Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tenryuu, 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

Link I added was informative with proof

My link was removed and stated that it is not adding anything, but if you read the Wiki Page, my link is adding much more information then the actual one.175.100.147.62 (talk) 07:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

How do I handle this situation since I'm not an administrator?

In a biography of a living person, there was a link to the website "beenverified.com". I interpreted that link as an advert|affiliate link and deleted it noting that it was an advert. In the normal course of editing Wikipedia, I've noticed that the link has been re-inserted,

I'm not one to get into edit wars; so what's the correct procedure for handling this? The article in question is Ryan Ruocco and is one of only four on all of Wikipedia referencing that site.
Mikeylito^TALK  07:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Can we use non-English newspapers as source?

There are many issues which are covered by non-English news papers in detail than English. For Example, The Times of India is reliable English source, it is largest selling English daily in the world. But same "Times of India" publishes Marathi language version in Maharashtra state(Population=110 million) of India named Maharashtra Times, also it has Hindi language version Navbharat Times. Times of India will not cover every important issue of Maharashtra state as it is a national level newspaper but Maharashtra Times will cover every detail of work relating to Government of Maharashtra or Biographies of people related to Maharashtra which can be very useful for readers. (Marathi language is also 16th most spoken language in the world). We can write it on Marathi Wikipedia, but as we translate articles from English Wikipedia to Marathi Wikipedia based on English language sources, then why we can't translate Marathi language articles to English based on Marathi language sources? Human3015 talk • 06:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Human3015, and thank you for your excellent question. The English Wikipedia is the free encylopedia of the entire world and universe. It is not the encyclopedia of the English speaking world. Reliable sources in other languages are perfectly acceptable, for topics where English language sources are lacking. So, when building an article on any given topic, English language sources are preferred if sources in many languages are ample. But if high-quality reliable sources are limited to those in other languages, those sources are perfectly acceptable as long as the resulting article otherwise complies with our policies and guidelines. Be sure that the sources are of high quality, and are cited properly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328 for your nice guidance. Nice to know that we can use non-English newspapers as source. --Human3015 talk • 07:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Book Notability "Published Works" Question

The notability guidelines for books state: "The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself," with the explanation, ""Non-trivial" excludes personal websites, blogs, bulletin boards, Usenet posts, wikis and other media that are not themselves reliable."

My question is, are Book Reviews from reputable sites and reviewers sufficient to make a new book article, and/or article for its author? The two specifically for my case are by a famous author at SFBook.com and from a professional reviewer at Lesbrary.com. Both sites are quite reputable and reliable.

174.24.38.211 (talk) 06:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 174.24.38.211. The first website you mentioned is self-published and incidentally, riddled with glaring typographical errors. The second one is self-identified as a blog. So, I have to disagree with you. Neither is a reliable source, in my opinion. We are looking for sources with professional editorial control and a good reputation for accuracy, fact checking and correcting errors. These websites, in my opinion, do not meet that standard. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:19, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Understood, thank you for your reply, I'll not make the new page.

174.24.38.211 (talk) 06:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Can't find answer

I received an email to say that there was a message from John from Idegon but I cannot find it anywhere. Can you please help. Thank you. Maplepond (talk) 04:56, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I posted what us known as a talkback template on your talk page (User talk:Maplepond) to let you know I'd replied to your earlier question here. Until you respond to the question I posed there, I have no interest in helping you further. John from Idegon (talk) 05:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@Maplepond:HERE Click it. It might help you more than that reply above mine... John from Idegon Consider at least pointing them in the right direction next time. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 05:56, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@Maplepond: Your original question and the replies to it have now been archived here. If John from Idegon had left the section name on his talkback, you may have found it before it was archived. The question that John from Idegon refers to above is “what is your connection to the company you are writing about?” Perhaps he suspects you have a conflict of interest on the company. —teb728 t c 08:00, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I work for ClearView, the company that I am trying to create the entry for. I am the marketing manager at ClearView. As mentioned before, someone unknown to the company, created an entry on Wiki for ClearView that was not factually correct. I am just trying to get factual information approved. Thank you. Maplepond (talk) 08:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

When is the proper time to insert a non-free image in an article?

As I mentioned in my guest profile, I've been a Wikipedian for more than 9 years now. So, I figure it's time I learned to do things correctly.

I'm in the process of developing several articles. Some I've written as userspace drafts;one currently resides in the Draft namespace. When I've uploaded a non-free image for use in my drafts, it has either been deleted or, preferably, commented out.

So, when is it proper to insert a non-free image into an article, assuming all other criteria have been met for using a non-free image?
Mikeylito^TALK  00:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mikeylito. Non-free content may be used only in article namespace—not in draft namespace or in userspace drafts. So the correct time is when the draft is moved to article space. —teb728 t c 00:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mikeylito. As TEB278 points out, non-free images are not allowed to be used in the userspace per WP:NFCC#9. I believe, however, that you may link to an image if you like so that the link acts as some sort of place holder until your article is ready for the mainspace. This is easily done by adding a colon before "File" name like this [[:File:file name]]. This will create a wikilink to the file's Wikipedia page. Once your article has been added to the mainspace, simply remove the colon and the wikilink will be replaced by the actual image. One last thing, make sure the image satisfies all 10 criteria for non-free use specified in WP:NFCCP. The one people seem to forget the most when adding non-free images to articles is the "separate specific non-free use rationale" required per WP:NFCC#10c. - Marchjuly (talk) 02:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks to both TEB728 and, especially, Marchjuly for your responses. Indeed, I was aware that all other criteria for non-free images needed to be met. In fact, I put the use rationale for the userdraft articles in the image's description, but clearly that was insufficient. However, the edit tip you gave, Marchjuly, is a quick method of developing an article with the least amount of bother while still being able to "see" the article as it should finally be presented.

I'm going to test it out with the article in the Draft namespace as that's the article most ready to go. However, I'm going to check some other places to make sure a violation isn't being caused elsewhere. Thanks!
Mikeylito^TALK  02:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Just a quick addendum. After a quick test, I prefer to edit out the reference to the non-free image and then implement it when (and if) when the draft is moved to Article namespace. Thanks for the responses.
Mikeylito^TALK  02:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: and @Mikeylito:. Actually a non-free file is not supposed to be hosted on Wikipedia unless it is used in at least one article. So the :File: workaround does not work unless the file is used in another article or unless the idea is to create a red link to a file that has not yet been uploaded (or unless you are relying on the fact that it takes several days to delete an orphan non-free file). —teb728 t c 06:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

You're right TEB728. I was basing my suggestion on the assumption that the non-free file being discussed above had already been uploaded and was being used in another article. I should have been clearer about that when I mentioned wikilinking because all you will get is a red link if no such file yet exists. - Marchjuly (talk) 07:53, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Writing about a book thats beneficial for the public and the environment

Dear Friends in Teahouse!

I read a book about two people from Melbourne who cycled to meet, interview and explore different people simpler living styles reducing, recylcing and reusing. I am a Singaporean citizen and an Australian permanent resident.

However I am working in China for couple of years now. I thought this was a great book that had the chance of finding main stream interest in Asia where many of these ideas need some attention. Also because its written in an easy to read manner and talks about a cycling adventure.

I am new to wiki and I wrote an initial first paragraph and it has been turned down twice. I dont want to give up because I think its worth the trouble. Can anyone please offer me some tips or ideas on how I can overcome this obstacle?

Thanks a million!

J.Raavenan (talk) 00:35, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi J.Raavenan. I am sorry to say that it does not help if a subject is beneficial. What is required is that a subject is notable (in the sense that it has received significant coverage in reliable sources) and that the article is written from a neutral point of view. Your draft was rejected because it was not neutral. —teb728 t c 01:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Purging

I need to purge an article; how do I actually do it? I have previously asked what "purge" is so I know what it is. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey DangerousJXD. Navigate to the page, click edit at the top of the page (not a section edit link). In your browser you will see a url like

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Masako_Katsura&action=edit

Change the word edit (that I've underlined at the end) to purge and hit return. Done. See also Wikipedia:Purge. By the way, if you go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and scroll down to Appearance section, you'll see one of the options you can tick says "Add a clock in the personal toolbar that displays the current time in UTC (which also provides a link to purge the current page)." Once you have this you will always have a clock in UTC which may be very helpful if you have your other time preferences set to an offset, and allows you to purge any page just by clicking on the clock. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks. —DangerousJXD (talk) 23:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@DangerousJXD: I would recommend enabling the purge gadget at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets → Appearance. This adds a little link in the more dropdown menu for you to purge the article easily. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 01:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

peer reviewed journal citations

Hi, The person I'm creating a Wikipedia page is a little flustered because she doesn't understand why the Peer reviewed journals that her work has been published in doesn't meet notability guidelines. She feels (like others I think) that you can't get much more notable than that. Her book has been published, but she wants her Wiki bio in place before she she launches it in three months. Any advice?v Chrisking1977 (talk) 21:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chrisking1977, welcome to the Teahouse. Have you looked at our relevant notability guidelines - WP:NACADEMICS and WP:AUTHOR? Also, please be aware that Wikipedia is not the place to promote oneself and have a look at our conflict of interest guidelines. It would help if you told us the subject's name so we can further advise you. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi NeilN, Thank you very much for replying. Yes I've carefully reviewed the notability guidelines several times. And I know what you mean about self-promotion. I probably shouldn't have mentioned that as it is secondary to the fact that this author quite notable in all respects.

My friend (the subject of the entry) has a lot of work has been rigorously reviewed in peer reviewed journals. So I think maybe I"m going about this the wrong way. I was wondering if you could suggest what kind of citations should be used here, and for what kind of facts. The article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Feminine_Capital

Chrisking1977 (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@Chrisking1977: Let's clarify this a bit. An article can only have one topic. The subject of the article you're linking to is the book, not your friend, so the notability requirements are different and listed at WP:NBOOK. So basically what we're looking for is published in-depth reviews of that specific book. The authors may be notable but that doesn't mean the book is. Each article (subject) must be notable in its own right. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

BTW, I see that the book's website has a reviews page. These are blurbs and not the kind of in-depth reviews we're looking for. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Neil. That's very valuable feedback. Sorry if I was unclear about the type of content. Chrisking1977 (talk) 00:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I've written content on many existing articles but...

I've written content on many existing articles but how do I submit my sandbox as a new article? For review and such... Its just a stub. Bobmodikiw (talk) 18:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the sandbox page. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You do not need to submit it as a new article. Once you finish your editing, you can just submit it and search for the item or article. The new page appearing would show your contributions. Cindyruoyu (talk) 02:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

See your talk page. Thanks EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 02:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Seeking opinion on a draft article

I'm writing an article on a music app that was released last fall called Auxy-- I'd like to know if I'm going in the right direction with it so far; haven't gotten any response in some WikiProject venues when I last asked for input, so I decided I'd try here. Here is what I've got right now in my sandbox, so a perusal by someone who either has some knowledge wrt writing app/software articles or even a layperson on the subject with an eye for NPOV and general article quality things would be great. Thanks, BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 18:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

BlusterBlaster hello and welcome to The Teahouse. Just from a quick look, the article looks better than a lot of drafts I've seen. It could use more detail but I think there's enough there for it to pass. However, the lead is longer than the rest of the article, when the lead should merely summarize what the article says. Ideally, it shouldn't have references, but the common name of the product appears to need a reference and I've seen that done in the first sentence. I'm not familiar with the sources but there appear to be at least some that meet the standards.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: Thanks for the input-- a lot of the structure and citing choices were based on WP:NSOFT and the MacPaint GA, so the structure is indeed a bit weird in comparison to the average article. I'll wait for a bit to see if anyone else chimes in, and from there I might give it a toss into AfC.

Little cleanup help please - screwup at AfD

Eek. I just seem to have made a certain amount of mess at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2015_May_18, by listing an AfD for Access intelligence and then unwisely doing a move of the AfD page (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Access_intelligence). Link seems to be correct now, but the entry in the log has failed to process correctly and now is glued to the bottom of the "Persona 3 The Movie: No. 4, Last Episode" entry, w/o a heading. Can't see how to rectify it. Can some savvy person fix it please? Cheers! -- Elmidae (talk) 16:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@Elmidae: Fixed in this edit. Make sure to follow WP:AFDHOWTO next time, or the a lot easier way use WP:Twinkle. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 19:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Cheers! Apparently following WP:AFDHOWTO with additional stupid little flourishes is not indicated :p ---Elmidae (talk) 07:48, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Why there is lack of arts related items?

One issue for wikipedia volunteers si that why there are not arts (specifically design)related terms and their explanations? For example, what does "framing", "rhythm", or "multimodality" mean in design? Cindyruoyu (talk) 16:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cindyruoyu your question "what does "framing", "rhythm", or "multimodality" mean in design?" almost reads like a homework question??
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary, so we don't normally define terms, please try Wiktionary
We do have an entire article on Framing (visual arts) and one on multimodality that mentions design 8 times - although I admit rhythm is almost totally about music - whereas it is also a very important term in architecture and other forms of design. Why are there no such articles? - because no-one has written them - so this is your opportunity.... - Arjayay (talk) 18:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cindyruoyu—Wabi-sabi is an interesting term. I think it relates to design. There are of course many others. And then there is an art movement called Pattern and Decoration, which I think is design-oriented. I share your interest in arts-related terms. There is also Painterliness, Tonalism, Monochrome painting, Hard-edge painting, Bokeh, All-over painting, and Minimalism. These are in no particular order. They are just a few of my favorite articles which loosely fall into the category of arts-related terms. Bus stop (talk) 18:37, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm trying to create my first page and am having difficulty getting it approved in the final stages - what does it mean when someone says: 'More coverage would be nice'? The page is on an entrepreneur called Alastair Lukies.

I'm trying to create my first page and am having difficulty getting it approved in the final stages - what does it mean when someone says: 'More coverage would be nice'? The page is on an entrepreneur called Alastair Lukies.

The process is so difficult, it's actually quite off putting I'm finding. I would love to keep contributing but unsure where I'm going wrong on this one.

Tidswesa (talk) 16:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse...what they mean is more sources by third parties.

See Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

You may also want to read over Wikipedia:Tutorial/Citing sources -- Moxy (talk) 18:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

• Link to the draft article: Draft:Alastair Lukies —Anne Delong (talk) 19:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Reference

Sorry,I forgot where to find the answer: How exactly do I refer to a page of a wiki article written in another language? Thanks in anticipation LouisBB (talk) 08:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi LouisBB
Rather than retyping the advice, which is quite long, please see Help:Interlanguage links - if you still have any specific problems, please come back - Arjayay (talk) 08:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) To create a wikilink to different-language Wikipedia (or another Wikimedia project) see Help:Interwiki linking - basically, you prefix your link with the appropriate language or project code. To link an article on en-wiki to an article about the same subject on another Wikipedia, go to Languages in the right-hand menu and choose "Edit links", then just fill in the relevant boxes. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Latest sumbission-can't find John's reply

I have received an email to let me know John from Idegon has responded to my question but I can't find it in the teahouse. Could you please show me where to find it. I have looked everywhere.. Thank you. Maplepond (talk) 07:06, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Maplepond - It is currently about 10 up from the bottom of this page Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Problem getting approval for Wiki entry. - Arjayay (talk) 08:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Anya Camilleri—Should I Revert?

On 17 April 2015‎, User:82.55.186.169 removed age and place of residence, along with the references for both of those facts from the article Anya Camilleri. There was no edit summary left for either of those removals. These are the only edits that have been made on Wikipedia by that IP address. Ordinarily, I would just revert, but looking at the IP address, it seems to originate in central Italy (and possibly from Ms. Camilleri's office or residence?). Is their some BLP reason for me not to revert? I asked this on the talk page about a month ago, but have seen no response from User:82.55.186.169. Carl Henderson (talk) 06:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@Carl Henderson: If the IP gave no reason for the revert and has not responded, then yes you should revert the edit as it is removal of sourced material. Where the IP is located shouldn't matter in any BLP situation unless they specifically are requesting removal of information on the talk page. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 06:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You will need reliable sources. The reference for her age doesn't give her age (probably did once but isn't archived anywhere). The reference for her house has been changed and no longer has the information that she wrote and signed there, but the page is available archived at http://web.archive.org/web/20121218233708/http://www.romizivillasinumbria.com/works.html. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The reference I gave for her date of birth on my last revision Company Check lists "Year of Birth: 1961". The other reference Our Renovation Works seems active, too. I just checked both in a browser I don't normally use and forced reloads to clear any cached content. I can't figure out why those are not showing up for you. Carl Henderson (talk) 21:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

A very big THANK YOU to Fougettaboutit for fixing the problems in my sandbox. I really appreciate it.Rayneet (talk) 04:45, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Alright just ignore my cleanup... -_- EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 05:51, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Rayneet: If you wish to thank an editor, it's often a great idea to do so on their talk page. If you think their work is exceptional, you can also consider giving them a barnstar. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 21:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Discography and citations

Screenshot displaying where to access the RefToolbar

Hi, 1. The second line of my discography is in a box and I don't know why. How do I eliminate this? 2. I need to use quotation marks in my citations. How do I get those? Rayneet (talk) 02:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@Rayneet: Page is User:Rayneet/sandbox. I have fixed the boxes in this edit. Any line starting with a space will be in a box. Your references appear malformed. I suggest using {{Cite web}} to help you. This is easily accessed in your edit toolbar as shown in the image to the left. It is under the Cite menu, then Templates, then Cite web. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 02:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Is this new article ready?

Might as well call this my first article... I've created my sandbox, and a sub page for a new article on SCIM (System for Cross-domain Identity Management).

There is actually already a stub for this, here. My article is here.

Should I solicit feedback first, or sign-off from anyone, or just go ahead and update it with my longer version?

Justapersona (talk) 01:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@Justapersona: Welcome! Given the quality and references in your version, I would recommend simply putting your version into the stub as it is undeniably better. Use an edit summary that links your sandbox such as Expanding article, content copied from my draft; [[User:Justapersona/SCIM]]. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 02:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Redirect/disambiguation question

This may not be the right place to ask this, as it is a very specific question and I'm not a new user - please direct me to a better forum if you know of one. I have a question about dealing with redirects and disambiguation of biologically-synonymous terms. I would like to (one day) create a page for Ellisia nyctelea, a small plant that I am fond of. However, to ensure it is not an orphan, I would also like to create a page for its genus, Ellisia. You'll notice that link is blue... that's because it is a synonym for Sertularella, a genus of hydroids, and the page redirects there. How would I go about creating a page for the plant genus (a currently accepted taxon in the Hydrophylloideae, so I figure it would get preference), while making sure the hydroid synonymy is respected as well? Disambiguation confuses me to no end and I don't even know where to start with this. Thanks! Antepenultimate (talk) 01:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

@Antepenultimate: Personally I would replace the redirect with your article, then at the top use a hatnote to link to the other article. I would suggest either {{for}} or {{about}} for this use. Something like

For the genus of hydroid, see Sertularella.

EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 01:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

That seems like a simple solution that is very doable. Thanks for the quick reply! Antepenultimate (talk) 02:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

What would be the appropriate venue to discuss or dispute an arbcom decision?

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#TheRedPenOfDoom.2C_third_filing resulting in the ruling that users with fewer than 500 edits/30 days should not/cannot edit Gamergate controversy or Talk:Gamergate controversy. Given that the discussion is closed and users with less than 500 edits can't/shouldn't edit the talk page, where should one discuss it? Do I need to open a request that the block be rescinded? Making such a request so soon after the decision was made (less than twelve hours at time of post) feels more than a bit bad-faith to me, but I can't find a good place to discuss this. Thanks, Riffraffselbow (talk) (contribs) 23:49, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

My advice was that if this relates to series issues involving a living person take it up at WP:BLP/N; otherwise leave it well alone. Another option would be to find 500 spelling mistakes... Stuartyeates (talk) 00:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice; I think you may have misunderstood what I'm upset about, though. I'm more interested in the meta-discussion as to whether limiting access to the talk page is a) beneficial to the core goals of Wikipedia, b) conducive with the "free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." mantra (though that thing has been degraded so much in the last decade that I'm not sure it should still be our tagline), c) an effective method of limiting edit-warring on the respective page, d) looks good to outsiders, e) looks good to insiders, and about a dozen other gripes. Riffraffselbow (talk) (contribs) 00:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

One thing to remember, it isn't as though such decisions are made out-of-the-blue, with no preceding events, as though arbcom randomly picks an article talk page and says "Nope, you can't edit it!". Unfortunately, there's a long history of a coordinated, off-Wikipedia attack on that talk page, and the only way to keep it under control was to shut it down to new users. If there is anyone to blame, it isn't arbcom, it's those who sought to disrupt Wikipedia for their own political or social reasons. You shouldn't bother ArbCom about this, you should bother THEM and tell them they shouldn't have been so obnoxious. Yes, it does prevent otherwise good-faith new editors from contributing, but they couldn't do that anyways, given the attacks on the page in question. This stops the problem. --Jayron32 00:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

But where would I discuss this; the Teahouse doesn't seem like a good place to get into a protracted argument on the philosophy of wikipedia governance. Surely there is some place where wikipedians could Wikipedia policy. The unusual nature of the decision precludes the talkpage of the relevant article as a realistic discussion venue, and I'm not well-versed enough in the multitudinous nature of community organization on wikipedia to know of an appropriate page, talk or otherwise, to start such a debate. I don't want to shit up the wrong place. Looking around some, perhaps WP:RFC is the correct place? Riffraffselbow (talk) (contribs) 00:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Looking further, RFC is definitely not the right place, as procedure there is to link right back to a talk page, which is impractical here for obvious reasons. Riffraffselbow (talk) (contribs) 00:37, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

General discussions often go on at WP:VPM. Maybe there? --Jayron32 00:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

It seems like as good a place as any. Thank you for the help! Riffraffselbow (talk) (contribs) 00:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

If you want to challenge an ArbCom decision, I would suggest you do so at WP:ARCA; this is the only venue where amendments can be tabled to ArbCom decisions. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Use of images

I have a short question that I have been wondering about for ages. I know you can use any image from the wiki-commons but wondered, how and what is needed to upload an image. I also wondered if you can use any image from a website such as shuuterstock, if I gave the reference. thanks Wrightie99 (talk) 20:57, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@Wrightie99: In general you can only upload images that you own and have the copyright to so you can't upload images from shutterstock as they would be owned by someone else. You can use the wizard here if you would like to try it out. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:27, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Wrightie99. Commons only accepts images that are free: either public domain (for example by being old enough) or explicitly release under a suitable Creative commons licence. As Winner 42 says, the easiest way to do this is if you own the copyright; but if the owner is willing to licence it they can follow the procedure in donating copyright materials and then you can upload it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Adding to the above answers: Welcome to the Teahouse, Wrightie99. If you take a photo of anything which is not itself copyrighted, then you hold the copyright, and you can freely license your photo under an acceptable Creative Commons license. I am not familiar with Shutterstock, but you can only upload other people's photos if they are properly freely licensed as indicated clearly on the website. Flickr gives people the option of specifying a license acceptable to Wikimedia Commons, but you have to check the specific license carefully, since a license that excludes commercial re-use is not acceptable. Copyright has expired on photos published before 1923, and work photos by employees of the U.S. Federal government are free of copyright. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I just visited the Shutterstock website and read their license language. I feel highly confident in saying that the Shuttertock license is not a Creative Commons license. Shutterstock is a commercial business. Customers pay them for limited rights to use a photo and they pay the photographer 25 cents per download. Freely sharing their photos is not allowed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

how to start a wikipage

I am new to creating a wikipage. How do I start, create, a page?Kurlywillows (talk) 20:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Kurlywillows and welcome to the teahouse. Writing an article from scratch (please think of it as an article, not a "page", as it will help get you in the right mindset for what we do here) is not the easiest thing to do, as there are a lot of rules and policies you must follow; so my advice would be to get some experience editing existing articles first. But if you want to go ahead, I would strongly advise reading your first article and then using the article wizard, which will help you create a draft where you can work on it without it being immediately subject to deletion if it doesn't meet all the criteria. General things to think about are the fact that every single statement in your article should be individually referenced to a published reliable source, and nearly all of it to sources unconnected with the subject. If you can't find any substantial writing about the subject by people unconnected with it, then it will probably be impossible to write an article that will be accepted. Another thing to beware of is that if you have any connection with the subject (eg yourself, your friend, your relative, your company, your band, your charity) then you are discouraged from writing about it because it may be hard for you to write in a suitably neutral way: see COI if that is the case.

After all that, I hope you can contribute, and enjoy doing so. --ColinFine (talk) 20:24, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Getting reported for no reason

I have been warned by Ukvoltaire123 for a small edit that I did. It was just a small change on some numbers and yes it was exact same place I edit and he/she warned but he/she accuse me for something I didnt do. And says he/she will report me if I continue. I'm really confused and I never get reported before so please help me. Paleocemoski (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@Paleocemoski: Don't worry, you've done nothing wrong and you have not been reported. I'm not entirely sure what Ukvoltaire123 is trying to say through their broken english, but it appears they are attempting to troll you. They have already been blocked in the past and I have reported them to administrators. Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@Paleocemoski: What s/he said is you must not add info without reference. That user is somewhat correct. Don't worry. As per BOLD, you have not done anything wrong.
But, have a look at his/her talk page. That user has blanked several pages, and was indulged in vandalism. Well, well. Please do read You don't need to cite that the sky is blue and WP:NOTBLUE as well.
I don't feel your edit was harmful. I consider this as personal attack. Though of moderate level, but, I would prefer letting an admin know.
117.212.138.199 (talk) 17:41, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Well I usually don't add info without reference but I just write the total episode number, which it is something that I counted. But probably I should put references even in that. Please correct me if Im wrong.Paleocemoski (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Generally sources are useful, adding a reference to where you having a listing of the episodes would be sufficient. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:17, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The user has been reported by Winner 42, and I have left a message at that user's talk. But, have a look at his/her talk page. I would advice you to stay away from that user. Very mischievous user. Call it peacock term but that user doesn't behave friendly.
117.212.138.199 (talk) 17:56, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

problem using sister contents of wikipedia

why cant i use other sister contents of wikipedia like wikibooks,wikitionary,wikinews e.t.cMentalist karan (talk) 15:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mentalist karan - Because, like Wikipedia, these websites can be edited by anyone - so are not reliable sources - Arjayay (talk) 15:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Please do not re-format your question after it has been answered - if you want to ask another question please do so under the reply - Arjayay (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

How to propose a merge and history merge

On Badi al-Zaaman Abu al-Izz Ismaeel ibn al-Razzaz al-Jazari and al-Jazari, these articles appear to be about the same person. How do you propose a merge and a history merge? Rubbish computer 13:55, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Rubbish computer: This is a pretty obvious case, so I would say that you can be bold and just go ahead and perform the merge yourself. You'd follow the instructions at WP:PROMERGE. That being said, I really don't see any content from the shorter article that's not already better covered in the longer article - if you agree, I'd suggest simply redirecting Badi al-Zaaman Abu al-Izz Ismaeel ibn al-Razzaz al-Jazari to al-Jazari. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:02, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I will do this. Rubbish computer 17:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Format?

On Theretra acuta, instead of 'Random article', it says 'Random page' at the side and instead of 'Talk' the Talk page is entitled 'Discussion.' I can't tell if this is only on my computer or whether or not this is a problem. Other articles do not appear to be the same on the whole but I have come across articles like this before. Rubbish computer 11:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't have that problem on that page (just checked), although I had that same problem on a different page a few minutes ago. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Format for References

What is the correct format to cite websites as References?

Thanks! WillWillyteatime (talk) 06:43, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Willyteatime: I recommend using Template:Cite web. To easily use it from the edit window, select the "Cite" dropdown at the top, and from the "Templates" dropdown, select "cite web". This will bring up a form where you can fill in details and get the template generated for you. See this image to help you locate it. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:57, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

What to do about biased tendentious editors?

Hi, I don't know how to proceed. I have edited several articles putting much time and effort into following policy and no editors have fought my edits until the controversial topic Zeitgeist (film series).

Editors of this topic appear to fall into 3 categories:

1. Biased in favor of the topic
2. Biased against the topic
3. Neutral editors who just want to characterize the topic

I've noticed the type 2 editors seem to be the dominant majority, reverting nearly everything, assuming bad faith, and pushing away editors of both types 1 and 3. This seems bad for Wikipedia. What steps can be taken to change this to a type 3 editor dominance? As a community, how do we ensure that this article and other articles are not dominated by a majority of biased editors?

Thanks for listening. OnlyInYourMind^(talk) 02:27, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, OnlyInYourMind. Wasn't your first edit to the talk page of that article? Because the Zeitgeist film series advances a variety of conspiracy theories, it is a fringe topic. Therefore, editing contoversies are highly likely and not surprising. WP:FRINGE offers useful guidance: "And for writers and editors of Wikipedia articles to write about controversial ideas in a neutral manner, it is of vital importance that they simply restate what is said by independent secondary sources of reasonable reliability and quality." The key point here is that the article should be built by summarizing reliable sources that are independent of the Zeitgeist films and movement. That is the path to building a high quality Wikipedia article. As long as all editors of the three types you describe follow that principle, then conflict should be reduced. If not, we have various forms of dispute resolution available. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:12, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

How to find pages that need more citations or edits so I can start editing and helping out the community?

Hello - Love the teahouse. I did some tutorials on WIkipedia and learned a lot. I found this page that shows a few pages that need editing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_portal/Opentask. However, is there another way to find pages in a specific niche that need editing. I am asking, because I am knowledge in the tech niche so I can help edit articles/citations/wrong information much better for that niche!

Any help is appreciated! Kingoptimizer (talk) 19:26, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Kingoptimizer: You might be interested in WikiProjects, which are groups of editors that have a similar interest in a topic area. For example, if you're into software, you might check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Software and consider joining. If you look at the 'Project Articles' section, you'll see a summary of articles by quality; if you look at the stub articles, you'll find many short articles that probably need expanding or references. Further down the page, you'll find a to-do list with articles that also need help.

Each WikiProject is independent and runs differently, so not all might have a to-do list - but as far as I've seen, most do have a list of project articles sorted by quality. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:55, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! User:SuperHamster. I think I have a new addiction now! Editing Wikipedia.. Thanks for your help - how can I boost your reputation or make you a friend or something? :-) Want to make sure that people know your a great user!! :-)Kingoptimizer (talk) 20:14, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem Kingoptimizer, happy to help. Alas, there's no reputation to boost or built-in friend feature :) See you around! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

But you could choose aBarnstar and leave it on SuperHamster's user talk page if you wanted, Kingoptimizer. --ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

2 questions

How many Questions can I ask in a day?

When I post an internal link its dark blue, but other links in an article are light blue ... How do I get light blue links? Bobmodikiw (talk) 17:00, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Bobmodikiw, there is no specific limit to the number of questions, so as long as they are real questions you have just ask away. The two blues of the wiki links show the difference between links you have visited or not (as stored by your browser history). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:15, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Bobmodikiw: To expand on Kylie's answer, Help:Link color describes all the different link colors you'll see on Wikipedia. You may also be referring to internal vs. external links (blue links being Wikipedia articles, and light blue links being links to other websites). ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Can I remove [citation needed]

In the article Water stagnation there are plenty of internal links which in turn have citations, for readability can I remove extranious-unwarrented [citation needed]? Thanks for my previous answer. Bobmodikiw (talk) 15:50, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. You may be right that the information in question is cited in other Wikipedia articles, but that is not enough. Each article needs its own list of references to substantiate its content. If the same info occurs in other articles, though, that does make things easier, because you can just copy and paste the references. Formerip (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Sock puppets

How to check and provide evidence that the suspected sock puppets are connected. KunalForYou^☎️📝 15:37, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kunalforyou. Read the instructions at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations and present your evidence there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

What should be added to this article

I recently created an article, Policeman (Eva Simons song) with a paragraph of some information, a simple infobox and of course a reference list. But I am currently struggling to add any more information as the sources are limited and I am running out of ideas. Other song pages aren't being of much help at the moment. Any help would be greatly appreciated -PotatoNinja123 (talk) 15:09, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello @PotatoNinja123: It seems at the moment the article is a {{stub}} meaning it is very short and has limited references, you have said you are struggling to add anymore information, maybe visit another users talk page and see if they can find anymore information that isnt already in the article, I'm going to have a look as well, to add thanks for your contribution. TeaLover1996 (talk) 21:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Asking for feedback for my first article: Should I create a draft for the article? How?

Hello! I am working in my sandbox User:EVDiam/sandbox, on an article under the title "Experimental Television Center" and any comment, recommendation or feedback is more than welcome! Should I create a draft for this article? Where am I going to create a draft? Thank you very much in advance. EVDiam (talk) 15:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

For all new/newish I would strongly recommend getting it reviewed. If you add {{subst:submit}} to the top of your sandbox page, then this submits it for review, under the articles for creation process. This allows you to get feedback and make improvements is necessary before it goes into article space. You don't need to move it anywhere, a reviewer can do it for you.

At a quick glance, it looks quite good though. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:12, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply Joseph2302! As soon as I finish it, I will submitted. Thnks!EVDiam (talk) 15:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@EVDiam: If it's almost finished, I'd recommend submitting it now, but continuing to work on it. It can take up to a week (sometimes longer) to get feedback from articles for creation, and you continue working on it after you've submitted it. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@ Great! Thank you very much Joseph2302. EVDiam (talk) 15:30, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Help need on Verifying an article

Hello all! I have recently created an article dedicated to a renowned Jazz festival in Sardinia, Italy (Draft:At_the_Borders_Between_Sardinia_and_Jazz) The article already existed on Wikipedia.it (it:Ai_confini_tra_Sardegna_e_Jazz), but had never been written in English.

The article got turned down, and I'd like to know how I can improve it to be accepted. I took other Italian Jazz festival (Umbria_Jazz_Festival) as references on how to do it, and I wouldn't know how to do it better.

Could anyone help ? Thanx guys! Ivan Tanda (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Ivan Tanda, unfortunately you picked a poor article to model yours on. The problem with both articles is a lack of references. The only reference you have in your draft is to the events own website, what is needed are reports, reviews etc from others who are not connected with the event. Good examples would be the music press, sources can be on-line or paper, in English or Italian, as long as the writers can be considered reliable and independent of the festival. Poor examples would be blogs or social media postings. Different wikis have different policies about the level of referencing required so I can't speak for the Italian wiki but here there is a reasonable degree of references required before articles will be accepted. There are a lot of old articles that need to be improved on and Umbria Jazz Festival is one of them. Nthep (talk) 11:14, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

If i find a bad citation on someone elses article...Can I delete it?

If i find a bad citation on someone elses article...Can I delete the bad citation? the citation goes to a corporate website offering no information on the subject. Bobmodikiw (talk) 05:18, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Bobmodikiw Yes, remove or tag it with {{failed verification}}. There is no such thing as "someone else's article", per WP:OWN all articles belong to the whole community of editors. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:16, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Bobmodikiw: Your case is reference 6 in [1] which just said [2]. A HTTP 404 is not a {{failed verification}} but a {{dead link}}. Don't remove citations to dead links unless you replace them with a working link. Others may know how to fix it. It was easy for me to find [3] with a Google search. See more at Wikipedia:Link rot. I have changed the url and formatted the citation.[4] PrimeHunter (talk) 11:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

How do I put photos or art on my page??

How do I add photos and art on to my page??Donovan delaney (talk) 04:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Donovan delaney. The hard part is finding photos and art that have been licensed by the photographer or artist for use by anyone for anything. Then you upload the file to Commons (or Wikipedia) as described at Help:Files#Uploading files (if they have not already uploaded). Then you use them on your page as described at Help:Files#Using files. —teb728 t c 08:05, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Adding to the above answer, Donovan delaney, you can find tens of millions of freely licensed images at Wikimedia Commons, and can use any of them on your user page. You can also upload your own photos there under a free license. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:49, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Is it worth writing an article?

I am thinking of having a go at writing an article about my Grandfather and the Yachts he designed. The trouble is I don't want to spend loads of time writing the article if it's not going to end up being notable enough. The yachts were designed in the 1930s. One at least won a design competition and was publihsed in the Yachting Monthly magazine. Another one had an hour long TV programme made about it - Boatyard I think it was called. They are also catalogued many times in the Lloyds Register of Shipping Small Craft Section. Is this notable enough? Are the references independent enough? Please advise. Thanks. Siddyboy3.0 (talk) 21:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@Siddyboy3.0: It is hard to determine without actually seeing the sources, but it appears that your grandfather may be notable for Wikipedia. What Wikipedia is looking for is significant coverage about him in independent reliable sources. Here is the notability guideline on people if you think he can fit that, he deserves a Wikipedia article. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

(ec) Siddyboy3.0 hello and welcome to The Teahouse. I assume Yachting Monthly would be considered a reliable source by Wikipedia. If so, that is a start. I'm not familiar with Lloyds Register but it sounds worthwile. The fact that one of the yachts has an hour-long program about it is another good sign, though depending on how old it is, I'm not sure what we would use to show the program aired or its content. If it was a production by a major network, it might qualify as a reference.

But getting past the question of notability and independent sources, you have a conflict of interest and would be discouraged from writing the article yourself. If you could provide independent sources and write with a neutral point of view, which is hard for someone close to the subject, you could try. But use the draft space or the Article wizard. Good luck.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:31, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - I might just give it a go and see what happens. I can't remember just now who produced the TV programme but it's been aired on QUEST, Discovery Channel and a few others.

Siddyboy3.0 (talk) 21:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: The Lloyd's Register is as reliable as it gets in the maritime world, so give it a go Siddyboy3.0! :) Just holler if you need any help. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 22:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

W.carter thanks. I knew the Lloyd's name was respected and figured it was related.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

A problematic conflict of interest exists, Siddyboy3.0, when promoting the topic the editor cares about is more important than improving the encyclopedia. Financial and ideological conflicts of interest are especially problematic. I assume that no one makes much money from promoting 1930s yacht designs, and there are no cult groups or political parties pushing those designs. So any conflict of interest is exceedingly mild - making grandpa look good. Rely on summarizing what reliable sources say, and refrain from inserting any family lore. Admit your connections, as you have already done here, and all will be well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Siddyboy3.0 I think discussing your article ideas with the folks at WP:WikiProject Sailing could probably be very useful. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

user:levidog101 its worth it righting an articale — Preceding undated comment added 14:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

External link problem

On John Moran Auctioneers#References, ref 3 says it leads to a different website to the one it leads to when I click on it, which is www.manta.com. What should be done about this? Rubbish computer 19:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Rubbish computer. Simply edit the reference to correct the error. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:31, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Rubbish computer 08:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

As A Self-Published Author How Am I Supposed To Be Able To Be "Verified"?

Seriously. I wrote the largest collection of private poetry ever published in the history of modern literature and I'm getting shot down by Wiki editors because the claim can't be "independently verified". Thing is, how am I supposed to do that? I've written the books, they exist, people buy them, hold them, own them, review them. I thought Wiki was a place for TRUE information. Well, my information is true, so why is it getting flagged? Please advise. AaronLA2012 (talk) 10:15, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi AaronLA2012 You cite the reviews, provided they are written and published by independent reliable sources such as mainstream media, literary magazines, etc. BTW, take a look at WP:TRUTH, verification trumps "the truth" every time, because "truth" is often a matter of opinion. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:24, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that. But reviewers often want money to write reviews... Which is frustrating because that seems biased in itself. The books exist. And a simple bit of Google work shows that there is no larger private collection of poetry out there... This is my conundrum...

Anyways, I do appreciate you taking the time to respond to my inquiries, and thanks for being patient with me, as I am new to this. I just want to get my works out there. It truly is an epic compilation.

Thanks!

AaronLA2012 (talk) 10:34, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

And that, AaronLA2012, is the point, I'm afraid. "Getting my works out there" is a form of promotion, which is absolutely forbidden on Wikipedia. Once several people unconnected with you have been interested enough to write about you and publish their writing in reliable places (such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers), then Wikipedia can take an interest. Until then, irrespective of the worth of your work, it won't. --ColinFine (talk) 11:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Just to add to that, any reviewer who wants money to review your work, would not be considered a reliable source by Wikipedia. Reviewers can expect you to send them a copy of the work to be reviewed, but that's all. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:39, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up Colin. That was about as clear as it cold be I guess, and as much as I may disagree with the morality of the policy, it is what it is. So be it :-)

Thank you for your understanding, Aaron. I wish you best of luck in your career. Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 14:10, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

How to upload an image to WIkimedia Commons

I am new to Wikipedia and actually started out by creating an article about a person who I thought was notable. The page is good and I got some help from other editors to get it going however I can't seem to add an image to the page. I am using images that have no copyright however I am still not able to add images. Not sure what I am doing wrong. This is the page I am referring to: Michael Palance. Any help is appreciated. Thank you tea house!!! Kingoptimizer (talk) 23:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey Kingoptimizer. If the images are truly "copyright free", then yes, you should upload them to the Wikimedia commons so that all Wikimedia projects can use them. Once uploaded there they can be used natively here using simple markup. (Later note: I see EoRdE6 has posted the direct link to the upload form below (I didn't 'forget-:-) but rather failed to read the section title; same result) But are they truly free? Photographs and other images are automatically copyrighted upon creation. There is no need for them to display a copyright symbol. The only way we can know an image is not copyrighted, or is but nevertheless can be used, is if A) there is some attendant condition that means it is not or is no longer copyrighted under law (e.g., it was published in the U.S. before 1923, or it is a work of a U.S. federal employee created in their employment capacity); or B) the copyright owner expressly releases the copyright, either into the public domain, or under a free copyright license that is compatible with the free license of our content.

In other words, if you find an image out on the Internet, it is assumed non-free copyrighted and cannot be used. There is an exception. We do allow certain images under the legal copyright exception doctrine called fair use. We have strict standards to meet that exception. I won't go into the details because what's important here is that photographs of living persons (except under certain rare circumstances not applicable here) cannot be claimed as fair use.

All this is to say that unless you find an image of him that's in the public domain or bears a free copyright license – which you know because that release is verifiably posted by the copyright owner – no image can be uploaded and used in the article. That is why we have so many articles on quite famous people with no photographs, or crappy photographs, because a professional image was unavailable and the only one that could be used was some candid on the street at a book signing or what have you, snapped by a Wikipedia/Wikimedia contributor who was willing to release it. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:27, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah... since Fuhghettaboutit forgot to answer your question, Kingoptimizer you upload files to Commons over at c:Special:UploadWizard. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both Fuhghettaboutit & User:EoRdE6. Fuhghettaboutit I really appreciate your answer - it is very helpful indeed. Explains a lot why some of my previous images got removed! I have a few more questions for you based on your response below. Thanks again for your help - TEA House is awesome!!

Regarding one of your suggestions, specifically "B) the copyright owner expressly releases the copyright, either into the public domain, or under a free copyright license that is compatible with the free license of our content." How would someone do that? Do I have to contact the actual person, in this case "Michael Palance" and ask him to do that? That seems very time consuming for me to do.

You also mention: "unless you find an image of him that's in the public domain or bears a free copyright license – which you know because that release is verifiably posted by the copyright owner – no image can be uploaded and used in the article." Can you provide an example of an image? What if he has a picture on his blog that he has copyright for - does that count?

Thank you in advance and hope someone else will learn from this as well. Kingoptimizer (talk) 05:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back, Kingoptimizer. Copyright can be tricky, and there are many variations and exceptions, so please take my comments as a basic but incomplete overview. As explained above, copyright has expired on photos first published before 1923, and official photos by employees of the U.S. Federal government are also copyright free. And so on with other minor exceptions.

But let's talk about the vast majority of contemporary photos. Whenever a photo is published anywhere, a copyright is created by the act of publication. Registration is not required. A copyright is a thing of value, even if the practical value is tiny. We cannot infringe on that copyright, except in very limited cases described at WP:NFCI. In most cases, the photographer, whether amateur or professional, owns the copyright to any photo they take. If the photographer is hired by someone else to take the photos with an explicit agreement that the customer owns the copyright, then so be it. But in most cases, the photographer owns the copyright. Lacking solid evidence to the contrary, we assume that the photo is copyrighted and owned by the photographer.

If a famous person appears in public, and someone takes a photo, the photographer owns the copyright, not the famous person. The celebrity owns personality rights, but that is a different thing.

The copyright holder (no one else) can sell or license their copyright as they see fit. A common commercial license is one time publication (in a book or magazine), with future rights reverting to the copyright holder. If and only if the copyright holder freely chooses to license their work under an acceptable Creative Commons license, then the photo can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons for free use by anyone, including here on Wikipedia. You can find several hundred of my photos there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

As Cullen indicated above, it is the photographer that generally owns the rights. Sometimes celebrities will purchase rights fully for publicity photos, but even in that scenario, it is doubtful they would release them under a CC license ad they lose all control over the image. Some unscrupulous soul could download a photo released under CC, edit it into pornography, and the person portrayed would be without recourse. The only sure way to be able to upload an image of a living person is to take it yourself. John from Idegon (talk) 06:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen328 & John from Idegon ! That clarifies some things, however - to your point John from Idegon; images are always manipulated even when they are under copyright - as you can see on most social media sites these days ;-) so I am not sure celebrities are worried about that anymore. I would really like to get an answer to the below - I think that will clarify things even more. I feel the page I created will have more value with an image (talk about this page in specific: Michael Palance which is why I am adamant to add one and this topic just keeps on getting more interesting. Love it!

"unless you find an image of him that's in the public domain or bears a free copyright license – which you know because that release is verifiably posted by the copyright owner – no image can be uploaded and used in the article." Can you provide an example of an image? What if he has a picture on his blog that he has copyright for - does that count? Kingoptimizer (talk) 06:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

You seem to be having an issue understanding this, so let me put it as simply as it can be put. Unless the image itself is clearly labeled with a release or the web page you are getting it from is clearly labeled with a release, the image is assumed to be copyrighted. If it is copyrighted, you can't use it. John from Idegon (talk) 06:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

To provide an example, @Kingoptimizer: Here is a picture from Flickr. If you look under the date, you'll see a link that says "Some rights reserved", and that it has been freely licensed under the CC-BY-SA 2.0 license. Since this license allows for anyone to use the image for any purpose, including commercial use and the creation of derivatives, it would be appropriate to upload to the Wikimedia Commons for use on Wikipedia.

Here is another picture from Flickr. You'll notice that the licensing is "All rights reserved" - the copyright owner retains their copyright and you cannot upload it to the Commons. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:55, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Greetings Kingoptimizer, at Wikipedia Tip of the day, there is How to find legal photographs and graphics which may be helpful. I have only tried a few times so I am not certain of its usefulness. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 12:30, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

To one part of your follow-up that wasn't covered, yes, you can ask a copyright owner for a release. Knowing who the copyright owner itself can be thorny, but let's put that aside and say you actually know who owns the copyright to an image. In that case you might model your request on the forms forms found at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. However, I debated whether to tell you this, because after reading the examples, I think almost all are deficient. Most the them lack a key piece of information: what the recipient has to do to provide the release to us in a manner that would let us use the image. So let me point you to one in particular which does contain that information. See the one at this section of the page. You can use any model, but should incorporate what it says about "please copy the form at ... , an ending with that they should email it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Thank you all. Fuhghettaboutit, JoeHebda, User talk:SuperHamster and John from Idegon. Really appreciate all the time and effort you put into answering this question. I have a clear picture on how to get image on Wikimedia now!

To your point JoeHebda about using Google Search to find images. Would using the Google Images Advanced Search option found here: Google Images Advanced Search with the option usage rights set on "free to use, share or modify, even commercially" work for that? After finding an image using the option I mentioned above, I could then contact the owner of the image (through the website its placed on) and ask them to provide permission to Wikipedia as Fuhghettaboutit mentioned in his latest reply. Kingoptimizer (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@Kingoptimizer: If the image is marked as "free to use, share or modify, even commercially," then there's no need to get permission, because you already have it - the image is free for you to use, share or modify, even commercially! Just be sure to double check to make sure the image is actually licensed that way if you find it through Google Search. What Fuhghettaboutit refers to is getting permission for an image that is not licensed in a way acceptable on the Wikimedia Commons. You would ask the copyright owner of the image if they'd be willing to freely license their photo in a way that allows for sharing, modification, and commercial use. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you User:SuperHamster. I think I have everything I need to start uploading images correctly now. Much appreciated!! :-)Kingoptimizer (talk) 19:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Changed username then forgot it

I recently changed my username but now I forgot what my new one was! Please helpEdit56824 (talk) 19:46, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you remember what your name was before you changed it? If so, you can find you name change request at Wikipedia:Changing username/Archives- don't know an easier way, sorry. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I do remember my old name. Is there any easy way to search on that link you provided?Edit56824 (talk) 19:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

There's a search bar at the bottom. If you type in your old username, I guess it'll find the username request you made. Although you do realise that you shouldn't use more than 1 account simultaneously? Joseph2302 (talk) 19:54, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

In most straightforward renames, the old username is redirected to the new one - if you just look up your old userpage, you should find yourself at your new one. Yunshui ^雲_水 19:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you I did find it. But I realize now that it identifies me. Can I change it again?Edit56824 (talk) 19:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Or link it with this new one I just created?Edit56824 (talk) 19:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Joseph2302 you're right. I would like to link this current account with my old one. I had to create this current one so I could ask the question. I'll keep better track in the future.Edit56824 (talk) 20:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

You could have just asked it by your IP.
117.207.26.105 (talk) 20:14, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Shoot. Well I'll know for next time but hopefully it won't happen again. So do you think I should pursue changing my now identifiable username again or try to link it with this new account I created to ask this question?Edit56824 (talk) 20:18, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

The issue is that I had a page I was creating under my old username so I'd like to keep that content.Edit56824 (talk) 20:18, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

No advice.Edit56824 (talk) 20:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Anyone there?Edit56824 (talk) 20:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@Edit56824: Accounts can not be linked. Either stop using this one and rename the old one or start using this one only. btw, we are all volunteers, don't expect an instance response. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)}!

The page you created should still be there. Try typing the title into the search bar, and clicking on "Everything" on the search page. What was the title of the page you were working on? Howicus (Did I mess up?) 20:48, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@Howicus: What on earth are you talking about? EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 20:50, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

When Edit56824 said "The issue is that I had a page I was creating under my old username so I'd like to keep that content.", I assumed they meant that there was a page they started with their old account that they are trying to find. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 20:53, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

user:levidog101 if you cant remember just start a new wiki page and then write down your new password and username

• always write down your pass word — Preceding unsigned comment added by Levidog101 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

How can I link my articles to the same articles on different language Wiki's?

Hello! :) I just as of recently created two articles that are present as well in the Russian Wikipedia (and one of them in the Azerbaijani language Wikipedia). However, I have no clue how to link them together so that on the side, when one clicks on the Russian or Azerbaiajni language Wiki, they will get ported to the same article in those languages.

Could anyone help me with this?

The articles I would like to have this solved for are;

• Amanullah Mirza Qajar, which exists on the Russian Wiki as [[5]], and on the Azerbaijani Wiki as [[6]].

• And for this article; Storming of Lankaran, which exists on the Russian Wiki as [[7]], but atm it has been wrongly linked to [[8]] (!)

I would appreciate it alot if someone here could aid me with this! :)

Regards - LouisAragon (talk) 00:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: We do this through WP:Wikidata. I have done it for you examples, d:Q4207237 for the first one. You can access this by using the Add links button on the very bottom of the left toolbar and adding links in the page that loads. Hope this helps! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 01:00, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

EoRdE6, thanks for your response! I see that the Amanullah Mirza Qajar page correctly links to the Azerbaijani Wiki, but for the Russian Wiki it links to a totally different article.

Its the same for the Storming of Lankaran which is supposed to link to [[9]], but atm it has been wrongly linked to [[10]], but links to several totally different articles in different languages atm.

unfortunately, I didn't manage to fix this myself as when I open the Add links section on my pc it shows that they're already correctly linked?!.

Regards - LouisAragon (talk) 16:29, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Yeah I noticed that. I think it may be a bug/glitch. I'll find out and tell you if I find anything. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 16:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Just to let you know, I got it figured out. Someone had left one of the old versions of the interwiki links at the bottom, which I removed. Nice article by the way! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:54, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

EoRdE6, hey! Thanks alot for the heads up! Good to know that it's solved now. Thanks as well about the article! Appreciate it :) -LouisAragon (talk) 18:29, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:Disrupt

Where do you report a user for disruptive editing TeaLover1996 (talk) 12:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse TeaLover1996, we hope to help you with this editing problem. The first thing that needs to be done is that the editor who is performing disruptive edits has to be warned on their talk page. I suggest that you include examples of what was disruptive. Editor-to-editor contact and discussion is always the best first step, an administrator will be more likely to assist in the problem if you have already tried to resolve it yourself. If this doesn't completely answer your question, please come back to the Teahouse for more help. Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  12:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: I need to know where to report someone in case I need to TeaLover1996 (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996 WP:RVAN is usually the best place to report vandals, but you must have warned the editor enough times (usually around four is good). Once you report, an administrator will review the report and decide whether the vandalism is severe enough for a block. Hope this helps! Cheers Katniss♥ 18:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

editing help needed

Hi there! Can you please advise as to what needs to be changed. I felt as though the peacock terms and opinions were removed and left only factual information. If you could give me sine examples of structure that needs to be corrected, I would be so very grateful. Thank you!

Teamwesley (talk) 22:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teamwesley (talk • contribs)

Hello, Teamwesley. It would be helpful if you would tell us which article you were talking about, but I presume it's Draft:August Wesley (wrestler). I haven't looked very far through it, but from the beginning:

• The first sentence "August Germaine Wesley, born the 2nd oldest of 7 (Linda, Veronica, Nina, Nefertari, Junior and Olympia) on May 21, 1972." isn't a sentence, as it doesn't have a main verb. The list of his siblings doesn't belong in the lead (too much detail) and isn't referenced.
• "with an illustrious career" is evaluative, not neutral, and should never appear in any Wikipedia article unless it references a reliable source, independent of the subject, which says that the subject's career is illustrious.
• I don't know whether the source you cite says that "he was honored" when he was selected, or just that he was selected; if it doesn't say he was honored, then the article shouldn't say so (and I'm not sure that it should say so even if the source does).
• The first paragraph of "Early years" is about his own view of his story. That is acceptable, (though a description by an independent source would be better). but still needs to be cited to a reliable source (but it could be a non-independent source as long as it is saying that this is what he says about his early years)
• "Little did he know that ... " is hardly ever appropriate for an encyclopaedia.

These are only a few points, but I hope they give you an idea of what's needed. One other point: you have plenty of references (good!) but none of then has a URL. It is not required that references be available on line, but it's a lot easier for reviewers to check them if they are. I guess (though I might be wrong) that quite a few of these are online, and it would help your article to be accepted if you made it easier for reviewers by providing the links. You could also used 'named references' to avoid repeating them when you use the same source more than once: see referencing for beginners. Good luck! --ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Help Me

I created an article of a notable person. "Mike Bleed Da BlockStarr" because he was on Wiki. I may did a few things incorrectly so if anyone can be of some assistance in editing the article so it will not be deleted, it would be of great appreciation. The information in the write up is all facts & can be searched in many sources. Such as Nola.com, allmovies.com, iHeartRadio.com, IMDb.com, mikebleed.com, among others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blockstarrinc (talk • contribs) 21:14, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

• Hi, Blockstarrinc, and welcome to the Teahouse. What is needed in this article are reliable sources that demonstrate that this musician is notable. Also, you need to add these sources to the article yourself, otherwise the article will probably be speedy deleted. Everymorning talk 22:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

And, Blockstarrinc, note that "notable" in Wikipedialand doesn't mean important, or famous, or popular, or influential: in most cases it only means that several people unconnected with the subject have decided to write about him and had their writing published in reliable places (which doesn't include user-generated sites like iMDB. I don't know about the other sites you mention). --ColinFine (talk) 22:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Newbie needs an invite

Hi. Can one of the Teahouse regulars leave a talk page invitation for this guy: User talk:Vlmh? He's made a handful of edits since late 2014, but has had no talk page communication with anyone before today. I had to revert several of his recent edits because he was inadvertently breaking pipe links, and I left a corrective/explanatory message on his virgin user talk page -- admittedly not the most welcoming first message for a potentially productive new editor. I would be grateful if someone would leave a friendly Teahouse message for him. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:08, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done in the future Dirtlawyer1, the Teahouse works in reverse and new sections go at the top. The blue button in the header does that automatically. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 03:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. Duly noted. I did find and use the "blue button" after searching in vain for the "new section" tab. Not sure how my comment found its way to the bottom of the stack. It's a mystery. Thanks for your quick response on the welcome message for Vlmh. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:23, 19 May 2015 (UTC)