Wikipedia:Teahouse

GoingBatty, 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

Article not being accepted

HI

I have submitted an article about a Journal. It has got rejected twice. Please help we on how can i improve it and sound the article like an advertisement about the Journal. I just want to provide information about the journal in the article.

REgards ApurvaApurva1410 (talk) 10:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Image upload

Hello,

My account has not been confirmed yet (I haven't made 10 edits) but I need to replace the picture displayed in the following page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonelli_Erede_Pappalardo. The one appearing on the page is out-of-date, since the firm has changed its brand name.

What should I do?

Thank you in advance for your help. SB88 (talk) 09:48, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Quick questions

On I'm with Cupid, at the very bottom of the page, it says "</noinclude>". How can I remove this? It isn't doing anything. Another thing: if I insert "#top" at the end of a url while on a page (which makes the URL look like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#top) I go to the top of the page. Is there something I can insert instead of "#top" to make it go to the bottom of the page? —DangerousJXD (talk) 06:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

@DangerousJXD: About that "</noinclude>" text: It was apparently due to the inclusion of two "</noinclude>" tags in Template:Breakfast at Tiffany's. I've removed one of them; all articles that have this template transcluded (including I'm with Cupid) should display correctly now. I don't know the answer to your second question, though; sorry about that. CabbagePotato (talk) 07:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Replacing "top" with "footer" does what I want. —DangerousJXD (talk) 08:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Ref-web

Hi what does this mean - Template:Ref-web & Template:Ref-notícia ? I found it in the references of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%ADctor_Santos_(author) Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 06:38, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Vivek.bekhabar its because it's a translation from another language wiki (https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%ADctor_Santos the Catalan version). The templates are often different on different languages so the reference template still need conversion. i.e. Template:Ref-web would I guess be changed to a Template:Cite web. It's a new article today, so I'm sure they be fixed soon enough - Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi KylieTastic, Ok, got it. I will put that page on my watchlist, if it doesn't change. Then would bring it up. Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 09:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Administrator

Is it possible,that I can complain against an administrator? Where can i do it?Silver Samurai 06:17, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Silver Samurai, yes it is, see Wikipedia:Administrators#Grievances by users ("administrator abuse") for your options. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

KylieTasticThe link you gave looks like it is for very serious issues. My issue is minimal and i want some neutral administrator's view about a decision made by an administrator which i feel is not right. --Silver Samurai 10:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

How can I up my WikiProject article quality grade?

I continue to tweak the article I am working on. How does an article's grade improve? Do you need to request a review? Jrptwins (talk) 04:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jrptwins. Only Good articles and Featured articles require a formal review by uninvolved editors. If you are sure that an article has been improved sufficiently, feel free to upgrade it yourself. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:05, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jrptwins. If you are referring to Joseph W. Papin, then I think it might be best for you to leave the assessing of the article up to other editors since you are fairly new to Wikipedia, are the creator of the article, and have pretty much only been editing that particular article. The article is listed as being within the scope of WP:WikiProject Biography and WP:WikiProject Visual arts. Some Wikipedia projects list the criteria that they use to assess and prioritize articles on pages such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment, so it might be a good idea for you to ask at WT:WikiProject Visual arts or WT:BIOG/A to see if there is anyone there who can help assess the article. - Marchjuly (talk) 06:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Something strange

There is a huge gap in this article: Víctor Santos (author).--Hienafant (talk) 23:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

the gap was caused by something in the unnecessary coding at the top of the table. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I've never contributed, but I'd like to rewrite an article about a company

There is a company called Catchword Branding and the information on their page is out of date and in need of being updated. Some of the key people listed in the article no longer work there and a lot of their work that is highlighted on the page is from many years ago. I was thinking of rewriting this article so that it's more current and detailed. I know that as a new user, I should only make small edits, but what if all of my edits are backed by citations and improve the quality of the article?

Jrendleman (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

We encourage everyone — even new users — to be bold when making changes. If you are certain that your changes are in the best interests of Wikipedia, please go ahead and make them. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 21:27, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

List of bean-to-bar chocolate manufacturers

Hi! I have been trying to add a bean to bar chocolate maker.... and i am getting, 'please write the article first' several people, and being told i am soapboxing for wanting to add a bean to bar maker to a list.

could somebody please tell me where i can post a link to a valid article?

ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_bean-to-bar_chocolate_manufacturers&action=history

thank you! chonkat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chonkat (talk • contribs) 19:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse! For many of these list articles, there is an (often unwritten) rule that the entries in the list should already have an article about them. This is to make sure that only the most notable things get listed. Otherwise, these list articles would quickly become completely overrun with all sorts of non-notable things. To take an extreme case, imagine what List of people from New York would look like! Since the notability requirements for subjects of articles already exist, it makes sense not to reinvent the wheel and use the existence of an article as the requirement.

The next obvious question then becomes, what is notability and how much of it do you need for an article subject? On Wikipedia, notability means that people independent of the subject have written about it in depth in reliable sources. A good rule of thumb is that newspaper articles and books actually about the subject (not a passing mention) are good sources, and you need at least 3-4 of them. However, just reprints of press releases don't count. Hope that makes sense. Happy Squirrel (talk) 00:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Do I have enough citations in the Mike Snowden entry?

I have added a number of links to my entry on Mike Snowden to show that he is a real person and that the information in his bio is authentic. Do I need to do anything else to complete this bio?Nietzsche40 (talk) 19:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Probably, so I have removed the BLP prod template. However, please take a look at referencing for beginners for guidance on formatting references properly as footnotes.--ukexpat (talk) 19:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Too many examples as a form of promotional content

At Shin-ik Hahm#Biography, a large number of examples is listed. Could this be seen as a form of promotional content? Rubbish computer 17:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Rubbish computer. In my opinion, the biggest problem with that section is that most of the claims are unreferenced. Anything that can't be referenced should be removed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Thank you. Rubbish computer 21:45, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

How to make edit protected request?

I'm not new user but I never tried to edit any full protected article, but I just want to know that how to make request for edit on full protected page? Thank you. --106.221.152.105 (talk) 16:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi 106.221.152.105 It's Wikipedia:Edit_requests#Making_requests your looking for. Just add the template {{edit fully-protected}} to a new section with you request in it, on the articles talk page. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:41, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@KylieTastic:, I forgot to log in, thanks for your reply. (Thanks for welcome message too). Cheers. --106.221.152.105 (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Fully protected pages do not have an edit tab, at the top, only a "View source" tab - if you click that, the next page explains about protected pages and has a second button "Submit an edit request" - this takes you to a partly filled out request form.
Complete the form, preferably requesting a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Most importantly, you must cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information will be added to, or changed in, the article. - Arjayay (talk) 16:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Article refused - Alfried Dettke

Hi my article has been refused, I don't understand why. As I state in the article the man was a fighter pilot in WW2 and an "ace" - thus a notable person.

It is my first attempt at writing anything for Wiki and I can submit articles on these men to fill in the blanks (names in red - ie: no article exists) on the existing Wikipedia listing.

I am not very IT literate but have decades of researching experience and have reliable info. thanks for adviceResearcher1944 (talk) 15:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Researcher1944:. Within Wikipedia, "notable" has a special meaning. And just because someone thought that a subject might/could/should meet the notability guidelines and so created the red link to it, that doesn't mean that the subject actually does. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:39, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I suggest that as Wikipedia has countless articles on fighter aces who achieved less than 20% of Dettke's wartime success, that he should be includedResearcher1944 (talk) 17:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

you can "suggest" all you want, but when you make suggestions that are not based on the policies and guidelines, you generally won't get very far. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Researcher1944. Our notability guidelines have been around for years and years, and I'm afraid we don't just suddenly decide to make articles about everyone who was an ace. We base everything on reliable sources. If there are any more references to reliable sources that you can find which talk about Alfried Dettke in substantial detail, then add them to Draft:Alfried Dettke, use them to write your article and resubmit it. If there simply aren't any more references, I am afraid Wikipedia can't have an article on him. But if Dettke really did have as much wartime success as you think he did, then I'm sure there will be plenty of sources which talk about him. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Hi Researcher1944 see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists for why the argument will not help get an article accepted than your accepted. In my experience it's more likely to get other articles proposed for deletion. Also as you give no examples it's difficult to comment, however there could be so many other reasons they are notable, or they could have just been written about more for no particular reason. Success is one small measure, and in many topics there are people/companies/etc much more 'successful' than others, but not notable in a general sense. I clicked on a few random people linked from List of World War II aces from Germany and each one had much more content than yours. This doesn't mean Alfried Dettke is not notable, just that comparing to others is not good argument on Wikipeida. KylieTastic (talk) 17:55, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I saw this discussion and went over to your draft. I give it a little tweak just to give you a leg up. Mostly just some copy editing, there are now sections to give some order to the article. Not really my area of expertise, just wanted to help out. I'll keep it in my watchlist and help if possible. Cheers MAbbey (talk) 20:16, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Researcher1944. I have a different view of the matter than several of the other editors commenting here. First of all, I believe that there is a very strong presumption of notability regarding a World War II fighter pilot who shot down over 40 enemy planes. The "other stuff exists" argument pertains to pointing out unreferenced or very poorly referenced articles where coverage in reliable sources is mostly lacking. Anyone can type "Category:German World War II flying aces" into the search box to see that we now have about 480 biographies of such men in this encyclopedia. In cases like this, "other stuff exists" is a valid argument to include the article, and the draft article already cites a number of sources, though incompletely. Of course, some of these articles are better developed than others, but the group of articles as a whole shows that the broad topic area has received extensive coverage in reliable sources. I recommend that you model your article on the better of those existing articles. Read Your first article and especially, Referencing for beginners. There is no requirement that sources be available online, or that they be in English. But it is important that offline sources be referenced properly and fully, with authors, titles, publishers, publication date, page numbers, ISBN numbers and so on, all cited properly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:45, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Want to add my photo on my article. How can I do that ?

Hi all, I want to show my photo when people search me. Please guide me for that.

Thanks.

Worship Khanna (talk) 14:30, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Worship Khanna: Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the details of how to donate an image. Note that Wikipedia only accepts donations of copyright materials under a licensing that allow free use by anyone, not just Wikipedia. Also note that it is the consensus of the editors who determine which images, if any, will be used in the article, and so even if you donate an image, that doesn't mean that the image donated will be the one selected for use in the article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:43, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Worship Khanna. You seem to have managed to upload a photo and put it on the page Worship Khanna. However, it will shortly be deleted as a copyright violation. In order for a picture to be used in Wikipedia, the copyright owner of the picture (who is probably not you, unless you have a contract with the photographer or the agency which specifically says you hold the copyright) must agree to release the photo under a suitable Creative commons licence (which will allow anybody to use it for any purpose). See Donating copyright materials for how to do this. The article will also soon be deleted, unless somebody adds some citations to reliably published sources where people unconnected with you have written at length about you.

Your editing of that article, and your question, suggest to me that you are confusing Wikipedia with a social media site. It is not one: it is an encyclopaedia, and has a different purpose. If it is established that you are notable in the special Wikipedia sense (i.e. that people unconnected with you have pubished extensive writing about you), then there can be an article about you. It will not be your article, you will have no control over the contents, and it should be based almost entirely on what those unconnected people have written about you, and written in neutral language. If you wish to contribute a photo of yourself, and can persuade the copyright holder to donate the photo, that will be welcome. --ColinFine (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Is it allowed?

I got a notice on my article about link rot and I think I corrected the problem. Am I allowed to remove the warning if I have fixed the problem? Thank you for your time. Jrptwins (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Jrptwins: and welcome to the Teahouse. Whenever you think a tag/warning is no longer appropriate, you are allowed to remove it- it's definitely been fixed now. With the linkrot warning, if you're using Refill like you did, you can change the options on that page to automatically remove the tag. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:42, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your fast response. You are appreciated!Jrptwins (talk) 13:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Article Deleted

My article has been deleted twice yet it has sources and devoid of advertisement. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Onlyhitss Kindly assist Umeshakshayan15 (talk) 10:41, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Umshakshayan15, that article had been deleted 3 times, not twice, and the title has been protected so it cannot be created again. Your draft had been rejected for the same reason the prior versions were deleted. You have not shown that the subject is notable. Your references are a copyright listing for the name, and a site that publishes press releases. Wikipedia only publishes articles on subjects that have been covered in detail in multiple independent, reliable sources. You have barely shown that this entity exists, much less shown that multiple reliable sources, independent of the subject and each other, have made note of it in detail. Until you can do that, you do not have an article on your subject. John from Idegon (talk) 11:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

hCards ?

Hi, What does hCards mean ? I have read it in few of the articles in hidden cateogry section. Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 10:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Vivek.bekhabar. Welcome to Teahouse. It is apparently some type of microformatting. Frankly it is way too technical for me to wrap my brain around, but perhaps hCard will make more sense to you than it does to me. John from Idegon (talk) 11:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @John from Idegon: Thanks! Yes I too think its a bit technical. Lets hope any other editor clarifies. Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 13:55, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia:WikiProject Microformats/hcard help?--ukexpat (talk) 15:07, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

How to get my artcile confirmed?

Need your advice, my article has been rejected despite the fact it includes independent sources (inman.com, bizjournals.com) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:TenantCloud

The reason is:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

What would you suggest?

Thanks in advance

Volodymyr Korol (talk) 09:22, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Volodymyr Korol, and welcome ro the Teahouse. Text such as "that’s why they decided to find a better and cheaper way to set themselves apart as renters and ease the landlording process at the same time. This was the start of TenantCloud, a free service that helps landlords, tenants, property managers and service professionals to organize their rental data and manage properties more efficiently. And "Previously in 2008 Joe joined Governor Perry’s office and managed $487 Million in state authority with a focus on early stage and emerging companies." read like a marketing brochure. Wikipedia has encyclopeia articles, not company profiles. This is why people are strongly advised not to write about their own work, it is very hard for most people to write neutrally about projects they are involved with. Also, Wikipedia articles do not normally describe people by their first or personal names. So not "Vitaliy and Leonid previously started the company..." but Ivanyshyn and Korkuchanskii previously started the company....

As to your sources, the first is a paper written by Joseph Edgar, one of the principals of the company. Tha is not an independant source, and so does not conribute to notability. The secolnd is a Press Release also writen by Joseph Edgar. The third is almost an interview and is largely based on statements by Edgar. The fourth is behind a paywall, so i can't judge it.

In short, this draft needs to be rewriten with a ruthlessly neutral tone, with all value judgements and chatty comments removed, unless they are in direct quotes sourced to people independant of the company, published in reliable sources. Additional independent sourcs need to be cited. If that is done, the draft might be approved. DES ^(talk) 12:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Got it, thank you so much for your help!

Volodymyr Korol (talk) 12:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Rejection reason ?

HI,

My Article was first declined due to wording used- they said it was more like an advertisement, i fixed this and even went to get it checked over on the chat site, they advised that it was much better.

I resubmitted and now ! Im told that something else was wrong, surely this would have been mentioned at the start, I do not agree with the outcome this time as the links and references are good ! they are all verified

can someone please help me, I have noticed a few people have left comments on this persons talk page for the same reason

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

Azura81 (talk) 07:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Azura81: While the first rejection did say "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view," that very same rejection goes on to state " and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. " -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 07:44, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @TheRedPenOfDoom:

HI, again im confussed by this, It has now been wrote in a neutral point of view, The links I have provided are articles that were created by newspapers/magazines, links that confirm airplay on bbc radio. I have followed the same route of other articles that have been created, the articles they used and ref were pretty much the same and it was accepted. I really dont know how to resolve this issue, When I got it checked on the UK chat site on wiki they confirmed that the links were good and the references, .. sorry Azura81 (talk) 08:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Azura81: Unfortunately, the article still has content like "Nasty P has an notable discography of albums and mixtapes from the acclaimed " so even the claims of "wrote in a neutral point of view" are not correct. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, Azura81; most of those references (all the BBC ones, certainly) show only that Nasty P has done programmes. They don't show that people have been writing about him, and until people (not him or his friends or agents, but people unconnected with him) have been writing about him, Wikipedia isn't interested. It's possible that the Rolling Stone reference is such an item, if it is an in-depth review but not if it is just a sentence or two and that rating: it requires registration, so I haven't looked at it. --ColinFine (talk) 16:36, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Thanks, Ive spoke with the person who first declined it and they have advised that I can use actual news paper articles that have been wrote about Nasty p, I wasnt aware I could do this and have lots of these so it should hopefully resolve the issue now. I will also correct the notable discography part, this was information taken from an article, I assumed that it would have been ok to use, I guess not., Thanks for all your help, I really appreciate it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azura81 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

why rejected?

Hello,

I have written an entry for the poet Mekeel McBride which was rejected. The reviewer, MatthewVanitas, referred me to you.

In the meantime I have added to my draft several references--they now total 8 (shows 10, but nos. 9 and 10 are redundant and I don't know how to delete them--can you help me there?). I don't think there is a question of Mekeel Mcbride being sufficiently notable. She has many publications.

My question: is there a way you can look into my sandbox and advise me as to what is lacking before I resubmit it?

Thanks,

Harmonium22 Harmonium22 (talk) 05:08, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Harmonium22, and welcome to the Teahouse. The main issue with Draft:Mekeel Mcbride, as I see it, is notability. You have several references to show that Mcbride had published poetry in several notable venues. But you don't show any evidence that anyone has writen about Mcbride, except for mentionign one review, and you don';t say anything about what that reviewer's opnions were. According to our General Notability Guideline (GNG) we need to see multiple, independent reliable sources that discuss the subject in some detail, or else at least one of the criteria at our guideline for notability of authors must apply, or better yet, both the GNG and the author guideline applies. That is what was meant by "See notability (writers)".

I have done some formatting cleanup, but you will need to supply additional citations. By the way, when citing offline (or PDF) sources, please supply dates and page numbers, and the same for web sources where these have page numbers. DES ^(talk) 13:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Is it deletion safe yet?

Hi, an article I published https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_jewelry_forum was marked for deletion. Originally there were notes that it did not have enough references, or links to other Wiki pages. I have added both. References are from a variety of sources including academic (.edu) webpages. Now those particular notes are gone from the page, but it is still marked for deletion with no indication as to why..... Are we good? Clarefinin (talk) 04:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Clarefinin - A formal deletion discussion (that normally runs for seven days) has been opened at WP:Articles for deletion/Art jewelry forum, please participate in the debate at that page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

concern regarding copyrighted material

Good evening - my name is John. I just submitted an article for review and received a message mentioning that it contained copyrighted information. This is my first submission.

The reviewer was seemingly mistaken since the document that the reviewer is concerned about was a non-copyrighted, public/municipal/open source document. A quote from the Mayor of Shreveport was the passage.

The draft is Draft:C.O. Simpkins, Sr.

Is there either an appeal process or an alternate way to include content that would be helpful to the article?

Thanks for any assistance you might be able to lend me. 2602:304:8922:C479:E073:505F:7D40:C98F (talk) 04:07, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Your assumption that the document is "non-copyrighted" is wrong. The default assumption is that any document you find anywhere is copyright, unless you can show that it is not. If it is sufficiently old, it will be out of copyright; and I believe that the US Federal Government declares that many documents produced by its employees in the course of their duties are in the public domain. But simply because a document has been written by a polity - even in the US - does not automatically mean that it is in the public domain. You would need to show that the City of Shreveport have somewhere declared that their council proceedings are in the public domain. (They might have done so; but it is up to you to demonstrate this - there is no automatic assumption).

Having said this, it is acceptable to quote from a copyright source, as long as the amount quoted is not too long, and it is explicit that it is a quotation, and cited to the source. So, I think the problem here is that you quoted an unreasonable amount from the source. A few sentences quoted might be acceptable. (I also think that quoting that encomium at length is completely out of place in an encyclopaedia article, for reasons of neutrality. But that is a different kind of criticism, and is open to argument.)

I know this is not what you are asking about; but there are other serious problems with the draft. The most obvious one is that most of it is unreferenced. You have a number of references, which is good (though note that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and may not be used as a reference); but huge swathes of what you have written have no references. If you start from the assumption that every single claim in an article should be individually cited to a reliable published source - and most of them to a source independent of the subject - then you won't go far wrong.

Finally, the tone is far from the neutral tone required of a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia's voice should never, ever, say of anybody that he "has excelled in a number of pursuits". If a reliable independent source has said this, then the Wikipedia article could say so, making it clear that this is the opinion of the cited source. Wikipedia does not have opinions, evaluations, or conclusions, and its articles should never suggest that it has. --ColinFine (talk) 16:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

How to remove "This article is an orphan"?

My first article had "This article is an orphan." I edited the source of 5 other articles to reference my article, but the "orphan" tag is still there in my article.

Does the "orphan" tag get removed after some period of time? Or do I have to submit something to say "I have now referenced my article in other articles."?

Dcj3616 (talk) 02:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Dcj3616. I have removed the tag. When you have fixed an issue in one of those tags on any article, you may remove it yourself. You don't need someone to approve it or anything. —DangerousJXD (talk) 02:45, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Redirect-

Rose Cohen redirects to Howard Unruh because that was one of the people he killed. But I created an article about a different person named Rose Gollup Cohen. So if you could help me with that somehow so people who search for Rose Cohen get the option of Howard Unruh or Rose Gollup Cohen that would be great.GrandmotherClause (talk) 02:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I have changed the redirect to point to the author and added a hatnote on the author page to send people to the other target in case that is who they are looking for.

The other option would be to turn Rose Cohen into a disambiguation page where the two potential target landing pages could be listed if there are more than these two or if someone feels that a significant number of people would be searching for the victim rather than the author. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 08:00, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I like what you've done - no need for the other option I think. Thank you for your help!GrandmotherClause (talk) 18:52, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Talk Pages: controversial topics?

Hi, I was trying to add info to a page under sanction and my edits were (not surprisingly) reverted. Someone told me they will have a better chance if I run them through the Talk page, but mostly what I see on there is "I think we should put this in---," with reply of "no, I don't think we should" type of pattern and then the issue seems to just get dropped... I looked at the Using Talk Pages section but did not find what I am looking for. Here are my questions:

I understand I need to post the intended edit plus citation. Then, other editors(...or are they admin...?)comment on it. How many of them need to agree with the edit before it can post? If they disagree, does that mean I can NOT post? If they agree, and I post, does this mean no one can change it later?

I am just wondering how to proceed in my goal of adding scholarly balance to this article without wasting a bunch of time. Thank you for your help. Juicebox 90 (talk) 02:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

That talk page is relatively civilized given the topic. The relevant essay is wp:BRD (bold, revert, discuss) and you are at the discuss phase. What you need to do on the talk page is explain what you want to do and why. The why is in the form of reliable sources and arguments about why it is relevant. Then other editors (some may be admins, but they are acting as editors in the discussion) will discuss the matter to try and get a consensus. The consensus could be "yes, put it there" or "no, don't" or "phrase it such and such a way and put it here" or "put it, and some balancing material in" or practically anything else. Editing against clear consensus is bad, really bad, you can be blocked for it. This goes both ways. If the consensus is clearly "no" and you edit anyway, you can be blocked. If the consensus is clearly "yes" and someone reverts you, they get into trouble.

Now, judging consensus is a tricky thing. Generally, unanimity or close to it indicates consensus, but that is neither necessary or sufficient. If you are unsure, just ask the more experienced editors on the page to help you determine consensus. Generally, wait until most of the debate dies down before calling it. If you find yourself being the last one debating, stop.

Good luck, and don't take it at all personally. Talk page debates can get heated and stressful on such pages. If you feel yourself getting stressed, just log off. Happy Squirrel (talk) 03:07, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Minimal Sources

The article I am writing has minimal sources, as not that much information is available on the person I am writing about (Ted Vulpius). What do you do if minimal sources are available and what am I doing wrong that the article got rejected twice? 01:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thrashbandicoot01 (talk • contribs)

Hello. Welcome to the teahouse. Subjects on wikipedia have to be notable, which here means that people unrelated to them have written at length about them. It doesn't have to be online, or in English (although that is preferred), but there must be that independent,reliable in-depth coverage. So unfortunately, if there are not many sources for the subject, the draft will probably never be accepted. The issue is unfortunately the topic, and not the actual draft. Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Question on editing my father's page

I just edited my father's page (he is Joseph Flom). I added the year he got married to my mom. I didn't cite a reference .... do I need one? How should I put in that the marriage ended when she died? Also, should I add that he has kids? PeterLFlomPhD (talk) 23:26, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles on Wikipedia should be based on reliable, published sources, so you should include references to anything that is not trivially true or any claims that might be challenged. This means that other readers can verify that what you have written is based on credible research and is not significantly biased in any way.

Because you are related to the subject of your article, I suggest that you consider whether you have a conflict of interest. It is very important to the credibility of Wikipedia that its articles are trusted to be written by authors who are not biased towards the articles' subjects. It would be prudent to make suggestions for how the article be written by writing on the talk page of your father's article, but refrain from editing the article directly.

tl;dr: Include references, avoid directly contributing to articles about family members so as to avoid introducing unintentional bias.

Kind regards, Matt Heard (talk) 23:45, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. The information was hardly controversial. Just a date. PeterLFlomPhD (talk) 00:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Everything needs references. The obituaries may have the details. For a deceased wife you can put something like "Mary Doe (1940-1960) d. 1960". References don't need to be online, but they do need to be published in reliable sources. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! PeterLFlomPhD (talk) 11:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Sandbox question

I have an article in my sandbox thai I am still working on (Bobby Ogdin) I do not want to lose this. I want to begin a second article in the sandbox on a different subject. How do I do this? Thanks , eagledjEagledj (talk) 22:30, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Eagledj you can create as many subpages in your users area as you want - so you have User:Eagledj/sandbox you could create User:Eagledj/sandbox/Another or User:Eagledj/Another etc - KylieTastic (talk) 22:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Eagledj. The article in your sandbox has a copyright problem, and specifically (I don't get to say this often) you are infringing on my copyrighted content, since I wrote part of the content you are using from Bobby Ogdin, which as you know was deleted after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bobby Ogdin was closed by Joe Decker, despite my attempt to save it by adding reliably sourced content. I can fix that by a history merge. It was smart of you to work on this in a sandbox this time, but you should have requested it be userfied, rather than reposting and using prior content containing other people's writing. Anyway, the other issue is whether this is subject to section G4 of the criterion for speedy deletion (I deleted a prior re-post by you under this criterion), and I think it isn't as you've expanded it significantly. Right now the main part of the draft is a large single block of text. I suggest breaking it up into paragraphs.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 09:10, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I recognized a certain pattern with 2 editors

I wonder what was the name or category, for the impression, that 2 editors were working together in a pair, the one editing (controversial) the other would secure it against change by revert every ones edits deleting the first ones edits, even if the first one did overwrite (repeatedly) statements in an article? It seems to be the ultimate weapon to get one sided agenda in to a certain article. I am referring to an article that is under the 1RR. Could somebody please help, because the pattern I recognized with two editors seems to be more than two editors working only by incident in the same direction, if not already rehearsed. Thank you --Miraclexix (talk) 20:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

"Sockpuppet" is the term for someone abusively using multiple accounts. See Signs of sock puppetry and Handling suspected sock puppets. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 20:57, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

It's called Meatpuppetry if one editor is guiding another editor to make certain edits on their behalf. It is very hard to prove that action is coordinated as a lot of editors share interests and have similar points of view. You can't speculate about editors by name if you don't have very solid proof to back up your assertions or it could be considered a personal attack. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. @Liz: are you following me, or is it simple coincidence, that comment again of yours to me today, seeking help on a totally different location now? Be it as it may, I also thank you for the help :) --Miraclexix (talk) 21:52, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I can vouch that Liz seems to genuinely enjoy helping new users all over Wikipedia. I don't think two helping incidents from her indicate she is following you, but if she is, you couldn't ask for a better guardian angel. Happy Squirrel (talk) 21:54, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hear, hear!! Having Liz as your guide is as good as it gets around here. w.carter-Talk 22:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, that is flattering of you two to say. For the record, Miraclexix, I usually visit the Teahouse every day to see if I can help although usually someone has already answered the open questions. There are a lot of experienced editors who drop by regularly. As to the other articles, well, I have them watchlisted and the furious editing going on on the talk page means they frequently appear at the top of the list. And if you appear on any noticeboards, filing a complaint or defending yourself, I'm likely to see that as well. I have far too many pages on my Watchlist! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Liz: O.K. I see. I am just unaware of what "the wikipedian" would do .. so at first I got a little suspicious. Thank you for the kind reassurance. Well, since asking is free .. but never mind! I saw you not stonewalling, nor not open for reasonable discussion - but to the contrary I saw you giving good advice in a polite manner, writing short and concise in your own words, w/o lots of warning templates/unexplained accusation series/block threatenings and gaming me down - so naturally Liz, I assumed good!(*I hope you got the double message*) -- And hey, have a good time and thank you, Liz! --Miraclexix (talk) 01:08, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I have also noticed a pattern like this. When visiting another editor's talk page I saw conversations on there between that person and another ed. to the effect of: "He's back on such-and-such a page, editing...I went in and reverted his edit for you" -"Thanks, yes I saw..." It sounded to me like these two were teaming up to sort of bully ed.s that disagreed with what they wanted to say, tag-teaming to delete edits that did not jive with their ideas... Thoughts? Juicebox 90 (talk) 02:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

How do I mark an article for disambiguation?

I wrote an article on the 1950's artist Andy Johnson, but there's a big message at the top of the save page that says this article already exists (because it's a common name). How do I mark it as something different so I can then link other articles to it? Snookoriva (talk) 20:24, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I have moved the page to Draft:Andy Johnson (artist). This is the way page titles are disambiguated: by including the topic of the subject (in this case, the profession of the person) in brackets. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 20:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I know redirects are cheap, but there isn't much point moving a draft article to another draft page with a disambuguating title. Any disambiguation can be taken care of if and when the draft is moved to the main article space.--ukexpat (talk) 12:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Dropbox URL within a cite web ref

Hi Teahouse Hosts Whilst examining and correcting articles with cite errors, I came across a cite web reference with a dropbox url. Is a dropbox url legitimate within a citation reference? CV9933 (talk) 17:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

What was it pointing to? With Dropbox, I would mostly worry about self-publishing or copyright violation. However, as always, it is the reliability of the source, and not the medium we are looking at. Happy Squirrel (talk) 18:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Article is Here and yes it was copyright violation that I was wondering about.CV9933 (talk) 18:12, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

The title page is missing, which makes me dreadfully suspicious. Also, no title page makes it hard to tell who put the document together and why. I would personally just remove the URL (leave the rest of the template) and see if anyone can find an official version to link to. Happy Squirrel (talk) 18:29, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I added a dummy archive date in the cite so that when an official version is found, the correct archive date can be added and the reference should work okay. CV9933 (talk) 19:17, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I've removed the dummy parameters just in case it could have caused confusion. The reference still works, though, and the parameters are still there, waiting to be filled in if anyone manages to find online versions of the source. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 19:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

UK election results

I just wondered if there was a discussion group for the Wikipedia updating of UK election results? There are 650 constituencies and I certainly don't have the time to edit all of them with correct sources - the the local returning officer. The real problem is that the figures for the total electorate are not always available and even the House of Commons Library has some incorrect figures!Cantab72 (talk) 17:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Cantab72. I don't know many of the answers here, but you could have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referendums or perhaps ask for feedback at its talk page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums. There is also Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. Also @Leutha: may be able to help, he was doing some work on this previously. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:26, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Appropriate citations

Hi,

I recently submitted an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lalita_Sharma) that was rejected on grounds of "lack of citations". I had, however included citations wherever a statement/claim has been made about the subject of the article.

I'm not quite sure if the issue is regarding the quality of the references, or the fact that there aren't enough of them. I'm not quite sure what type of sentences in my article qualify for citations. I am concerned about over-citing the article, since each sentence could possibly be considered a "claim" about the subject of the article.

Could someone help identify where in the article I need to cite?

Thank you, Wolfdane Wolfdane (talk) 16:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Woldfdane and welcome to the Teahouse. Inline citations are nice, but are only needed for contentious material about a living person. If a paragraph comes from one source, put the reference at the end of the paragraph. If a paragraph comes from several sources, put the reference at the end of each sentence or group of sentences that it serves as the source. The problem is the quality of your citations. For an article about her, a link to a press cutting on her website isn't enough. You need to include information about the published article itself naming the newspaper, title of article, author, date. See User:Yunshui/References for beginners and Help:Referencing for beginners. To show that she is well known (notable) you need references that are independent of her, not from her website. Find other articles about her. They don't need to be in English or online as long as you provide the complete reference. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, no, particularly for living people pretty much everything should be cited in/after the sentence that is making the claim. Given the multivector continuous non-supervised editing that happens at Wikipedia, a single footnote at the end of a paragraph is not really acceptable as content gets added, removed, moved around by multiple people many of whom may not know or care about policy . The issue is however, two-fold. It is not only the need for a footnote, but a requirement that the source in the footnote is "reliable" - ie it has a reputation for accuracy, fact checking and editorial oversight and is not just some guy who posted something on the web. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:30, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Is there anything I can so the page automatically only shows main headings, which could then be expanded/opened up by choice?

Hi, I'm working on a wiki page about a TV show that's been produced by a Chicago museum and library for over 10 years. I've used the format that most pages about TV shows have adopted for tables of each season's episodes, but this page is getting really long. However, there isn't enough information for each season to have a separate page.

Is there anything I can so the page automatically only shows main headings, which could then be expanded/opened up by choice? Oh and this is the page in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pritzker_Military_Presents

([[User:Filterkaapi71|Filterkaapi71]]&#124[[User talk:Filterkaapi71|t]] )([[User:Filterkaapi71|COI]]) (talk) 16:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Filterkaapi71: I think what you are looking for is here Help:Section#Limiting_the_TOC.27s_depth. While I havent looked specifically at the article you are talking about, it might also be appropriate to spin off single article for all seasons/episode information - there is no reason to limit the options to "each season needs its own page" or "all seasons and episode information must be on the single page about the show" .-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I was actually looking into creating a composite page, but I ended up collapsing the tables in each section. The section on Limiting ToC looks helpful and I'll definitely use it to streamline the ToC box.

([[User:Filterkaapi71|Filterkaapi71]]&#124[[User talk:Filterkaapi71|t]] )([[User:Filterkaapi71|COI]]) (talk) 19:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Restoring Deleted Article

Hello,

I recently submitted Draft:BitShares and it was deleted due to copyright infringement. I helped to draft the pages in question on bitshares.org/technology. If I put a license in the website repository that says the website copy at bitshares.org/technology is in the public domain, is there some way I can have my deleted article restored? I would like to give the article submission another shot and there was a lot of work in Draft:BitShares that was also my own writing that I would like to retain for the 2nd attempt at submitting.

So are deleted articles gone forever or can I recover some of the material that I submitted?

Thanks!

Robrigo (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Robrigo, from the notice on your talk page "...Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly exists under a compatible licence and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to.", so I guess changing the licence on the source would be ok. However, content copied from a commercial website is unlikely to be neutral and also it sounds like you have a Conflict of interest. However, if you do change the licence you can request undeletion at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. KylieTastic (talk) 15:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Kylie. I am a follower of the open source cryptocurrency project BitShares and member of the forum at bitsharestalk.org. I also helped proofread the latest version of their website. Do you think that is enough to constitute a conflict of interest? I am not paid by anyone for my work, nor am I elected as a delegate via the protocol.I have a modest amount of the cryptocurrency the article is describing. Just curious what your opinion of my scenario would be (CoI or not CoI), thanks for the quick response! Robrigo (talk) 17:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Robrigo. That sounds fairly borderline for COI. But the reason for discouraging COI editors is because they are likely to find it difficult to write in a suitably neutral tone. Can you write an article which is almost 100% based on published sources independent of the subject (which would exclude anything published on bitshares.org's site), and does not go beyond what those independent sources say? And does include material based on sources that are critical of the subject, if there are some? That is what is required in a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

And Robrigo only administrators can delete/restore articles. They do it for many legitimate reasons. I suggest you rewrite it again, this time using your own words rather than copy pasting. That way you would be able to avoid copyright infringements. Also, if you follow Wikipedia's core content policies when writing an article it's more likely to be accepted. Cheers!--Chamith (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I will give it another shot if I can get the article undeleted to bring a more neutral view to the topic and tone of the discussion.

For your information, you can request for your draft to be undeleted at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. But first you must request for undeletion on the talk page of administrator who deleted your draft -- Chamith (talk) 18:12, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Robrigo (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Chaminth. The majority of the article was in my own words, except for the Technology section, so it would help me to regain the history section as well as all of the references that I used for that section so that I don't have to reinvent as much of the wheel. I appreciate all of the help and suggestions!

Robrigo (talk) 18:14, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@ChamithN: Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion is only for uncontroversial deletions (typically articles deleted by PROD or abandoned drafts)- anything deleted as a copyright infringement will not be undeleted there. @Robrigo: you would need to contact the deleting admin, @Jimfbleak:, however, as it was a copyright infringement it's unlikely they will restore it. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:16, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Question

Hi all. Please try to understand this problem: Suppose, I created an article on English Wikipedia and again I created same page on Nepali Wikipedia. So now, On English Wikipedia article, how can I add read this article in other languages>Nepali. I don't know how to explain this properly in text. If you don't understand this problem, then please talk me in my talk page. I just want to know that Wikipedia article is available in many language and there how to add Nepali language? Please talk with me if you didn't understood the problem.Noxboy (talk) 11:32, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Noxboy: At the left side of your screen, near the bottom of the toolbar, there should be a "Languages" section. If there is a Nepali version of the article you are viewing, it should be accessible from there. If there isn't, please give me the name of the English and Nepali articles and I will try and see what the problem is. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 11:44, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Note: I replied to this, and added the Nepali version of John Cena to the relevant Wikidata entry - see the item 11 sections below. I don't know why my answer does not satisfy Noxboy. --ColinFine (talk) 17:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Thanks for the help. I have understood now

Pictures (2)

My pictures are always off centre at the top of the page and are slightly to the right. How do you alter the positioning and what does Image Size do because when I change it there is no apparent change. Indubitably58 (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Indubitably58, I assume you are talking about instances like Patrick Theodore. Infoboxs do not use thumbnail views. Not all Infoboxs are the same but most take just the image name in the image parameter, and if a cation is needed then use the 'caption' parameter. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
• Hi Indubitably58, also note most have an 'image_size' property (but usually used) which takes the number of pixels wide to display, but the actual image size as you had as 594 x 395 on Jamie Young.
• Lastly your images are going to get deleted anyway as images like File:Jamie Young Brisbane Roar.jpg are clearly copyrighted. KylieTastic (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, so to be clear you can't specifically configure where the image will be. Indubitably58 (talk) 11:29, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Indubitably58, not within Infoboxs, they are always centred so pages look the same. You can position images outside of infoboxes, see Wikipedia:Picture tutorial for help. KylieTastic (talk) 11:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Multiple names

If you are trying to link a name, but there are multiple names that are the same, how do you set it out. EG: Hitler ????? Indubitably58 (talk) 11:01, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Problem solved. Indubitably58 (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Editing on Varangaon

I want to know how can i improve Varangaon article. Any help and suggestions.

Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 08:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, the article has "This article needs additional citations for verification" at the top. The way to fix this problem is to make sure there is a reliable source for every statement made in the article — you could help, for instance, by adding references to the last two paragraphs in the article. You could also "copyedit" the article (go through and check spelling, punctuation and grammar) or add new information to the article, as long as it is linked to a reliable source. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 10:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, as is the case with most articles, you'll need to find sources, and also copy-edit the article multiple times. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I would like the reference I added to have a number, but it is in the text of the article itself.

Hello. I am trying to edit the article "Jim Fulton" by adding a reference to a speech he made in the House of Commons. The reference itself is now stuck in the article, rather than numbered and located at the bottom of the page. How could I fix this? Thanks for your help! EricJWoodwardEricJWoodward (talk) 03:17, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

You have to put the reference in <ref>reference tags like this</ref>. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:32, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

That worked. Thanks Ian!EricJWoodward (talk) 04:07, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

pictures

How the hell do you insert a picture into an article.Indubitably58 (talk) 01:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Standard advice follows:

• If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
• If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.Template:Z40--ukexpat (talk) 03:09, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

"Stashed file was not found" when uploading to Commons; how to recover lost "stash"?!?

I tried to add about 23 files to Wikimedia Commons, and to add the geocoordinates and explanations took me about 3 days. Despite that the files readily accepted/auto-filled the Category sections for each photo, when I finally clicked "Submit"/"Upload Files" it all crashed and gave the error message "The stashed file was not found when attempting to upload it from the stash."

All of the images are still there on my page, and since the "Describe" tab comes after "Release Rights" and after "Upload" it would seem logical that the metadata is recoverable SOMEHOW (i.e. pairing the explanations I just lost with the images that are still present), but I don't want to click anything until I hear back from someone more expert.

A. Is there a way to recover everything I spent 3 days typing in? B. Is there a way to reorganize the uploading process such that "Upload", coming 2 STEPS before "Describe" somehow actually *RETAINS* images/data that the descriptions will correspond to, rather than assuming the "stash" will be "described" within 20 minutes (or whenever the "stash" data decides to get lost)???

Bush6984 (talk) 00:24, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bush6984. This is a place to ask questions about editing the English language Wikipedia, just one of many independent projects of the Wikimedia Foundation. We have nothing to do, directly, with Wikimedia Commons, an independent file repository. So the short answer is to ask the volunteers there at Commons, since they are the experts on their own project.

But what I will say is that, from previous questions, I have learned that it is difficult or problematic to try to upload 23 files all at once. Far better to upload each image individually. At least that is my beginner's experience regarding Wikimedia Commons. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Why did the bot relabel an article as an orphan?

I did several link ins to it and then it was re-labeled again as an orphan

Vinny009 (talk) 21:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vinny009:, assuming we're talking about Abraham George Issa then the bot didn't do anything except add a date parameter to the {{orphan}} tag. Although you added incoming links to other articles you didn't remove the orphan tag once it was no longer applicable - tags are not removed automatically - so the bot did what it was supposed to do and clarified the age of the tag. Nthep (talk) 21:12, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification! So if by deleting that then I delete the tag as well?

-V

Vinny009 (talk) 21:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't know where to go and I'm at wits end!

I have submitted this numerous time and have modified it many times and added references as well. Tom doesn't have a lot of "published" references and most everything that I can reference is from his webpage. He is a major contributor to the art of ventriloquism and he needs to be in Wikipedia for specifically being the first to design an online course in ventriloquism as well as working with Mark Wade and Ken Groves on keeping Maher Studios going and starting the IVS (International Ventriloquist Society). Any help would be greatly appreciated! Here's the link for Tom Crowl - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tom_Crowl Ventdanieljay (talk) 19:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The comments explain why the article has been declined. At least two of the statements that you have made are not verified from the references. The tone of the article is not neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

To add to that, there are some sources there that are just not reliable (YouTube and The Magic Cafe Forums are the most obvious examples). If "Tom doesn't have a lot of "published" references", then he's simply not notable by Wikipedia's standards and we can't have an article on him. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 19:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

e/c I've added a few "failed verification" tags, all content MUST be supported by the references. The subject really doesn't seem to pass Wikipedia's notability requirements. Theroadislong (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

It might help to read No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability - it is only an essay, not policy, but explains notability, or the lack of it, quite well. - 10:48, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

new wiki corp page

Hi I added a new article on SpotXchange and it was flagged in violation of wiki standards. Could you assist me in getting it in compliance? I am new to creating articles and could use all the help I can get.

Thank you,

Bryce Wilson

165.236.183.1 (talk) 17:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Our articles must be on notable topics, which means that multiple reliable secondary sources need to have discussed them in detail. Articles without reliable references may be deleted. You can submit articles to Articles for Creation, where an experienced user will look at your page and explain what needs to be improved if it fails our criteria (although this may take up to a month). Please also note that Wikipedia is not to be used for promotional purposes, must maintain a neutral point of view and discourages people writing about themselves or their own companies. One other pedantic point to note is that "wiki" is a generic term regarding websites expanded through collaboration by many people, and is not the same thing as "Wikipedia", which is a specific type of wiki. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Bryce Wilson, and welcome to the Teahouse. Actually, the same action will fix both issues listed. Someone needs to find additional independent reliable sources that discuss SpotXchange in some detail, and use them to add additional content to the article, or to support what is already there, or both. Those sources need to be properly cited inline. Note that press releases, or "news stories" that clearly just reprint press releases will not count, the first cited source in the article now (from Bertelsmann) seems to be of that type. And of course, anything sourced to the company or its principals or employees will not count. Simple directory listings or brief passing mentions will not count either. Sources need not be online, although a link is handy when available. DES ^(talk) 17:22, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Questions

I have some questions here. Hello all, I have recently created article named John Cena on Nepali Wikipedia. But when I went to English Wikipedia >John Cena>read in other languages, I didn't find Nepali l. Can you tll me how to add Nepali language there? 2.And in every page, there is a subtitle...like John Cena has American wrestler, actor and rapper. How to add such text below a title? Noxboy (talk) 16:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Noxboy. I have added ne:जोन सिना as a link in John Cena (I did it by picking the 'Edit links' link below the list of languages, and then editing the 'Wikipedia' box in the Wikidata page to include newiki:जोन सिना).

As for what you call the 'subtitle': no, that is not on every page. The policy is to use it only when it is necessary to distinguish different people with the same name. John Cena is correctly titled. --ColinFine (talk) 21:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@ColinFine: How to add there? In desktop version, its not available. And from mobile I didn't find edit option in other languages. Can you teach me how to do? And another I mean that when I search John Cena, There is written John Cena American wrestler actor and rapper or if we search any actor then it is written below their title like american actor or something. So I mean how to write like that?Noxboy (talk) 01:53, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello again Noxboy. I don't know how to answer you. I made the change in the desktop version - at the bottom of the list of links to other languages is a link that says "Edit links", and that's what I picked. I don't know about the mobile version - I've hardly ever tried to edit on that, and it may be that the language links can't be edited there.

If you are talking about what Google shows when you search, you'll have to ask Google. Wikipedia has no control whatever over what Google displays - it gets part of its information from Wikipedia, but only Google knows where it gets all the information or how it chooses to display it. --ColinFine (talk) 09:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Noxboy. I think you refer to a text which is only displayed to mobile users (see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Tech News: 2015-28). It is taken from Wikidata but I don't know how to locate the Wikidata page in the mobile version. The bottom of the mobile version of articles should have a "Desktop" link. If your mobile device displays the link and can handle the desktop version of pages then click the link and look for "Wikidata item" in the left pane of the page under "Tools". For John Cena it goes to wikidata:Q44437 which says "American professional wrestler, bodybuilder, rapper, and actor". Is that the text you actually see? You wrote American wrestler actor and rapper. I don't know whether the mobile version of Wikidata can be edited but there should be a similar "Desktop" link at the bottom. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:44, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Reference citation

Hi, What action to take when any reference takes you to the homepage of that website instead of redirecting to that particular page ? Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vivek.bekhabar. Do you mean when clicking on an existing reference in a Wikipedia article? That usually means the referenced text was once there but has moved or been deleted. See Wikipedia:Link rot for general help. We can give more specific help if you name an article and reference. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, PrimeHunter, yes same thing might have happened. Wikipedia:Link rot is helpful and discusses about using URLs in the first place and specifically not for existing links of these kinds. This is the wikipedia article I am talking about - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajit_Gulabchand , please check reference number 1. I have come across several articles having issue of this kind. Suggest what to do in these kind of cases. Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 17:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vivek.bekhabar: Wikipedia:Link rot#Repairing a dead link is about existing links. Also note the following sections. Sometimes you just have to mark the link with {{dead link}}. The first reference in Ajit Gulabchand links to [1] which works fine for me. There is an article called "We create entrepreneurship against odds: HCC chief Ajit Gulabchand", as the reference says. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi@PrimeHunter:, this case is for reference number 5. By mistake I typed 1 instead of 5. Please check 5th reference of the same article. Sorry for inconvinience. Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 06:24, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Vivek.bekhabar:, I have fixed the link now. It was pointing to a wrong page earlier. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:43, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rsrikanth05, Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 11:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vivek.bekhabar: Wikipedia:Link rot#Repairing a dead link has advice to fix this case. The new url is easily found with the Google search site:business-standard.com/ "Newsmaker: Ajit Gulabchand". PrimeHunter (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Ok...nice! It will help in repairing other dead links too. Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 08:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

hello, can you tell me more details about requested articles?

proposed article content

Qarva is a company based in Tbilisi, Georgia. Qarva creates software solutions for TV service operators, for IPTV/OTT TV. We are proud that we have the solutions that will hold very important page in IPTV/OTT development history. Our products are “know how” products for the best IPTV and OTT TV systems. We are the first company who can announce such thing and our demonstrations around the world always prove this idea. Company Qarva has a great role in the era of Internet TV(OTT). And we live in this era.

94.43.85.2 (talk) 11:20, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @94.43.85.2: If you wish to request an article about them, you may do so at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies- note that your addition to that page must include at least 1 third-party, reliable source about the company, else the request will be deleted, and the text added about them to that page should be neutral tone, not a first-person advert for services, like the above is. Note that Wikipedia has no deadline, so the article may not be created quickly. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Notification on talk page

Hi, How can I get notification on my talk page, when posting any question here or at some other user's talk page ? I have seen it at some users talk page. Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 10:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vivek.bekhabar. There is no system to automatically get a talk page notification. Some users will manually post a notification when they reply to you. I will do that in a moment but it's more common to notify you by linking your user page User:Vivek.bekhabar (see Wikipedia:Notifications for details), or not notify at all but just expect you to watch the page for replies. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:03, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok! I was actually searching for the same. No issues. Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 13:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Wording question

On the article Television advertisement, I worked on wording and grammar a bit and part of this was changing the word 'ad' to 'advertisement'. I feel this is unnecessary now but do not want to revert everything else I have done in order to change it back. Do I need to change it back or should I leave it? Thanks, Rubbish computer 09:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I always considered "ad" too informal for encyclopedic writing, and therefore I think you should leave your changes in place. Online dictionaries seem not to say so, apart from one, which defines it '1841, shortened form of advertisement. Long resisted by those in the trade, and denounced 1918 by the president of a national advertising association as "the language of bootblacks, ... beneath the dignity of men of the advertising profession."'

If you had wanted to change it back without undoing every other change you made in an edit or series of edits, one way to do this would be to edit the page, copy the source into an external text editor, and then carefully search and replace the word you wanted to change back. Then you would copy the changed text back from the external text editor into the Wikipedia editing window, and save the page. You would also need to check the history afterwards to see if you were over-writing any changes made by someone else in the meantime. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Arthur goes shopping: Thanks, I think I will keep it as 'advertisement' as this seems more formal. Rubbish computer 10:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

User name - Suitability of article - improperly sourced - editing

Hi I am new to Wikipedia and not familiar with the processes. Just wanted to work through the issues that have been pointed. I also incorrectly listed my user name as the same name as the person I am writing about. So 1/. I would like to correct that. 2/. Advised "Sourced incorrectly" what does this mean and how do I do about that 3/. Also advised "questionable notoriety". how do I satisfy that ?? I guess if no. 3 cannot be established there is not much point in the rest. Any assistance or advice would be appreciated. Cheers. StephenR (Kara Moana Healey)Stephen R (talk) 08:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen. Yes, using somebody else's name is not a good idea. You can either abandon that account and create a new one, or follow the instructions at WP:CHU.

The word we use is not 'notoriety' but 'notability', but this has a special meaning in Wikipedia. It does not mean importance, or influence, or significance: it means almost solely "Have people unconnected with the subject written extensively about them, and had their writing published in a reliable place?". Since every Wikipedia article should be based almost entirely on what independent reliable sources have published about the subject, it follows that if there is little or no such writing, then it is impossible to write an acceptable article. Every single statement in your draft should be individually cited to a published reliable source; and apart from uncontroversial factual data, it should be to independent sources. Please see WP:GNG and Referencing for beginners. --ColinFine (talk)

How do I make a Page about a brand new program without it getting deleted?

I am the chair of a new program at an established teaching institution. I would like to make an article for this new program.

"If an institution's faculties, constituent academic colleges, or academic departments are especially notable or significant they may have their own dedicated article."

My institution's page is very general for all its programs, one sentence. This new program represents a radical departure for my institution, literally moving it from 20th century teaching to 21st. It focuses on technology and new ways of telling stories. The content for the new program is not replicated on the institutions page. The program is brand new.

A. Can I make a page for such a program or will it keep getting deleted? B. If i am allowed to make such a page how can I proceed without it getting deleted? C. Why would making an article page for a new academic program be considered promoting a business?

I am sure there are many people like myself who find wikipedia mystifying. When one searches one finds all kinds of disparate articles and listings so its hard to understand why a listing that I myself might like to find as a user is deleted on day one.

Any advice would be helpful. Thanks. ebk 08:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebkilroy (talk • contribs)

Hello, Ebkilroy. Thanks for coming here and asking. The answer is almost certainly that you don't. Wikipedia is not for telling the world about anything, no matter how worthy or earth shattering that something is. All Wikipedia articles should be based almost entirely on what reliable sources unconnected with the subject of the article have published about it. For something new, it is unlikely that any independent sources have yet written about it (that is what we mean by being 'notable', nothing else) so it is impossible to write an acceptable article on it. --ColinFine (talk) 10:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Ebkilroy, but the situation ColinFine describes might not always exist. While it is unlikely that your program would be covered by sources like newspapers and magazines, you could use independent sources like books, academic or trade journals that cover your field if they discuss how ground-breaking your program is. Also, if your institution has a Wikipedia article with a description of its programs, you might be able to add a mention of it there. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

was invited to join the co-op .. having trouble creating profile

hi, when i begin to complete the profile information required, the form does not take the information in the second required field and will not create a porfile without it. any suggestions as to how to remedy this is most appreciated. thank you. Taoyin2004 (talk) 07:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Taoyin2004 I have notified the WP:Co-op of your issue, I'm sure someone will help soon. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:44, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

thank you! Taoyin2004 (talk) 07:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Taoyin2004: Hi there Taoyin. If I'm understanding the issue correctly, I don't think there is a problem here. The second required field asks, "Briefly share what you're interested in having a mentor help you with". This gives you a chance to articulate what you want to work on during mentorship, and also helps the mentor get a sense of how you want to contribute and how they can best help you. If you have lots of things you need help with, you can just write one of them to get started, or if you're not sure how to describe it, you can just say so and you and your mentor can discuss things once you are matched. Let me know if there is something else going on with the form, though. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 17:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

hi jethroBT. can you tell if my full profie with the second field has been saved? i stumbled upon some other way to do it by including all the formatting delimiters(?) is that term still used and still don't know if it worked.

is there anyway you can post to the Paulie Zink page and ask people to be patient with me as i learn how to write article for wiki? i've tried entering comments several times but obviously i don't know how to make them appear. Thank you so much for your help and i am happy to hear that i have been paired with a mentor. i welcome any and all suggestions to speed up my learning cureve. Taoyin2004 (talk) 19:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Taoyin2004: Your profile was created successfully, but unfortunately you were matched to a mentor who just happens to be inactive right now and did not mark themselves as such to prevent the match. Sorry about that. As for the article, it's problematic to copy-and-paste text from a website into a Wikipedia article due our expectations in using copyright content. It is very important that you try to summarize content in your own words, and in a neutral manner. The article needs a lot of work, so I'm going to move it into a userspace draft for you to work on before it goes into the article space. The article is now located at User:Taoyin2004/Paulie Zink. In the userspace you can generally work on the article at your own pace, whereas in the article space, articles can be deleted when they do not meet certain expectations. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 19:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

hello JethroBT,

i understand your concerns. would it be possible to revert the page to the place before i started fiddling with it? Originally it was redirected to Monkey Kung Fu and that only seems fair. i am sorry for causing this problem and will study the requirements carefully. at this point in time, i am not sure why it is an issue to transfer the information about an individual from one researched page to another if i have referenced them. please enlighten me. and thank you for your help in restoring the page to its original form. Paulie Zink has been featured on many covers of magazines among the other reasons the original page was accepted. thank you for your help and for educating me. Taoyin2004 (talk) 21:39, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

hi JethroBT,

i am beginning to understand what you referenced regarding original words vs cut and paste. is it possible for you to mentor me since the assigned one is unavailable if your time permits it? many thanks. Taoyin2004 (talk) 21:44, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Question about editing the article of a company I work for

What would you recommend as a process for a company to enhance their Wikipedia page? I am an employee of said company that meets the notability guidelines set by Wikipedia and that currently has a rather short (and factually incorrect, in some places) Wikipedia page created by our previous PR agency. I reviewed the Conflict of Interest guidelines and understand that it's not considered appropriate for me to edit the same. What would you recommend be done in this case, given the backlog in Articles for Creation? Thank you for your help in advance! Riashroff (talk) 06:16, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Riashroff, the best practice for a COI editor is to post suggested improvements to the Talk page of the article, remember to include independent sources wherever possible. As the article already exists the Articles for Creation system is irrelevant. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Riashroff. In addition to what Dodger67 has said, please read my answer to Sarah Sills two sections below this. --ColinFine (talk) 07:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine and Roger (Dodger67). I will check on this and proceed.Riashroff (talk) 07:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Editor translation of an English article into Spanish - value added or plagiarism?

As a brand new editor and as a high school English teacher with many Spanish speaking students, I am interested in using Wikipedia in English and Spanish in my classroom. I have thought that it might be an empowering exercise to have my students create their own articles in Wikipedia. Would there be value added to have students find a Wikipedia article in English, Copy it, Google Translate it into Spanish, Paste it into Wikipedia Spanish version, and clean up or fix the computer-generated translation? Or would this be frowned upon as plagiarism? Thanks in advance for your insights.Cactusinred (talk) 03:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

If the articles in question are already in Wikipedia in English, then it would appear that there is no plagiarism or copyright violation in copying a translation into the Spanish Wikipedia. Maybe an editor who also edits the Spanish Wikipedia could confirm (or deny). Robert McClenon (talk) 03:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I am more familiar with the policies of the English Wikipedia, and there definitely would be no violation in copying a translated article from the Spanish Wikipedia to the English Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Cactusinred. In general, this is encouraged (see WP:Translate us). But there are a couple of caveats. First the rules and policies are local to each language Wikipedia, so it is possible that a subject is acceptable for the English Wikipedia but not for the Spanish one. (I don't think this is very likely, but not being familiar with the es.wikipedia policies I can't be sure). Secondly, the requirements for sourcing may be different: in English Wikipedia, sources are required to be reliably published, but do not have to be online or even in English, as long as a reader can in principle get hold of them. I would guess that the Spanish Wikipedia has a similar rule, so that the English sources would still be acceptable, but again, I don't know. The third point is that automatic translation is not generally regarded as good enough for Wikipedia articles. I realise that you are intending for them to use this initially and then clean it up; but I would suggest you talk to people over there first, perhaps at es:Wikipedia:Café (ayuda), to make sure, for example, that somebody isn't going to delete your students' drafts before they have a chance to improve the translation. --ColinFine (talk) 07:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Cactusinred as you are planning a classroom activity I wish to very strongly advise that you discuss your ideas at the Education noticeboard. The Wikipedia Education Program has developed systems, tools, procedures and advice for helping class activities to run smoothly. They will guide you on how to set up your project optimally. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe that translating articles from other language Wikipedias into English is OK as long as proper attribution is given per WP:Translation#How to translate which says "Because Wikipedia licensing requires attribution, the translation source must be credited to avoid copyright violation." This can be done by adding Template:Translated page to the article's talk page. As for going from English Wikipedia to other language Wikipedias, I think you need to take care when using machine translations. Machine translators do not work very well for some languages. Japanese Wikipedia, for example, really frowns on pure machine translations and administrators there will delete such articles when they find them, so I think it might be a good idea to ask about this at es:Wikipedia:Café to find out what Spanish Wikipedia's policies are. Good luck. - Marchjuly (talk) 08:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Cactusinred: please see also Wikipedia:Student assignments. While writing may be "empowering", most high school students will not know how to properly write for an Encyclopedia, particularly one with Wikipedia's rules. Improperly prepared students placing inappropriate content into Wikipedia will soon find their work hacked to pieces/ deleted/accounts blocked for copyright violations or promotional spamming and find the experience "disempowering" -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Wiki page for local company

I would like to create a Wiki page for a local company I work for. Would this page probably be deleted because it is not "notable"? Thanks! SarahSills (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, SarahSills, and welcome to the Teahouse. If the company is purely local, than quite probably it would. Note that waht we have on Wikipeda (not just "wiki", there are many diferent wikis) are articles, which are supposed to be about encyclopedic, notable topics, rather than just "pages". See our guideline for notability of corporations. The simple version is that there must be coverage or discussion of the subject in some detail, in published independent reliable sources. These should be mre than merely local in scope, too.

Also, as an employee of the company, you have a very strong conflict of interest. If you were to start such an article, you would be required to opnely disclsoe your relationship, see our policy on paid editing. You are strongly discouraged from writing aout yourself or your employer, even if the topic is notable. If you did go ahead, I strongly urge you to use the Article wizard, but you would be likely to waste your time and find it frustrating, I am sorry to say. Is there any other topic you would be interested in writing about here? DES ^(talk) 02:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, SarahSills. We are all here to make the encyclopaedia as good as we can, often by improving articles. But if you are employed by that company, your idea of what would enhance an article about it is probably different from Wikipedia's consensus of what would do so. For Wikipedia, an article is improved by making sure it is rigorously sourced to reliable published sources, mostly to sources independent of the subject; written in a way that is determinedly neutral, and does not contain any marketing speak or any judgments or conclusions except those quoted from independent sources; and covers all published views of the subject, including any that are critical. --ColinFine (talk) 07:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Statistical analysis on a Wikipedia dump

Hi, thanks for the invite! How can I find someone who knows how to do a statistical analysis on a Wikipedia dump? I would like to have a list of the most frequently used words on Wikipedia that contain more than x characters. I think x=6 should be enough. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 17:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi The Quixotic Potato, you will find the technical experts at the Technical Village Pump. The Teahouse deals with beginner-level editing help so your request is outside our field. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! The Quixotic Potato (talk) 10:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Should this be a biography?

I created Rodricus Crawford after seeing an article this month in The New Yorker, strongly suggesting wrongful conviction and prosecutorial misconduct. Two of my other references also suggest misconduct in this case, as well as others. The matter is still in litigation.

The subject is notable because of a single event, but press coverage seems to be continuing. My concern is about the subject having a separate article. I thought about merging my article with a more general article, but the case is far from over.

I would like the opinion of a more experienced editor. Comfr (talk) 17:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Comfr! Looking at the state of the article you have right now, it would probably be best to merge it into an existing article about the case if there is one, or write an article specifically about the case and only develop an article on Mr. Crawford later once there are RSes that talk about him and his background as a person specifically, as his article seems to contain mostly information pertinent to that court case anyway and notsomuch the article subject-- I'm left to assume not much has been written about the person himself, but more on his role in the trial. It's already been tagged for its neutrality and other problems which are especially important to attend to, since the article is about a living person, and issues of writing an article in a factual and neutral way are of particularly high importance when discussing a living person.

In general, my opinion on such an article would be to keep this out of Wikipedia mainspace and perhaps incubate the article in a sandbox page in your own userspace, until there is more coverage in reliable sources that can be used to support its inclusion as a live article. Or, you could write an article about the court case if there isn't one, and just use the information you cited in the Crawford article in that one instead. ^BLUSTER⌉⌊_BLASTER 19:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes BLUSTER, the article is about a prosecution, not a person. Crawford is not notable, except for the way he was prosecuted. Now the question is, "What to call such an article?" What about, "Prosecution of Rodricus Crawford," or "Death penalty in Caddo Parish, Louisiana?" Comfr (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Comfr, I would think the most appropriate way to title it would be something more like Trial of Rodricus Crawford, in keeping with the WP:ARTICLENAME style guide specifying that the title of a given article needs to be in keeping with a neutral, non-emotional presentation of the facts. If you're going to discuss how the death penalty is handled specifically in that community of Louisiana, then you need to seek out sources that discuss this topic specifically and write the article based moreso on that-- that would be the only circumstance under which I'd recommend titling the article something like Death penalty in Caddo Parish, Louisiana. Does that help a little? ^BLUSTER⌉⌊_BLASTER 12:22, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Speech mark list

On Constitution of Kosovo#Elementary Freedoms and Rights, I do not know how to put speech marks around a numbered list. Thanks, Rubbish computer 17:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Per MOS:BLOCKQUOTE, "Do not enclose block quotations [quotes of more than 40 words] in quotation marks". I've had a go at formatting the lists for you: to create an automatically numbered list, just include a hash sign (#) at the start of each line. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 21:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Thank you. Rubbish computer 09:43, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Reliable source

Is there any reliable source to mention the Worldwide Gross of movies released before 1989. Boxofficemojo has no record pre-1989. And we must also consider the inflation adjusted gross. Aero Slicers (talk) 15:08, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe that it differs from case to case. Research should be done for each movie. You could refer to the List of highest-grossing films, which also includes an inflation adjusted table. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 15:26, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

[[[No Page]]]

Hi, What does it mean [[[No Page]]] ? Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 14:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Vivek.bekhabar. I can think of one or two things you might possibly be referring to but I have never seen [[[No Page]]] written exactly like that anywhere before. Can you give me a link to a page where you have seen this used? — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 14:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Just a guess: Did you get an error message saying "no page" or "no page specified" when attempting to use or seeing the output of a template – maybe an error message in the display of a page's references? Template parameters are defined in their code by tripled curly braces, i.e., {{{something}}} but ... Hmm. Yes please specify where you saw it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Bilorv & @Fuhghettaboutit, I scrolled down the notifications, where I saw a notification saying - [[[No Page]]] was patrolled by 'some user name' more than a month ego. That's why I asked! Thanks... Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 07:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vivek.bekhabar: Aha! Okay, that means you looked at a notification related to a page that was deleted. I'm sure they could fix this so it said something more sensible.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vivek.bekhabar: I have changed MediaWiki:Echo-no-title from the MediaWiki default "[No page]" to "[Unknown probably deleted page]". Do you see the latter now? Does it seem more sensible? I don't think the name of the probably deleted page is available for the message but just to be sure, please copy the exact text of the whole entry as displayed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Notifications?uselang=qqx. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @PrimeHunter:, This is the exact text displayed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Notifications?uselang=qqx. - "(pagetriage-notification-mark-as-reviewed2: Oiyarbepsy, (echo-no-title)) 1 month ago" , while now I see this at the notification when I scroll down "[[[Unknown probably deleted page]]] was patrolled by Oiyarbepsy 1 month ago" .

I too think the latter message makes sense. Thanks!

@Fuhghettaboutit, fyi...it has been fixed now by PrimeHunter Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 13:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. As expected the page name is not available for the message MediaWiki:Pagetriage-notification-mark-as-reviewed2. It may have been Soulflower. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

You are Welcome PrimeHunter. And it is Soulflower. Thanks! Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 06:29, 8 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

Hey F.karkar. You may be able to set your browser to do this directly or with an add-on. For example, in Firefox which I believe cannot do this natively, I found this add-on with a Google search of <firefox open links in new tab automatically>. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi F.karkar. At Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets you can select "Open external links in a new tab/window". You cannot make a link in Wikipedia open in a new tab for others who haven't requested it. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Prime Hunter, that was helpful, it worked. F.karkar

You could also consider an even faster method which works for me (I use Google Chrome). Simply click on the link while pressing the control key on Windows. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 15:28, 7 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)

I see no reason why not. I think the best way to do this would be to edit Template:IPA-ti, delete its current contents, paste the contents of Template:IPA-zu and then replace the three instances of the word "Zulu" with "Tigrinya". Please tell me if you want any help with that. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again! I've done this (at least hope I have). 184.147.138.101 (talk) 11:31, 7 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)

Thank you so much for the detailed answers.

It does feel good to see that you really care and want to help :)

Yes, it was the Wild Asia Responsible Tourism Award.

I will look at the links you two provided and will re-write it.

I think it is notable, but I'll re-read the regulations.

Thanks, Roi Roi.eco (talk) 11:10, 7 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)

@Valuenyc: If I understand your question correctly, you have seen this example:

Markup	Renders as
This part of the text requires clarification,<ref group=note>Listed separately from the citation</ref> whereas the entire text is cited.<ref>Citation.</ref> And this needs even more clarification.<ref group=note>Another note</ref> ==Notes== {{reflist|group=note}} ==References== {{reflist}}	This part of the text requires clarification, whereas the entire text is cited. And this needs even more clarification. Notes References

You would like to use {{efn}} and {{notelist}}to have the ^{[note 1]} and ^{[note 2]} replaced with ^{[note A]} and ^{[note B]} respectively, but so far you've only gotten it to show ^[A] and ^[B].

The reason it seems impossible is that, despite what the documentation implies, it is impossible (at least without rewriting the template code for references). To understand why, consider how {{efn-ua}} works. Internally it gets translated into {{efn|group=upper-alpha}}, which produces the uppercase letter superscripts. One can instead use {{efn|group=note}}, which produces the [note 1] superscripts. But there's no way to combine the two effects - no group=note-upper-alpha. I suspect the reason it was written this way was that the word "note" in the superscript was necessary to distinguish numerical notes from numerical references, but if the notes are alpha instead of numeric it was presumably felt that there was no need for the word "note".

You could achieve a very similar effect by prefacing every explanatory footnote with a superscripted "note", using {{sup|note }}{{efn-ua|Yet another note}} to produce.^{note [C]} Understand, however, that if you do that the next editor who comes along may look at that, go "Eeeuw! That's non-standard!", and rip it out. Probably best to resign yourself to what works in Wikipedia. Worldbruce (talk) 07:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, boy, I wish I'd checked here first before spending yet more time on this today. (I didn't get another message that there was an additional note here. I guess that's because it wasn't on my talk page? I'm learning....) Anyway, I thank you very much. I do hope there's some way to suggest a revision to the documentation? It's simple enough to say that you can't use "group |" because the "efn" tag already creates a group. As it is it really cost me (because I'm so stubborn.) ... Unless there's some other purpose for "group" that I'm too green to conjure up... Well, again, thanks. Valuenyc (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Valuenyc: I find the documentation misleading, but believe it's technically correct. One can use efn|group=note, or efn|group=upper-alpha, ... or efn|group=lower-greek, but not efn|group=note|group=upper-alpha, or efn-ua|group=note, or similar combinations. If you can come up with a better way of expressing this, then, this being Wikipedia - the encyclopedia anyone can edit, you can be bold and change the documentation yourself. A more cautious approach would be to suggest a change of wording at Help talk:Footnotes, which appears to be closely monitored by subject experts. Worldbruce (talk) 04:44, 9 July 2015 (UTC)