Wikipedia:Teahouse

David notMD, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.

Help Wikipedia

New Articles

Are new Users allowed to create new articles directly? Or, they have to submit draft?Aero Slicers (talk) 09:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Aero Slicers. Registered users are allowed to create new pages without needing assistance from anyone else. See Wikipedia:Your first article before you decide to write a new article, and make sure the topic is notable, and not already covered in Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Is there a way to make the external links open in a new tab?

External links to open in new tabs!

(F.karkar (talk) 08:46, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

There are two ways I do this: (1) Right click on the link and select "Open link in new tab"; (2) Click on the link with your scroll wheel (if you're using a mouse). This also works with internal hyperlinks in Wikipedia and with links on sites outside of Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Bilorv, though I wonder if there is a special code to make it when clicked automatically open in new tab F.karkar

Changing

I request to change the Solapur Junction railway station to simply 'Solapur Railway Station because 'Solapur' is not an officially recognised 'junction' by Indian Railways. Its a normal railway station — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dongar Kathorekar (talk • contribs) 06:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

It looks like someone's done this for you, but in the future, you might want to read Wikipedia:Moving a page#How to move a page — any user can boldly change article titles by themselves if they think no-one will object. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:00, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

IP

I am dealing with a disruptive IP (see my contributions which will lead you to a talk page post). How can I proceed? —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm no expert in this area but warning templates are usually the response for a couple of unconstructive edits. If the IP (or, it seems IPs) are being continually disruptive, WP:AIV might be the place to go. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I myself call it vandalism but many would just see it as unproductive. It isn't clear 100% vandalism. That's why I won't / can't revert it again and that page you linked says it's only for full on vandalism. I haven't given a warning template but I have told them that it's inappropriate for the article multiple times. So I have pretty much warned them. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Winner 42 seems to have warned the user and I've tried to establish a short-term compromise on Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction with this edit. You've included some explanation in your edit summaries but I think you're going to need a bit of a more detailed rationale for removing the sourced paragraph. I advise you to post on the Talk:Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction and if the IP doesn't object within a reasonable amount of time, or if there is clear consensus from other users, you can remove it. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikiwand

I saw this site, and its like an overlay for making the wiki interface of articles how you want. For example, editing the font. This is a link to it http://www.wikiwand.com/ Just wondered if it has any connection to to Wikipedia or Wikimedia in general. thanks Wrightie99 (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

If you take a look at Wikiwand, it doesn't seem to have any official connection to the Wikimedia Foundation. It seems like a nice site, though — I've seen some of its effects (e.g. different font, preview of links) created by user preferences (see WP:POP) and custom CSS, but I'm sure many readers without accounts (and without any technical knowledge) find it very useful. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Adding article in other languages

Sir, Is it possible to write an article other than english! Please do reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianjalianilkumar (talk • contribs) 19:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

On the Wikipedias for other languages, yes. On the English Wikipedia, no. Go to the main site, and find the language you wish to write the article in. That will take you to that language's Wikipedia. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Simple Wikipedia problem

I have a problem with using the Simple English Wikipedia and I am unsure of where to ask there. I can't edit it for some reason, although I managed to today, and I have VisualEditor switched on there. I don't know what VE does but it is making it much harder to use and I just want to switch it off. Thanks, Rubbish computer 18:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I think the page I was trying to edit was semi-protected or something, as I can edit others. However, I still do no know why VE is switched on or how to turn it off. Rubbish computer 18:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer. simple:Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing has the option "Temporarily disable VisualEditor while it is in beta". PrimeHunter (talk) 18:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thank you. Rubbish computer 18:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

problem in creating page

I would like to create a page for my teacher who teaches me chemistry in allahabad, India please tell me what should be the requirements Atifh8 (talk) 15:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, @Atifh8. Wikipedia only allows articles on topics which are notable: this means they need to have been talked about in several reliable secondary sources. Unfortunately, unless your teacher is particularly famous for reasons other than teaching chemistry, we cannot include them on Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 16:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

inserting a section to an article

I'm new to Wikipedia editing. I've tried to edit an article on Walther von Reichenau and left my edit in Talk and Sandbox for a few days but haven't gotten any sign that it's observable by anyone else.

I'd appreciate some feedback. Specifically, I'm looking for a way to add the section after "Nazi Support" and to integrate my references into the present ones.

Thanks!

Radixetramus (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Radixetramus, and welcome to the Teahouse. There has not been any edit, by anyone, to Talk:Walther von Reichenau since 2012. I don't see any edit by User:Radixetramus except to User talk:Radixetramus and a sandbox page of yours. You should discuss such a major addition at Talk:Walther von Reichenau. No one would be watching for such a discussion on your user talk page unless you had already been in conversation with them.

Technically, you simply edit the section above and add the new section after it, starting with the section title surrounded by paired equals signs, like this:

==New section title here==

The article Walther von Reichenau seems to use ordianry ref tags, so you could put your references inside ref tags, and they would be automatically included in the refernce list. Do not use "ibid", repeat the source information or use shortend footnoots. See our Referencing for Beginners page for details, and Help:Footnotes for more advanced topics on citing sources. I hope this helps. DES ^(talk) 16:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

You seem to have put your question and proposed content on your user talk page - while people can see that, no-one working on the article would know to look there. You should put questions and comments about an article's content on the article's talk page, which is the tab on the left next to 'Article'.

For adding references, see Help:Referencing_for_beginners - you describe the source where it's used, and they're automatically numbered and placed in the References section. I'd suggest that you use the citation templates (unless you're using VisualEditor of course). FLHerne (talk) 16:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Why are editors blocked from editing for 24 hours after they involve in edit wars?

Why are editors blocked from editing for 24 hours after they involve in edit wars even if their contributions look clean. Can't they be warned and left for once rather than blocking them? NextGenSam619^t@lk 14:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Read the edit-warring policy. The main problem with edit-warring is that at least one of the edit-warriors typically is trying to resolve a content dispute by persistence rather than by discussion. Content issues should be discussed on the article talk page; edit-warring avoids or interferes with discussion. Usually an editor is warned before being blocked. If an edit-warrior is well over 3RR (say, at 5RR) and is edit-warring against consensus of two or more editors, an admin may reasonably decide that it is necessary to block the edit-warrior in order to get their attention. To restate, usually the editor is warned before being blocked, but sometimes, based on admin judgment, a block may be the only way to get the attention of a persistent edit-warrior. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

tecchie question re IPA pronunciations

Hi. After getting the IPA pronunciations at the Language Ref Desk, I added them to two articles. However, the one where I started with IPA-zu correctly rendered as "Zulu pronunciation" (see MTN-Qhubeka) but the one I started with IPA-ti (see Daniel Teklehaimanot) did *not* render as "Tigrinya pronunciation" but just as "IPA". Have I made an error I can't see? Or if someone needs to add the ti code for Tigrinya language to some magic code somewhere, where would I request this? Thank you. 184.147.138.101 (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't know why this is happening, but I can understand what is happening. When you type {{IPA-zu}}, you are transcluding the contents of Template:IPA-zu: if you look there, it says "Zulu pronunciation", so that is what appears in MTN-Qhubeka. However, {{IPA-ti}} redirects to {{IPA-all}}, which is just a generic template that says "IPA:", so that is what appears on Daniel Teklehaimanot. You don't seem to have done anything wrong; it's just the way the templates have been set up. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the explanation! Can I make a Tigrinya template that works like the Zulu one?184.147.138.101 (talk) 09:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Maiden names as middle names

When did it become established that married woman use their maiden name as middle names, e.g. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Michelle Robinson Obama? I'd never heard of this practice before, but it seems to have become common in recent years. (ps, I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question, but I don't know where else I would ask it.) Zacwill16 (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, you are in luck, the Wikipedia:Reference desk is set up just to answer factual questions. You might try either the Miscellaneous or the Humanities Desk - both get a lot of traffic. Please ask at only one though. 184.147.138.101 (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I've asked it at the Humanities Desk. Zacwill16 (talk) 18:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

What to do with dead links ?

Hi, at some articles I have found some dead links(page not found), being used as references. Should they be removed? Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vivek.bekhabar
Please do not remove deadlinks, but tag them with the deadlink template {{Dead link}}.
To quote WP:KDL "A dead, unarchived source URL may still be useful. Such a link indicates that information was (probably) verifiable in the past, and the link might provide another user with greater resources or expertise with enough information to find the reference."
You could try and find an alternative source of that information, or try using an internet archive, such as the Wayback Machine to find an archived copy of the original information, and then link that. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Link rot - Arjayay (talk) 12:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for the information, will use it when come across with such links. Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 06:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

discussion

How do I call the attention of all users who have contributed to a particular page, so that I can discuss with them before making any major edit.srini (talk) 10:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi srini as far as I know there is no way to do such a thing as this would be very bad on many articles where their would be hundreds of contributors, many with no great interest in the topic just doing things like vandal reverting, copy editing, formatting etc. However you can manually alert people with a mention either by including a link to the user as I just did with you here, or using templates such as {{Ping|Srinivasprabhu933}} or {{Mention|Srinivasprabhu933}}. If your referring to 2014–16 ICC Women's Championship then the history shows only two other main contributors so not much work to ping them. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
• Hey srini: if you want to discuss a big change, the article's talk page is usually the place to do that. You are also encouraged to just be bold and make the change yourself, especially if the page in question is a small or obscure one that is unlikely to attract much attention. Your changes will be seen by anyone who has that page on their watchlist, so people who have signed up to be notified when the page is edited will see the edits you have made. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 12:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Connected Applications

This link from my preferences page showed I have 0 Connected applications. What are those applications that I can connect?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:OAuthManageMyGrants X Swordsman Xcalibur 09:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Here is the list of applications that you can be connected to.

Cheers --Lionratz (talk) 10:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Most are technical. Probably I don't need them at all.--X Swordsman Xcalibur 10:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Also note that Special:OAuthManageMyGrants includes the link "Learn more about connected applications". PrimeHunter (talk) 10:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

That is entirely up to you. Personally, I have never used these applications and that does not hinder my editing.

Have fun editing!--Lionratz (talk) 10:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

My new article was deleted without notice...

Hey there, I just wrote an article, with citing sources, and not using the same words (copy-pasting), but it seems it wasn't good enough.

Of course I wanted to improve it if it was not perfect, but instead - it was just deleted - not taking into account the time I have spent in sincerely creating it.

Its so frustrating... I can't believe I've done this mistake and didn't save a copy of it on my computer. so... hours of work are gone...

What can I do? How can I convince the Eraser to bring it back (if she can...)?

Thanks, Roi Roi.eco (talk) 08:15, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Nothing that's written on Wikipedia is ever gone for good — your article is just hidden rather than completely removed. See WP:REFUND: on this page you can ask for your article to be "userfied", so you can slowly work on improving the page without others rushing to delete it. However, please bear in mind that there are some topics which are just not notable for inclusion on Wikipedia because reliable secondary sources just don't exist. I can't see what the article you wrote was about, but there's a chance it won't ever make it into Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:54, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Roi,

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! As you have not specified the article in question, I presume that your are referring to the the Draft of Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards. (However, do note that articles at the Articles for Creation page are not published articles yet)

In Wikipedia, deletions also follow a process, which is explained in detail in this guide. Most deletions require a discussion, but in your entry's case, it comes under what is called a "Speedy Delete". The reviewer has found that your article was copied from a couple of sources, and thus judged it as a copyright infringement. This is a perfectly legitimate reason to speedily delete an article.

You should first contact the reviewer on his or her talk page to find out more about his or her decision. Perhaps there was some misunderstanding? Or you could ask for suggestions so that if you recreate the article, it would not be deleted again. Other possible solutions can be found here.

As for undoing deletions, I have not heard of such a thing but it might be possible for certain users who are given special rights. (see Bilorv's explanation above) In future, perhaps you could save your draft before submitting it so that your can have a copy to work on?

Best of luck in your future editing!-- Lionratz (talk) 10:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

If you are talking about Draft:Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards it was " deleted page Draft:Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: from http://rt.wildasia.org/responsible-tourism-awards/about-the-awards/)". As it says in the notices above the editing box "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." so, you were "given notice."-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

help me adding photo

please help me adding this プリントパンティーの例：花柄パンティー|300px photo in Panties article.Farzana zardari (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Farzana zardari, I'm seeing you are adding this photo to article replacing current one. Current pic in Panties has 3 different panties and they looks new and decent, while pantie in your pic looks used one. If you want to add new pic then click a better photo, panties should be non-used and photography should be done in professional way. As said in article there are various kind of panties but article don't has real photos of all kind of panties, you can click photo of other kind of panties whose photos are not there in article. --Human3015 knock knock • 07:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Farzana zardari, your attempt to display this photo in the article has been reverted on the grounds explained above. Please respect that. Asking at the Teahouse will not change things. If these panties hold some special meaning for you, then you should treasure it yourself and not on the Wikipedia. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 08:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Asking almost the same question more than once within the span of less than a day is considered tendentious editing. You won't get a different answer by asking the question two (or three or four) times. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Secure connection

I checked every preference settings. I can't find the secure connection https option --X Swordsman Xcalibur 04:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, X Swordsman. I get a HTTPS connection whenever I log in. Please read Wikipedia:Secure server for technical suggestions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, X Swordsman, Everyone should now et a secure connection (https) automatically, and so the option was removed. See WP:VPT#HTTPS by default for details and people who object. DES ^(talk) 12:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

asking for permission

I want to give a semi-nude photo in Panties article (a girl wearing only panties with no clothes) , this kind of photo is found on Wikimedia commons .Farzana zardari (talk) 04:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Helo, Farzana zardari, and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't, strictly speaking, need anyone's permisison. (See WP:BOLD.) But then neither does anyone need permisison to undo your action. (See Bold, revert, discuss cycle.) There is already an image in that article of a woman wearing a G-string and nothing else. I question if another is needed. You could discuss this on Talk:Panties. DES ^(talk) 04:50, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@DES I have uploaded a new photo in Panties.Farzana zardari (talk) 04:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Farzana zardari. You added the photo and it was reverted shortly thereafter. I do not think the photo adds encyclopedic value to the article. If you want to include that photo, you need to gain consensus. Explain your reasoning on the article's talk page. There has been no discussion on that page in 2015, though various editors have tried to add provocative photos without explaining why. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Change name

Can we change the name of already created Wikipedia page or not? Suppose, there is a page called abcd .Can we change it into abcd (actor)...like this?( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxboy (talk • contribs) 02:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Noxboy, and welcome to the Teahosue. Yes, a page name can generally be changed. We call it "moving the page" and the process is described in detail at WP:MOVE. The short version is that there will be a link "Move page", proably under the page menu, dependin on your setup and preferences. If you click this a box will popup asking you to enter the new page anme, and if applicable the new namespace. In most cases, any autoconfirmed user can do this. If there is already a page at the target name, an admin must perform the move.

However, that does not say if the move is a good idea. We have some rather complex guidelines on how articles should be named. See Wikipedia:Article titles for a full list of them. One of the most important is that we normally use the most common name by which a subject is known in reliable English-language sources. Another is that we don't add parenthetical disambiguators such as Joe Doaks (actor) if there is only one "Joe Doaks" with an article on Wikipedia. We add such notes only when they are needed to avoid two different subjects having the same title. There is extensive discussion of this at Wikipedia:Disambiguation.

Finally, if a move might be contentious, the procedure at Wikipedia:Requested moves should often be followed, so that consensus can be obtaiends on the best name for an article or other page. DES ^(talk) 03:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

References not enough

Hello, I have been attempting to get a character listed on Wikipedia but have been rejected for not having an experts testimony that the character is relevant. The character was created by myself and is a cartoon representation of a bumblebee. It is used in a series of children's books to raise awareness of the plight of bees in America. It is true that the book is brand new and has yet to be reviewed, but the artistic representation exists and it is used in a work with a ISBN number and is listed on Amazon etc. I do not know where one would go to find an expert to review the character to make it relevant. I will do so if you can direct me to them. I notice that Wikipedia does list many other cartoon artistic representations of characters. How did they get on Wikipedia? Thank you for your time, James Padgett Makaena (talk) 19:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Makaena, and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, since you created the character, you have a clear conflict of interest and should not create or edit the article about the character, even should the character eventually become Notable, which it almost surely is not right now. If, as you say, the book featuring this charcater has yet to be reviewed, its being a real book with an ISBN number does not alone make it suitable for a Wikipedia article, however worthy the cause it represents. It is not a matter of "expert testimony" exactly. It is that Wikipedia does not publish original work. Wikipedia is not a place to make things better known. Wikipedia articles summerize what has already been published about a subject by reliable sources, mostly independent secondary sources. The books themselves would be primary sources, not secondary. They could show that the character exists, but not how notable it is. If some expert, or even some reviewer who is not particularly expert, discusses this character in some depth in an indepnedantly published reliable source, that could be used in an article. If this happens several times that would probab;y be enough to support a new article. Otherwise, no such article could properly be created, and if one was created anyway, it would pobably be deleted fairly quickly. I am sorry, but that is the way that Wikipedia works. DES ^(talk) 19:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It is unlikely that the character will ever be notable - however, reviews in prominent press might end up making the book notable. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It does sometimes happen that a character will become notable in its own right, occasinally even more widely known than the original works in which that character appeared. Sherlock Holmes is an example. But it is pretty rare, and I should think even more rare for a character from books written for children. It is not likely in this case, and if it does happen, Makaena, someone else will write the article. DES ^(talk) 00:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

What about Smoky the Cowhorse? But I get it. I'm just some guy out in Hawaii with some stupid kids book. Who cares?Makaena (talk) 03:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Makaena. Our article Smoky the Cowhorse is not an article about a character, but rather it is an article about a highly notable children's book that won a Newbery Medal in 1927. No one said or implied that the book you illustrated is "stupid" but you informed us yourself that the books are new and have not yet been reviewed. This is an encyclopedia and we do not have articles about unreviewed books or their characters. If your books are widely reviewed or win major prizes like the Newbery, then that is the right time for an article about the books. And if the character is widely discussed in reliable sources, or made into a movie or TV show, then perhaps an article about the character might be justified. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:15, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, Makaena, you are a guy who has recntly written a book. Maybe it will become the next Where the Wild Things Are and be read over and over by generations of loving readers. I don't know. But that hasn't happened yet. Wikipedia doesn't have articles abotu things that might be well known in the future. It has articles about things that have been written about by others in the past. Tha tis because we base articles not on what their creaors say of their work, but on nwhat independant relaible sources have said. That is how we stay neutral, not a site to advertise things or attack things. Instead we summerize how others have already described things. No ofence to your creation, or to you, is intended. Would you be offended by someone saying that you haven't won the Newbury Medal, yet? These things take time, and I wish your efforts well. DES ^(talk) 04:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Addition to External Links

I would like to add a link to the Vasculitis Foundation to each of the articles about the diseases on which they do research. This foundation provided the information and support that my mother and our family needed when she was diagnosed several years ago. I would like to link this information to alert others with these conditions that this resource exists. I added the link to two of the topics but when I tried to add it to a third one (their are many forms of vasculitis), I received a warning. Please let me know what I need to do--and if it's not okay for me to add these links.Pepper4984 (talk) 17:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Pepper, welcome to the Teahouse! I know your intentions are good, but no, that's not allowed. Wikipedia is pretty restrictive on the external links it allows in its articles: you can look at this page for more information, but the general idea is that external links must be directly connected to the subject to be okay for Wikipedia. I don't think linking to your foundation from disease articles will fly--linking to your foundation from a Wikipedia article about your foundation (should it be notable enough for one, which is a whole different story) is more the thing. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

primary source is a first hand account

I want to add some information to a page from a primary source. This information comes directly from the individual who participated in a historic event (the duty officer for the first F-100 mission of the USAF in the Viet Nam War).

Is it permissible to source information this way in a proposed addition. Does the reference have to be an already published source?

Here is the information I want to add:

On the 3rd or 4th of June in 1964, the Air Force sent 8 pilots from the 615th Tactical Fighter Squadron to Da Nang, Republic of Viet-Nam. Two Navy Recce aircraft had been fired upon, and this was the retaliatory force. The target was a 'AAA' site near the Plain of Jars, and the mission destroyed that site. This was the first official strike of the USAF in the Viet-Nam War.

Thanks,

KTroboy (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC) Kim Troboy KTroboy (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi KTroboy. No, you cannot use this content unless you can source it to a published reliable source. The verifiability policy requires that sources of information be available to the public in some accessible form – so that our readers can check the information themselves. See also our policy on no original research. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

That policy is unfortunate, then, although I can imagine why it is in place. I happen to have the qualifications to do original research, have been published, and had hoped to contribute here, but I guess this is not the outlet for me or the information I have.

KTroboy (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC) Kim Troboy KTroboy (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, KTroboy this can be frustrating. But it is the only way Wikipedia has to preserve verifiability and reliability for its readers. You may well be highly qualified to do and publish original research, but Wikipedia has no way to validate those qualifications, nor the quality of your research. Insted we rely on secondary sources to excersize editorial control when they publish content, checking the qualifications of authors and perhaps fact-checking their work. Publishers that have a reputation for doign this we consider reliable sources, and article content should be sourced to such reliable sources.

You could publish your interview and research elsewhere, as a biography or biographical sketch, in some appropriate venue. Then that publication can perhaps be a source for a Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk) 21:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Redirection

Hoping to give back to Wikipedia, I have begun translating and expanding articles from German into English. In terms of content, I am fine; however, I am having some difficulty in learning the technicalities of form etc.: even having conversations with other users in the edit tab is a challenge for me.

Basically, I wanted to suggest that the entry for Max Weber Center on the English Wikipedia receive its own entry, rather than falling under the University of Erfurt. The institute is semi-autonomous, and the German Wikipedia has it listed on its own, with a redirection from the University of Erfurt.

How would I go about suggesting this move? I can't seem to figure out who, exactly, would need to be asked to do so. Foosland (talk) 14:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Foosland and welcome to the teahouse. No one needs to approve in advance, you can just boldly create such a article. However, remember that the policies on article inclusion and particularly notability are different here than on de. You might want to create Draft:Max Weber Center and make sure that you have sufficient independent referencs from reliable sources to clearly establish the notability of this center before you move to mainspace. DES ^(talk) 15:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Foosland:, Rather than a "German Wikipedia has a stand alone article about X, so English Wikipedia should, too." Think about it as described in this process: Wikipedia:Summary style - as enough content about subtopic Y is available/accumulated, subtopic Y spins off to be a stand alone subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

A bit unrelated to your question, but we could always use more people to help with Category:Articles needing translation from German Wikipedia. If you are having difficulty editing the formatting, you can try out Visual Editor which can be enabled in beta preferences. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Use of accents in Spanish with non-Spanish proper names

With a name in Spanish, like Bartolomé de Las Casas, everybody, including me, agrees that they should be spelled according to modern Spanish rules.

My query is about proper nouns of non-Spanish origin that are more commonly used in Spanish than in any other written language. Nahuatl and Teotihuacan, and many others, are written in modern Spanish with an accent. There's a rule in Spanish that says so. In modern Spanish, the accent (Spanish only uses acute) marks the stressed syllable. (See Spanish orthography for a full discussion, if interested. In the original languages, there was no alphabet.)

The English Wikipedia seems to use them without the accent. I can't find a style guide in WP that addresses this point. I think more good would be done by including the accents than omitting them, though I may be prejudiced since I know Spanish. Your guidance appreciated. deisenbe (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Deisenbe. Please see the section of the guideline at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) known by the shortcut WP:DIACRITICS. In short, the core gauge is the commonality of use in reliable English language sources. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Similar name

Hi I have a question here. Suppose, if there are 2 or more people with same name then how to create two different page. How to create Wikipedia disambiguation page?? I am having problem with this. Shankar Acharya is an economist but another Shankar Acharya (not created article on Wikipedia yet) is a Nepali actor/director. Now people may be confused with this. So what can be done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxboy (talk • contribs) 13:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Noxboy and welcoem to the Teahouse. In such a case, one, or possibly both names, will be modified to make them distinct. Fpr exmaple, we might have Shankar Acharya (actor) or Shankar Acharya (economist). See Wikipedia:Disambiguation for more details. DES ^(talk) 13:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Can we see recent changes in articles related to specific WikiPorject?

If we click on "recent changes" we see ongoing changes in all Wikipedia articles, but can we see recent changes made in articles tagged with specific WikiProjects? -- Human3015 knock knock • 10:46, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Human3015: I believe only for some Wikiprojects, for example Wikiproject medicine has it set up at Special:RecentChangesLinked/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Lists_of_pages/Articles. Winner 42 Talk to me! 02:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

E-commerce portals as a reference ??

Hi, Can we use e-commerce websites as a reference ?? As I found some books available in different languages on e-commerce websites, so from their can I add the number of languages and languages against the name of the books on wiki ?? Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 09:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vivek.bekhabar. "E-commerce" is a somewhat broad category of website and the reliability of sources (reliability being a condition precedent to source use) is always context-specific, so I don't know if there really can be any proper answer given the broadness of the question. However, it seems to me that regardless of any particular site's reliability, the only way you could add the number of languages in a manner implying the total is known, would be if the source says the number as a total and not by counting the number they list. To do the former would be original research. You might be able say something like X is translated into at least X number of languages based on such a count, but you could not say "X has been translated into Y languages", because that implies the source gave the answer in some form of definite register. By the way, this site is called Wikipedia, not wiki. A wiki is any website using wiki software; there are thousands of them.Template:Z30 Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit I too had the same thought but was not sure. So, posted here. Thank you for the clarification.

It's Wikipedia. I got it. Thanks Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 08:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

reflists

Oh, dear, I'm adding some extra spaces in order to show the markup/coding here....

This:
< ref group=Note >Explanatory note separate from the citations.< /ref >

properly shows "Note 1" as a ref. and displays the note under { {reflist | group=Note} }.

But I'd like the ref. to say "Note A" and I can't figure out how to get "Note" in there with

{ {efn-ua | More info. } } and { {notelist-ua} }

The help pages suggest that this ought to work: { {efn-ua | group=Note | More info.} }

But so far, I can have letter references or I can have the word "Note" but not both. An additional word can only precede arabic numerals? I've been fussing with it forever it seems. Am I missing something blindingly obvious and simple?

Thanks for any guidance. Valuenyc (talk) 04:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Valuenyc and welcome to the Teahouse. Just exactly where have you been "fussing with it"? The only thing I can see you working on is Joseph Rescigno (or am I missing something?), and that article has neither {{reflist}} or {{notelist}}. Something that an article should have. Instead there is a long list of External Links. Before you start with the more complicated templates for Notes with references, it would be best if you familiarized yourself with proper references. Read User:Yunshui/References for beginners and Help:Referencing for beginners and start converting the external links into proper inline citations. Once you have done that, just give me a holler and I'll help you sort out the Notes with the Refs. If you want to see an article where Notes and refs are used click here. Best, w.carter-Talk 21:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear W. Carter: I do hope I'm responding in the right way. I've never used this forum. I am fussing in a sandbox, just trying to learn the markup, while I'm working separately on some long-overdue improvements to the page you cite. In my sandbox, my notes are working beautifully in every respect but this. If you feel you cannot shed any light on my question, so be it. I thought it would be a pretty straightforward matter: Can one have "Note A" rather than "Note 1"? If so, what is the syntax?

Thanks for your interest. (I don't know whether you are supposed to be able to see my sandbox. But, FYI, for the moment, it is so minimal that I haven't saved my work there, only on my computer here. (I guess you could say I'm shy. ;-) )) Valuenyc (talk) 21:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Valuenyc: Well, shy or not, the more open you are with what you do, the better we can help you. We have all been new here once and we are here to help the new editors. Most of us don't bite. The letters or numbers are auto-generated so if you use the {{reflist}} you get numbers, and if you use the {{notelist}} together with the {{efn|Some text}} you get letters (lowercase letters), as you can see in the article I sent a link to. You can't do anything about it. But it is always easier if you have some text where an example can be shown. I will also leave some notes on your talk page about things that can be helpful to you. Best, w.carter-Talk 22:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

My problem is that this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Footnotes#WP:EXPLNOTE

says that {{efn}} supports | name= and | group= . I don't think I asked this in the most intelligent manner and I apologize for that. But it is | group= that I cannot get to work with {{efn}}. I'm fine with numbers here and letters there. It just seems that if one wants "Note" in the ref one must use <ref> and take "Note 1" but "Note A" (or "Note a") using {{efn}} is impossible. I do appreciate your continued attention, but if this must wait until I put up some real content, then so be it. (Wish me luck with MS Word to Wiki. Ugh. And thanks for teaching me that nowiki tag! Boy did that throw me at first.) Valuenyc (talk) 01:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@Valuenyc: There are many ways to do the references, I am not familiar with all of them. Maybe some other editor know how to make the word "Note" appear in the text. As for examples, I have made one for you in one of my sandboxes where you can see how the whole thing works. Hope that this will clarify things a bit. A word of caution when you transfer text from MS Word to Wiki: Some if the characters, such as the " and ' are displayed as "slanted" (not the WP standard) if you just copy paste the text. You will have to fix that afterwards. w.carter-Talk 08:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

How to propose for deletion

WP:Articles for deletion appears to contain no instructions as to how to nominate an article for deletion, as I would like to do with Office management software, and I haven't got time to read that page in more detail. Thanks, Rubbish computer 17:57, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually, the article does contain instructions although it's fairly far down the article — see WP:AFDHOWTO. I've nominated the page for you: it can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Office management software. Please provide your reasoning for deletion there. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 18:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Twinkle does such nominations semi-automatically. DES ^(talk) 18:09, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bilorv: @DESiegel: Thank you. I have now provided a reason. Rubbish computer 18:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Someone claimed my username

Hello, we are a company who would like to create a Wiki account using our name - but it seems to have been already claimed? How can we get it back - or see who uses it? (as they may be an employee or past employee)

63.145.79.4 (talk) 16:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, 63.145.79.4. No one owns a Wikipedia article, or can "claim" it. If you refer to a username, usernames should identify specific individuals, not companies. An account named for a company is often blocked from editing for that fact alone. Also, no account should be shared by multiple people. One Person -> One Account. Our privacy policy prevents revealing what person uses any particular account, except in very limited circumstances. DES ^(talk) 16:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi 63.145.79.4! To add to what is said above, many companies, or employees of companies, want to get accounts on the Wikipedia because they confuse it with Facebook or LinkedIn or other social sites where they can promote their company, something that Wikipedia as an encyclopedia is not meant for. So before you do anything, please read the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Best, w.carter-Talk 16:42, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Which username is it? PrimeHunter (talk) 16:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The Username is: SketchUp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.145.79.4 (talk) 17:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

There is an article SketchUp, but there is no User:SketchUp registered at this time. DES ^(talk) 17:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Three was a user User:Sketckup who was renamed to user:Sketchup~enwiki apparently de to a conflict with a user name on another mediawiki project. 17:19, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

It was User:Sketchup (created 8 December 2006, has made no edits) who was renamed to User:Sketchup~enwiki, due to a conflict with de:User:Sketchup (created 30 December 2011, apparently made 2 edits which have since been deleted). The poster wants the name SketchUp with upper case U. There has been no English Wikipedia user by that name but the global rights to the username belongs to commons:User:SketchUp (created 25 May 2007, made 33 edits in 2007). The username cannot be usurped without permission form the user but as mentioned above, it would also be against our username policy. None of the three accounts have specified an email address and the long inactivity makes it unlikely they would reply to posts to their user talk pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

So there is no way for me to claim this username? What if they are inactive for years...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.134.88.50 (talk) 00:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think so, no. But if you did somehow claim the name, and then used it to edit the SketchUp article, or about that buisnss, you would be promptly and permenantly blocked from further editing under that name in any case, so if that is what you hand in mind, it's not much of a loss. DES ^(talk) 00:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm I on the right track?

Can a editor take a look at the article I am working on and tell me if I am going in the right direction in correcting what was wrong with the article? I needed to cite third parties and establish "notability". I believe I have done that. There are news journals that I am still searching for that wrote about his work that I will continue to add, but I really would love someone's experienced two cents at this time. Thank you in advance to whoever that might be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Joseph_W._PapinJrptwins (talk) 15:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jrptwins and welcome to the Teahouse. I took a very brief look at your Draft, and there are a couple of things that stands out immediately. The article has to be what we call "Wikified", that is it has to be adjusted to the format used in similar articles. I think you should take a look at articles about other artists such as Dick Rockwell and Leo Hershfield where you might find clues as to how such an article should be written. Further there should not be any urls (that is links outside the Wikipedia) in the text itself as there are in the "Books Illustrated" section. Please make references of those instead. The "Career" section is a mighty big block of text. Try to cut it up into smaller sections to make it easier to read. These are my first obsevations. I'm sure other editors will add their own to this post. Best, w.carter-Talk 15:57, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Jrptwins, and welcome back. I think you are on the right track with Draft:Joseph W. Papin. Here are some further sugestions:

• the "life facts" should not be a series of sentance fragments. Either make them full prose sentances in a proper paragraph, or move them into an ingobox, probably {{infobox person}} or both.
• "Employment" should not be a bulletted list, but rather running prose, just as with "life facts". A citation or two would be useful here.
• "Career" should be divided into multiple paragraphs, the large block of text is unwieldy and puts off a reader.
• Does the phrase "the artist as reporter" come from the Meglin book? If so, make that more explicit. If not, where does it come from? Such a phrase is an evaluation or opnion, and should be cited to a source who said this of Papin. If no one said it of Papin, the draft should not.
• You give a quote, but you need to explicitly say who is being quoted, in addition to the citation. ("Joe Papin is a reporter. He works for one of the largest newspapers in United States—the Daily News—and has covered some of the most historic moments in recent American history. His professional title is artist. The tools of his journalistic trade are not the notepad and typewriter, rather an assortment of pens and a sketchpad...Papin has been drawing scenes of life—the grand and the commonplace...from a straightforward, objective viewpoint.") This is particularly true since the quote expresses opnions.
• A citation should back a speciifc phrase or sentance, or at most a paragraph, not an entrie section. If the same source backs mltipel items in a list, repeat it with a nnmed ref.
• A citation should go to a specific source, not a general web page that must be searched, and not a query string. If a site offers a "permalink" option for more stable links, use it. For example the cite to "http://www.nyguild.org/" is of no value without an indication of what specific page on that site to see. A citation must always be as specific as possible.

There are more, but thjese are a start. i hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 16:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both for your help. I believe I have done all (or most!) of what was suggested. Any other suggestions would be welcome. Also, at the point when I hopefully "get it right" how do I resubmit the article or do the powers that be just get back to looking at it when they can?Jrptwins (talk) 21:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

You have already (re)submitted it, Jrptwins so it is already in the queue for a volunteeer reveiwer to look over. But yiou can keep working on it while you wait. i ahve made some further sugestions at Draft talk:Joseph W. Papin. And yes, quotes need to be both cited and explicitly attributed in the article text. See my resposne on my talk page to your question about that. DES ^(talk) 22:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Rollback rights

I don't have rollback rights. In spite of that I can see the rollback button for consecutive edits made by another user: probably due to Twinkle. Twinkle has various functions. Those who can use Twinkle; do they get any extra facility by using Stiki and Huggle? I can't use them as I don't have rollback rights. Still I want to know what extra works they do, from users who use them.Silver Samurai 07:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Silver Samurai. Whilst Twinkle effectively gives you rollback (which is why you can see a rollback option), STiki and Huggle (and Igloo, which I really like but everybody seems to forget!) offer substantially more in the way of anti-vandalism tools, by filtering and flagging elements of the Recent Changes feed and giving you multiple action and reporting options. However, these are considered to be fairly powerful tools as a result, and so access to them is restricted to users who have demonstrated extensive experience and good judgement in fighting vandalism. As a result, the original Rollback feature, whilst largely redundant as a tool thanks to Twinkle, is often used as a benchmark to demonstrate a readiness to use these advanced tools. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Yunshui: Stiki, Huggle and igloo are only for Vandalism! I don't need them for Wikilove messages and article creation. With Twinkle, we can nominate a page for deletion, give talkback, also warn users, even report them to Administrators, revert vandalism and disruptive editing. Twinkle does almost everything to fight Vandalism. These tools look unnecessary to me; with due respect to those who created them. Silver Samurai 07:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I've not used Huggle or igloo, but I use STiki sometimes and I wouldn't call it unnecessary. Twinkle is just a tool I use that's handy when it comes to speeding up tasks I was already about to do (e.g. reverting vandalism and warning the user); STiki is something I use that gives me something new to do. It presents edits which it thinks might be vandalism, and the user needs to categorise them. So it helps revert edits which Cluebot thinks might be vandalism but isn't too sure, and edits on obscure pages which won't turn up on any active user's watchlist. (To use STiki, you need either 1000 edits, rollback permission (NOT Twinkle) or a very good reason to make an exception.) — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 08:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

If you're happy using Twinkle, that's great! It's certainly more varied in what it can do; as you say, Huggle, STiki and Igloo are pretty much only for anti-vandalism. They are excellent tools for this, effectively making one into a human ClueBotNG, but they can't send Wikilove, tag articles, mark pages for deletion etc. Really, I would only consider aiming to use these if you are a particularly fervent anti-vandalism patroller, with a lot of experience. You can, or course, find out more about each tool at WP:STIKI, WP:HUGGLE or WP:IGLOO. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Totally off topic, but @Yunshui: what are the benefits to using Igloo over my current preference of Huggle? Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I've never used Huggle personally; though I understand it's at least somewhat similar. The advantage, for me at least, is that Igloo is totally browser-based, with no need to download anything. Yunshui ^雲_水 17:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Podcast interview

Hi, this may not be the right place to ask this question, I apologise.

I make a podcast called 'Random Article', in which I find the topic for each episode by using the wikipedia random article function. I'm currently making an episode about the article Syndesmica, and I can see that the article has been recently edited. I'd like to contact the person who edited it and interview them. What would be the best way to contact them? Chmjasper (talk) 03:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Chmjasper. Go to the editor's talk page and leave them a message. Enter "User talk: editorname" into the search box, substituting the actual editor name. If the editor has email enabled, which is optional, there will be an "email this user" link active on the left menu when you are on their talk page. Some editors pay a bit more attention to emails than talk page messages. Those are the two main ways to reach out to another editor, though there are various types of alerts and pings, like the way I just notified you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

to quote or not to quote, that is my question

I have a question for any experienced editor from Teahouse. Is it necessary (or good) to quote directly from a reference source or is it enough just to put the source. If it is not a live link, it would be the only way to see the content, but perhaps that is not necessary? I think in an effort to cite old newspapers articles I might have gone overboard. Thanks for your advice.Jrptwins (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jrptwins. In general, we summarize or loosely paraphrase the sources we reference. However, the original source material may include a very pithy and incisive phrase or sentence or two, which is worth quoting directly. The decision of when and how often to quote a source is a matter of editorial judgment. Ask yourself, "Why am I quoting instead of summarizing?" If a summary is as effective, then do not quote. If a quote seems clearly useful in conveying knowledge to the reader, then add it, either enclosing it in quotation marks, or setting it off as a block quote, so that any reader realizes that it is a direct quote and not your words. And always reference every quote, 100% of the time, at the end of the quote. In conclusion, "moderation in all things" (attributed to the Roman playwright Terence) is a good approach to quotes and all things. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Jrptwins and welcome to the Teahouse. When a source is offline, and a short quote from the source indicates the meat of how the source supports the stated fact, you may, but need not, include such a quote as part of the citation. If using citation templates, the quote= parameter exists for this purpose.

If you refer to making a direct quote, as opposed to a paraphrase, in the article itself, it is a judgement call, and depends on the purpose of the reference. When it is to include an expression of opnion, such as a review of a book or film, or an endorsement of or attack upon a person, then a fully attributed and cited direct quote is often best, if it is not too long. Try not to use very long quotes, trim to the essentials for the purpose, but not so as to change the meaning of the original writer or speaker being quoted. Always cite and attribute any quotes.

So I'm sorry, but the only general answer is, "it depends", but it is almost never required. DES ^(talk) 03:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both for your help. I am slowly but surely learning! Jrptwins (talk) 04:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Userbox problem

Hello, I don't know how to arrange my userboxes so they aren't all overlapping. Thanks, Rubbish computer 01:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi there Rubbish computer. I'm going to make this easier for you to understand. To prevent userboxes from overlapping you can use table cellpadding as I've demonstrated below. Cheers! -- Chamith (talk) 02:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

{| style= <!--style (if you want any)-->
|-
|{{userbox template}}
|{{userbox template}}
|-
|{{userbox template}}
|-
|{{userbox template}}
|}

or you can use the following method,

{{Userboxtop|<!--title-->}}
  {{userbox template}}
  {{userbox template}}
  {{userbox template}}
{{Userboxbottom}}

@ChamithN: Sorry but I have no idea what any of this means, I've copied the methods here out and the userboxes are still all over the place. Rubbish computer 09:24, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish. It was the {{Multicol|800px}} that caused the boxes to overlap. I have substituted that with the template that ChamithN suggested above, the {{Userboxbottom}}, and the boxes seem to behave now. Revert it if you don't want it. The other ting that was suggested, was using "Tables". You can read about that here: Help:Table/Introduction to tables. Best, w.carter-Talk 10:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and if you want them in a single column, you just remove the {{multicol break}} that you had placed between the userbox templates. w.carter-Talk 10:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@W.carter: Thanks. Rubbish computer 11:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Delete i page

How do I recommend this article (Marine Engineering and Research Institute, MUMBAI) for deletion? As I find that, the above mentioned article is duplicate of Marine Engineering and Research Institute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srinivasprabhu933 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Srinivasprabhu933, and Welcome to the Teahouse. I converted Marine Engineering and Research Institute, MUMBAI into a redirect (link) to Marine Engineering and Research Institute. It could have been nominated for deletion at Articles for Deletion (AFD), but this is a simpler and quicker method. And if there was any useful information in the redirected article, it can still be found via the page history. It seems that we have had these duplicate articles since 2011, thank you for spotting this. DES ^(talk) 22:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much.srini (talk) 01:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation

I have prepared a biographical article in my sandbox for Frank Harrison (born 2013) with no middle initial that I know of.

There is already an entry for Frank G Harrison (born 1940) with redirect from Frank Harrison.

How can I create a new page for Frank Harrison (born 2013)?

Many thanks Kllwiki (talk) 16:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Kllwiki and welcome to the Teahouse. Just to clarify, the article in your sandbox states that "your" Frank Harrison was born in 1913 and died in 2013, so I assume the above year is a typo? w.carter-Talk 17:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, sorry. Born 1913. Kllwiki (talk) 17:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello. You will need an administrator to help you with the move. You can use the template {{Admin help}} to ask one to come help. That being said, there is a long quote currently in the article whose purpose is not quite clear at the moment. You may want to either give it more context or rewrite in your own words. Apart from that, nice article. Happy Squirrel (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and kind words. I'll fix up that quote then ask for assistance from an administrator. Kllwiki (talk) 18:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Should I resubmit the article after Editing as suggested by the reviewer?

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

I have edited the above draft page that I have created a while back. The edits involved few suggestions by Eugene (ELee), who has reviewed the article and declined it with comments.

Now that I have edited and addressed the concerns, should I resubmit it? or Is there an easy way to forward it to Eugene to make sure all the concerns were addressed?

Thanks ChennaiWiki (talk) 15:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, ChennaiWiki. You can do either or both. I see that you have already resubmitted it; but there is no harm in drawing ELee's attention. One way is to ping him (as I have just done: there are different ways of doing it, but I used {{U|ELee}}), so he will get a message directing him to this thread. Alternatively you could put a message on his talk page User Talk:ELee; but I suggest there's probably no point in that now that I have pinged him. --ColinFine (talk) 18:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

ChennaiWiki, ColinFine - Actually it is preferable not to repeatedly solicit the attention of the same reviewer, it's better to have a different person do the next review. This is so that the article does not become skewed by the biases of one reviewer. Some reviewers are also better (or weaker) at different aspects of the review workflow. A variety of reviewers makes for a better article when it is accepted. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:50, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Alignment in Infobox

Hi, I am trying to correct the allignment in Infobox - to put Website just below the religion in the Infobox for this page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama_Bijapurkar I tried different ways, even with having a look on other pages with right alignment. Its still the same. How to do it ? Thanks!!! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 13:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Vivek.bekhabar: The reason is because you're using the person infobox template, and this template puts the website in the middle. That template is protected (so only admins can edit it), so you'd have to ask at Template talk:Infobox person for it to be changed.

Also, which other pages have the website in the correct alignment? I guess they must be using a different template, which doesn't put the website in the centre of the infobox. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Joseph2302: Thanks for the reply! I was unaware of the same template and thought that their should be proper alignment. I referred this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Music_Entertainment ...So, its OK if infobox remains as it is for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama_Bijapurkar ?? Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 05:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

HotCat

I have activated HC from gadgets. Still can't find where HotCat is located?Silver Samurai 12:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

At the bottom of every article, you'll see a Categories list with a small +⁺ indicator next to it - that's HotCat. See Wikipedia:HotCat for instructions on how to use it. Yunshui ^雲_水 12:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Article on Kabooliwala.com

Hi I am trying to write an article on kabooliwala.com a online e cmmerce portal managed by us. Please help be creating an article for it. This is first e commerce portal from Kerala StateRajesh.madhavan (talk) 10:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rajesh.madhavan, read WP:PROMOTION, you may not create article on this website. At least you should have independent sources stating importance or notability of the website. --Human3015 knock knock • 10:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I think you have some independent sources [1], but your article Kabooliwala.com has been deleted for 3 times today. I think you should discuss this matter with admins who deleted your article. But you should provide more independent sources. --Human3015 knock knock • 10:44, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

As Human3015 says, material on Wikipedia cannot be intended to promote a company: we have a neutral point of view. If your company is notable, which is required for inclusion on Wikipedia, then someone else may create an unbiased article on the subject. If you are sure the company is notable (it needs to have had coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources), you may submit an Articles for Creation draft and it should be reviewed within a month or so; if it meets our guidelines, it will be accepted as an article. Unfortunately, if it doesn't meet notability guidelines then we cannot have an article on it here. You should also read our Conflict of Interest policy. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 10:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Bilorv, I think article is notable enough, two of India's leading newspapers have given news about it, [2], [3]. They even projected it as competitors to Flipkart, Amazon, Snapdeal etc. I think we have many articles which have only one or two unreliable sources but we kept that many times, but his article has at least two highly reliable sources which shows that website if notable and national media gave coverage to it. Moreover, we can find many sources for it local news papers of Kerala state. --Human3015 knock knock • 11:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The first two times the article was created, it was highly promotional in tone. The next time it was created, the only reference provided was the URL of the website itself. The next two times it was created, it contained the same promotional wording from the blogspot. If there are references to demonstrate notability, they should be included in a draft of the article. I suggest using Wikipedia:Articles for creation.Deb (talk) 11:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

No, Human3015, both those newspaper articles are simply quoting people from the company and its partners (probably from press releases) so neither of them counts as an independent source. Hello, Rajesh.madhavan. Deb's advice is good: if you want to write this article, I recommend you follow it. I have a further suggestion as well: find articles that, unlike the ones Human3015 pointed to, are actually pieces of writing about Kabooliwala by people who have nothing at all to do with Kabooliwala. If you cannot find such sources, then give up: it is impossible to write an acceptable article about Kabooliwala at the moment (the Wikipedia jargon for this is that it is not "notable").

If you can find independent sources, then forget everything that you know about the portal - everything - and write the article entirely from what those sources say (don't just copy their words, or it will be a copyright violation: it needs to be new text, but everything in it must come from those sources). If you have been able to create a substantial article, you may flesh it out with some uncontroversial factual material (such as dates and places) from the business's own published sources such as its website. But most of the article must be based on independent sources. --ColinFine (talk) 18:24, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Redirect or New Article

Hi,

If a company is due to rebrand. Does a new article need to be created and then redirected to the new name or do you just need to set up a redirect, to the new name?

Thanks

Plestan (talk) 10:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey Plestan. One topic, one article. So, you would create a redirect from the new name pointing to the existing article, or possibly, move the existing article to the new name (which will leave a redirect behind) if the new name starts to be used frequently in reliable English language sources following the change. See the common names policy, which includes the guidance, "if the subject of an article changes its name, it is reasonable to consider the usage since the change." Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Lost "page curation" tool

I patrolled new pages for couple of days but suddenly I'm not seeing that page curation tool when I'm visiting new pages or un-reviewed pages. How its happened? I have not done any mistake while patrolling new pages earlier, not got any warning or notification. How I can see that page curation tool again? Human3015 knock knock • 07:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Human3015. Click on any article found at Special:NewPages. Once there look to the list of links on the left hand side of the interface (underneath the Wikipedia Globe). See the list under tools? The last link there (or near the bottom if you have certain settings on) should say "Curate this article". Clicking on that should reanimate the toolbar. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I never knew it, you made it very simple. --Human3015 knock knock • 10:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Why is my page viewed as an advertisement?

I have just created a page for the company FRIMO, but it keeps getting tagged for speedy deletion because it is too much like an advertisement. I'm not sure how to make it less "subjective". Can anyone help? Oconna78 (talk) 06:44, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Oconna78. Your article is filled with unreferenced promotional advertising statements like "FRIMO became one of the world’s largest suppliers of production technologies for manufacturing high quality plastic components for the automotive industry through the takeover of competitor Heidel. In 2004, the companies in the FRIMO Group were awarded with the SPE Award seven times, with five first and two second prizes." Who says they are one of the world's largest in that field and who says that being the world's largest in that field is significant and not trivial? Who says that the SPE Award is a significant award worth discussing in an encyclopedia article? Your article relies on PR Web references. Experienced Wikipedia editors know that PR Web just regurgitates press releases and is utterly worthless for establishing notability on Wikipedia. The article must be built on summarizing what reliable, independent sources say about the topic. Press releases excluded. Everything else should be removed from the article, especially any statement that an uninvolved editor would consider promotional. Every single thing. If nothing is left, then we should not have an article about this company, and the article should then be deleted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I've re-edited and added sources. Do you still find it promotional? If so, every Wikipedia article about a company should be deleted. There are so many other company articles that do not get deleted that have the same kind of information.Oconna78 (talk) 09:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Oconna78. The first eleven sentences of the "Company History" section are unreferenced: if it were moved to article space in that state, anybody could (and arguably should) delete them as unreferenced. Furthermore, if we look at the actual wording:

• "The foundations for the company FRIMO were laid in 1962." That is not objective fact, but opinion or interpretation (who can say at which point in its creation "the foundations" for a company were laid?). It does not belong in a Wikipedia article, unless, possibly, it is quoted from a reliable source, independent of the company - but in my view, even in that case it would probably not be an appropriate tone for an encyclopaedia article.
• "Fritsche Möllmann GmbH & Co. KG was founded in Bohmte in the district of Osnabrück, Germany ..." This is reported as a straightforward fact, and provided it is cited to a published reliable source, certainly belongs in the article. Because it is uncontroversial factual data, this could even be cited to a non-independent source such as the company's own website. It must still be cited, though.
• "...and managed to establish itself on the market ... " This is advertising puff, and should never appear in a Wikipedia article.
• "...as a supplier of foam molds for PU processing and model construction." Again, objective fact, and OK as long as it is cited to a reliable published source.
• "In 1969, due to constant expansion and growth in staff numbers, the company moved to its current location of Lotte, Germany." Again, a mixture of verifiable factual information (the move, the date, the location) which is fine as long as it is cited, and a claimed motivation, which is information of a very different kind, and should not appear unless the company has explicitly and publicly explained that this is the reason for the move.

I won't go any further, but I hope that this illustrates what a reviewer would be looking for. It is undoubtedly the case that there exist articles in Wikipedia which are no better than your draft; but that is a reason to improve them (or delete them if they cannot be improved), not to accept another inadequate article. --ColinFine (talk) 18:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Oconna78, please be aware that we delete hundreds of non-compliant articles every day. But we have nearly 5 million articles and weeding the bad ones out is a lifetime job. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Create a page

How do you create a pageangelz (talk) 19:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

What sort of page? Do you mean an article page? If so, read WP:Your first article and use the article wizard to create the article in draft space and submit it for review. I will also post a welcome message containing links to various policies and guidelines that would be good reading for new editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Is adding to a list considered a minor edit ?

Hello,

I'm wondering if say adding another book to the list of works by an author, or similar actions, is considered a "minor" edit ? To my mind, it would be. I'm new, but I have made a few such such edits and labeled them "m. However, when I've looked at article edit histories, I've noticed that "m" is not used very often so I began to wonder. Physalis longifolia (talk) 20:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Physalis longifolia. Adding an item to a list is not a minor edit. A minor edit is correcting a typographical editor or adding missing punctuation. Minor edits do not change content. So, please be careful about marking edits as minor. Please see WP:MINOR for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

There are a few editors who habitually mark all of their edits as minor. This is considered disruptive editing. It results in frequent warnings. It is not normally considered sufficiently serious to warrant a block, but it may result in a longer block when the editor gets into an edit-war. Please don't become one. As Cullen328 said, changing the content of a page, such as adding to a list, is not a minor edit. Thank you for asking. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. So what should I do, if anything, about the entries that I have already made ? 143.235.254.194 (talk) 20:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

It appears that you, first, posted this question in the wrong section. I have moved it. It also appears that you forgot to log in before posting it. The number of such edits that you made is small, and you are a new inexperienced editor. There is no need, in my opinion, to worry about a few new mistakes. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. So what should I do about the entries that I have already made -- undo them and then redo them ? 143.235.254.194 (talk) 20:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Physalis longifolia, there is no need to take any action on these old edits. Simply follow the guideline in the future. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

post to a User page

How do I post to a user page? I see I can add something to a post already there using "edit" but I want to have a separate post; for instance in order to thank someone for their help. The one method I tried did not work.King.parker3 (talk) 17:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Messages should be posted on user talk pages; at the top-left of your screen, when you are on a userpage you should see a "Talk" button. Click on this and there should be a button on the right-hand side saying "New section". Click this and you can entire a title for your post in the "Subject/headline" box, and then type the message itself. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

how to delete a user page

I want to delete the user page User:King.parker3/Tadeusz A. Jezierski which I created. This page is empty but I see no way to delete the reference to it.King.parker3 (talk) 16:50, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@King.parker3: I've deleted it for you. For future reference any page in your own userspace you want deleting just add {{Db-u1}} to the top of the page, this will place the page in a category and an admin will delete it for you. Nthep (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Good article status for Solapur

Im desperate for the Solapur article to be recognised as a good article. I love this city and im ready to give 100 more reliable source citations for it. But what is the correct method im confused. Does it need mutual talks with senior editors or something else useful? Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 16:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Dongar Kathorekar:, great to read that you are improving an article. For an article to be recognised as a good article, it has to have been reviewed by someone who is aware of the standards needed for an article to merit the status. You can find the procedure and nomination page at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions. During the review the reviewer may have questions or suggestions to make about the article which you can discuss with them. Nthep (talk) 17:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

To add to what Nthep has said, the exact criteria for good articles can be found at Wikipedia:Good article criteria. Taking a very quick glance at Solapur, the ^{[citation needed]} tags in the Tourism section should be addressed before the article is nominated for GA status; you should also try to make sure that every statement in the article has a reliable source and maybe copyedit the article (go through and check the spelling, punctuation and grammar). — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

To,

Nthep Sir and Bilorv Sir, I am grateful for your advice and help.

Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 17:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Questions

1.How to revert changes in page? 2.What to do to those users who do vandalism? 3.What is category about? 4.How to find coordinates of a place? 5.What are the basic tags needed in Wikipedia for editing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxboy (talk • contribs) 16:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

1. See Help:Reverting: from the history of a page, you can undo a user's changes if they are unconstructive.
2. Warnings can be issued to users who do not seem to be making constructive changes, and administrators can block users if they perform consistently unhelpful actions.
3. A category is a group of articles which fall under a common topic. They are used for navigational purposes.
4. I'm not quite sure what you mean; on Wikipedia, co-ordinates are often displayed in geographic articles' upper right-hand corners (e.g. Caldas da Rainha).
5. You might find Help:Wiki markup and Help:Cheatsheet useful.

Please ask if you want any more detail on any of these topics, or have any further questions. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

• @Noxboy:, for getting co-ordinates of place that you wanted, you can use websites like Wikimapia, there are also county specific website for coordinates like Indiamapia. You just have to type name of place and write Wikimapia in front of it on google and search it, you will get coordinates of the place. That coordinates you can add in article. --Human3015 knock knock • 08:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

References and footnotes

Most articles have references, featured articles have footnotes, notes and bibliography. In edit tool, i couldn't find any gadget that helps inserting footnotes. Inserting footnotes is not easy. Can an article have reference, notes and footnotes together? Count Chimera 15:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Count Chimera, and welcome to the Teahouse. There are a number of ways to format citations. See this page, and Help:Footnotes for more detail. It is indeed possible to have references, notes and footnotes all in the same article, and indeed to have more kinds of sourcing than that -- charts and tables can have their own separate notes, for example. But most articles do not need that level of complexity. For most articles, when you enter or edit a fact, you should (normally) have a source that supports that fact. Right after the fact, or at the end of the sentence, insert the following markup: <ref>Source information here</ref>. At the end of the article, in a Notes or References section (I prefer the former, many editors don't) include {{reflist}}. Replace "Source information here" with enough information to allow a reader or editor to find the source. For a book, title, author, publication date, and page number. ISBN if possible. For a magazine or newspaper, name of periodical, date, title of article, author, page number(s). For an online source, title and url, date and author and publisher if available. You can use a citation template or not. That is the basic process and should be enough to start with -- if everyone did that much all would be much better. DES ^(talk) 16:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

There is also information at WP:REFB for help at the intro level.

The "Insert Citation" button on the editing toolbar above the exit box is very helpful, particularly if you are researching via googlebooks (the "Book" subtool) or major online newspapers (the "News" subtool). Just paste the URL in the box and hit the green button. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

missing content

I created a comprehensive article on a company history but for some reason what I wrote does not show up when the page is viewed. When I go to edit mode all the content is there, but when saved and viewed, over half of it is missing. It was fine before, but I just noticed it this morning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taito_of_Brazil LMParadis (talk) 14:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi LMParadis. For whatever reason you had placed a number of citations ending with "</ref><ref". The code is just <ref> ... </ref> or for a named citation, <ref name="Intuitive Name"> ... </ref> for a first use, and then, for a later use of that same citation: <ref name="Intuitive Name" />. By the way, citations go outside of punctuation, so all periods, commas, etc. are placed before the code. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I tried to use the subsequent use of the same reference string that you mention but it came back with an error.

LMParadis (talk) 17:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey again. LMParadis. You posted only the secondary use of the name without defining it first. The first time you use a named reference, you have to provide the full citation but add the name definer to it. The code you used was for the second time you use the same reference after already providing the name. Let's be concrete. What you did was take the existing citation text:

<ref>{{cite web | url= http://augustocampos.net/taito-brasil/ | title=The curious history of Taito in Brazil, 1968-1985 | accessdate=29 June 2015}}</ref>

and change it to:

<ref name="The curious history of Taito in Brazil, 1968-1985" />

What you needed to do instead was take that existing citation and add the name to it. So the first use would become (changes underlined and bolded):

<ref name="The curious history of Taito in Brazil, 1968-1985">{{cite web | url= http://augustocampos.net/taito-brasil/ | title=The curious history of Taito in Brazil, 1968-1985 | accessdate=29 June 2015}}</ref>

With that you would have you've defined that citation's name name, and the next time you wanted to use the same citation you would just type:

<ref name="The curious history of Taito in Brazil, 1968-1985" />

However, I would keep use a much shorter name, maybe "curious history".--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. that works great

LMParadis (talk) 14:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

draft article

Hi there teahouse hosts I have drafted an article and although I think I could move it myself I think it wouldn’t do any harm to run it through peer review first. I think that if I place {{subst:submit}} on the article, a bot should pick up on that and do the rest, is that correct?CV9933 (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @CV9933: Welcome to the Teahouse! All you have to do is place {{subst:submit}} at the very top of the draft and save the page. This will automatically generate a template that will mark the page as pending a review (no bot involvement here). A reviewer should come by and review the article, and either approve it or let you know what needs improving. Note that there is a backlog of drafts awaiting review, so a review could take anywhere from a day to several weeks. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 13:51, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That's basically correct, although given the current backlog at Articles of creation (the reviewing venue) you might be waiting quite a while for a review. Assuming you're talking about Draft:Frank Gill (engineer), I can see no glaringly obvious reason not to move it to mainspace; there are improvements that could be made, naturally, but it meets Wikipedia's criteria and would pass an AFC review fairly easily. I'd suggest that you move it to mainspace; any serious issues will be picked up by the New Page Patrollers. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Yunshui: Unfortunately – and it's an issue that should give everyone who cares some pause – while everyone now having an automatic sandbox link and the creation of the draft namespace have their pluses, they have greatly increased creation outside the mainspace. Concomitantly, these types of moves to the mainspace (and not through AfC) have greatly increased—which entirely bypass Special:NewPages (as well as page curation). So drafts like this are unlikely to be seen in the ordinary course by any newpages patroller.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

That's interesting; I did not know that. As you say, that's slightly concerning. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, that was very enlightening.CV9933 (talk) 18:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Creating table

Hi all... There is a page about Nepali Comedy duos in Wikipedia and it is not improved well. So I want to add table there. What to write in place of xxx here {{infobox xxx ? It is the page of two Nepali comedian who work as a group... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxboy (talk • contribs) 13:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Noxboy. I guess you are talking about MaHa. {{Infobox comedian}} would appear to be the right choice, but you'll need to include it twice, once for each of the duo. Follow that link to find out what the parameters are that you need. I must say, though, that making an article pretty with an infobox is far less important and urgent than making the article reliable by adding citations to independent reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 13:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Three questions together

What is sandbox for? In edit summary Users type "rv" and "ce", why? Can I give Wikilove to Users I never interacted with? Count Chimera 12:26, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Count Chimera:!

A sandbox is a test environment. You can create drafts of articles or content that is not ready to go public. You can practice complicated markup like tables to see how it works. you can leave notes for your self of policies or guidelines or tools that you want to be able to find quickly. see WP:UP

people use abbreviations because they are quicker. "rv" would be for "revert" or "revert vandalism", "ce" would be for "copy edit"

Yes, you can give Wikilove to users for work they have done even if you have not directly interacted before. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi User:Count Chimera - to answer your questions in a 1,2,3 format

1. A sand box is for testing and experimenting in - although many users also use them for starting an article or storing useful information. There are a few restrictions as to what can be included, such as no personal attacks, civility, and copyrights. For more information see Wikipedia:About the Sandbox
2. Rv = revert and ce = copy edit - these and many more can be found in Wikipedia:Glossary
3. No you do not have to have interacted with an editor, but Wikipedia:WikiLove should only be used for things that you really appreciate, not given to, say, everyone who edited a page. - Arjayay (talk) 12:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Rename, move or create new

Hi,

Recently the company I work for changed their name but many still know us by our old, we have an existing wiki page under the old name. What would be the correct way to create a page for the new name.

I attempted to create a new page based on the new name, and reused some of the content from the old page (company history etc.), but now CorenSearchbot is complaining about duplicate scope and refering to the old page.

It's hard to rewrite the company history enough to not trigger a "duplicate", would it be better to move the old article? How do i make sure it's possible to find the article based on both new and old name?

Hovlandur (talk) 07:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Request a move of the original article to the new title, specifying that a redirect needs to be left in place. As a company employee, your conflict of interest means that you should not attempt to move the article yourself. Yunshui ^雲_水 07:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Hovlandur. You are a new editor deserving of assistance not criticism, and you have openly and honestly declared that you work for the company, which is a great early move to make. I suggest that you declare your conflict of interest on your (currently blank) user page. "Move" is the correct procedure in this specific situation, which is not intuitive. Think of article titles as being discrete entities from article content. When a company (or a celebrity) changes names, and the new name is widely recognized, the article should be moved to the new corresponding article title. The old title will remain as a "redirect", which means that a search for the old article name will yield a link to the new article name. Please do not make substantive edits to the article (other than reverting obvious vandalism) itself, but instead propose edits on the article's talk page, citing reliable, independent sources. A low key approach is best, and please return here to the Teahouse if no one comments on the talk page within a few days. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both for excellent answers, Cullen and Yunshui, I will go back and make the appropriate actions, I didn't think of conflict of interest would be an issue, but it makes sense. Is there a easy way to delete the article I created?

Hovlandur (talk) 08:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done, I was about to do the move, Hovlandur merging any changed content, but Fuhghettaboutit took care of the matter already. See the page now at Ambita AS. By the way, the article is a bit short and with only a few references. If you can suggest on the talk page (Talk:Ambita AS) any additional independant reliable sources about the company they could be used to expand the article. Any sources in English would be particualrly helpful, as so many editors do not speak Norwegian. DES ^(talk) 11:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

creating my page - was deleted just after

I wanted to create a new page for a new word that I have trade mark to - the reason for deletion was copywrite breach of text on a website I own that defines the word - what is the best way of getting this revised - I do not want to revise the meaning of the word as that defeats the object. The history of the word can be changed with different wording although I have written the history. Copywrite how can I use my own content that own copywrite for. I have put this to the person that deleted my page and await a response.

(2.31.172.213 (talk) 07:29, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary; so it generally does not have articles for words. Rare exceptions would be word that have received substantial coverage in reliable sources. The facts that it is a new word and that you have trademarked it makes it extremely unlikely that such coverage would exist. Furthermore, is seems that you want to publicize the word, which would run afoul of Wikipedia’s policy against promotional articles. So it seems to me that it would be a waste of effort to try to license your original text under an acceptable license. Sorry, —teb728 t c 07:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Renaming or moving an article

I have an article under review with the short Title 'Peter Hore' I want it to come up under the title 'Peter Hore (historian, biographer and obituarist)' I've created a disambiguation link to that name from the main Peter Hore page. How can I rename my page to 'Peter Hore (historian, biographer and obituarist)'?

Imbwiki (talk) 05:47, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Imbwiki:- Well, you shouldn;t. see WP:DAB for the naming guidelines - we choose the broadest descriptor that distinguishes one Peter Horne from the others, not a laundry list. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 06:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I've read that. But if the page isn't named 'Peter Hore (historian, biographer and obituarist), how will the disambiguation link to it.

During drafting I lost the copy with that title and somehow submitted the earlier draft with the simple title "Peter Hore". There is already a unique page with that title which is another person.

So what I want to do is re-name my page to distinguish it from others, just like another Peter Hore page is named - Peter Hore (professor) to distinguish it from the first Peter Hore page.

Can't it be renamed once the review is finished?

Imbwiki (talk) 03:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Imbwiki: right now there are only two Peter Hores, so no disambiguation page is needed. I don't know whether the Peter Hore you wrote about is more notable and more likely to be a search target (which would justify just his name and not a descriptor after it), but for now, the title of the article is fine.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Vchimpanzee.

I'll just it continue through review process and see how it works.

Imbwiki (talk) 04:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

promotional content?

Dear Wiki,

I am trying to update a Wikipedia page of a university. I am checking with other schools to guide me and maintain neutrality while stating important information. I've looked at other university websites (like the New School), but I just saw that Wiki is saying that there is promotional content on the page -- I had made a link to an online source which sends out newsletters and also editorial content for many schools and institutions, but it seems it is more advert related, and thus I have removed it. Could you let me know what the "policy" regarding "promotional content" is? Another question I have though is, if one is trying to expand a wiki page for, in this case, a university, is one not allowed to use any content from the university itself? I just don't want to make another mistake and want to be clear and honest. Also, in the infobox section I am unable to add certain categories, such as “founder” (if you look at the edit, you can see that “founder” is listed but it won’t show up)

If you could help me at your earliest convenience I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you and all my best, Julia 178.165.130.44 (talk) 22:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia cares about what other people of relevant backgrounds say about the subject, not what the subject or its subsidiaries say about it. We represent all of the major views of the subject, in the proportion they are held by the mainstream academics in the field. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Creating a Wikipedia Page

Hi Guys, I have a quick question. I want to create a wikipedia page and am having trouble doing so. Can anyone guide me in the right direction? Thanks MaxDanielLevin (talk) 21:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, @MaxDanielLevin. What is the exact issue you are facing? To create a page, you can type the page you want to create in the search bar in the top-right of your screen; if you are certain that there is no page already existing which covers the topic, you can click the red link in the message You may create the page "[page name]", but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered. and write your article. However, please see Wikipedia:Your first article: all the articles on our site should meet notability guidelines and a few other criteria. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 21:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey MaxDanielLevin. For a treatment of the technical mechanics of page creation across all namespaces, see also Wikipedia:How to create a page. This will not, however, provide the guidance on what the page must and must not contain, which is covered by the link to your first article provided by Bilorv above. If the page you intend to create is an article, you might wish to do so through the guided articles for creation process. Just remember that providing citations to reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the topic being written about and which treat that topic in detail is fundamental. You should not attempt to write any article unless you've checked and those sources exist. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Uploading Picture

Hi there,I submitted an article for review last week. I was wondering if I can still upload a picture?

Thanks

Kayreif (talk) 18:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Kayreif:, yes you can upload a picture, providing it isn't copyrighted- I'll leave a message on your talkpage about the Wikipedia image policy. You can also continue to edit and improve the article. Assuming that you're talking about Michael Andrew Arntfield, the draft has been accepted, and so is now a proper article, congratulations. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I have two books as my reference but I don't know how to cite them as a reference. Please help. Thank you :-)

Louiejrsalvador (talk) 16:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)I have two books as my reference but I don't know how to cite them as a reference. Please help. Thank you :-) Louiejrsalvador (talk) 16:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I think you are looking for Template:Cite book. If you need help knowing how to implement the template within your article, let me know. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:19, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Louiejrsalvador (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)may I ask, if these books contain all relevant and important and all information about my article, can i use it as my reference for all of the information given? Thanks again☺ Louiejrsalvador (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I find the question a little too ambiguous to answer. I think the answer is "yes", but I wouldn't want in any way to discourage use of inline citations. Can you give a link that shows the specific circumstances? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Topics for a stand alone article require significant coverage by multiple sources. And 2 books by Lee Smith do not count as multiple. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, louisjrsalvador. I think you are thinking about referencing the wrong way round. I suggest thinking about it this way:

• Here is a statement I think should go in the article.
• Can I find a reliable published source for the statement?
• If no, then ignore that statement and pass on to the next one. The statement may not go into the article, period.
• Is the source I have found independent of the subject of the article?
• If so, type the statement into the article, citing the independent source with enough information that an interested reader can find where it supports the statement.
• If not (the source is connected with the subject of the article), is the statement an uncontroversial factual claim (such as a date or a location)?
• If so, type the statement into the article, citing the source as above.
• If not, forget it and pass on: that statement may not go into the article.
• If after all this, there is hardly any information which can go into the article, then the subject is not notable, and you should give up on the article.

See referencing for beginners for more detail on how to reference.

--ColinFine (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Louiejrsalvador (talk) 09:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)thank you very much. All of your tips is helping me right now how to cite valid multiple references. I will look for more references.... Thanks a lot.👍👍👍👏😊☺Louiejrsalvador (talk) 09:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Twinkle

How I will get access to Twinkle, Huggle, Stiki. Darthvader Skywalker 15:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@Darthvader Skywalker:, go to the relevant pages for each of these gadgets; WP:Twinkle, WP:Huggle and WP:Stiki and follow the instructions for the installation and use of each. Twinkle you can probably load immediately, the others need rollback permission which you do not have and other requirements about the number of edits you have made. However you do need to make yourself very aware that for all three - you are solely responsible for any edits you make with these quite powerful tools and that misbehaviour or misuse can result in you being blocked from editing even if your motives were good. As you only have two edits to your name and two of the tools are not immediately available to you I would strongly urge you not to use even Twinkle and spend time learning how to edit Wikipedia manually and what the various policies are that make for good editing. Nthep (talk) 18:32, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree. I had a couple hundred edits under my belt when I enabled Twinkle and the sheer amount of damage I could cause with my fat fingers almost scared me witless. I am used to it now, but I strongly recommend you edit manually for a while. After all, looking up templates every time builds moral fibre and forces you to read the documentation and really check whether you have the right template. Best of luck! Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

i want to create an article about a committee, name is China Energy Fund Committee

I want to create an article in Eng and Chi about a committee, name is China Energy Fund CommitteeSUNREST (talk) 14:08, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, SUNREST. To create an article in en.wikipedia, please read your first article and make sure that you can find enough published material where people with no connection with the Committee have written about the Committee. If you can find these sources, then I recommend you use the article wizard to create the draft in Draft space, so that you can work on getting it up to standard before submitting it for review. Remember that every single thing that goes in the article should be based directly on a published source.

For the zh article, we cannot help you here, as each Wikipedia has its own rules. zh:维基百科:互助客栈/求助 might be of some help. --ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I try it before, the wizard said the name contains <China>, need to contact administratorSUNREST (talk) 15:38, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I have created the draft for you, where you can write the article, subject to the usual notability, neutral point-of-view, and other Wikipedia policies. You can find it at: Draft:China Energy Fund Committee. When you are finished, hit "submit" on the Articles for Creation template I included. I hope that is helpful, if you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:55, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

thx a lot ^^ SUNREST (talk) 15:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Also answered below: #I want to create an article about China Energy Fund Committee.--ukexpat (talk) 17:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Visual Editor

I don't know where to inform but today, I pressed Alt+Shift+V to launch visual editor. But it did not launch. What to do?
117.207.31.111 (talk) 11:25, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what happened to the keyboard shortcut but you can click the normal Edit link and then manually change action=edit to veaction=edit in the url. You can also create an account and enable VisualEditor at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. Then articles will have edit tabs for both VisualEditor and the source editor. A lot of customization options is one the benefits of having an account. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Sir, I used my account, and then tried the shortcut, it failed. The blue bar of loading appeared, and then within milliseconds, it was vanishing. And, it was not on WP, but on a sister project. What should I do and where is the correct place to inform about this?
117.212.136.169 (talk) 02:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello. If it was on a sister project, you should probably let them know there. If you let us know which sister project it was, there may be someone here who can find the best place for you to ask. Best of luck! Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Some problems are reported at the bottom of Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Please include a link to a specific page with the problem if you make a post. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

It was Wikinews.
117.212.136.169 (talk) 02:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

About Wikipedia:WikiProject Maharashtra

There are have been addition of several articles requiring citations, how can this be updated on the task section? Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 10:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey Dongar Kathorekar. At the top, right hand side of the tasks section display are these links: edit · history · watch · refresh. Clicking on the edit link there will open up the transcluded page Wikipedia:WikiProject Maharashtra/to do and allow you to do the update. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:32, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you to Fuhghettaboutit buddy Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

how to solve "disambiguation needed"

In my Wiki on "Wilhelm Karl Ritter von Haidinger" the remark "disambiguation needed" was inserted (twice) behind the name of Thomas Allan. The following Wiki gives the correct link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Allan . My reference indeed concerned Thomas Allan FRS FRSE FSA FLS (1777-1833), a scottish mineralogist. Alas, because I am a beginner, I do not know how to introduce the required link to solve the problem of disambiguation. Is there someone out there to help me? Thank you so much! JeffDellbart (talk) 09:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

This was actually fixed in this edit. The problem was that Thomas Allen (note the spelling of the surname) leads to a disambiguation page rather than an actual article. However, Thomas Allan (correct spelling) leads to the correct article, and so the disambiguation is no longer an issue. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)JeffDellbart, there was just one letter that needed changing – you had written "Thomas Allen", which I have now changed to "Thomas Allan" to link to the page you wanted. Good article, btw! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks to Yunshui and Justlettersandnumbers for their help! JeffDellbart (talk) 11:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC) 11:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Akpujiogu page

Hello, Akpujiogu page was deleted minutes after I created it yesterday, even though I protested. The basis is lack of sufficient content to justify the subject matter. While my protest got no response, I am fully aware that scantier pages have existed on Wikipedia for years, most without even references. This page is necessary as it is a town's history. I need it recreated Please what do I do? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MystiqueOBNOY (talk • contribs) 06:04, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, MystiqueOBNOY. If you want to create an article and do not already have the sources identified to establish its notability, it's much better to use the article wizard, which will help you create it in Draft space. As long as it doesn't contain some serious problem such as copyright violation or an attack on somebody, a draft in Draft space will be left alone for you to develop it at leisure. Note that the fact that other stuff exists is never taken as a strong argument: improve those other articles rather than taking them as justification for creating another bad one. And no page on Wikipedia is "necessary": every single thing in a Wikipedia article should already have been published somewhere. --ColinFine (talk) 08:20, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Can i make my own bio on Wikipedia?

I just wanted to know if it is possible to write your own bio so if anyone searches your name in google a short bio appears. i am not famous at all. Please answer as soon as possible. Thank you!24.205.175.228 (talk) 23:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Don't. All articles require multiple independent reliable sources* specifically about the subject, and should not be written by the subject. *Reliable sources include professionally published mainstream books (especially academic ones), newspapers, and magazines, but not stuff like blogs, personal websites, Youtube videos, Facebook profiles, or anything else that anyone can throw on the net. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Facebook is good place for your personal bio or Linkedin if it is more profession/business/career oriented. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:19, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Bal des débutantes complaints

I stumbled on the article about Bal des débutantes in Paris and I saw that there are quite a few unanswered complaints on its talk page. This article has been written in the style of a press release and a lot of claims in this article are not supported by any sources. It would be good if an editor could look at this particular article. Thanks--Renoiretmoi (talk) 21:51, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Renoiretmoi, and welcome to thr Teahouse. The article curretly cites many sources, most of which appear on superficial examination to be reliable. The complaints on the talk page are from one or two IP editors with one logged-in editor briefly staing agreement. They cite no sources at all. If you think the article is biased, or gives undue weight to particular views, say so on the article talk page with sources to indicate that other points of view have been reliably published. If there are uncited statements thst you challange, tag them with Template:Trl or challange them on the article talk page, or both. If you can reword to be more neutral, do so. DES ^(talk) 12:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you have a go yourself?!. We all have to start somewhere and that would be as good a place as any. If you make mistakes they can be undone.--ukexpat (talk) 12:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Adding pages in categories

I'm wanting to add a few articles into Category:Association football utility players. How do I do that? Thunder4231Rush (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse! In the source editor, add [[Category:Association football utility players]] at the bottom. Another option is wp:HotCat if you will be doing more category work. hope that helps! Happy Squirrel (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. So, what exactly is the source editor? I'm really new to this. Thunder4231Rush (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Thunder4231Rush. Happy Squirrel means what you get if you pick "Edit" at the top of the page when you are looking at most articles. Add the text Happy Squirrel gave you - including the double square brackets - at the bottom. Please note that putting a player in that category is implicitly making a claim about what kind of player they are: you should not do it unless the article explicitly says that the player is a utility player; and in turn the article should not make that claim unless it cites a reliable published source which says so. Wikipedia articles should not contain anybody's opinion - yours, mine, or anybody else's, except citing a reliable published source which advances that opinion. --ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much Colin Fine! So if I find a source that says that, say, Chris Tierney can play anywhere in the defense and in the midfield, and I put that source on Chris Tierney's article, would I then be able to add Chris Tierney into the category? Thunder4231Rush (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Its whatever you feel is need in the categories man mainly bots your talking to on hereArabAmazigh12 (talk) 22:34, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't know much soccer, but I do know I, and most of the other volunteers on here are human beings, even though my user page does claim I am a squirrel :) Thanks! Happy Squirrel (talk) 22:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Thunder4231Rush. It's a judgment call. I would have thought that you needed a source describing him as a "utility player", but this is partly influenced by the fact that I had never heard the phrase before this evening, and had to look it up to find out what it meant. I guess that if the phrase is widely used and understood in football, then maybe it is enough that he is described as playing in these different positions. I have no idea what ArabAmazigh12 is trying to say, by the way. --ColinFine (talk) 23:31, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I have been watching footie for almost 55 years and I have never heard that expression. Sounds rather subjective to me...--ukexpat (talk) 12:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft: Joseph W. Papin

Matthew Vanitas has been helping me make corrections to my article. I believe that I have added the important information that validates its. Since he is on vacation until August will someone else take a look to see if it is good to go? Thanks so much, JanineJaninepapin (talk) 21:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Janinepapin. I'm sorry, but in my view the answer is no. You have 27 citations - but the majority of them are to Papin's own work. You could have a hundred or a thousand of these, and they still wouldn't contribute to establishing notability. The Chicago Tribune is the right sort of thing, as it is a piece of writing by an unconnected third party, which is about Papin: but I don't think it says enough about him to establish notability on its own. I thought the Syracuse catalogue might do it; but it does not appear to contain any writing about him except by himself. As MatthewVanitas has been telling you, you need to find places where people unconnected with Papin wrote pieces about him and got them published. Without those, he does not meet the criteria for notability.

Another way to look at this is by considering the content. You write "Joseph Papin specialized in reportorial art – on-the-scene drawing – the artist as reporter." Without an independent source for this statement, it must count as original research, which is not accepted in Wikipedia. Similarly, later, 'Joe Papin started as artist working his way through Ohio State University, made training films for the Army Signal Corps, and represented himself as a freelance artist for thirteen years, “thereby receiving another sort of education and just frequently enough some nice commissions, books to illustrate[15], and challenges to grow on.”' Aside from the fact that this contains an unattributed and unsourced quotation, the whole sentence is in fact unsourced (pointing at an example of a book he illustrated is not providing a sources for the information). So without substantial independent writing about him, there is almost nothing which can legitimately go in the article: which is effectively a restatement of the requirement of notability.--ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Collin, Thanks for the insight. I will certainly change the bio. I did put in direct quotes from Newspaper articles about him in that first paragraph and cited them. They are valid aren't they? ( "Joseph Papin is a reporter who has never touched a word processor. His pen interprets a story with images rather than words."[4] "Joe Papin is a reporter. He works for one of the largest newspapers in United States—the Daily News—and has covered some of the most historic moments in recent American history. His professional title is artist. The tools of his journalistic trade are not the notepad and typewriter, rather an assortment of pens and a sketchpad...Papin has been drawing scenes of life—the grand and the commonplace—for the Daily News, not through the humor of the comics nor the commentary of the editorial page, but from a straightforward, objective viewpoint."[5] Those statements are from Newspaper articles about him. I will only put in quotes from articles and interviews that were about him if that is the case. What about the News-Mafia connection? The news story was picked up the United Press International. But I also cited several newspapers articles that were about the commotion his work caused at the mob trials. Quoting from the paper and citing the writer is the correct way to establish whether or not he is "notable", am I right? There are several T.V. and Radio Interviews that I am currently gathering the information from. I will continue to work on this. Thank you for your patience and help. Janinepapin (talk) 23:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Janinepapin. I noticed that your username is similar to the name of your draft (Draft:Joseph W. Papin). Is this purely coincidental or are you connected to Joesph Papin in some way? If you are connected to Papin, then you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, particularly the section titled "Writing about yourself and your work". COI editing is something Wikipedia highly discourages; It's not expressly prohibited, but it is something that is tricky, even for experienced editors, to pull-off successfully. This is because it can be hard to write about something in a neutral manner when you're closely connected to it. If the name similarities are purely coincidental, then you might want to consider changing your username to something else to avoid any misunderstandings or confusion if you intend to continue working on the draft after if it becomes an article because other editors might mistakenly assume that you are connected to Papin in some way due to your similar names. As long as this is only a draft, you'll probably find most editors are willing give you a little leeway regarding possible COI and let you continue to work on the draft. If, however, the draft eventually gets upgraded to article-status, you might find editing the article a bit more difficult and other editors more scrutinizing of any edits you try to make. I'm not trying to scare you off editing, but since you're fairly new to Wikipedia and this draft is pretty much the only article you've been working on, I'm not sure how familiar you are with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. - Marchjuly (talk) 07:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Marchjuly for your information. I appreciate your help. Jrptwins (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

No problem Jrptwins. I see that your username has been changed. That's fine, but please be aware that simply changing your username does not automatically mean that you no longer have a conflict of interest. As I said above, if the the similarity between your old username and Joseph W. Papin was purely coincidental, everything should be fine. However, if you are connected to Papin in anyway, e.g., a relative, a representative of his estate, a close friend, etc., then you may have a potential conflict of interest. If the latter is the case, then take a look at Wikipedia: Plain and simple conflict of interest guide to find out what kind of edits are generally considered acceptable for COI editors. - Marchjuly (talk) 00:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I have a question for any experienced editor from Teahouse. Is it necessary (or good) to quote directly from a reference source or is it enough just to put the source. If it is not a live link, it would be the only way to see the content, but perhaps that is not necessary? I think in an effort to cite old newspapers articles I might have gone overboard. Thanks for your advice.Jrptwins (talk) 19:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Redundant navbox

Perhaps long time ago, {{Dosage forms}} and {{Routes of administration}} are two distinct but related navboxes, such that many medical articles have both of them. However the latter is now a redirect to the former one, which caused about 90 acticles contain a duplicate navbox. I can't manually remove the code by myself. Can anyone help?--Quest for Truth (talk) 04:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Quest for Truth, I'm pitching in. I've done about 20 and can do more. Thanks for finding this. A question - I'm new to the concept of categories, but I noticed that some (but not all) these articles are placed in both a "Dosage forms" and "Routes of Administration" category. Separate issue, right? Or is it an issue at all? Will it need to be addressed or can the categories be left as is? Thanks. Kekki1978 (talk) 06:03, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Kekki1978 for helping. Categorization is another issue. Since I'm an outsider of the medical profession, I can't rule out the possibility of an article fitting the two categories. So it's better to handle the categories on a case-by-case basis. It might be better to ask more wikipedians to look at this issue. --Quest for Truth (talk) 14:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Quest for Truth. The {{Routes of administration}} template has been removed from the 90 or so articles that your query listed. A bit of history behind the two templates was discussed on the talk page of yet a third template ({{Routes of administration by organ system}}, which also now redirects to {{Dosage forms}}), so I'm making a note there about the the redirects, duplications, and removal of the duplicates. Thanks for finding these duplications. Kekki1978 (talk) 05:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Just to confirm, the redirect {{Routes of administration by organ system}} is now orphaned, presumably thanks to the efforts of the above editors. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC).

Talk Page Cleanup

I have a lot of old comments/discussions on my talk page, and frankly, it's getting a little cluttered. I quickly found out that deleting the messages by holding down the backspace button was very tedious work. Is there some other way I can go about doing this? BluJay (talk) 02:25, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi BluJay! I do not know the exact answer to your question. However, most editors use an archiving bot to keep their talk pages clean and up to date. This way you get rid of old posts and still have easy access to them if there is something you need to go back to and check. This is the recommended way of keeping your talk page tidy. Read about archiving at Help:Archiving a talk page. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 17:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello, BluJay. This isn't just a technique to use on Wikipedia, but if you want to delete the messages on your talk page quickly, pressing Ctrl+A will highlight the entire contents of the page, so you can delete the lot with one backspace. However, this is not necessarily advisable: while messages can still be retrieved via the talk page, it is recommended that conversations are archived rather than simply deleted. (Automated messages from bots are a possible exception.) — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 18:14, 30 June 2015 (UTC)