Wikipedia:Teahouse

David Biddulph, 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

Tried my first edit and failed miserably need help in correcting my error

Tried updating Robert S. Morse page with new information I have from a 1961 Army R&D magazine and tried placing some of the content. That went well but when I tried to edit and add my source I received a bold error saying the reference was not found. Now the page doesn't show up on Wikipedia. I feel I have lost the pervious work on the page. Any help would be greatly appreciated.NeoGraphix (talk) 16:09, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing Neo. I'll take a look and then get back to you on your talk page :) --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 16:19, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

All sorted. It was a simple syntax error which I have explained on your talk page :) --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 16:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

HOW TO

Can we but infoboxes in sandboxes? I do not know. And how can I invite authors? Dadapotato (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Dadapotato welcome to the teahouse. Yes, you can put Infoboxes in your sandbox. Your sandbox is meant to be a temporary work area where you try things out before posting changes to the actual encyclopedia so you can pretty much put anything you want in them as long as it's related to editing Wikipedia. The one restriction that I'm aware of is certain copyrighted images (e.g., album cover art) that have restrictions and can only be used in the actual article not in temp pages. But don't worry about that too much that doesn't happen often and if you do put such an image in your sandbox there is a bot that will automatically delete it after a short time. As for inviting other editors it depends on what you want to do. There are lots of ways to network with people here but the two most common are article talk pages and user talk pages. If you have a question about how to edit an article or if you edit an article and someone reverts it and you want to discuss it the best place is on the talk page for the article. If you have a specific question for another user you can post it on their talk page. Here is my talk page for example: User_talk:MadScientistX11 You can see an example of someone contacting me (another teahouse guest) and the two of us talking here: User_talk:MadScientistX11#N142pb_is_trying_again_- BTW, the question that user was asking me was similar to your question and my answer on my talk page goes into more detail about how editors communicate with each other on Wikipedia. Hope that was useful, feel free to ask a follow up if you still have questions or you can ask me for more details on my talk page. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

I do not know how to add them I tried several times before asking and I do not know how to put infoboxes in sandboxes.Dadapotato (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Article submission denied

I've submitted a page about author Alma Katsu two times and have been denied twice. The second time the rejection was for not establishing notability. I am confused because I have found other pages on authors that have similar amounts of content on them and they were not rejected. I guess I am missing what exactly I am not adding to the page to establish notability. I'm not sure if there is a way for me to link my draft so that it can be read, or if that is already available because I sign this question, but if I am missing something that would be helpful, please just let me know what to do. Thanks in advance for your assistance and advice! Jill.salz (talk) 04:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jill.salz. Your draft article can be seen by any editor at Draft:Alma Katsu. The first thing that I notice is that your references are bare URLs. Please expand and fill them out as described in Referencing for beginners. I also notice that several of your references are one-sentence or one brief paragraph listings in publishing industry websites that exist to promote new book titles. We are looking, instead, for significant coverage in reliable, independent sources that devote quite a bit of attention to the author as a person, not just to her books.

Please be aware that this encyclopedia has well over 4.6 million articles, many of which do not meet our standards. We delete crappy articles all the time, at the rate of hundreds or thousands a day. It is a logical fallacy for you to state that you saw some unnamed mediocre article, so we should accept your mediocre article. No, instead, we should delete or improve those other mediocre articles, and we would if you had linked to them. Your job here is to create adequate, compliant articles, not crappy ones. Create articles about indisputably notable topics, with the potential to be expanded into truly good articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:18, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Your advice and comments do help actually. I wasn't trying to be snarky in pointing out other author articles that are short, I was trying to understand why my article was rejected for "notability" and when looking at other existing articles for context, I was surprised to find articles on newer authors who seemed less notable than Ms. Katsu. The articles I was referring to were these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Neville_(author) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Dun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raelynn_Hillhouse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kira_Peikoff I can see how my references are bare URLs, so that is something I can correct. I am new to editing on wikipedia, but I really love the whole concept and wanted to try my hand at participating. I'll admit it is a bit daunting to have to get an article to such high standards before it is accepted for publishing. I was originally under the impression that it was common practice to stub out an article, post it, and then improve upon it along with others editing over time into something really great. I'm now realizing that really isn't the case if you don't want your article deleted. Anyways, thanks for your help. Jill.salz (talk) 05:40, 12 November 2014TC)

The four articles you mention above, Jill.salz, are all mediocre and can certainly be improved. The first two, though, assert that those authors have written best sellers, which is a legitimate claim of notability. The third asserts national security expertise, citing published articles in the Washington Post and elsewhere. The fourth on your list claims that the writer has been published in the New York Times and other highly notable publications. Without a doubt, each of those articles could be improved. So could the majority of articles here on this encyclopedia. Set your standards higher than barely adequate articles.

You chose to submit your draft through the Articles for Creation process, which is optional but provides for a review by a more experienced editor. You could have plunked your article down in the main space, where new pages patrollers would probably have tried to delete it right away. Pick your poison. Or better, write articles that comply fully with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and you will encounter few problems here.

Personally, I have written more than 60 articles here without going through the Articles for Creation process. And not a one has been deleted. But before I did so, I studied Wikipedia's standards, and took great care to comply. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

While I appreciate your taking the time to explain some guidelines I don't exactly find your tone friendly as is stated in the welcome message for this discussion area. As a newbie to editing on wikipedia, it's intimidating and unnecessary to insinuate that I am shooting for "mediocre" or "barely adequate". Though it is my choice to go through the Articles for Creation process there is a statement that indicates that articles that are simply posted but do not meet standards will be deleted and there is a limited number of times that a deleted article can be resubmitted. That would seem to be a poor format for posting one's first article. I'll continue to work on the article and hopefully establish notability. Jill.salz (talk) 06:45, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

If you find my tone unfriendly, Jill.salz, then I must apologize to you. My intent was to be frank and informative, not unfriendly. The vast majority of attempts by new editors to create new articles here on Wikipedia, by any method, are unsuccessful. My comments were intended solely to improve your chances of success. If you are having difficulty seeing that, then perhaps another editor can do a better job than I have, in giving you advice. "Friendly" does not mean "compliant", at least in my dictionary. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:57, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

You're reading into my words if you got the idea that I wanted you to be compliant.98.216.143.197 (talk) 13:17, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings, Being somewhat new to Wikipedia, I found two things helpful.

One, Portal:Biography contains a section, Things you can do.

Two, updating and improving existing existing biography articles. Over time it's easy to see the quality level of different articles--some are minimal, other articles are very good.

Good luck & best wishes. JoeHebda (talk) 14:08, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Although only essays, not policies or guidelines, two pages that help some editors to understand those policies and guidelines are Wikipedia:Other stuff exists and Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability - Arjayay (talk) 15:32, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

@Arjayay: Thanks for posting the Wikipedia:Other stuff exists article. This issue seems to be coming up a lot lately and I knew there was something like that but couldn't remember the name of the article. I know it's not a policy but I think that article really explains things well. Will bookmark for future reference. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:53, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Help with notability

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mandali_Mendrilla

Mandali Mendrilla, is definitely a notable person, and the article has a lot of references. I understand the editor has different ideas, please help me.Madhu Gopal (talk) 02:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Article always deleted

I have submitted the same article five or six times. And it has been deleted for copyright violation, even though the information I used was provided by the article's subject, a professor at UCBerkeley. She is having the page written because she was asked by UC Berkeley to create it.

The article has been deleted because I am being paid to create it, I have a conflict of interest, I am advertising, there are no external references, etc.

I have researched other pages of professors and don't see any significant differences apart from the amount of material provided. In my first draft I included many external references about the professor. All of my work has been deleted without delay, causing me hours and hours of trying again and again. JB, DRAGA design, Oakland, CA USA 00:11, 12 November 2014 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Barenose (talk • contribs) 09:11, 12 November 2014 (UTC+9)
(*Note: signature added per WP:TPG#Attributing unsigned comments - Marchjuly (talk) 00:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC))

Hello and welcome to the teahouse. Do you have a question for us? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, how do I get my article to be accepted? I have repeatedly said that the professor about whom the article is has given me her permission to use the material I have used.

She has repeatedly rewritten the material, hoping to fit into the Wiki guidelines. No success. JB, DRAGA design, Oakland, CA USA 00:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Barenose welcome to the teahouse. BTW, please remember to sign all your comments with five tildas rather than just typing your name. That's a convention here so we know who said what. If the professor is trying to write her own page or to get someone to write a page for her that is what Wikipedia defines as a wp:conflict of interest. Regarding copyright, just because someone says "I give you permission to use this" doesn't necessarily resolve copyright issues. Wikipedia is more rigorous about such things than many other sites on the Internet. It's OK to include quotes of copyrighted material as long as they are identified as quotes and properly sourced. But in general the main text of any Wikipedia article is meant to be original text written by editors. So any text that is found to be copied and pasted from some other source will likely be deleted fairly quickly. Here are some FAQs about Copyright on Wikipedia: Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright As for researching other pages of professors that unfortunately is a common complaint; Wikipedia is a work in progress. The process for reviewing new pages is a bit stricter now than it was in the past. So the bottom line is that you can't pick some arbitrary pages and assume that just because they are published that they are models of a good page. To understand what makes a good Wikipedia article it's much better to use articles like this: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything as a guide. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 01:06, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Barenose, although you may not be happy with some of my remarks. First of all, as a paid editor, you have been advised to declare your conflict of interest on your user page. You have not done so. Please do so promptly.

You state that "she was asked by UC Berkeley to create it" which I find to be an outlandish claim. I have participated in a Wikipedia Edit-a-thon on the Berkeley campus, and have collaborated with several experienced editors with ties to that university. I have never once heard of the university "asking" a faculty member to have a Wikipedia article written about them. I would be astounded if that is true.

For three months now, you have been trying over and over again to create an article the wrong way, and consequently, your talk page is full of excellent advice from experienced editors, which you have chosen to ignore. Your determination to build the article on extensive quotations from copyrighted material on the UC Berkeley website is misguided. This professor can't grant permission to freely license content from a copyrighted university website. Only the Regents of the University of California, or their designated representative for copyright issues can do that. Far better for you to loosely paraphrase such content, instead of trying to copy and paste it into an encyclopedia. This type of material isn't written in an encyclopedic style anyway. It is your job to write this article in the style that Wikipedia prefers, not the university style.

Your strategy of pointing out that other crappy articles exist and saying that you want to create another similarly crappy article is logically flawed. We delete crappy articles all the time, and this one will be subject to scrutiny, since you have requested such scrutiny yourself. Far better to create an adequate article, an acceptable article, and an article with the potential to become a good article.

Your primary job here is to show, conclusively, that this person meets our notability standard WP:ACADEMIC. The vast majority of college and university professors fail that test, and don't have Wikipedia biographies. You must show that this professor is truly notable. You have not yet done so. And complaining about other editors acting in good faith won't get you across that finish line.

So my advice to you is to openly declare your obvious COI on your user page, show that this academic is notable, and if you can do that, write a neutral, well-referenced biography that complies with Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and manual of style. In the mean time, please stop complaining. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

things on my sandbox doesn't shown on my profile :(

Hi, I just started to edit on wikipedia, I have some info in my sandbox and its doesn't shown on my profile after I press save or publish... why is that? thank you Yaelbotser (talk) 23:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

It looks like you are confusing your sandbox with the article Yaelle Maftsir you created. You need to add references to the article. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 00:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

You also should read WP:COI because it appears you have created an article about yourself - which is against our policies. Please add references to support the article. It may be OK if you can support all the statements with references..... Regards, Ariconte (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Click "Contributions" at the top right to see your edits. Special:Contributions/Yaelbotser shows you have created three different pages with similar content: User:Yaelbotser, User:Yaelbotser/sandbox, Yaelle Maftsir. The last one was created in the encyclopedia and risks being deleted. The other two are in your userspace where you have more fredom to work on pages. Add {{subst:submit}} to one of them if you want to submit it for review to be included in the encyclopedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:38, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Information on sand forests

Hi! I'm trying to make an article on Sand Forests and was wondering if anyone had any good tips on how to begin, where to get good info (I can't seem to find much) and where's a good place to get pictures. Any help would be great!Secahill (talk) 21:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Secahill. We already have an article called Southern African Sand Forest. If that's what you are thinking of, you could work on improving that article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:05, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

how to include references that were written in Danish

I've written an article about the Danish author Louis Jensen, and while I wait for it to be accepted and moved into article space, I continue to tinker and improve it (search Draft: Louis Jensen). One issue--I have several sources that are written in Danish. For example, the literary critic Gunnar Jacobsen wrote a whole book about Jensen. When I quote from these sources, I translate the passage into English--should I instead quote the Danish and provide a parenthetical English translation? I do have several sources establishing notability in English. I have also been trying to find on all the myriad help pages some discussion of how notability is established for non-Americans. Louis Jensen has a page on the Danish version of Wikipedia (although the English article I've written is much more detailed and complete). I feel confident that he meets the standard for notability--he has been nominated for several international awards, and his work has been praised in academic articles and a book in English, all reliable, independent sources. But I wonder if the fact that some of my references are in Danish is a stumbling block for the editors reviewing the article... Thanks for any help!! LeastRivers (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hej LeastRivers och välkommen till Tehuset. As long as you have reliable, independent sources (books, websites, magazines) it does not matter what language they are in as long as you use them as references in the right way. Even if this is the English Wikipedia, there are plenty of people with other language skills here. I'm Swedish (a fellow translator) and I'm sure you will find a whole bunch of Danes soon enough. The things you quote should be in English if the quotation is long. If it is just a title or a name, you should first write the Danish version (since it is about a Dane) and after that a translation in English. You can see how this is handled in this article about a Swedish painter. I took a look at the references, and it looks very good. You might want to read Help:Referencing for beginners to learn how to use the same ref twice. Best, w.carter-Talk 20:45, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I would like to know a good source that i can use to list episode names from the wwe network

When i submitted my article the one that edited said that imd was not the best place to use as a source and was wondering if their is a place i could find the episodes on the wwe network somewhere other then theirWrestlepro112 (talk) 16:46, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Wrestlepro112, welcome to the Teahouse, yes you are right IMDb is not a good reference as it's mainly based on user generated data. Anyway I suggest you check their official website. Or you can use sites like tv.com. What about this link. Does it contain the data you need? I'm not familiar with WWE shows, So I might not be the best person to help you out.--Chamith (talk) 17:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

No this does not work this is not one that is shown on tv is is part of their own network that they have so this does not really workWrestlepro112 (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

It's best to look for other independent websites or newspapers or magazines that mention the WWE Rivalries show specifically. If there is detailed coverage of WWE Rivalries in newspapers or magazines or other independent and reliable website, then it might be possible for Wikipedia to have an article about it. If not, Wikipedia won't have an article about it, so it would be better to improve other WWE articles instead. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Jagermeister machine

I have been looking for information on Jagermeister machines, more specifically, the year and model numbers of the first machine. To have a generalized value at that time manufactured, and current approximate value. The first machine had a patent pending. Obviously the newer have a patent number. I' actually more interested in the before patented model. Any information would help. Thank You for reading. 108.219.95.162 (talk) 07:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Internet user. Perhaps you misunderstand the purpose of the Teahouse. We answer questions about editing Wikipedia here, not questions about machines to assist in the drinking of Jägermeister. Maybe the friendly people at the Reference desk may be of assistance. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:13, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

To add Cullen's excellent answer, You should try discussing the matter on specific article's talk page. It's the best way to get help from people who are specialized in that sector.--Chamith (talk) 08:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid I must disagree with Chamith on this. Every talk page says in the box at the top: "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the XXXX article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject." Questions about the Jagermeister machine, unless they are directed to improving the Wikipedia article, are not appropriate at Talk:Jägermeister. Cullen's recommendation of the Reference desk is more appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 15:02, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@ColinFine:. Actually I thought he is looking for that information because he wanted to improve Jägermeister.--Chamith (talk) 17:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Reference desk is fine for that too. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Writing a new article about company

Hello, I am a new user to Wikipedia. Although I have added minor information in two/three articles but this time I want to create new article. The article is about Sony's subsidiary in Japan. The article about that company exists in Japanese version Wikipedia but I want to create the article in English. The problem is that company may not be well known outside Japan to people but I consider it important since it one of the core production houses of company should I write article on this?111.68.102.115 (talk) 05:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. First of all I suggest you create a new account. You may either register now or ask for your article to be created at Articles for Creation. It is much easier to manage everything if you create an account. I assume that the company meets Wikipedia's notability standards. As you are writing an article about a company please make sure to write it in a neutral point of view style. And also find sources to verify content you are going to add. Check out Wikipedia:Starting an article to get an idea about how to write your first article.--Chamith (talk) 06:27, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Internet user. Please consider setting up a Wikipedia account, which offers many benefits to editors. The fact that the "company may not be well known outside Japan" is irrelevant, assuming that the company is truly notable in Japan, as I am reasonably sure that it is. This is the English language encyclopedia of the entire world, not the encyclopedia of the English speaking world. Please read WP:TRANSLATION for information about how to translate Wikipedia articles from one language to another. You can use Japanese language sources as references, but if you can find any English language sources, they would be best, for accessibility reasons here. Good luck to you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:31, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

P.S.: I saw that your talk page is full of warnings about vandalism and disruptive edits. Probably because your IP address is shared with large number of people. If you didn't do those edits I strongly recommend you create an account before contributing to Wikipedia.--Chamith (talk) 06:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Create page on Ibycus rachelae?

Dear ladies and gentlemen here on Wikipedia: I would like to create a Wikipedia article on the Ibycus rachelae, also know as the 'long-tailed slug'. I thoroughly searched for a similar page on Wikipedia, but could not find one. Please give advice,and/or comments as I am not very experienced with editing or making pages. Thank you for your time.

D011235813d (talk) 23:31, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@D011235813d: Hi D011235813d! That's a great topic, as all animal species warrant articles. What I suggest is first starting with taking a slow and thorough tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial. It will give you a grounding in many things that will help you become more familiar with basics (for example, not starting lines with leading spaces, which I've fixed above:-). Once you do that, I suggest you take a look at some similarly situated articles that you might emulate to some extent in writing this one. Since this appears to be the only species in the Maoriconcha genus, you'll have to look at other types of similar gastropods. Maybe some of the articles in Category:Onchidiidae, Category:Panpulmonata, Category:Limacidae or Category:Stylommatophora might help? Meanwhile, you might try posting for some collaboration and/or help with this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gastropods. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:12, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I need help for protect my article which is proposed for deletion:Alexandra Mas

Dear Sir (Mrs) wikipedians, I ask you for your help about my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandra_Mas which is being proposed for deletion by Biruitorul. First,Mr.Biruitorul was impolited because he don't left any message on may talk page. Second, his affirmations are ironic.His reason is that this painter has no notability.Anyone looking at the article looks like it is not true. The article is not 100% finalized.I am still working on it. It is about art.Alexandra Mas is a pluridisciplinar artist at age 36 with over 22 art show in entire world:France,Japan,England,Bucharest,Beograd.She create a new curent on art:Le Magnifisme.Se developed a new concept of art a la port in fashion.For me ,she is a prodigious person. She capted the atention of the known art critic Jean Deulceus,professor at LIISA ((Institut supérieur des Arts appliqués),France. Also,Alexandra Mas is the niece of the known artist Mircea Milcovitch. The article has 32 of references about Alexandra's art shows, about albums where she appear... Anyway,I feel a great desapoiment that in wikipedia can happen something like this. Anyone who read the article will se the beauty of creation of Alexandra Mas. Why so hurry to delete an article about art? I'm awaiting your (honestly of course)support. Please enter at this link if you want to help. I accept any point of view wich is honest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alexandra_oMas

Thank you very much! Leedskalnin (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Leedskalnin welcome to the Teahouse, Your page has been marked for possible copyright violation. Wikipedia takes copyright violation seriously and it will be speedily deleted. As mentioned in WP:COPYPASTE you shouldn't copy details from copyrighted sites and paste it here. You have to write articles in your own words. And no, you can't prevent page from being deleted by protecting it. You have to understand that the problem is not in the subject of the article, it's copyright infringement.--Chamith (talk) 04:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Leedskalnin. Didn't we talk about a Brazilian samba dancer a while back? Best wishes to you.

I am sorry to have to tell you that articles about artists are held to the same notability standards as all other articles. Advocating for a more lenient standard regarding articles about artists won't gain much support here. Articles about Romanians are held to exactly the same standards as articles about people of any other nationality on Earth. Hinting that Biruitorul is somehow biased against articles about Romanians is a weak argument, as Biruitorul is Romanian. Pointing out that Biruitorul supports deleting some articles is also unpersuasive, as all experienced editors know that we have plenty of crappy articles that should be deleted.

Words of praise, even by a very famous author, printed on a book jacket, do not contribute to notability of the book. The same is true of words of praise about an artist, even by an expert, on the artist's own website. That is not an independent source. Your personal assertions that this artist is notable hold no weight here. What counts is significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. That is all. Furnish sources of that kind, and the article will be kept. That's the bottom line. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:58, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much Sir,Let's discuss it,I appreciate very much your comments. If you are looking at references,you will see that is it not from only "not independent source".The vernisaje,art shows,and other sources quoted are not related by Alexandra site.On the conceptikolas galleries,or galerie-be-espace and other nobody cant have acces if he is not a "notable" art creator. Anyway, I will continue to search reliable sources from the experts about Alexandra. What about suspicion of me about very much romanian users which page was deleted by this user (which is romanian from hungarian origin,I suspected , I'm not so sure about what you say (is my opinion). But, finaly,do you think that I must continue to work on this project or to stop? After of course I will resolve the problem with copyright? Leedskalnin (talk) 06:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Of course, you should continue your efforts if you believe that the artist is truly notable. But coverage by an art show or gallery exhibiting an artist does not establish notability of that artist, unless the art show or gallery is indisputably world class. I am an art collector. If I set up a website for "Cullen's Art Show", and exhibited all the pieces I own, would that make all those artists notable? Of course not. Some are notable on their own merits, and others aren't. I can't establish notability of beginning artists by "showing" their work. This artist is relatively new. We need rock solid evidence of notability. Furnish it, please, without arguing with "Hungarian" editors. My wife is of half Hungarian-Jewish ancestry, by the way. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:45, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Sir Let's discuss it, I leave into an area with many ethnic problems...You have right, my remarcs was some at anger,maybe they are subjective (realy I believe this).

Thank you very much for your advice, I will rebuild the article.Your opinion is very important for me.

Apropos,is not need to say nothing about Galerie Be Espace,Espace Ticolas,Galerie Claire Corcia,Musée des Beaux Arts Monaco, Saint-Petersburg,Grand Palais Paris,galerie Memmi,Musée des Beaux Arts Monaco,Triennial exposition on Kanagawa Japan.This galleries dont have need of recommendations....

Leedskalnin (talk) 12:56, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Leedskalnin (talk) 13:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Searching for Sources

I am trying to find sources for an article using Google. I have used WestlawNext in the past, and it lets you search for documents with a search term appearing some minimum number of times (atleast). So if I searched atleast50("wikipedia"), it would only return documents in which the word wikipedia appears at last 50 times. Does anyone know if there's an equivalent for Google? thanks. Becky Sayles (talk) 21:20, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Becky Sayles, welcome to the Teahouse. In my opinion search engines are the best way to find sources. I use Google as my primary search engine (let's say source engine). But when I use search engines to find reference I always alter the terms instead of using the words used in Wikipedia articles. I do this to prevent search engine from returning Wikipedia articles as search results. But sadly I do not know other tools which can be used to find references, if there is some kind of tool for that then I'm pretty sure that it'd be search engine as well. Like I said before search engines are the best way find references on the Internet--Chamith (talk) 21:28, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Becky Sayles. Here are two links with info about Google power searching: http://www.google.com/advanced_search and https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?p=adv_operators&hl=en&rd=1 --MadScientistX11 (talk) 21:59, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Becky. I pine for some of the same search functions that Lexis provides when I use Google but there is no equivalent I know of for many of them (especially useful would be equivalents for w/3 and pre/3). There are a number of tricks you can use though. See this Google guide to search operators and other guides from the list on the left hand side of that page. But I don't think there is any equivalent of the atleast function. Hmm, I'm wondering if you could cheat, by using the + operator. Let me check.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Becky Sayles: Okay, yes, it does appear you can use the + operator to achieve this result, albeit it's a bit painful. Just type your search term then a + before it as many time as you would have used for atleast. It actually only takes a few moments if you use copy and paste (type the words twice, copy that, paste a few times, copy them all, paste a few times), For example: coat alone returns about 40,000,000 results but coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat +coat returns only just over 20,000 results.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Becky Sayles! Google does not provide that function. Modern web search engines have moved from a search based on (key)words to a search based on more abstract entities, like concepts. As a result, they do not have functions related to the mere quantity of words in a document and, generally, web search engines do not use the repetition of a word as a signal of relevancy. If you really need to focus on the quantity of words, though, the only Google trick that I can think of would be to use a search query like "cat * cat * cat * cat", which would return documents that contain at least four instances of the word "cat". I hope that it helps. Cheers! ► LowLevel ^(talk)

Article submission: Music artist/producer: Ranto Bokgo

Hi Wiki peeps, I have just submitted an article covering a biography of one of Zimbabwe's most enterprising acts Ranto Bokgo. which my hopes were it would be placed online as an official wikipedia article. I've just received mail from Mr. Varitas that the article requires 'cite' support? How would i add these to the article including a jpg or two??? Rantobokgo (talk) 21:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rantobokgo. The biggest problem with your draft article is the lack of references to reliable sources. Every factual claim needs to be referenced. Please read Referencing for beginners and follow that advice. Please also remove the duplicate content. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

(ec) Hello, Rantobokgo. The comments both at the top of Draft:Ranto Bokgo and on your talk page User talk:Rantobokgo explain what the problem is, and contain links (the blue words) to pages that explain what they mean. The point is that in a Wikipedia article, every single statement needs to be referenced to a reliable source, such as a major newspaper, or a book from a reputable publisher. The problem is that even if everything you write in the article is correct, Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anybody may edit; so tomorrow or next week or next year somebody may edit it - perhaps to improve or correct it, but perhaps they will be mistaken, or mischevous. If there is a reference, then a reader can check the information, but if there is no reference all the information is unreliable. Please see referencing for beginners for more information.

I'm afraid there are other problems as well. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which means that articles are required to be written in a neutral tone, and from a neutral point of view. Phrases like "inspired guitar style and poignant voice" simply do not belong in an encyclopaedia (unless they are quoting a reliable published source unconnected with the subject, such as a review in a major newspaper). If you are Ranto Bokgo, then it is likely to be very hard for you to write the article in a suitably neutral tone: that is why we strongly discourage autobiography on Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 22:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Genieo and MacKeeper pages on Wikipedia should and must be removed

Stephanebosch79 (talk) 20:40, 10 November 2014 (UTC)As a technician on MacOSX for more than 20 years now, working in different school and users I’m officially asking you to please remove the MacKeeper page or to remove any article telling people this product is good.

Since it has been released, I saw a lot of my users installing it and getting issues more and more until the hard drive breaks, internet stop working and many awful side effects on the computer. This software is a scam and should be removed from internet.

I please beg you to stop advertising this to people, lots of people in my school showed me your page saying they installed it because even wikipedia says it’s a good product but IT IS NOT ! It’s a malware like Genieo and breaks Mac computers.

Thanks in advance for your help.

If you don’t trust my email, please do some researches on the internet you’ll very quickly see other users / technician alerting to remove it as soon as possible.

Best Regards Stéphane Bösch KLAS IT AdministratorStephanebosch79 (talk) 20:40, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Stephanebosch79. The proper place for you to express your concerns about Mackeeper are on the Mackeeper talk page: Talk:MacKeeper An article on Wikipedia does not imply that Wikipedia promotes or endorses the subject of the article. Also, articles are meant to be wp:neutral so if any article reads like an advertisement for a product that article is not consistent with Wikipedia policies and needs to be changed. I took a quick look at the Mackeeper article and it didn't seem that promotional to me. There already is a section: MacKeeper#Criticism_of_marketing_techniques that goes into some of the negatives about the company. Feel free to express your concerns on the Talk page in more detail. One thing you should know though is that what counts most on Wikipedia is not who you are and what you know but what kind of references you can site to back up what you say. So rather than say "I know this because of my X number of years as a Mac admin" it is much more convincing to say "as documented in sources X, Y, and Z Mackeeper has the following issues..." And the more X,Y, and Z are what Wikipedia considers wp:reliable sources the better your argument is. So in this case sources like MacWorld, PC World, Informationweek, are all examples of reliable sources. If you can site some articles from sources like that that backup what you say and that describe problems currently not documented on the Mackeeper article I think that would be a very valuable addition to the article. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 20:59, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, we don't remove an article because a product is bad. See thalidomide, asbestos, etc. We sometimes delete software articles where the software does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements, however. From a quick glance, it seems like that software is in fact notable. I'd have a look over the policy that I linked to. Feel free to write back here if you think there is a notability problem with the software. Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Any advice for why, after logging in and beginning to edit an article, I get a prompt saying I'm not logged in?to

Thanks for any help.71.15.248.221 (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure, and that might be beyond the scope of this help desk. You might want to ask at WP:VPM or WP:HD, where more technically minded users often hang out. Or you can wait and see if someone answers your question here -- your call! Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Internet user. The most likely thing is just that the login failed. Perhaps you didn't remember your password correctly or there was a glitch between the Wikipedia server and your computer. It clearly failed though because if you were logged in then your signature above would be your user ID not your IP address. Here are the simple things that you can do to solve a lot of Internet related problems: 1) Empty the cache on your browser 2) Restart your browser 3) Restart your router 4) Restart your computer. I suggest trying those things and then try to login again. Look carefully at the message you receive and if the login fails and if you get an error message write down the message so you can post it here. Also, if you continue to have problems leave the name of your user ID that will help debug the problem. One more thing to remember: when you login there should see a box that says something like "remember me on this computer" If you are not on a shared computer then check that box. If you don't check that box your login won't last very long and you will need to re-login every time you come back. Please note though if you are on a computer that other people also use you shouild not check the box. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 21:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Help With Programming

If Anyone In The Teahouse knows java can you please help me im getting some errors in my code. Shadowvault (talk) 15:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Testing my new signature //ShadowVault {<a href=""https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Shadowvault>Talk</a>} (talk) 16:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Shadowvault: I don't think we use Java anywhere. If you say which page you are trying to edit then somebody may be able to help. The signature is misformatted. What are you trying to make it do? PrimeHunter (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Shadowvault: welcome to the teahouse. For more on customizing your signature I suggest you look here: Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing_your_signature Also, fyi if you want to look for info about editing Wikipedia first preface a word with "wp:" before you search. Just like Java Wikipedia also uses packages. The default package is for articles but there are other packages. Things related to editing Wikipedia are in the Wikipedia package and can be indexed with the abreviation "wp:" or "wikipedia:" BTW, I know Java if you have a simple question feel free to leave in on my talk page. I haven't done much programming in a while though so if it's complex better to try Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Computing The teahouse is for questions about editing Wikipedia which doesn't require one to know or use Java. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 17:47, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Shadowvault, and welcome to Wikipedia! From the looks of your code, I think you were trying to do this: //ShadowVault (talk). If so, this is the correct code:

[[User:Shadowvault|//ShadowVault]] ([[User_talk:Shadowvault|talk]])

Now, go to your signature settings, paste the code I gave you into the box, check the "Treat the above as wiki markup" checkbox, and click "Save". After that, you can come back over here and test it out. --Biblioworm 21:37, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Article as an advertisment

Hello. We have trouble with an article posted in English. It was translated from Russian into English and the following announce has appeared: "This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links. (August 2014)" What should we do? Many tnx for help Jazzfille (talk) 10:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jazzfille. Firstly I could give more specific help if you linked to the page you are referring to. For advertisement problems in general, Wikipedia should be written from a neutral point of view which means not describing a subject in an overly positive (or negative) way. In the case that an article has been deemed too promotional/advertisement-like, the problems could be one or more of many, but are likely to be largely due to the subject being written about in too positive a manner. Other problems might include listing products or services that the subject would be interested in advertising, or leaving out negative coverage. For a full description of what is deemed 'advertising' on Wikipedia please have a read of WP:NOTADVERTISING. Hope that helps, Sam Walton (talk) 11:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

anachronisms. Compile a list

Hi

I read quite a lot and its common - almost invariable - that modern authors make an "anachronatic" error. I think it would useful to authors if we compiled a list as we noticed them.

A common one is referring to common plastic items before they were available. Another is items in the home before they were available. Or TV satellite images before they existed.

Good idea? Bad idea?

MalcMalc9141 (talk) 02:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Malc9141: Hey Malc9141. Great idea... in general; bad idea... for Wikipedia use. Because of what Wikipedia, is – an encyclopedia, which summarizes existing mainstream knowledge about a topic – it does not publish original research. An encyclopedia is, by its nature, a tertiary source that provides a survey of information already the subject of publication in the wider world (which we provide here through citation to existing sources verifying that existing mainstream knowledge). Even though I think this has no place here, I actually would be a consumer if you posted it somewhere else. I spot these myself and would find a list of them fascinating. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:47, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I am a Louisiana Historian I just started creating a series on historic plantation home of Louisiana and I feel I am being a bit bullied

I am a Louisiana Historian I just started creating a series on historic plantation home of Louisiana and I feel I am being a bit bullied, I cite sources and all of the home I am working on are part of the National Historic Register, but my work is criticized for not being important enough. Every building on the National Historic Register of the United States is important. rmistrotRmistrot (talk) 21:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Rmistrot. Sorry that you've had a rough time getting started on your articles, but this is not an uncommon experience. I haven't looked at all the articles, but looking over Rene Beauregard House, one important issue was that parts of the article came directly from one of the sources, with is a copyright violation. This concern supercedes all other concerns about whether the topic should be included as an article. I've gone ahead and rephrased the problematic sections.

As for the buildings, if they are in the NHRP, that is usually a sufficient claim for inclusion, which we call notability. The NHRP should maintain a listing online, so just referencing to that should be fine. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:55, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

There are also many other copyright problems with large parts of the article being copied and pasted from two ther sources here [1] and here [2] Theroadislong (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: Thanks for catching these. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 22:06, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Rmistrot, and welcome, both to the Teahouse, and to editing Wikipedia. Your expertise as an historian is respected here, and we very much hope that you will continue contributing. But you also need to understand and respect our social norms. Experienced, committed editors here are fervently opposed to copyright violations because of our dedication to providing truly free knowledge to all of humanity. Copyrighted material is not free and must be used here only in very limited ways. Properly cited brief quotes within quotation marks are permissible under Wikipedia's policies and the legal concept of fair use. Unattributed "copy and paste" copyright violations are not permitted, and will be removed when detected, without exception. This is not bullying. This is compliance with policy, and is not negotiable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

check the page before publishing

Hello, I'm building a page about an artist but I want to be sure that what I'm doing is fine according to the wikipedia's rules,since I'm still a beginner, where should I move the page before I'll publish it so it will be checked from users with more experience? Thank you in advance Krokamaora (talk) 17:13, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Krokamaora, do you mean User:Krokamaora/sandbox? If you can see a "Review (AFCH)" option on one of the drop down lists at the top of the draft, you can submit it to Articles for Creation (AFC) yourself. Otherwise it will be an easy job for someone here to do it for you. However, for your draft to stand any chance of being successfully moved to main article space, you'll need to make sure the subject has been covered by multiple reliable, independnent sources (e.g. newspapers, magazines, books etc.). Sionk (talk) 22:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Krokamaora. If you feel the page is ready to be reviewed, put {{subst:submit}} at the top of it. The review process is very backlogged so it could take several weeks. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 12:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Krokamaora. Just to add to the good info given above, one other thing you can do, is... just what you did do ;-) post a comment here and ask teahouse hosts to take a quick look at your work. The feedback you get from that usually won't be as detailed as when you submit the article for review but it will probably happen more quickly and it will at least let you know right away if there are major issues with the article before you try to submit it. If you do that it's best to leave a link to your sandbox or wherever the draft article is to make sure everyone is on the same page. It sounds right now as if you don't have any references in the article at all. I suggest you read this article: Wikipedia:references for beginners. Also, here is an overview of what makes a good Wikipedia article: wp:42 --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

WP:EDITWAR

I have been told "Please do not WP:EDITWAR." My original edit was referenced. It has been been removed twice - neither "reason" for the revert mentions any issue with the contents. My perception is that the first accusses me of being a spammer (untrue); the second accuses me of being an "Edit Warrior"; this kind angers me. How do I deal with this?

Finally having initiated a talk page discussion I feel the conversation is too personalised, insinuating that (1) I do not know what I am talking about (2) The folks working here need to agree that this is a useful addition - I thought my edit alone meant I was working here. How do I join this exclusive club? Stacie Croquet (talk) 16:39, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Stacie, well, I agree it takes two to "edit war" and the other editor seems to have leapt in with both feet. However, I can understand why the other editor thought this was some form of advertising. A leaflet inside a product in your medicine cabinet isn't a great source at all. Better still would be a more widely available published source, such as an academic journal article. I'm not an expert at all in drugs or chemistry, but I'm guessing from the response of the other editor that it is incorrect to draw general conclusions from a single medical product. Maybe it is a simple solution to explain politely to the other editor you had no intention to "edit war" and start a discussion about the specific paragraph/fact. Sionk (talk) 23:13, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Stacie Croquet, welcome to the teahouse. In addition to the good info that Sionk gave you, I wanted to reply to your comment: " I thought my edit alone meant I was working here". That's not the way Wikipedia works. No one owns any articles and everyone is free to edit anyone else's work. Wikipedia editors disagree all the time. The way we resolve the disagreements is by conversations on Talk pages. The way you "join the club" is to become more familiar with Wikipedia policies so that you can have better arguments to convince other editors that your edit is correct. If another editor was making a personal attack on you they weren't following policies about Wikipedia:Civility. There are various ways to resolve disputes by bringing in third parties when two editors can't agree. However, before you can start to use those dispute resolution tools you need to make a good faith effort to work things out yourself with the other editor on the talk page of the article. Also, keep in mind that while being rude, calling people names, etc. is definitely not acceptable Wikipedia behavior just telling someone they are wrong is not a personal attack. At least in the one interaction I looked at on the talk page you linked to here: Talk:Glucocorticoid the other user Jytdog was being perfectly civil in their response and the way they tried to communicate why they thought your edit was not appropriate. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Checklist while uploading an image ?

Hi TeaHouse Team,

I'm trying to upload few images to wiki, which has come in media/paintings/caricatures done by artists/protest clippings etc. Could you please help me find a checklist for the same. And if possible, how could I build a team for doing the same.

Almithra (talk) 15:38, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Im not a teahouse host, but would reccomend getting a few experienced Wikipedia members to help you with this, and by this i mean you can create a post in your user sandbox where they can help you with stuff and callaborate using the talkback feature. Shadowvault (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Almithra. I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but unless they are very old, it is likely that the media, paintings, caricatures and clippings are all copyright, and may not be used in Wikipedia unless the copyright holder for each explicitly releases it under a free licence. See Help:Upload for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 22:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Change screen displayed when you click on images

I can't stand the screen you get when you click on images. I like the view you get when you click on "more details". Is there a way to change a setting somewhere so that when I click on an image it goes straight to the "more details" view? Thank you. HalfGig talk 13:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi HalfGig, welcome to the Teahouse. Media Viewer is controversial. You can disable it at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:41, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank YOU! I can't stand that view. HalfGig talk 13:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Historical Telegram

I did some research on my grandfathers military records. I have the actual telegram sent by the admiralty to the crew of H/120 squadron congratulating them on the sinking of U-200 on June 24th, 1943. Im not a programmer but was wondering if someone within the Wiki community would like to add it to either the 120 squadron wiki page, the U-200 page or both174.5.192.88 (talk) 12:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi IP 174, what a fascinating piece of military history you have! Unfortunately it wouldn't be of any use to Wikipedia, because the telegram is an original document so to use it here would be what we call 'original research'. Original research isn't allowed on Wikipedia. However, I'm sure there are plenty of other people - museums, newspapers, historians - who would be interested in seeing it. All the best! Sionk (talk) 23:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello user with an IP and welcome to the Teahouse. While it is true that this is a primary source and the text itself cannot be used in an article, there might be a way to include it in the article as an illustration. If you take a picture of the telegram and upload it on the Commons (like this telegram, and several others). Use the "Upload file" in the left column. After uploading it, you can post a message + the https:... for the picture on the article's talk page and see if there is any interest of including that picture in the article. Best, w.carter-Talk 02:26, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

new user help with uploads and splitting

how can I upload photos? and how do I split the users into a list rather than seperating via semi colon? thanks CCB Centre of Sporting Excellence is the Page Morgans11 (talk) 07:33, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

CCB Centre for Sporting Excellence

Hello Morgans11, welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. One way to create a list is to put each entry on a separate line beginning with : and no leading space. Or to create a bulleted list begin with * instead of :. I hope that is clear enough. —teb728 t c 08:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

As for photos, see Help:Files for an overview of how to upload and use them. —teb728 t c 08:30, 9 November 2014 (UTC) Your account has to be four days old before you upload photos to Wikipedia, but you can already upload photos to Commons. —teb728 t c 08:34, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Are there volunteers on Wikipedia who like to make animations to improve articles?

I'm looking for a custom animation (best) or an image (also good) to improve a particular spaceflight/science-related article. Is there anyplace on Wikipedia where people with such interests hang for discussion, or for considering such requests? (My analogy is the Guild of Copy Editors where a bunch of good writers and English-language folks gather to help copyedit articles by request. They are great; and I'd like to see if such might exist for skilled and interested image folk.) Cheers, N2e (talk) 03:44, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey @N2e: The Graphics Lab is the place for these types of things. Not sure about the availability of animators and whatnot, but that'd be the place to ask :) ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:14, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @SuperHamster:, that's exactly what I was looking for. Ain't Wikipedia great? Turn over a rock and you'll find a bunch of super people making this amazing emergent phenomenon even more wonderful! N2e (talk) 04:34, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

And so now I have done just that. Here is the request I put over at the Graphics Lab. Enjoy. N2e (talk) 05:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, N2e, maybe this software might help you or the artist who will accept your request. Cheers! ► LowLevel ^(talk) 06:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, LowLevel. Looks useful. I've added that info to the article Talk page, and also to the request over at the Graphics Lab. N2e (talk) 00:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

How to indicate that a Userspace article is "Draft"

I am confused about the use of the "userspace". I was thinking that I could work on some articles in there and later on submit them. But then I came across something about using the category "Userspace draft" Can someone please clarify for me on the appropriate approach to indicating something is a draft in my userspace? I noticed my current userspace article is accessible by google and did not really intend it to be indexed on google until the article was hopefully accepted later on after I feel I am ready to submit it for review and further edits needed are done.

also can someone please tell me how to thank the users who help me on Teahouse?PhilPsych (talk) 20:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi PhilPsych. Add the following text to the top of your userspace draft: {{userspace draft}} This will mark the page with a templated message that will let users know that the page is a work in progress. It also automatically adds the NOINDEX magic word to prevent search engines from indexing the page. Best, Mz7 (talk) 20:33, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Howdy, Phil. The _NOINDEX_ won 't remove the indexing that has already been done. You can make the existing links in search engines go to a blank page by moving your draft to a subpage of your sandbox and then blanking the redirect that is automatically created.

There are lots of ways to say thank you. I like to use the template {{Thank you}} that produces a Thank you. Just stick it on their talk page or at the end of a conversation followed by your signature of four tildes. If you click on the link to the template, there are lots more templates that might convince others that you know what you're doing around Wikipedia. Take care and You're welcome!, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) Join WER 21:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank youPhilPsych (talk) 21:10, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

On a related note, one of my drafts showed up in a Google search. I've never moved it to article space because it seems to fall short in several areas, despite my attempts to find information over the years, even though I'm sure the man would qualify as notable.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Nina Allan.....

Can someone please grade the article Nina Allan..thanksS.tollyfield (talk) 09:39, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, S.tollyfield. Another editor has rated the article "C class". Here are a few suggestions for improvement:

Brief quotations should be designated by quotation marks, not by italics. External links, in this case to her website, should not be in the body of the article. Linking to her website is fine in the infobox and a separate "External links" section at the end. The generic photos of a spider, a watch and dog racing to illustrate her interests do not seem appropriate to me. A portrait of her would be better. Please fill out your references with author, publication, date of publication and so on. You may find Referencing for beginners to be useful in that effort. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:37, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I wish I had a picture of Nina Allan I could use - but getting one and the permission to use it is almost impossible.S.tollyfield (talk) 06:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

free licence

what is free licence of a photo ?i am asked it in WP:FFU.would anyone like to reply soon,please? Jojolpa (talk) 02:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jojolpa. One of Wikipedia's fundamental principles is that Wikipedia is free content. All edits submitted to Wikipedia are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. This "free license" allows anyone to share, modify, and distribute Wikipedia content freely, subject to certain conditions. Without the free license, a work would be protected by copyright, barring users from modifying or distributing it. A free license does away with certain aspects of copyright, while still retaining a few key parts of it. Text submitted to Wikipedia is automatically made available under this license, but Wikipedia frequently borrows images that were not necessarily originally created by the editor who uploads them.

We have a rather strict image use policy that states what types of images are acceptable for Wikipedia. To hold true to the "free content" principle, we cannot accept images that are not made available under a free content license. In other words, one cannot simply take any random photograph from the Internet and use it in a Wikipedia article without first confirming whether or not the owner of the image has made it available under a free license. For a list of acceptable free licenses, see WP:ICT/FL. There are certain exceptions to this policy that allow you to upload non-free content to Wikipedia; however, the non-free content has to satisfy all of the criteria listed at WP:NFCC. If you took a photo yourself and would like to donate it to Wikipedia, you must first make it available under a free license.

As a logged-in user, you have the ability to upload images yourself, without the need for WP:FFU. I recommend using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, as it will help guide you into making an informed decision over whether or not your image is acceptable for Wikipedia or not. If you are still confused, just leave a follow-up response and I or another host will be happy to clarify. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jojolpa. Let me give you a very brief answer: A free license is permission from the copyright owner (for a photograph that's almost always the photographer) that allows anyone to reuse the photo anywhere for anything (including modification commercial use). I hope that helps. —teb728 t c 04:27, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Who can I talk to directly to answer my questions about my difficulties with my articles

In particular David Clarke (author) Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists The Bierton Crisis Converted on LSD

ammoung others

Is this a none article post ??

David Clarke 22:59, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello 519Clarke,

Looking at your Talk page and contributions it appears that you are having difficulty creating articles successfully. Typically when you receive a message on your talk page, like the ones about the articles you've mentioned, it is appropriate to respond on the same page. You can use a template to notify the other user that you have responded, like this: {{ping|Username}}, substituting "Username" with the Username you'd like to receive the notification. You may also message other users on their talk pages by clicking on the (talk) next to their username, and then creating a new section on the talk page.
Some of these links may be helpful: Wikipedia:Starting an article Wikipedia:Notability (books) Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) Wikipedia:Notability (people)
Becky Sayles (talk) 23:57, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello @519Clarke: (David), if you're asking us "where can I just talk to someone about what's wrong with my draft?", then here is probably the best answer. I've seen a few of your drafts come through AFC, and from what I'm seeing the simplest sum-up is that you simply are not acknowledging the policy WP:Notability and are just trying to push through articles about yourself, your book, a dispute in a church group you're involved with, etc. Anything you want published on Wikipedia absolutely must meet the requirements of WP:Notability. If it does not, it cannot, full stop, be accepted. I strongly urge you to read WP:Notability in detail, as that's pretty much the exact reason why you've repeatedly had articles turned down, deleted, etc. Does this help explain it? If you do read Notability, and still aren't sure what the issue is, please come post here again, and let us know specifically what about Notability you don't understand, or how you think your drafts do indeed meet it. It'd help also to provide us some links to Declined drafts so we can see where you've run into tangles. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:23, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I am a slow reader and it takes time for me to take things in. I will look at the document you mentioned. Half the time I simply do not understand what is being written in the references . The language is technical and precise which makes learning difficult.

Some body mentioned they had seen a reference in the States about Bierton Strict Baptists, some thing I was unaware of. When I asked for that reference it was suggested I was being lazy that I should find the reference my self to make an article stick. I have loads of references but I am not sure if they are acceptable to Wikipedia and a simple one to one vocal could clear up many cloudy issues and thus avoid me making so many mistakes. David Clarke 15:52, 11 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 519Clarke (talk • contribs)

Potential article title change

Hi - I'm wondering if Glass Flowers should be retitled. Right now the majority of the article is about the Ware Collection of Blaschka Glass Models of Plants at Harvard, with a short section on the Blaschkas' marine invertebrates (mostly a list of the museums which have invertebrates in their collections) and no real information about Blaschka flowers in other collections. The title Glass Flowers seems a little vague - there are a lot of glass flowers not made by the Blaschkas, and there are other Blaschka glass flowers outside of the Harvard collection. It looks like the article was titled Blaschka glass flowers at some point, but the name was changed because the Ware collection was most commonly referred to as the Glass Flowers (see this talk page). A search for "glass flowers" does turn up The Glass Flowers Collection (title of the Harvard website) and The Glass Flowers (an article about the Ware collection from the Corning Museum of Glass website), but it also turns up a lot of other sites for glass flowers (mostly flowers for sale). Perhaps this article could be retitled The Glass Flowers Collection or The Glass Flowers Collection at Harvard? I'm happy to make the change, but wanted to ask for opinions first (is there a better place to ask when the change shouldn't be too controversial?). Thanks in advance! extabulis (talk) 20:37, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi extabulis, thanks for your question. It's an interesting situation you present here. Although glass flowers as a concept seem to go beyond the particular collection at Harvard, it also seems like the most prominent of them belong to this collection. For now, I would wait a few days to see what others say at the article talk page in the section you have started there. Here are a couple of other considerations:

• The Glass Flowers could be the new title for this article based on this article. Adding the definite article is clearer, and it's also the name of the exhibit.
• Until a fuller article is ready, Glass flowers could redirect to Artificial flowers#Glass
• If Glass Flowers ends up going someplace else, it should have a hat note about this particular collection.

(Other hosts, please feel free to add in if you have a different perspective.) Thanks, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts, I JethroBT. I'll wait to see if anyone else joins the conversation. I agree with your other suggestions, and thanks for pointing out Artificial flowers#Glass - I hadn't seen that page yet! extabulis (talk) 19:42, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

civic education

Discuss the officials of public service — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.190.46.81 (talk) 05:34, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for coming to the Teahouse. First, questions about general knowledge and facts are better handled at the reference desk, whereas the Teahouse is more appropriate for questions about editing and contributing to Wikipedia. Second, your question is a little unspecific. What country? And discuss what? Be sure to provide enough detail for your question to be answered, or it may not be at all. Take care, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 05:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

We must take attitude!

Cullen328
ChamithN
DangerousPanda
W.carter

Dear Gentlemen.

I make an article (which was deleted)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alexandra_Mas
And I enter into editorial war withMr.Biruitorul on link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alexandra_Mas
I don't want to defend my article anymoore.But I want you to take attitude into next problem: the attitude of this user about some french personalities.I want to tell you that this discution was folow by some artists and wikipedian french users from France, and the language used by Biruitorul can make very bad image to english wikipedia.I except the fact that he make me an nonsens man "the nonsense Leedskalnin is throwing up",this not bother me.But to say "who the hell is Jean Deulceux and why should we care what he says?" it is inaceptable.I was part in many discussion on wikipedia talks, but I never meet such language.I have many discussion with you too,and I never insult or make such statements about nothing.I bear in my mind that wikipedia must be a place of politely behavior,of construction, of free deliberates,of ideas.Again this is not about may article,it is not about Alexandra Mas, it is about the remarks wich can insult other people which are not part of wikipedia and who follow this discutions.It is remarcs whic insult french art:
"Galerie BE-Espace, Ticolas, Galerie Claire Corcia, Musée des Beaux-Arts du Monaco, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Saint Petersburg, Galerie Memmi, Kanagawa International Print Triennial, GemlucArt, Cielo Gallery. I think the redlinks speak for themselves, although I will note that none of these has an article on fr.wiki either, which does have significantly better coverage of French topics."
What is this???
What coverage is neded for Musée des Beaux-Arts, Saint Petersburg Russia which have over 400000 artworks?Please,let not insult institutions just because them are not in wikipedia!!!
Please,take attitude!!!
Thank you very much,gentlemen!
Sincerely yours,
Leedskalnin (talk) 13:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)