Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 585: Line 585:


:Hi [[User:Swartzcr|Swartzcr]], welcome to the Teahouse. I see some of your edits are made with VisualEditor. I don't know how it works there or whether it's even possible (it wasn't when VisualEditor was introduced). I use the source editor and there it's done with <code>rowspan</code> documented at [[Help:Table]]. I have done the first in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rob_Crow&diff=652004174&oldid=651996325]. Just looking at that diff will probably enable you to do the other years in that table. But rowspan can be tricky to work with. Always click "Show preview" before saving. [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 00:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
:Hi [[User:Swartzcr|Swartzcr]], welcome to the Teahouse. I see some of your edits are made with VisualEditor. I don't know how it works there or whether it's even possible (it wasn't when VisualEditor was introduced). I use the source editor and there it's done with <code>rowspan</code> documented at [[Help:Table]]. I have done the first in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rob_Crow&diff=652004174&oldid=651996325]. Just looking at that diff will probably enable you to do the other years in that table. But rowspan can be tricky to work with. Always click "Show preview" before saving. [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] ([[User talk:PrimeHunter|talk]]) 00:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

== NEWS: March 2015 ==

If you want to interest at my petition called "BBC One: Reinstate Balloon Idents" on change.org.

You can keeping an update on that on twitter; @BBCIdents1.

My friends, I need your help.

Your Sincerely

[[User:BilboBaggins34|BilboBaggins34]]

Revision as of 01:04, 22 March 2015

Pixel gun 3d

Miterrkids (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC) I wrote an article ten minutes ago and now it is gone. Can you help?Miterrkids (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Miterrkids, your article is not gone (yet) it is here Pixel Gun 3D. However it has been flagged for speedy deletion as it looks like its just promotion, and has no references. There is a message on your talk page that points this out. You can contest the deletion, but you'll need to be quick before it is deleted. You would also need to add some good references for it to be shown to be notable and not deleted. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

changing redirect

While editing a wikipedia article about a bishop with the surname Peterkin, I noticed that a quick search just for his last name (apparently fairly common for those of Welsh descent) always ended up in a start-class page for a 1939 film, Scrambled Eggs. After his sister was named one of the honoree women this year by the Library of Virginia, I quickly set up a page not only for her, but an additional one for the surname. Within 10 minutes of posting it (before finishing cleanup), someone patrolled it and marked it for notability. Personally, I think the redirect to the fairly unnotable cartoon character is the problem, but I don't know how to correct it.Jweaver28 (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - I have edited the redirect to point to Peterkin (surname), which also does have an entry for the obscure cartoon. The trick to editing a redirect is that it takes you to the target page, and you then have to click the redirect note to edit the redirect itself. See WP:Redirect for more information. As I said to another editor recently, it's easier to do it if you know how to do it than it is to explain. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear teahouse,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Djeak

He is a Real Person, Famous Person. What miss I so that this page is always gotten CSD A7?

with best regards,

Akorda KhanAkordakhan (talk) 18:15, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Akordakhan. The only references in the article are to the person's own website. You say that he is "famous". If so, provide references that are independent of this person, such as newspapers and magazine articles that give him significant coverage. His own website is not useful for showing notability. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


is this to not enough ?

[links removed for copyright reasons. Drmies (talk)]

is now enough ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akordakhan (talkcontribs) 18:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regards,

Akordakhan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akordakhan (talkcontribs) 18:36, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At first glance, those articles appear to be significant coverage, but I do not read Dutch. Perhaps a Dutch speaking editor like Drmies can take a look. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:20, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This has already been answered at WP:Help desk, as the editor is WP:Forum shopping. To quote User:TheRedPenOfDoom:
No. Local promotional event coverage does not provide "significant coverage of the subject by non related reliable sources." - Arjayay (talk) 19:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, no. The Zutphense Koerier isn't just a regional paper, it's also a weekly, and those are usually little more than advertising mediums whose reporting is limited to feelgood stories. Sorry, but this does not add up to significant discussion in a reliable source (I don't know what that first one was, of him holding his son, but that also does not constitute something that adds up to what we consider coverage. IN addition, we can't link to those things for copyright reasons so I'm going to remove them, and I'm going to delete the article. Sorry, but A7 applies: there is no reasonable claim to importance. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How to improve Sources and Citations

First of all I would like to thank you on behalf of the Majestic Team who are working on the Wikipedia Page Project now in Draft at:

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

We have been following advice and implementing comments review after review over the past weeks and wish to thank ColinFine who offered some very useful insights on how we should approach creating our Wikipedia page.

The recent review by Bluerasberry offered information as to why the page was not approved in the format we have proposed. The comment posted was:

"Please identify several sources which feature this product as their subject".

As all sources cited mention or feature Majestic, we would very much appreciate your support to understand what is missing or seen as inadequate.

We have based our proposal for a Wikipedia Page on an existing one for the Aerospike Database (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerospike_database).

Your help and support is very much appreciated :)

Santejachille (talk) 17:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aerospike database is up for deletion because of concerns that "There are not sufficient sources to satisfy any relevant notability criteria" so probably not a good article to model another one on! Please also note that user accounts are strictly for individuals only, not company "teams" Theroadislong (talk) 18:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article declined for importance

Hi, I submitted a value - Maria Kong, who are an israeli dance/theatre contemporary troupe. their work is registered and of great importance to israeli cultural development, they follow punchdrunk immersive theatre etc..

how can I prove this topic is of cultural value and worth a wikipedia page?? this has been the reason for the decline, I find it hard to prove....

thanks for any help and tips.

AKastelmacher (talk) 15:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Draft: Maria Kong was declined, as it says, because it does not provide information about notability of the group. That is, why do other people want to read the article? I will also comment that the article needs copy-editing, and could have been declined on that ground also. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Page Name

Hi There,

I have just created a Wikipedia page.

It is my first page and is really a draft at this stage.

My name is Jack Picone. The Page is User:Jack Picone (Photographer). My question is why is 'User' before my name and how can I delete it so it just appears as Jack Picone (Photographer).

Any advice you can give me will be very much appreciated.

Best, Jack Jack Picone (Photographer) (talk) 14:47, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are two problems. The first, and less serious, is the one that you are asking about, which is that you entered the article in user space rather than in mainspace (article space). The more serious problem is that you tried to create an article about yourself. See the policy on autobiographies and the conflict of interest policy, and the violation of those policies is why your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regular visitor asking yet another question - sorry!

So I've been editing Newgrounds regularly since I joined, and I'm running into issues since information I need is blocked by my work's firewall, and I don't have time to edit at home-- There's benefit to be had from other hands on the article, essentially. No other regular editors frequent the article as far as I can see aside from the site's founder User:Tfulp, and I've already gauged the COI situation there on his talkpage-- he's a really beneficial and nonproblematic flavor of COI editor, and I just hope I didn't scare him off since he hasn't edited since I approached him... anyway, back to my question.

Is there a specific noticeboard I can go to in order to recruit editors for general-purpose improvement of an article, where there isn't a specific issue with the article aside from a lack of information or content to bring it up to snuff? BlusterBlasterkablooie! 14:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

how can I be the official member of Wiki?

how can I be the official member of Wiki? 85.154.172.215 (talk) 13:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Declined article

Hi I am a first time author, but followed guidelines as i understood them and my article is being declined for formatting/layout issues.

Would you be able to help in the specifics of whats holding the article back?

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

Looking forward to your response

Thanks H.Johnstone15 (talk) 11:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First, the article apparently was meant to have headings, as it should, but the headings should be marked off with equal signs so that they are boldface. That is the most obvious layout issue. I haven't reviewed the references in detail, but I didn't see any footnotes in the article body, only a list of references at the end. When a fact is reported about the subject, it should be followed immediately by a footnote. I think that other editors may have other suggestions. The most obvious one has to do with boldface headings. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:49, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i want to get an article in Wikipedia about the letter number combination c824767

I want to find a scientist that can show significance to the letter-number combination of c824767 so that I can compose a meaningful Wikipedia article about it.

I got the idea when I recently joined Wikipedia and I falsely thought that Wikipedia asked me to compose such an article.

I did compose a relatively informal if artistically interesting article (It linked this letter-number combination to the colour purple, amongst other things) but the WikiPatroll deleted it. Invoking the "patent nonsense" Rule.

Haha. I am otherwise likely to be labelled "overeducated" and can probably swing an article, especially after looking at the German WikiSpielwiese..... C824767 (talk) 01:31, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that your first introduction to Wikipedia might have been such a negative one. C'mon: Have a cuppa tea and a croissant. Relax. You are among friends. I am not sure of the meaning of c824767, but it might fall under the stricture of being a neologism. Read more at this Wikipedia page. Care to share some more here about this problem? Maybe we can help you. Regards, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 02:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand its connection to the color purple. I would truly be interested in reading your article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talkcontribs) 06:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would take more than a mathematician showing some significance of C824767; his opinion would have to be published in a reliable source. That would certainly leave out the link to a particular shade of purple and the fact that it was your employee id. —teb728 t c 08:04, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Considered for deletion

I have received a message saying that a page is being considered for deletion due to no "no coverage in reliable third-party sources". Sources have been added when page was created. Similar sources that have been selected by similar magazines. I am not sure what other "reliable" sources would be required? Or is this a personal matter concerning Huon's sarcasm? Please let me know what other sources would be required to prove it is a printed magazine?Madegray (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The page in question is Mafia Magazine. The sources that had been given (compare this revision) were not reliable third-party sources, but largely themselves, their publisher and their distribution company. Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspapers or reputable trade magazines discussing Mafia Magazine in some detail. For all I can tell, no such coverage exists, which means that Wikipedia should not have an article about Mafia Magazine. Mere existence is not enough; a subject must be notable for Wikipedia to write about it. Huon (talk) 00:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This link is a reference (citation) that is not written by mafia Magazine but an independent source that was featured in Mafia Magazine. Link: http://www.prlog.org/12106591-hip-hop-fashion-designer-michael-porter-featured-in-mafia-magazine.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talkcontribs) 00:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PRLog is a press release distribution service. Press releases are not subject to editorial oversight and are not considered reliable sources. Huon (talk) 01:03, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to delete the page, Huon. You seem determined to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talkcontribs) 01:07, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Madegray, Huon will not be deleting your article. An admin will do that after the deletion discussion has been open for 10 days and a consensus has been reached to delete it. It appears to be a foregone conclusion that will happen, however. I too could find nothing to indicate any notability for the publication. Perhaps it is just WP:TOOSOON. John from Idegon (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation. We will withdraw our submission of Mafia Magazine and delete the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talkcontribs) 03:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May I post a temporary article in celebration of a six-month-iversary?

Hi, I was hoping to write a very short parody entry on Wikipedia. The contents will be of my and my girlfriend's relationship. Obviously, that is not strictly "notable", but this is very important to me, and it would mean so much to me if the editors could overlook this article. I would post it on the date of the "anni"versary, then remove it on the next day. Would that be alright, do you think? By the way, the date of the anniversary is March 28th. 2601:6:8B81:65A:3538:1FAC:F68A:6811 (talk) 23:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@2601:6:8B81:65A:3538:1FAC:F68A:6811: Technically no, but I could create a spot in the Draft: namespace for you to do that if you want. Just need to know what you want the name to be EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 00:00, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You should generally avoid creating any pages that aren't related to Wikipedia's mission, regardless of whether they're in the draft namespace or not. However, if you want, you can edit some page with the parody message you want, click the "show preview" button (it's next to "save page"), take a screenshot of the preview, and then cancel the edit. --Jakob (talk) 00:10, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I personally will make an exception for this and if you wish to attack me or report me you can for it. I feel like this isn't a hard request to do, and I will {{db-author}} it afterwards, no harm done. So 2601:6:8B81:65A:3538:1FAC:F68A:6811, what should it be named? EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 00:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The page will be deleted almost immediately by an admin. Sam Walton (talk) 00:26, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Samwalton9: Under what criterion? Drafts are more or less exempt from quite a few, so it would last longer than you think. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 00:28, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I thought you were allowing the user to post in article space. Draft wouldn't hurt anyone I suppose. Sam Walton (talk) 10:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article

Hello,

I'm an actor. I'm on IMDb, IMDbPro, and various other sites. My big movie will come out this year. It is Death in the Desert. I just created an account on here today. May I add an article on myself and my career?

Thanks for your help!

Timothy Skyler Dunigan (talk) 21:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Timothy Skyler Dunigan: I suggest your read WP:NOTEBLP for more on whether you are notable enough for an article. A quick Google News search pulls back nothing, and the only thing on Google is the IMDb with lots of uncredited roles (don't really count). Also I suggest reading WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY too. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 22:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Timothy Skyler Dunigan hello and welcome to The Teahouse. First of all, are you notable? That means are there reputable newspapers and journals which have written extensively about you? Second, if you are, it is not recommended that you write the article yourself. People who write about themselves have trouble with a neutral point of view. The closer you are to a subject the harder it is to write about that subject as someone would who is not connected.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've had speaking roles and my name in the credits. I have a large newspaper article on me that just ran back in October of 2014. Timothy Skyler Dunigan (talk) 23:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Timothy Skyler Dunigan: Lots of people have small speaking roles, an even more are listed in the credits. Now this newspaper article, are we talking small town local news or something bigger? And in honest reply to your original question, yes you may add an article on yourself, but there is no guarantee it won't get deleted and it is highly likes it will at least get an AfD. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 23:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome
I am afraid you cant add by yourself,
Please read here
Aftab Banoori (Talk) 03:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How should I upload screenshots?

What category do screenshots go in? I have a cropped screenshot of formatted code that I want to upload, but I don't want to be blocked from editing! I understand that Wikipedia isn't a cloud storage service, and strongly believe that this file can be used in an article. IndiePhunq (talk) 21:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a new page and proposed deletion on an old page.

I have been trying to create a page to point to or distinguish Gordon Gray, the publisher from Gordon Gray, the producer. I have added refernces but the page keeps getting declined. (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Madegray/sandbox). After receiving the decline notice for that page, I then received a proposed speedy deletion for an additional page that I used as a footnote for the new page on Gordon Gray, has been up for about two years. (Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia_Magazine) and I am not sure why or how to remedy this.Madegray (talk) 21:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Madegray hello and welcome to The Teahouse. I'm sure your article on Gordon Gray (publisher) could be improved to the point that it would be able to stay on Wikipedia. One of the problems is references. Where you use references, it is best to have them inline, meaning <ref>Source</ref> immediately after what the reference supports. You should give the source a title and wither a work (for a newspaper or book) or a publisher (for a reputable web site). Then you use {{reflist}} in the references section and that will cause your references to appear there.
One of your references is a Wikipedia article, and this is not allowed. Wikipedia is not considered reliable because anyone can edit it. The best thing to do is find the sources for the article you used as a source, and use those references for your article. And it is not the article you used as a source which was speedily deleted. It was an image.
A couple of other problems I can correct myself, if you wouldn't mind. I'll give you some other directions: Instead of a heading for "Gordon Gray", change his name on the first reference to Gordon Gray. And add blue links to terms that people might want to read more about. You use [[brackets]] for this purpose. And I'm not sure "media mogul" is a term you want to use. It sounds promotional.
Finally, with external links, the official web site may be fine. Use {{Official}} for that. For the others, I'm not sure these are allowed.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Madegray: You can remove the deletion request from Mafia Magazine as it isn't a speedy deletion tag, it is a proposed deletion tag. Anyone can removes these to prevent deletion. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 21:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate any help you can offer and feel free to make whatever edits you are willing to help with. I will follow your advice and repair the sentences and find more references. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talkcontribs) 22:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Necessary, or not?

Hello!

I have two questions if that ain't too much of a problem :) Firstly, I'd like to know, is it necessary to list every single person that worked on the book/publication one wants to cite or use as reference? Or is mentioning the main editor "sufficient"? My second question is, I'd like to know how, when having to cite the same source several times on a page, how to shorten in the info between the < ref> tags, so that only the authors name usually remains within the tag when quoted from the second time and on.

I focus myself namely often on fixing sister cities and cooperation agreements between international cities, and it happens often that one source will be citing the info needed for let's say, 10+ cities on the same page. This could save me some time and I think it's the way it's supposed to be eventually, no? (at least that's the assumption I got here in my short time :) )

Thanks a lot in advance! Orangesaft (talk) 18:38, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Orangesaft and thank you for visiting the Teahouse. Here's the easy answer:WP:Citation templates. It appears to me that you have some leeway in deciding how to reference such a work. There is not one firm-solid-established-citation system on Wikipedia but you do want to make the information as accessible as possible. Best Regards,
  Bfpage |leave a message  18:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Orangesaft: About the using shortening, a simple way is during the first use of a reference type <ref name=whatever>Reference goes here</ref>, and then next time it is needed type <ref name=whatever />. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 21:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Orangesaft - even traditional organizations like the Royal Astronomical Society have to shorten their lists of authors sometimes, such as the following example I came across the other day: Bauer, A. E.; Hopkins, A. M.; and 23 authors (2013). "Galaxy And Mass Assembly (GAMA): Linking Star Formation Histories and Stellar Mass Growth". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (MNRAS). 434: 209.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) I figure if that is how they cite it themselves, it's good enough for me. --Gronk Oz (talk) 02:10, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm trying to update the logo on the Bristol Alliance of Companies page. I went through the upload process to create this file: File:BristolAllianceCompanies Logo.png

When I went to edit the page, however, I noticed the option to update a logo. I'm not sure if I should upload again. I've never done this before, so I'm unclear on next steps.

Would someone help me with this, please? CaseyWriter (talk) 18:34, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi CaseyWriter, you successfully uploaded the image File:BristolAllianceCompanies Logo.png so no need to upload again. I fixed the error in the Non-free use rationale template. I'm not really sure what you mean by "I noticed the option to update a logo" unless you just mean the "upload file" link in the left hand Tools menu? If so this is just a generic link. To update the logo on the page edit it (top right) and edit the name of the file (first line), add an Edit summary, preview if your not sure if its all ok, then "save page" when happy (this is all assuming your not using the visual editor thingy). Give it a try and any problems, just come ask. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It worked! Thank you very much, KylieTastic CaseyWriter (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar title problem

I created the redirect Tourism in saint martin, intending to call it 'Tourism in Saint Martin'. Do I need to make a different redirect with the correct grammar or will this one suffice? Rubbish computer (talk) 17:53, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rubbish computer, welcome to the Teahouse. It depends much upon the search term. If users are most likely to search for that page using that term/heading then creating a redirect for that specific term is important. Otherwise, not so much.--Chamith (talk) 18:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is kind of off-topic. But why did you redirect Tourism in saint martin to Economy of Saint Martin? Is economy of Saint Martin mainly based on Tourism? --Chamith (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can an editor please take a look at my article?

Hi all, I created an article on the STOP Bang Questionnaire and I was wondering if someone can take a look at it and let me know how it can be improved?

Thank you! Lambbchops (talk) 15:47, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Lambbchops. I took a very quick look at your article and I think it'll probably make it into the encyclopedia but it relies very heavily on primary sources. In addition, you do have a conflict of interest because you work for this guy right? I still think you did a fine job of being objective. Your article will sail through the process if you can find tertiary and secondary sources that help to establish the notability of the wide use of this questionnaire. What would you say was your best reference? Is it in a high level journal? The preponderance of primary sources is sort of like self endorsement. Remember this is an encyclopedia article and not really a means to publicize and encourage the use of the questionnaire. It won't take much to bring it up to standard.
  Bfpage |leave a message  18:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article that contradicts itself

In this section Kalaroa Upazila#Education it states there are more than 12 colleges, and 8 colleges, in this geographical region of Bangladesh. It contradicts itself but I don't know how to tell which statement is right as this article's one reference does not include this.Rubbish computer (talk) 15:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, RC. You could mark the conflicting statements with {{dubious}} tags, and create a section on the Talk page to discuss the issue. Perhaps at the same time you could encourage an editor to provide a reference, using this example to illustrate why they are so important.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will mark these statements. Rubbish computer (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

editing articles

How can I find someone who can post changes. I am totally baffled by the various instructions and these pages which take a person in circles. I only want to edit 3 articles which have gross errors in them.76.7.176.125 (talk) 15:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Most articles are editable by anyone including you, by simply clicking the blue Edit near the top right of the page. A few articles are what we call Semi-Protected, which means you either need an account to edit them, or need to post your request on the Talk page. So you should be able to "post the changes" by using the edit button and making them yourself. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 15:19, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

This picture [1] is in Gujarati Wikipedia , but I am not able to use it in English Wikipedia . You can see my edit CosmicEmperor (talk) 03:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse CosmicEmperor. No, gu:File:Chaitanya mahaprabhu.jpg is uploaded only to Gujarati Wikipedia. In order to use it, it would need to be uploaded to Commons (or English Wikipedia). And in order to upload it, it would need a licensing tag, which is absent on Gujarati Wikipedia (so the file may be in risk of deletion even there). —teb728 t c 05:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looking further, I see that the similarly named Commons:File:Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.jpg was deleted with the summary "Copyright violation: dervative of windows wallpaper + flickr washing", but I can't see if it is the same image. —teb728 t c 07:37, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help in editing my userpage

Hello,

I am trying to edit my userpage and I like everything except one thing, The Context Bar. It stands off from all the others. I have seen many users with no context bar. Can anyone of the kind fellows help me?

Thanks a lot Komchi 22:03, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Komchi, welcome to the Teahouse. If you mean the table of contents then you can remove it with the code __NOTOC__ (double underscore on each side). See more at Help:Section#Table of contents (TOC). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:08, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
ok and thank you Prime Hunter Komchi 06:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How to find a previous post

I have a message that a post from last week was answered. The link went to pg 310 of the archives, but the post referred to wasn't there. Went 5 pages back to 305 and five fowards to 315. How do you locate posts like this? CaptJayRuffins (talk) 19:10, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Was it this one? - I found it by putting CaptJayRuffins in the Archive search box - there was only one match. Arjayay (talk) 19:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for help with "formal tone"

Hi there, My article was declined as it did not have the formal tone required - is it possible to get some help with this? victoriafoleyannis 17:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicki Foley-Annis (talkcontribs)

Vicki Foley-Annis hello and welcome to The Teahouse. There are some obvious problems with Draft:Epicure (party-plan company).
"Epicure™" should not be used. We do not use "TM" in articles. Also, the first use of the name should be Epicure. The external link, which we do not allow in articles, should be at the end of the article inside the template {{Official}} under the heading "External links"; headings are explained below.
Another problem: you must use complete sentences. And they should be in past tense for everything that has happened.
Put [[Wikilinks]] in the article whenever you think a person might want to refer to another Wikipedia article about a name or term you used.
You can use an infobox at the top. Details about the company do not go at the end, but should be displayed at the top. To see what an infobox should look like go to Duke Energy and click on "edit this page" or "edit" at the top. I'm not sure what you would see but it's one of those. Then copy the code (everything above "'''Duke Energy''', headquartered in [[Charlotte, North Carolina]],") move it to where you edit your draft, and replace that company's details with yours, where appropriate.
And the sections of the article should be identified with == Headings ==. You take the section names you have now and put them between pairs of equal signs.
It is preferred that references be inline. Take each reference you have at the end of the article, put it between <ref> and </ref>, and place it immediately after the part of the article that the reference supports. If you use the reference more than once, name it. <ref name=Epicure>, for example, where you define it, goes before the reference instead of just <ref>. Then when you use it again, <ref name=Epicure/>. At the end of the article, == References == should be followed on the next line by {{reflist}}. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a more detailed explanation regarding my article being declined

Draft:Johnny C. Taylor, Jr.

I used 11 articles from a range of independent, reliable, published sources, and did not use any materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed, however the article was declined and I was told I did these things which I did not do. Can someone provide an actual explanation or assistance?

Kevin-tmcf (talk) 16:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. The first sentence which I chose at random was "However, most HR departments are still using the same old cookie-cutter approach to finding new hires". I find that this is a direct quote from the sales blurb from Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/The-Trouble-HR-Insiders-Finding/dp/0814413447, and I see that almost the entirety of the section Draft:Johnny C. Taylor, Jr.#Author is taken from that same sales blurb. Firstly you are likely to find that copying that text verbatim is a copyright violation, but secondly it is extremely unlikely that you will ever find a sales blurb which is written in a non-promotional neutral point of view as required by Wikipedia. If you don't want it to sound like an advertisement, don't copy an advertisement. Write it in your own words. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Kevin-tmcf I am not a Teahouse host but I noticed the second part of your user name tmcf might be associated with Thurgood Marshall College Fund which is mentioned in your article. Might you have a conflict of interest? Others could better advise than I if you have. SovalValtos (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2 same articles...

Hi,

>Tyrants of the Rising Sun
>Tyrants of the Rising Sun: Live in Japan

2 same articles and i don't know how to gather them (i didn't found a help content for that). Need help from community :)

Husky Dream (talk) 15:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Husky Dream. Someone appears to have taken care of that. While we're waiting for details, I'd just like to mention that there is a better way to link to Wikipedia articles, using just the name of the article and double brackets. For example, your first link could be written [[Tyrants of the Rising Sun]], giving Tyrants of the Rising Sun. See also Help:Link#Wikilinks. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

should i inform author?

Should I tell people on a talk page when I have made an edit? Is there a page with explanations for the abbr. Like rfc, diff, etcetc? Sorry if this has been asked62.107.1.225 (talk) 13:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. In general there is no need for you to discuss on the article talk page if the edit you have made to the article is supported by references to published independent reliable sources. You may, however, need to discuss if your edit is disputed. As for the abbreviations, try WP:Glossary. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But it is a good idea to provide an edit summary for every edit. It does not always need to be expansive – and people often do use short abbreviations just like you asked for a page to translate – but telling others at least something of what you've done upon an edit is a stand-in, basically, for exactly what your question is about: informing people of your edit. Especially when your edit is not self-explanatory, or might be seen as controversial, I'd take the time to explain more clearly what you've done in the edit summary. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:38, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Picture cropping

I would like this picture cropped for Chandler Parsons' page. Where I can request this? --DangerousJXD (talk) 07:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DangerousJXD. You can do it yourself. Download a copy, crop it as you see fit using any graphics program, and then upload it back to Commons, making it clear that it is a cropped derivatative version of the original image. This is basic graphics file work requiring no special expertise. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am using a phone... Also I would have little idea how to do that anyway. –DangerousJXD (talk) 08:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can also use Template:Annotated image, which can crop the original picture without having to upload a new one. Yunshui  12:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Shall I just take this to the article's talk page? –DangerousJXD (talk) 01:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, DangerousJXD. To quote my god-daughter, "YouTube is your friend." I'm not sure what type of phone you have, but YouTube will show you how to crop pictures with it. For instance, if you have an Android phone here is a quick (less than a minute) instruction for how to do it using the built-in Gallery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQDaG8WbnYw Hope this helps! --Gronk Oz (talk) 07:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

user contributions

                      ^^^^^To reply

@EordE6 Also, what did you mean by semi hidden in the edit history?

Studentcollege (talk) 02:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Studentcollege: By that I mean, if I go to the article, the edits will no longer be displayed. But once again, if I click the history button (see the one in the top right here), I can see my edit and everyone elses from the past. Also as I have said before, please reply in this section (don't use the ask a new question button.)

user contributions

If you make a contribution to an article page and that contribution goes directly to your user contributions page then that contribution cannot be deleted am i right? Studentcollege (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Studentcollege: I know you may be new here but consider this a formal warning. Do not post this same question repetitively here again. It will be considered spam and could be removed. Instead, respond to the editors who answered previously by using the little blue edit link next to the title of the section or on our talk pages. I will copy this message to your talk page too. Thanks for your cooperation. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 01:57, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@EordE6 on your latest post what did you mean by undo the edit or remove it from the article? Studentcollege (talk) 02:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Studentcollege: For example look at this history page. You see next to each edit there is a small link labeled undo? You can go to here and try it out if you wish. This will remove whatever that person just added to the article from the main view of the article, but your edit will always remain, semi-hidden in the edit history. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 02:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

user contributions

So once you make a contribution on an article page that contribution goes straight to your user contributions page and that contribution cannot be deleted am i right?

Studentcollege (talk) 01:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Studentcollege: Yes, that's correct. The answers to your other questions below expand on this. If you ever wish to clarify or expand on a question you've already asked, you can do so in the same section - no need to create a new one :) ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Studentcollege: Welcome... again. If you scroll down a bit you will see this has been answered multiple times but I will sum it up. You can always undo the edit or remove it from the article, but it will always be visible in your user contributions for viewing. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 01:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

user contributions

I also want to know if you look at your own contributions page then I guess you cannot delete your contributions from your own account am I right? Studentcollege (talk) 00:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Studentcollege. Once you have made a valid edit, it will be part of your public edit history forever. If an editor, for example, makes a death threat accompanied by a string of obscenities, or violates copyright, those edits will be removed from public view by an administrator, but will still be visible to administrators and a small number of other highly trusted users. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:12, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

user contributions

Hello, I just want to know if you can delete some of your own user contributions from your own account?

Studentcollege (talk) 23:39, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Studentcollege: thanks for stopping by. No, every change is preserved forever in Wikipedia's database. A special class of users called administrators have a tool that allows them to sorta delete things, in the sense that they can hide specific edits from public view. But that is only done for very specific reasons, and not just willy-nilly. I hope that helps! --Jayron32 23:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Studentcollege. Jayron32 is quite right that the logs always contain the historical record of changes, but I'm not sure if that is what you were asking about. You have not made any edits so far, so I guess this is a hypothetical question, and I will give a couple of hypothetical answers. If you make an edit and then later you change your mind, you may be able to "undo" that change by clicking the "Undo" link from the article's History page (it may depend on what other changes have been made since). The log will still show both the original change and the undo. If you can't undo, then you can always edit the article again to put right any mistakes. On the other hand, if you create a sub-page in your user space (which might be named something like "User:Studentcollege/Butterflies") and you want to delete that entire page, then you can request an Admin delete it by adding the following code at the top of the page: {{db-userreq|rationale=Brief reason goes here.}} . I hope that makes sense; if we did not cover what you wanted, please come back and ask specifically.--Gronk Oz (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So I guess all your contributions will forever remain on your user contributions and cannot be deleted am i right? And just so you know newly created wikipedia users will always say the exact same questions just to clarify on certain things@EoRdE6

Studentcollege (talk) 04:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Studentcollege: Yes to sum this up again, your edits are permanently viewable in your user contributions. Nothing you do can get them removed from there. This is to ensure accountability for bad edits and vandalism, and to allow reviews when people are asking for higher permissions (rollback, file mover, adminship etc). Your edits will always be in your user contributions. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 04:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @EordE6 for your patience and kindness.



Studentcollege (talk) 04:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kenya at the Cricket World Cup

Not a new user, but I've done something I don't know how to fix. I moved Kenya at the Cricket World Cup from my sandbox to the article page, using the move function, but now my sandbox has become a redirect to this page. How do I remove this redirect, so I can use my sandbox again? Joseph2302 (talk) 23:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joseph2302. If you click a redirect like User:Joseph2302/sandbox then the top of the page says "(Redirected from User:Joseph2302/sandbox)". Click there and then edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:11, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Fixed Thanks. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:12, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

speedy deletion

So a page I just made for the Alliance of Women Directors has been flagged for speedy deletion for "unimportance" & "irrelevance". Part of the page listed over 150 members and that list has been removed. Seriously, WTF? You guys claim to not be sexist, to want women editors and then you flag a page for speedy deletion because you deem it irrelevant?!? Some of those women members that you deleted are highly recognized and honored in the film industry.

If you need some links to why that group is so significant check here... http://blogs.indiewire.com/womenandhollywood/dga-study-women-and-minority-directors-face-significant-hiring-disadvantage-at-entry-level-20150109

I call bullshit!

JenJjenred5 (talk) 18:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not up for speedy deletion, rather a deletion discussion is ongoing and I see that you have made your points there. We cannot second guess the discussion so further comment here will not help.--ukexpat (talk) 19:57, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The blog you cited, Jjenred5, does not discuss the organization in question, so it does not help in establishing the notability of the group. The deletion debate will last at least a week, so that gives you time to add reliable, independent sources to the article, if they exist. Any notable individual woman director probably already has a Wikipedia biography or is eligible for one. But having notable members does not make a group itself notable. As for us "guys" and our "bullshit", I notice that the first recommendation to delete came from a highly experienced and respected woman editor, MelanieN. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:16, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Jjenred5. There's no way you could have known this but you're traveling a well-worn path. When you see posts by people who aren't familiar with our common standards for articles whose submissions have been marked for some deletion process a common denominator—oh, not all the time, but often enough—is, depending on the topic: you must be anti-Italian; you hate French people; you're a bunch of antisemites; you must be sexist; you're racist; what do you have against Chinese people; you're liberal bias is outrageous; your conservative bias is outrageous; and on and on depending on the topic. Then we explain: uh, no, Wikipedia requires reliable sources to warrant an article; Wikipedia requites notability of topics to be demonstrated; information in articles must be verifiable; Wikipedia does not allow original research; no, you can't copy and paste other people's copyrighted writing; yes, you should have attempted to understand the basics of our standards and attempted to comply before posting; yes we really are an encyclopedia and all that that implies; no we are not a social networking site; and on and on depending on the subject and what was written.

Simply put, you've taken a wrong turn. It's not only untrue, but it does nothing at all to further what I assume is your goal – to have an article on this organization here. If you want that, the answer is simple. Find reliable, secondary, independent sources that discuss the topic substantively. List them at the deletion discussion. Cite them in the article. It will not be deleted. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:27, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Jjenred5, looking at the article history the speedy deletion would have been added because there was only one reference not coming from the group itself, a problem that was later fixed hence no more speed delete. Any new article without reliable references is likely to be flagged if an editor does not think it meets the basic levels of Notability. The notice is a standard notice put onto a large number of articles every day, and gives the information needed to contest.
  • Note that the notice does not say the topic is "unimportant" or "irrelevant" is says "...does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject." - i.e. its not calling it unimportant, just stating that it is up to the creator, or anyone else, to show importance. This problem would not have happened if the Articles for creation process had been used, when using the direct creation method you run the risk of deletion as the warnings said.
  • Next you claim "You guys claim to not be sexist...." - firstly there is no "You guys" on Wikipedia, for the most part we are individuals (all sexes, genders, races, ethnicities,.... ) acting totally independently; secondly the actions such as the speedy flag [2], and removing the list of members [3] where taken by two individuals, not by any group of "guys"; but most importantly why jump to the conclusion this was a sexist action? If you created a page about some mens group with no references it would also likely be flagged.
  • If you are in doubt that this was not a sexist action just keep an eye on Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as importance or significance not asserted and look at the other articles being flagged for the same reason as yours. Also as the article is now under consideration at Articles for deletion you can see its just one of 63 so far today, and I find it difficult to look at such a list of diverse topics and find any bias other than towards our Notability standards.
  • You also should not assume all the involved editors are male, in fact some already involved with the article identify on their user pages as female. Many of us choose to not identify either way. I personally don't find labels useful as they are often used to judge, when only each edit in its own right should be judged.
  • Finally, I hope this experience does not discourage you, and that you continue to work to try to bring this article up to Wikipedia Notability standards. And if in the end the topic is not yet notable enough to remain, that you continue to help create, edit and improve the millions of other articles that need it. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please create an article about Magnes the shepherd.

Magnes was a Cretan shepherd in north Magnesia. It is believed that he discovered Lodestone ( and thus magnetite). Please feature it. 62.231.239.140 (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Magnes the Shepherd is mentioned in the history of geomagnetism article. I encourage you to write a draft article about this character using the Articles for Creation process. Cheers LukeSurl t c 17:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done. See Magnes the shepherd. Everyone reading this is truly welcome to add to it!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That turned out to be a very nice article. It's nice to see how well the Teahouse can work.
  Bfpage |leave a message  18:55, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Runaway question moved here from somewhere in the other questions by w.carter-Talk 16:00, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Sorry to post a question here. I can't post my question when I hit 'Ask Question' button. Why is it so? Tafeax (talk) 13:20, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Have you added the four tildes to the end of your post? Without doing that, you can't post your question. AmazingAlec (talk) 17:53, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to be that person, but they obviously figured it out as they posted immediately after in the section below. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 17:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
LOL! Oops! Need to pay attention more... AmazingAlec (talk) 18:01, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where has my sandbox gone?

Hello!

Got problem with sandbox. It redirect to the page which I've been moved for article. The article Flymojo, seems to show my sandbox edit history too. All this while, I used sandbox as an experiment page. Sometimes I made major update by copying from main article, do the improvement on my sandbox and put it back. Am I doing the right thing? How to remove edit history of my sandbox on Flymojo? How do I get back my sandbox? Thanks Tafeax (talk) 14:14, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey and welcome! I have fixed this issue by removing the redirect from User:Tafeax/sandbox. While yes some random edit history has gone to the main article but this isn't an issue. But in the future it is better to create a second sandbox or a draft article so this won't happen. Good question though! EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 14:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot EoRdE6! Tafeax (talk) 14:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
EoRdE6If I may ask you, how do I create a second sandbox? Tafeax (talk) 14:38, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Tafeax: In your own user-space you can have pretty much as many pages as you want (as long as they are loosly Wikipedia related). So to create one just type User:Tafeax/pagename in the search bar, replacing page name with whatever you want, click on the redlink in the search results and create. So you could use Sandbox 2, or if you're building and article maybe the name of the article. It honestly doesn't matter as long as you can find it. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 14:46, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Top icon problem

Hello. I am a file mover in Wikipedia, and when I used the {{File Mover topicon}} template, it did not show up on my userpage. What happened? Any replies, please ping. Thanks, Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:56, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nahnah4:, the icon is there but you've hidden it by accident. Most of these topicon templates have a parameter |icon_nr= and you have used the value 1 for this parameter both for both {{File Mover topicon}} and {{Rollback}} so the images are superimposed on each other. Change one of the values to 2 and the issue is resolved. Nthep (talk) 10:27, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Nthep: Oh thanks! Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 05:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What does a superscripted question mark mean?

I was just editing the article on Okayama Castle (Okayama-jō in romanized Japanese) & ran across several superscripted question marks that seem to indicate uncertainty about the correct spelling. Is that in fact, what these marks indicate &, if so, how can I remove them when I correct the spelling? Evalpat (talk) 09:15, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Evalpat. If you pick on one of them, you'll find they are links to the page Help:Installing Japanese character sets - so they are nothing to do with the spelling, and are really designed for people who don't get shown the kanji, because they're not installed on their computer. (I agree that the meaning is not clear, but it's trying to be helpful). They're created automatically by the template {{nihongo}}. That page shows that it is possible to replace it by a different template {{nihongo4}}, which does not have the query; but I'm not sure that replacing it is a good idea. --ColinFine (talk) 09:27, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ColinFine,

Thanks for the quick reply.

I hadn't run across those before & find them misleading. Given their function, I don't suppose anything can be done about them. It's unfortunate that question marks were chosen for this purpose tho. To the uninitiated like myself, they really appear to call some aspect of the preceding text into question.

Evalpat (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well you can go to Template talk:Nihongo and propose that the "?" be removed. All the best: Rich Farmbrough15:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC).

Copy editing

Hello again! Can I get some clarification on what 'Copy Editing' is please? --DangerousJXD (talk) 08:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DangerousJXD
To quote Wikipedia:Basic copyediting "simple improvements that you can make without being an expert in the subject. Copyediting involves the "five Cs": making the article clear, correct, concise, comprehensible, and consistent." - There is more information on the Wikipedia:Basic copyediting page. - Arjayay (talk) 08:52, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Questions I want to ask

Here are some questions I want to ask.

  1. I see that after someone has nominated a file for deletion, it either gets deleted or stays. So after you have a file nominated, how do you delete the file itself after receiving requests?
  2. How do you become an administrator?
  3. I asked about developing portals earlier, but you did not provide the exact code for the featured stuff. What is the exact code for my portal, Portal:Scottish Wildlife?
  4. How do you customize a taxobox so that it is whatever colour you want it to be, regardless of the life form you are talking about? (for example, a taxobox for a living thing in the kingdom Animalia, but the taxobox is pink, unlike the default, in which the taxobox for such articles is tan)

Provide the exact codes, and give as detailed answers as possible. Do not say anything like "go to this article and read it". The answers to each questions should be numbered in exactly the right order.Scottishwildcat12 (talk) 07:13, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Scottishwildcat12. Sorry for referring you to other pages in some of my replies, but in order to say much more, I would just have to copy the content of those pages.
1. Only an administrator can delete a file. But if you uploaded the file and provided the only substantive content to the file description page, you can request deletion by adding {{db-author}} to the file description page. —teb728 t c 07:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
2. You (or someone else) can nominate you for adminship at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. After that there will be a discussion of whether you have sufficient experience. (It requires a lot of experience to be approved!) If you want details, you can read Wikipedia:Administrators#Becoming an administrator. —teb728 t c 07:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
3. I will leave your portal question for someone who knows about portals. For reference your previous thread is at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 257#Making A Portal. —teb728 t c 08:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
4. The color is assigned automatically based on the entry for regnum, virus_group, unranked_phylum, or phylum parameters, in that order. For example for animals specify the regnum parameter regnum = [[Animal]]ia. (There is also a color parameter, but there is no need to specify it manually. If you do, be sure to use rgb or hsl format; see examples at Template:Taxobox.) —teb728 t c 08:14, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Educational assignment

Hello, I'm very new to Wikipedia and English is not my prime language. I created an article in my sandbox as a part of my educational assignment. I assume that next step should be submitting it to review; however, I'm afraid that I've made too many mistakes and it will be just deleted. Could someone please have a look at it and tell me if I should change anything? Here is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ichmusic/sandbox Thank you Ichmusic (talk) 06:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ichmusic, it looks quite good. I think you should try to find a few more reviews by critics, that would help the article clearly pass Notability, which is a bit marginal now. Look in major mainstream news or magazines. Your English is good and there is no danger of it being deleted. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Roger (Dodger67) thank you! I'll try to find more reviews then

Ichmusic (talk) 07:05, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My draft of an article I am posting (first time editor) has been blocked due to an IP that is a web page host.

I am a military historian with two web pages for veterans who served during the same time period can review these historical events. There is nothing commercial about either website. What are my options?217.217.128.83 (talk) 05:11, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome IP editor. Although your specific problem is unclear, I suggest you consider setting up a Wikipedia account. This Teahouse question is the only edit from this IP address, so I can't analyze your earlier work in order to make more specific comments. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:17, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But as always, the touchstone is independent reliable sources. If there are articles by people unconnected with your websites and published in reliable places such as major newspapers, that talk at length about the websites, then there may be enough material to ground a Wikipedia article. If there are not such sources, then it is impossible to write a satisfactory article about them, and you should not try. It makes no difference at all whether the sites are commercial or not, or how worthy they are. In addition, as the proprietor of the pages, you may have a conflict of interest, and should be very cautious about working on any Wikipedia article about them. --ColinFine (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015-16 NCAA Divsion I Men's Basketball season

Can You put Things on like read edit and view history for the article 68.102.58.146 (talk) 20:59, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How can I create the 2015-16 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Article 68.102.58.146 (talk) 21:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome! The article you are looking for can be found at 2015 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 21:52, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, the user is trying to create 2015–16 NCAA Division I men's basketball season. It is becoming hard to assume good faith here as this user has been told across multiple fora for several weeks how to do this (not necessarily with this specific article, but with numerous prospective sporting event articles), and has steadfastly ignored all good-faith attempts to help them. The first dozen or so times he may have been genuinely having trouble making it work. At this point, it has gotten so surreal it feels like he's playing us for fools. I don't want to believe that, but this is starting to get past the point one can believe he really is still having trouble. --Jayron32 04:06, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How Can I Start this article 68.102.58.146 (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can't. Don't. Jrcla2 (talk) 00:50, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question re: the "definition" of consensus on WP

Okay, so as well as a (very, very dead) RfC I'm involved in right now, I've been investigating the nature of RfCs and how they typically go on Wikipedia, and I'm finding myself a little confused. So an RfC's result is determined by finding consensus on a given matter, right-- but how is that achieved? How is consensus really "defined" on WP, per se?

I understand that the technical answer is that it's "mutual agreement", but I don't really get how that's achieved through RfCs since opposing opinions and disagreement are the catalyst for RfCs. Is the result determined by the way of a majority-wins situation, or the way of whichever side presents a more convincing side in the debate (since it even states in WP:CONSENSUS that it's not a voting or democracy system, I find it really odd to see RfC's counting votes or listing who is on X or Y side of the debate)-- or is it ideally supposed to cumulate in a meet-everyone-halfway, compromise-based solution where everyone is at least okay with part of the result? Does it depend on how contentious or ideologically sensitive the topic area is?

Additionally, is one's responsibility in an RfC more than just contributing their two cents-- should I work towards crafting a solution based on everyone's input as well as putting in my own? Or is that up to someone else, like an uninvolved editor? What if the topic area is noncontentious and/or not of interest to most (admittedly, I think my going to the trouble of doing an RfC over something like Alien spit was a little silly, but I just didn't know how else to keep the discussion in a constructive direction)?

I know that was a lot of me yakking about this, but I feel like it's something important to set straight in my mind. I'd appreciate input. BlusterBlasterkablooie! 13:37, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great question and thank you for stopping by the Teahouse, BlusterBlaster. I have to admit right from the start that if I have trouble falling asleep tonight, the discussion to which you refer is what I'm going to read to take me off to ZZZZZZZZZ land. If it were me, and I might be a little more likely to go ahead and make the edits and then see if anyone cares enough to make a reversion, but that probably is not really in the spirit of consensus building. Are all these bits and pieces important enough to all the discuss-ants to NOT come to an agreement. It seems to me that when I am involved in discussing articles for deletion the comments are short and sweet and end up getting closed by an administrator. This drawn out process is too much for me. If I were interested enough in the topic, I probably would leave the discussion and come back later (a month) to see if things had wound up. ....alien spit? Really?
  Bfpage |leave a message  21:39, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Discuss-ants" makes me think of this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:37, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Have some more tea. I certainly don't see anything wrong with trying to come to some sort of consensus in a Request for comment. But it seems to me that a Request for comment is just that: People comment and when most folks (or some folks) have weighed in, then you yourself can decide what to do. I agree with Bfpage here that, when you have pondered all the comments, you can make your proposed edit under WP:BRD and see what happens: perhaps get into a very heavy back-and-forth about the aptness or inaptness of your said edit. But perhaps not. Anyway, Consensus is often gained through one chivalrous person just giving up with a shrug of the shoulders and walking away. GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:59, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Sorry for the delayed response; NS got absolutely walloped in snow and I've spent the last two days pulling my hair out about not being able to get to work...) Thanks for the answers, guys, I'll keep that counsel in mind. I'm fairly certain the editor who raised the whole Alien spit weight issue to begin with has lost interest in pressing it anyway... color me unsurprised, it's not exactly the most riveting thing to argue about. BlusterBlasterkablooie! 12:04, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

wrong type for a picture

Hej I have edited the wrong text on the page "diatoms", where it was written that 2 mM silicate would be limiting for diatoms according to Egge & Aksnes 1992, but after Reading that paper I noticed that it is 3 magnitudes wrong, and actually the value is 2 µM (Micro instead of milli). that is quite important for an ecologist, and probably many people wrote the wrong number from wikipedia already instead of checking the original. But I don't know how to correct the Picture which is connected to that text, how to change in the Picture mM to µM, can anybody help me there ? (or change the Picture ASAP) name of Picture in Wiki: Egge and Aksnes 1992 plot.svg Thank you Maria Kahlert (SLU) Maria Kahlert (SLU) (talk) 10:07, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Maria Kahlert (SLU). The caption you are talking about is within the image File:Egge and Aksnes 1992 plot.svg. I'm afraid there are no tools within Wikipedia for editing images: somebody would need to edit it outside Wikipedia using a suitable graphical editor, and then upload the new version (I am guessing that GIMP could do it, but I don't know). You may find somebody who can help at the graphics lab. --ColinFine

(talk) 11:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse Maria Kahlert (SLU), it's glad to have you pay a visit here. I have found graphs available on wiki commons that I have had to alter for very similar reasons and this is how I did it: since the image is copyright free you are free to alter it as you wish. I snipped the image off of my browser window and into Microsoft publisher. After I pasted the image into a Microsoft publisher document, I then inserted a white rectangle over the bottom axis label. Over the white rectangle, I inserted a text box and then wrote the correct access titles and legend on to the graph. I then an enlarged the image that I had created in Microsoft publisher to fill my screen. I then used my snipping tool in Windows to snip the new image that I had created from the old graph. I retitled the graph and uploaded it to wiki commons. At that point I was able to insert the newly created graph with the correct access labels into the article. It isn't the easiest process but it actually goes much faster than it sounds. Discussions in the Teahouse are all about editing and so I hope this helps you.
  Bfpage |leave a message  11:58, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just a clarification about the copyright. It is not copyright free, it remains 100% copyrighted, but under a free license, which requires attribution be provided to the authors. If you use the "Upload a new version of this file" at the original page then nothing needs to be done because the history is all there; just note the change you made. If you are uploading it anew, as modified, you must provide the appropriate credit: detail of the the page it was taken from, what was changed, link to that source, and provide at least one of the same licenses.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey guys, I have just built a new version of the image in question - took the opportunity to redo the labels in a more convenient font too. I used a screenshot of the image as a basis and edited it in PS (the current version being some Illustrator interpreted construct). Based on the comments above, I'm not quite sure how to attribute it now. What kind of attribution needs to be made to the original authors (Egge & Aksnes) and to Sakurambo (who made the Wiki version), respectively? Image is located here (Commons). Elmidae (talk) 20:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've provided substantial attribution. See this diff. However, as I note in my edit summary, I'm not at all sure the original upload (and thus everything after) was not a copyright violation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks mate :) Updated the image in Diatom. Do you think we should put the copyright question to WP:CQ? Elmidae (talk) 08:21, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Policy regarding behaviour in arbitration fora

Recently I have noticed quite a bit of nastiness in places like Arbitration Requests/Enforcement, Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents etc. To be clear, is it allowed to show contempt for previous Arbcom decisions, in particular to make veiled Nazi references (e.g. "Superior orders") in characterizing their actions (er... unwillingness to WP:IAR I guess?), in the middle of those discussions? Is WP:CIVIL actually actionable in any way, or is there some other policy to cite here? 70.24.6.180 (talk) 05:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor. You have chosen to spend time in the areas of Wikipedia where the most intractible and emotional disputes are discussed, often at mind-numbing length. Almost inevitably, these are places where tempers often run high, and people often vent their emotions in an ugly fashion. One great thing about volunteering with this encyclopedia is that you get to choose where to participate. So, if you prefer "sweetness and light", volunteer to help kindergarteners work on art projects, and do not hang out at the drunk tank at the county jail late on Saturday night. Figuratively, of course. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but should it then follow that I am blocked when I point out that behaviour, observe another IP get blocked (and the comment reverted) for making far more reasonable criticism, and get blocked again myself when I attempt to restore that which has been censored (by the person who was criticized, no less)? I am more than willing to roll up my sleeves, and don't particularly expect kind treatment, but to me contributing to Wikipedia means ensuring that rules are consistently and fairly applied and that hypocrites and the corrupt are dealt with appropriately. I have been repeatedly accused of signing out of my (nonexistent) account in order to point out these things. The simple truth of the matter is that it is because of the things I point out that I cannot in good conscience create an account. 70.24.6.180 (talk) 07:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Creating an account gives you a higher degree of anonymity by far than editing from your IP address. The advice I give you now is the same advice I would give any editor: Take things slow and steady at places like AE and ANI. Be very, very careful to avoid disruptive editing such as calling people hypocrites and corrupt, and do not try to evade a block. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:07, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The pages you mention are for frank discussion. As long as people are prepared to use their accounts and thus own their expressions of opinion, both sharpness and forthrightness are acceptable IMO. On the other hand, editing those pages logged out or from an SPA sock while posing as uninvolved is discouraged. (Incidentally I see you just posted on ANI, claiming to be "uninvolved" in the matter under discussion.[4] But how is anyone to know?)
This page, the Teahouse, is "a support space designed specifically for new editors";[5] it's not intended for hints and roundabout passive-aggressive accusations from experienced editors. At least say who you're specifically accusing of what, preferably with diffs. And, if it needs saying: if you're blocked, don't post at all. Since I'm not a regular here, I won't remove your question as trolling, but that is actually what I think should be done. Bishonen | talk 15:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Added note: the IP above has acknowledged here that they're the same person as 76.64.12.157 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), which is currently blocked for disruption. Blocked per WP:EVADE. Bishonen | talk 18:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Lost and Don't know where to start re-writing on my draft.

So I've been trying to publish an article Draft: Hassan's Optician Co. I've been working on for at least a month and I'm stuck. I'm a novice at writing anything actually and I was hoping someone could help me out?

This article was the first optician and first official approved optician store in Kuwait just to give you an idea why I thought it should be written.

Thank you, Krystel Espiritu (talk) 05:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. I have gone ahead and cleaned and accepted your article. I am not saying it will stick, and I continue to suggest you improve it, but it can now be found at Hassan's Optician Co. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 19:03, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @EoRdE6:,

Thank you so much for your help and I will continue working on it but could you kindly advice me on where I could improve it further from your perspective? I really appreciate it, Krystel Espiritu (talk) 06:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@EoRdE6:Also I have a lot of hard copies of newspaper articles is there a way I can publish them online and use those links as references? If yes, could you refer me to sites where I can publish them? Because most of the newspaper websites here their archive only dates back 3 years. Krystel Espiritu (talk) 08:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also I've been told that it is not necessary for that source to be available online. It is quite sufficient to provide the source information of the newspaper article (newspaper name, issue number, page etc.) Krystel Espiritu (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To add to User:Krystel Espiritu, it is certainly recommended to provide an online source--this makes verification easy, and lets others improve the article if they get more information out of the source you used. If the newspaper is out of copyright, you could upload a scan to WikiSource or Wikimedia Commons and link to that in your citation. But you are free to cite offline sources so long as they are verifiable; a published newspaper that is no doubt archived somewhere (even if only on microfilm in a single Kuwaiti library) qualifies. Use sources that provide the best information for the article; that they are easy to verify is just a bonus. Knight of Truth (talk) 18:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody please move that to -> Alfredo Di Stéfano Stadium (with capitalised "Di"). Compare this with the spelling on the Real Madrid website. Arguably, also there are occasionally misspellings "di Stefano". His name is of Italian origin therefore the capitalisation. Spanish has it not, therefore frequent misspellings.

Image of the stadium with name on it: http://irealmadrid.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/estadio-alfredo-di-stefano-1024x521.jpg

Compare also:

Cheers, 115.69.63.229 (talk) 08:44, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia won't let me move it, because it's counting Alfredo di Stéfano Stadium and Alfredo Di Stéfano Stadium as the same thing. Help please? Joseph2302 (talk) 12:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think there is a compelling case to make the title Alfredo Di Stéfano Stadium then you need to add it to the list of requests at Wikipedia:Requested moves. In practice it's going to make very little difference as the lowercase Alfredo di Stéfano Stadium will redirect to the article so anyone searching it won't make any difference if they type Di or di. Nthep (talk) 09:29, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Those fancy tables

I just added a table to the Rob Crow page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Crow) and I was wondering how to get those nice multi row cells that you see on a page like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Froberg for multiple releases in a single year — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swartzcr (talkcontribs) 23:10, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Swartzcr, welcome to the Teahouse. I see some of your edits are made with VisualEditor. I don't know how it works there or whether it's even possible (it wasn't when VisualEditor was introduced). I use the source editor and there it's done with rowspan documented at Help:Table. I have done the first in [6]. Just looking at that diff will probably enable you to do the other years in that table. But rowspan can be tricky to work with. Always click "Show preview" before saving. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NEWS: March 2015

If you want to interest at my petition called "BBC One: Reinstate Balloon Idents" on change.org.

You can keeping an update on that on twitter; @BBCIdents1.

My friends, I need your help.

Your Sincerely

BilboBaggins34