to have the notes separate from the refs in a notelist, just like in this article which also contains tables and lists. Happy editing! w.carter-Talk 19:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks for your very helpful comments, W.carter! kosboot (talk) 23:02, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Looking for feedback in Elaine King article

Hello, I´m the creator of this article (paid edition). Following the suggestion of an editor who is participating, I´m looking for feedback. Some lines of the article were deleted because the editor considered them promotional; in some of them it is ok, but I have doubts in two of them: 1 - about Elaine King´s role in her current job at WE Family Offices, the text was: "where she works with families to establish channels of communication, identify their specific needs, and create customized solutions that support and strengthen the family business." is this "promotional puffery"? 2 - "King also advises on retirement planning, saving for educational needs, estate planning, family meetings and financial competency programs focused on children and women."... is this "unreferenced promotion"? is this not a fact? .. And please check "About "Community" section deletion" in talk page, and tell me what you think. Thanks!--Ane wiki (talk) 20:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, to me these are promotional. It's a matter of level of detail. The fact that her role includes advising families on financial and business matters is fair enough, provided this is supported by the sources, but the detail about the methods she uses is not unless there is substantial writing in independent sources which focusses on these methods or areas.

In answer to your other question on the talk page: the article is an orphan because there are no other articles which link to it: it's not something which can be solved in the article itself. --ColinFine (talk) 21:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your answer. I understand. I will look for this sources. As for the second question, I understand that the article is an orphan, I was talking about the discussion in "About "Community" section deletion", at the end of the talk page.--Ane wiki (talk) 21:49, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Ane wiki for asking this question. I think you're going to help a lot of people by bringing this up since so many will have the same question. I do a lot of editing for brevity. My goal is to say things with the fewest words possible and to remove puffery, weasel words and things that express a point of view. For example, here is your version of the text:

"where she works with families to establish channels of communication, identify their specific needs, and create customized solutions that support and strengthen the family business...King also advises on retirement planning, saving for educational needs, estate planning, family meetings and financial competency programs focused on children and women."

Now here is my version of the text: "X facilitates the improvement of family communications by identifying specific needs. Customized solutions are provided to support the economic goals of the family."

  Bfpage |leave a message  20:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Bfpage! thanks for your advice! Can I upload the phrase you've written?

As I said on the talk page, I saw other pages like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariela_Dabbah which were written in the same style, and I did not see anyone questioning, then I thought it was valid. An editor answer me with "Please see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists "... I understand the idea, then can I edit other articles, like it, where I found this style? or make the suggestion to an admin?--Ane wiki (talk) 00:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Go ahead and edit them to improve the style, Ane. See Be bold, one of our most important guidelines. If your changes should be reverted, don't revert back, but start a discussion on the article talkpage. Bishonen | talk 11:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC).

Thank you Ane wiki for letting me suggest an edit to your article. Of course you can use what I have written. It is not copyrighted!

  Bfpage |leave a message  12:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help!--Ane wiki (talk) 16:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hi,

I face problem in upload figure onto the article that I wrote. It say I need to wait 4 days. I create my account 2 days ago....

Is it true? Or I saw the wrong lines : -) Is there any other way out?

Tks Ben Fang — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben Fang (talk • contribs) 00:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse Ben Fang! The notice you've seen was probably stating you needed to be autoconfirmed to proceed with the action. Once you get 10 edits and 4 days of Wikipedia activity, your account will be autoconfirmed and you may be able to upload the file, move pages or edit semi-protected pages. If you want to upload an image you could use Wikipedia:Files for upload, a place where volunteers upload requested image under policies or you may request your account to get confirmed. Best, ///EuroCarGT 02:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

questions by user Comp-heur-intel

Hi there. 2 questions 1.I recently put myself up as a host. I was removed. Maybe I didn't understand the process. If someone could explain, great. 2.I recently made a new page, then a couple of days later added some references, as requested. The new page is still invisible. I cleared caches. Should I just wait? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comp-heur-intel (talk • contribs) 01:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Comp-heur-intel. With regards to your first question, you only have made 69 edits in the two weeks since you established your account, so you clearly do not have the experience necessary to be an effective host. For example, you did not sign your question with four tildes, and SineBot came along and did it for you. Teahouse hosts should have broad experience with editing, and familiarity with our most important policies and guidelines. You are welcome to ask questions here at any time, but I suggest waiting a few months before asking to become a host.

As for your second question, I assume that you are talking about Heterostasis(Computational). That article is live and not invisible. However, the article has significant shortcomings. The three references you have provided do not establish that this is a discrete and notable topic in computer science. Much of the article discusses the origins of the word and uses outside of computation. Please read our policy on articles about neologisms. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

work

How to know which articles need helps? I mean how to get works to do?Jojolpa (talk) 01:58, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome Jojolpa to Teahouse! Thanks for your desire to dive right in! You could start out by helping over at the Community portal, a page listing some pages that may require work. You could also try out Wikipedia:GettingStarted a feature which allows users to improve Wikipedia, you could enable it by heading to the Main page and on your browser URL bar, add ?gettingStartedReturn=true right beside the URL link and load the page. It should suggest you some pages for improvements. Best, ///EuroCarGT 02:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

ACCESSIBLE

I think this website should be designed so that it is easily accessible with any internet device. It should easily be approachable by many people can edit it.Jojolpa (talk) 02:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your question, Jojolpa. Please read Help:Mobile access for information on reading and editing Wikipedia with a variety of devices. Personally, much of my editing (including writing this answer) is done with an Android smart phone. Currently, I use an HTC One, accessing the desktop site rather than the mobile site. That's my preference. The Wikimedia Foundation works hard to make all its websites as accessible as possible to the widest variety of users. This is a challenge for many technical reasons. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:35, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Agreed with what Cullen328 said above. I often edit with my Nexus 5 and use the desktop site. The mobile site is designed to work with many devices with web browsers. Wikimedia Foundation has a variety of mobile applications such as Wikipedia Mobile to be well suited to your device that are available to the popular operating systems. Another application from the WMF is Wikipedia Beta which you could test now and report comments, suggestions, problems or concerns to developers to assist you and others to build a better browsing and editing experience for everyone. ///EuroCarGT 03:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

UPLOAD

Hello everyone ,I'm again here to ask a question .Can we upload articles instead of creating them?Jojolpa (talk) 02:37, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jojolpa nice to see you again on Teahouse.If you are looking for a way to upload a document from your computer to Wikipedia then I'm sorry to say that it isn't possible, But you can always use your sandbox to do test editings and other experimental edits.And remember, you shouldn't copy-paste details/content from other copyrighted documents to Wikipedia articles.--Chamith (talk) 02:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

DOWNLOAD AND INSTALL

Can this wikipedia be downloaded and installed as like as other browsers can be?Jojolpa (talk) 03:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Wikipedia is a website and could be access on any web browser with an established network connection. ///EuroCarGT 03:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

One never knows though. It is possible that one day a free "Wikrowser" might come to be, provided that: 1. Someone takes the time to put it together and 2. It utilises only its own resources, with the exception of resources that are made freely available. Such a thing exists on mobile platforms already (or at least on devices utilising iOS) in the form of Wikipanion. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

IMAGE

Can information icons, warning icon and hand stop icons can be used by me on other's talk pages to inform them or I need some special permission to do that?Would anyone like to answer this question please?Jojolpa (talk) 03:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

You're talking about warnings and notices, right? If so, you don't need any "special permission" to place such warnings/notices. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 03:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

But you shouldn't misuse these warnings/notice.Civility is an important factor on Wikipedia. Misuse of warning templates to harass/attack other editors is not accepted and you will be blocked if you continue to do so.--Chamith (talk) 03:22, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jojolpa: Hi again! :) And when we are on the subject of civility: Please don't use all capitals in the headings for your questions, that is considered equal to shouting here. We know that you are new, so no-one is offended now. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 10:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

NOTIFICATION

If I type {{ping|someone}}, will this notify someone ? I mean, will he/she get notification or not? would anyone like to reply,please?Jojolpa (talk) 03:51, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Someone would be notified by doing so. You can also notify someone by typing [[User:Someone]], if you want to link to one's userpage without notifying them, you can use {{noping|Someone}}. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 04:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jojolpa and welcome to the Teahouse. I have left you a small guide on how to ping and alert others at your talk page. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:33, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jojolpa: They will usually get a notification if you signed the post but there are some technical details at mw:Help:Echo#Mentions. It also assumes they haven't disabled "Mention" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo, but I'm guessing few users have disabled it. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Converting a family tree from Template:Family tree to Template:Chart

Hello

I'm trying to convert this family tree to chart by writing chart instead of familytree. I tried it manualy, or using familytree.js. The unwanted result is this. The last two columns are disappearing, with the exception of the last three boxes. I don't know how to fix this. Can someone, please, help me. What should I do for my chart to appear in a normal, complete, way? Thank you. Daduxing (talk) 06:04, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Daduxing and welcome to the Teahouse. Having wrestled with family trees I know how difficult they can be. I have not looked in detail at your examples, but I know that they are very sensitive to having the right number of "|-|-|-|" between the different names. If you fall short by even one "|-|" the chart can't produce the last box (it can't "reach far enough" to put in the box). Try adding and subtracting these spaces first and see what happens. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I tried, but is not working. I realized that when I change it back to Template:familytree it's displaying properly. Only in the chart format the boxes are disappearing. Daduxing (talk) 12:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, this is beyond my knowledge then. I have looked at it properly, but cannot find the "missing part". Best, w.carter-Talk 13:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Pictures

Is it legal to put one or two pictures found on Wikipedia into my essay? -- Annonymus user (talk) 06:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Annonymus user. If the images in question are made freely available under a Creative Commons license, then you can use them in any way you choose. However, some images on Wikipedia are used under our policy on use of non-free images. Common examples are movie posters, book and album covers, corporate logos, and the like. Those images can't be re-used in essays, or anywhere else other than the specific authorized article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Blank the page

So, is the teahouse page being blanked once in a while? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annonymus user (talk • contribs) 06:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Annonymus user. The Teahouse has had some technical challenges in recent days, related to an upgrade of the MediaWiki software. Hopefully, things will settle down soon. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:37, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I don't think you understand what I mean. -- Annonymus user (talk) 06:39, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you can clarify, then. Detailed questions are better than vague ones. My second attempt at an answer is that older questions and answers get archived. Is that what you mean, Annonymus user? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Never mind, this question isn't important anyway. -- Annonymus user (talk) 06:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Can someone help me delete this question? -- Annonymus user (talk) 06:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Annonymus user. The answer to your question is no, the Teahouse page is never (intentionally) blanked. Instead conversations are archived for future references. You can see the archive a bit further up this page to the right where it says "Question archived?". The archiving is an automatic and continuing process, so in a while this question/tread will also be archived. The only way to really delete something at the Wikipedia is to make a request for deletion. Read about it here: Wikipedia:Deletion process. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:17, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

newly created articles

Is there a page that says "XXX just created a new article YYY" or "XXX just edited article YYY" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annonymus user (talk • contribs) 07:09, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Annonymus user (talk · contribs), yes there is. it's called Recent changes and it's another useful link you'll find in the interaction section on the left hand side of the screen. If there is one particular user's edits you want to know about then your need to look at their contribution list. It's another toolbox link called User contributions that is only seen when you are looking at that user's userpage or talk page. Otherwise you can type Special:Contributions/XXX to see XXX's contributions. All contribution logs are public so anyone can view any user's log including those of unregistered (IP) accounts. Nthep (talk) 08:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Expanding on Nthep's excellent answer, Special:NewPagesFeed provides a feed of all the recently created pages and articles. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 08:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Just a note to Annonymus user. I can see from your question that you may be thinking that the WP could perform like Twitter or some other social media, where you get updates on activities all the time in small notifications. Well, the WP is not like any of those sites. This is one of the most common misunderstandings about the WP. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

How to fix non-working external links?

I'd like to replace two no-longer-working external links on the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe page with the current working URLs. On the edit page the links are currently in brackets and have an asterisk in front of each. Can I simply paste the correct URL over the bad URL, with the correct URLs still in the brackets and also leaving the asterisk in front of each? There are also a couple bad links in the "Notes" section, but when I click "edit" there, the current URLs aren't shown--all I see is "reflist." How are links in the "Notes" section corrected? Is there somebody I can notify to correct them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SkybirdForever (talk • contribs) 02:33, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello SkybirdForever and welcome to the Teahouse. You are quite right, the external links have really gone sour. And yes, you can exchange the nonexistent urls with the correct ones. Just be sure to keep the single space between the link and the description of it, otherwise it will not perform correctly. As for your other concerns please post them in detail on the talk page of the article and someone working on the article may come along and help you with it. I will be keeping an eye on the page for you as well. References are a bit tricky, you can read about how they work here: Help:Referencing for beginners. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Asian Games medal tallies from the past to the recent Asian Games in Inchon, South Korea.

Dear Wikipedia Editor,

My question is if you can correct the error on the added total medals from the past to recent Asian Games? Here are the medal tally of the Philippines in past Asian Games. Count the number of total medals. It's excitedly what I mention. The correction is 64 golds, 112 silvers, 205 bronzes and a total of 38. As far as this year's Asian Games in Inchon, South Korea is concern, it show 2 silvers and 12 bronzes. The corrections are 3 silvers and 11 bronzes. The 1 gold and 15 total medals are correct. Anyway, add carefully the total medals. It's excitedly what I added there.

Year Games	Gold	Silver	Bronze	Total	Rank
1951 New Delhi	5	6	8	19	4
1954 Manila	14	14	17	45	2
1958 Tokyo	9	19	15	43	2
1962 Jakarta	7	6	24	37	3
1966 Bangkok	2	15	20	37	10
1970 Bangkok	1	9	12	22	11
1974 Tehran	0	2	11	13	16
1978 Bangkok	4	4	8	16	9
1982 New Delhi	2	3	9	14	10
1986 Seoul	4	5	9	18	6
1990 Beijing	1	2	7	10	13
1994 Hiroshima	3	2	8	13	14
1998 Bangkok	1	5	12	18	21
2002 Busan	3	7	16	26	18
2006 Doha	4	6	9	19	18
2010 Guangzhou	3	4	9	16	19
2014 Incheon	1	2	12	15	22
     Total	63	111	196	368	10

Sincerely,

Alejandro Munoz § — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.0.120 (talk) 02:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Alejandro. (I have reformatted your table so that it is more readable). This sort of comment should go on the talk page Talk:Philippines at the Asian Games. But that table should not appear in the article unless all the information in it - including the totals - is referenced to published reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity...

This has nothing to do with me; rather, I ask this out of curiosity.

If one is a long-time Wikipedian who abides by the rules, and is not jaded in any manner whatsoever, and they are asked by a company that they work for to start a Wikipedia article on their company, and they consider doing so (first having to make sure that the company is attested in reliable print sources, as well as that the company meets our notability guidelines), and (if it meets those) begins to write an article on them, would they still have a conflict of interest?

What I mean is, if, for sake of argument, the Wikipedian in question did not actually have the company's interests ahead of their wishes to improve (and abide by the rules of) Wikipedia (and as such wouldn't actually include material that couldn't be reliably backed up, nor would they include promotional material), could they really be said to have a conflict of interest? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 11:16, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tharthan. In your hypothetical situation, the good Wikipedia editor has a boss who is almost certainly not as well-informed and committed to the neutral point of view as your imaginary editor. A person with the power to fire, or to give salary increases or promotions. This editor should use the Articles for Creation process, and disclose their conflict of interest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:47, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

That's a fair point. I never considered it from the perspective of a meddling executive messing with the due process of article creation. Hmm... I wonder if any cases like that have happened before. I'll have to search the archives of Wikipedia:AFC and see what comes up.

I just find it interesting reading through historical discussions (it's a guilty pleasure) for my own amusement. Please do not think poorly of me for doing so.

In any case, thank you for answering my question. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 20:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

How is gas dupont achieve standards? Let you know comments - http://www.gasoto.com

How is gas dupont achieve standards? Let you know comments! - http://www.gasoto.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaslanh01 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Gaslanh01. What is your question about editing Wikipedia? That is the only kind of question which is appropriate for this page. --ColinFine (talk) 16:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

bentsutomu1234

I would like to submit this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Bentsutomu1234/sandbox&oldid=629754472....how do I do it?

Hey Bentsutomu1234, welcome to the Teahouse. The article you've written is probably more appropriate for Wikiversity which hosts free learning materials, or could possibly be added to content already on Wikibooks, where free textbooks are hosted. The English Wikipedia generally excludes essays because they're not within in our encyclopedic scope. That said, it looks like some of content might be able to improve information in the special relativity article, particularly as you've included many sources in your report. Let me know if you need any help moving the content to a particular spot. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)