Wikipedia:Teahouse

David Biddulph, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Notability

I am trying to write an article for Andreas Borgeas a former City Councilman and a current Fresno County Supervisor. He is also a published law professor. My article keeps getting rejected for notability standards. If an editor could please read the article and give me specific suggestions for improvement, that would be wonderful. Currently, all the feedback has been very vague. I am happy to add proof of his legislative achievements, but do not want to waste my time if that kind of addition will not help with his notability. Helkins (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Unable to add Infobox Image

Hello experienced editors,

I am attempting to upload and add an image to musician Randy Barlow's entry page. I have uploaded the image to English Wikipedia, with a non-free:promotional (publicity photo) rationale. I may or may not have done this correctly, but the image file did upload.

The image file is named Randy Barlow country music singer 1979.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Randy-Barlow-country-music-singer-1979.jpg#Summary

I have researched how to add an image for {{template:infobox musical artist but my result is that file name text appears instead of the image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Barlow

Below is the portion of the info box code pertaining to the image: {{Infobox musical artist <!-- See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Musicians --> | name = Randy Barlow | image = Randy Barlow country music singer 1979.jpg | caption = Randy Barlow, 1979 | image_size = What am I doing wrong? Thank you in advance!

A2Ypsi (talk) 22:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• Hi A2Ypsi I fixed the image from your uploads, but then you broke it again, so I re-fixed. To find out the names of files you have uploaded, click on 'Contributions' (top right) then click on uploads (top left) i.e. Special:ListFiles/A2Ypsi. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 22:46, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Creating a new page

I want to create a page about Vitale boarding primary school, I have created a draft kindly guide me on how to proceedMutisoCNdolo (talk) 13:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. There are a number of useful links on your user talk page. In particular you need to read WP:Your first article and WP:NOTPROMOTION. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:12, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

External links

Hi there! Are the links to websites in the Writing career section of Zach Hyman allowed to be used. Or they should be put in the external links section instead. Ikhtiar H (talk) 08:30, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ikhtiar H. I would say they are spam in either place. —teb728 t c 09:25, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Cambridge Journals

Hello. Does anyone know what happened to Cambridge Journals? I can't rent any of their articles, and buying them is 5x as expensive (they have ridiculous prices). Any ideas? I e-mailed them yesterday, but haven't received an answer yet. Peter238 (talk) 07:02, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Peter238: Cambridge Journals appears to be paywalled (I know of few people actually willing to shell out for rentals...). You might consider asking for the articles you need at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request. Many editors with university net access have subscriptions to that portal, and you will probably find that someone (e.g., myself) can provide you with a given article within the day.-- Elmidae 08:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Maybe they finally figured out that a 3-year-old child could bypass their "no saving" policy for rented articles. Peter238 (talk) 08:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Elmidae: A friend of mine just told me that they're just fixing some kind of bug that affects Firefox, Chrome etc., but wasn't able to tell me when it will be fixed. So apparently it hasn't been paywalled. Peter238 (talk) 13:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Peter238: Hmm. Can't tell from here, since I do have free (University) access, but if there is a rental option at all, that does meet the definition of paywalled, I'd say - as opposed to free access. Unless you do want to pay for rental, I suggest popping over to Resource request, and you should get the lot for free :) (or let me know directly and I can probably do it right now).-- Elmidae 13:47, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Elmidae: Ok. Thanks for the offer, but my question was just a general one. I don't think I need anything from CJ yet. Peter238 (talk) 14:04, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Can someone fix the problem below?

When I am looking for information about the Atomic Bomb blast at Bikini Atoll, Wikipedia has no information on it. But if I search for Operation Crossroads all the information is right there. Wikipedia needs a reference or re-direct from Atomic Bomb or Bikini Atoll to Operation Crossroads.138.207.201.158 (talk) 06:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the question. The page Bikini atomic tests redirects to Nuclear testing at Bikini Atoll, which includes information about the nuclear testing at the Atoll. It appears the testing there was significant enough to have its own article. CatcherStorm ^talk 06:22, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Bikini Atoll describes the atoll in general, and contains a link to Nuclear testing at Bikini Atoll. Rojomoke (talk) 14:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

There was no link from the History section of Nuclear weapon to Nuclear testing at Bikini Atoll, so I have added this.--Gronk Oz (talk) 15:46, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

There are almost no published sources on some parts of a person's life. What if I email a person and they give me info, can i use it in article?

I had a couple photos of a hollywood boulevard street theater guy, General Hershy Bar from the 1979-83 period. In researching about him, I found some info on wikipedia. Noted there was no pic and so donated my pics to the commons so that he'd have a pic on line. Then I started adding things I found out about him from doing research to his article. I have more to add still.

I was stymied on some areas of his life, so I found a guy that writes about him here and there around the net and contacted him. It turns out he as a good friend and neighbor of this guy General Hershy Bar. He has now provided me with lots of information. Much has been confirmed by my other sources on line. So I trust him.

Here is my question. How can I capture and use this info in the wikipedia article? I have been trying to be diligent about citing sources. I now know that he was married several times, I have some names and dates. Can I use that info? That is one of many examples.

Second question is that this person is now sending me lots of pics of the General that he scanned from the General's scrapbooks which the General gave him years ago. How can I use these images? The man has said I can use them and that he'd be happy to send the commons an email.

Thanks for helping. Diatom.phage (talk) 22:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Diatom.phage, we require secondary published sources about an individual, so no, emails from this writer friend of the individual wouldn't be acceptable. If you'd like to add to the article, a better place to find info is on Google news.

About the pictures, if he owns copyright of them then he can release them to Commons. If he doesn't own the copyright, they'd probably get deleted. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 00:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

If the General owns the copyright, then he can license them if he chooses, by following the procedure in donating copyright materials, and then you can upload them. But it must be the copyright holder that does this. --ColinFine (talk) 00:25, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to answer. So, if I have a scrapbook of my life with snapshots of me, give it to someone, and then die(the general is dead)...the contents of the scrapbook with my snapshots are kinda lost in some black hole of rights management/determination issues. Because they are so lost, they can't be posted on the web and so likely disappear from the collective memory. That seems like a dang shame as some people's histories might be lost that shouldn't be.

I'll use the info from his friends to guide me to 'legit' published sources then. Thanks once again.Diatom.phage (talk) 06:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello Diatom.phage. Yes, you are somewhat correct about a scrapbook. If it is about a person's life, then the photos it contains are probably taken by a variety of unknown photographers. We cannot use those photos without infringing on the valid copyrights of those unknown people or their heirs. Other websites or publishers may not have Wikipedia's high standards, and future legislation may be more lenient with "orphaned works", so maybe they will not be lost. Museums and libraries are other options for preservation. But if you legally inherit a portfolio of original photos or negatives taken by a known person such as an ancestor, then you are the copyright holder, and can freely license them at Wikimedia Commons, if you so choose. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Rough draft of list article: any problems?

Hello, I have a ROUGH, INCOMPLETE draft of an article I'm writing "List of datasets for machine learning research" here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Datakeeper/sandbox/List_of_datasets_for_machine_learning_research

The goal of the article is to start collecting the most noteworthy machine learning datasets used in research. Most datasets do not have their own page, and what is far more useful for readers is external links to the datasets themselves. I am familiar with the Wikipedia "NOT A DIRECTORY" and "NOT A RESPOSITORY" policies, and so I have tried to make this page so that is not either of these things. The completed page will contain the most noteworthy datasets used for research in each of the prospective fields. Given the surge in popularity of machine learning and data science, I believe a collection like this is noteworthy and would be highly useful to the community.

I was hoping to appeal to the expert editors on here. Given your extensive experience and knowledge about Wikipedia and it's policies, do you see any glaring errors or problems with a having a page like this? Thank you Datakeeper (talk) 22:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Datakeeper, and welcome to the Teahouse. I wouldn't describe myself as an expert editor and don't have huge amounts of experience with lists, but I can give my perspective from what experience I do have. One of the problems with some lists of important or notable things is a lack of clear inclusion criteria, and hence the lists can be considered original research (because what gets included are the things that the editor who created the list think is important, rather than what reliable sources think is important). Take a look at Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists#Selection criteria on this. Ideally, you could rely on a source that clearly states which datasets are most noteworthy. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:37, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

article rejection

My page continues to get rejected even when I have made the noted corrections. I am not sure how else to change the content becuase I am stating FACTS and then sighting them.

I would love some help so I can sucessfully have my post live on wikipedia.

Nisdaner (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The draft Draft:Jarrod Moses is just several faulty copies of the article in your user space. Please copy the full article just once with references. You have already been told which sentence to remove, but you also seem to have copied what Jarrod has written about himself when you should have been finding articles written about him in Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Linkdin and alumni profiles are not the best references. Try to use your own words rather than copy sentences, stick to facts, and avoid saying how great he claims to be. You need to write an encyclopaedia article, not promotional material. Have you read WP:Biographies of living persons? Dbfirs 22:20, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

It now appears that the draft was just deleted as G11, that is, unambiguous promotion. If you want to improve the article and resubmit it, you may ask to have it put in your user space by going to requests for undeletion, but learn from your mistakes, and don't submit drafts containing multiple copies of the same text, and remove promotional language. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:43, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

See User:Nisdaner/sandbox/Jarrod Moses.--ukexpat (talk) 02:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Proposed change to Wikipedia: asking a question, receiving an answer

I have worked up a proposed change to Wikipedia, wherein a person would be able to easily ask a question about a subject (article) and receive answers from people who volunteer to assist. I have posted it on my talk page as I am not sure where to post it. Zedshort (talk) 20:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello Zedshort. Great to have new ideas and innovation here! In this case the Wikipedia:Reference_desks may well already fulfil much of your proposal! :) --LukeSurl ^{t c} 20:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, but I think what you pointed me toward completely fails. The whole reference desk thing strikes me a very clunkey; far better to have the question-answer dialogue conducted in as close association with the article from whence the questions arose. The vast majority of readers don't even know that the reference desk exists, much less how to find it. So, the question remains, "Where should such a proposal be posted?" Zedshort (talk) 01:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Try WP:VPR maybe?--ukexpat (talk) 02:26, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Zedshort (talk) 15:12, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

So, this one may be slightly humorous

Hello Teahouse. Would it be possible for an editor here to help me tidy up my user page? My knowledge of markup is pretty much negligible, but the page does look great on the mobile version! I'd really appreciate the help. Kindest regards, Chesnaught555 (talk) 20:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@Chesnaught555: Welcome to the Teahouse! I added a few clear templates with this edit. This makes sure that each new section appears under the last, instead of colliding and overlapping. Hope this helps, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 21:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Chesnaught555 (talk) 21:34, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Notability impasse - What happens next?

Apologies if I have sent this twice by mistake!

I have been working on an article (Draft:Gill Fielding) for some time and some editors are challenging the subject on notability grounds. Where do we go from here as I believe there is a strong case for notability and I think other reviewers would see my point?

Here is my position on the subject's notability based on the basic criteria: This says that "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other and independent of the subject." Fielding has had non-trivial articles written about her in two (and arguably three) national UK non-tabloid newspapers. The Sunday Times and Telegraph are considered upper market newspapers - hence reliable - while the Daily Express (which has run two articles on Fielding) is described as a middle market newspaper (defined as 'the halfway point of a three-level continuum of journalistic seriousness; uppermarket newspapers generally cover hard news and down-market newspapers favor sensationalist stories.'). She has also featured as the central subject in a Channel 4 TV programme. Channel 4 is a publicly owned UK-wide TV channel. She also has a chapter written about her in an independent published book by Stephanie J. Hale.

In my mind, this only leaves the definition of 'significant' up for debate. I consider the above coverage to be significant yet some of those who have commented seem to disagree with me. How can we get this resolved? Thank you for your attention Neilho (talk) 20:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The Sunday Times article says that she avoided her taxes (this is not mentioned in the draft) and appeared on a TV show. The Telegraph article confirms that she's worth £15,000,000. The Express article presents an interview with here, and is therefore not independent. I believe that all this does not constitute evidence of notability. Maproom (talk) 00:54, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Maproom for getting back to me. OK, I can mention that she flipped her properties to save on Capital Gains Tax - that would clearly improve the balance of the article. But as the Times is a secondary source which is reliable and independent of the subject, I hope you would agree that this article would still be evidence of the subject's notability. As for the Express articles (there are two), one is an interview while the other is a mixture of interview and editorial which contains researched facts to support the article. Are interviews not allowed? Citation No.6 on the Notability of people page defines independence as 'whether people independent of the subject itself have actually considered the subject notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it.' This adequately sums up the Express's position. The newspaper itself qualifies as an independent source as it has editorial independence and no conflicts of interest (no potential for personal, financial, or political gain). I still stand by my original assertion that the subject is notable as a property developer and TV personality. How about the Hale book? Independent books from a respected publishing house are mentioned as a valid source for notability and this one has a full chapter on the subject. What is the next step to move this process forwards do you think?

109.150.25.155 (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

The "next step" should be one of three things: (1) you add another, better, reference or two, and resubmit; (2) you somehow persuade a reviewer that the references already in the draft are in fact adequate; (3) you accept that adequate evidence of notability cannot be found, and abandon the draft (which will then be deleted in six months, I think). Maproom (talk) 17:27, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Article Rejected Twice

Hello Teahouse! I have submitted this article twice with no luck of securing a Wikipedia page. I would greatly appreciate anyone who has the time to read and add suggestions on how to make it better. The comments given thus far are vary vague. I am looking for more detail.

The page is for a real estate developer, David Johnson. I was also wondering if submitting a page for his development company first would give him more credibility and thus his own page. I would appreciate feedback on this as well.

Here is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_V._Johnson

Thank you for your help! Kperezz (talk) 19:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Basically, not every person can have an article on Wikipedia. You may want to see WP:42 for a simple guideline, or WP:GNG for the actual policy of inclusion. sst✈ 14:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Remove photos

How do I remove incorect uploaded photos (watermarked) Help files useless and user unfriendly.JP Labuschagne (talk) 19:27, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi @JP Labuschagne: Welcome to the Teahouse! Since you've uploaded photos to the Wikimedia Commons, I assume you are talking about one of your images that you uploaded there. If you'd like to upload a new version of the file without your watermark, you can simply overwrite the file by going to the 'File history' section of the file and clicking the "Upload a new version of this file" link. Alternatively, you can request the speedy deletion of files you upload as long as you do so within 7 days - see the Commons' criteria for speedy deletion for more details. To request speedy deletion, you would use the following template: {{speedydelete|<INSERT REASON FOR DELETION HERE>}}. I would not request the deletion of the file unless you replace it with a version without the watermark. Even if you do not have the file without a watermark, another editor may edit it out at some point. A file with a watermark is better than no file at all. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:19, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

How does one start a sock-puppet investigation?

I have noticed some things about a few users and IPs and would like to know how one submits suspected sock-puppets for investigation? Also is there such a thing as a meatpuppet investigation? :) YuHuw (talk) 19:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi @YuHuw: Welcome to the Teahouse! Sockpuppet investigations can be opened at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. Instructions are available there for how to do it. Make sure evidence is available, and the evidence is made clear and clearly linked. If it's your first time dealing with sockpuppetry, I recommend giving Wikipedia:Sock puppetry a read to have a better understanding of sockpuppetry and how Wikipedia deals with sockpuppets. As for meatpuppets, there isn't a designated page for meatpuppet investigations, but we do have ways to deal with meatpuppetry. Check out WP:MTPPT for more information. If meatpuppetry is suspected in a discussion, meatpuppet comments are often disregarded when establishing consensus. If action should be taken, meatpuppetry can also be discussed in various forums, such as the administrator's noticeboard of incidents. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Article rejected twice

Hello! I've edited my page two times now, and though it very much feels and sounds like the other pages on Wikipedia, it keeps getting rejected, saying it lacks notability and verifiable sources. I have included many third-party sources. Here is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eagle_Hill_Consulting_LLC Can someone please help give me some guidance? I have it sourced and referenced and it's accurate. Why is it still not being accepted? Thank you so much in advance! Bsmith1052 (talk) 19:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Bsmith1052. Please accept my apologies that no one has replied to your question yet. Have you had a read of Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)? Without having looked at the sources you cite in the draft in detail, I suspect that the problem is that not enough of them discuss Eagle Hill Consulting in sufficient depth to constitute significant coverage (which requires more than just a passing mention). Cordless Larry (talk) 21:07, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

What does it mean when another user "reviews" your user page?

I got a notice that reads: "The page User:Nothingimportanthappenedtoday was reviewed by White Arabian Filly". What does this mean and why does it happen?—nothingimportanthappenedtoday t c 17:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The patrol feature on Wikipedia is used when a page is created: unpatrolled pages are put on a list for people to review. A human editor (other than the creator) needs to come along and click a button at the bottom of the page ("[Mark this page as patrolled]") that marks it as "patrolled", just to check that it's not vandalism or spam or inappropriate material (for "articles"—which doesn't include your userpage—there are more strict criteria pages have to pass). It's nothing to worry about. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! --—nothingimportanthappenedtoday t c 19:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Guidance regarding conflict of interest

I work for Eastman Kodak Company and am new to Wikipedia. I tried recently to add constructive, factual information to pages about movies and was blocked. I apologize for over-stepping but I was unaware of the protocols for conflict of interest, which I now have researched further on your site and understand. I’d like to work with the community of Wikipedia editors to find an appropriate way to add factual information to articles using credible, well-sourced third-party citations. I believe that the information provided will be valuable to Wikipedia users. Thank you for reading. I look forward to your reply.165.170.128.65 (talk) 15:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Follow the usual procedures on requesting unblock, rather than editing from an IP address when blocked, which is a form of sock-puppetry. Is an administrator watching this page? If so, can they block this sockpuppet? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Robert - to put it into context, the only edit from this IP address in the past three months has been to ask this question. 165.170.128.65 - the process for appealing your block can be found at Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Unblocking. Good luck, and I hope you enjoy your time here.--Gronk Oz (talk) 20:27, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

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

Good afternoon. I desperately need some help as my editor has abandoned me with the words 'you're on your own'. He became frustrated because I deleted his ref changes when I thought I was doing the right thing. Anyway - long story - I need someone to tell me that I'm doing OK. The first batch (down to Heisenberg were the changes I had made yesterday before he left me that message. The Heisenberg is as he had it (No 7 or 8). From there on today I've been trying to follow instructions from a different citation page which appear to work but they look very unruly with today's date showing. Is that date necessary or is there a way of hiding it? But first and foremost I would appreciate someone telling me that I'm doing them OK as there are still many to do.

Help would be much appreciated. Thank you. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 13:17, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Balquhidder2013, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry to hear about the troubles with the other editor; without wanting to sound trite, working together in a team of volunteers can be a surprisingly difficult task for all involved. I ran your page through the "reFill" tool (with a little tweaking) and it has filled in just about all of them. Only two bare URLs remain, and those will have to be filled in manually. Of course, if those changes were not what you wanted then you can revert them from the "View History" tab. If you have any further questions, please feel free to come back and ask.--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:47, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to answer a part of your question. Yes, it is good to include the "accessdate" information; it can give readers in years to come an indication of how current (or otherwise) volatile information is. I didn't because I don't know when you accessed the information to build the article, but if you want to add it then it should be simple to add "|accessdate=8 January 2016" (or whenever) into each citation, just like in the one for the Heisenberg Ensemble. As a general rule, I try to include as much information as I can in the reference, because you never know who might use it later on.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Balquhidder2013, you seem to have a misconception about Wikipedia. Someone apparently volunteered to help you, but unlike in the "real world", there is no "editor" as such. The term as used here applies to all the volunteers, including you.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:15, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Request for an article

An editor left the following question on my User Talk page:

Hi i have requested for an article Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Business_and_economics/Companies#F. Its not been picked by any editor yet. What can i do next? MelitaFernandes (talk) 10:10, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't have any personal experience with the article request process, so I am copying it here in the hope that somebody here can be more help to MelitaFernandes.--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The WP:Requested Articles process is very backlogged. Is there a WikiProject where you could ask for help? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi I dont find any related wikiproject. Can someone help me out here? I have already worked on the draft. However, since i play a role as a content writer with the same oragnization, it is creating a conflict to write for my own company. Can someone please help me edit it. The article has been supported to by number of Third party resources

Thanks MelitaFernandes (talk) 10:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Here is the draft of the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Four_Fountains_De-Stress_Spa

MelitaFernandes (talk) 10:22, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz Thanks

MelitaFernandes (talk) 10:23, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

No experience in wiki-coding a formula

I have a draft in my sandbox which includes the use of a formula. I've never formatted anything mathematical before and need some assistance. Thank you ahead of time for all your help. Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) (talk) 12:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Barbara (WVS). I can't help with the formula; hopefully somebody else can do that. But I am concerned that your article duplicates part of an article that already exists, Polyamory. Did you consider merging any new material into that article, rather than creating a new article with so much overlap?--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:22, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your input and the time it took you to review my sandbox, Gronk Oz. I've read the article on polyamory and it is quite different than the non-subjective, quantitative measures of multiple sex partners. There is not a way to measure polyamory and it is a term not used by clinicians, statisticians and most importantly HIV epidemiologists. Multiple sex partners is a term (phrase, really) that represents a measure and a reproducible case study method of measuring disease incidence. Polyamory is not a measure of sexual activity. Defining a person's number of multiple sexual partners is a number that is critically linked to defining the risk of sexual behavior-subjective and without some moral judgement attached. Polyamory can not provide such information since it largely defined by the persons who do and often does not even involve sexual activity. But your comments are quite helpful. The article is still in the sandbox with lots more content to add and reference. Best Regards,

ceBarbara (WVS) (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I went and LaTeXed the formula. I hope that helps. Happy Squirrel (talk) 16:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Charles Perrault - error in calculating his age at retirement

If Perrault died in 1703 and was 75, he was born in 1628. The "Life and Work" section states that he was forced to retire in 1682 at 56. He would have been 54, not 56 unless the retirement date was wrong. 199.128.189.216 (talk) 12:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Address this discrepancy at this talk page, Talk: Charles Perrault. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:51, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia.

Hi everyone, I've worked for a good while trying to get this article up and running. Practically every sentence in it is a fact that's supported by an external reference. Having had the original dismissed while I was still trying to find my feet, it's been a really disheartening experience. Can someone please help me fix this as I'd love to know where I've gone wrong and what's the best way to go about it as I would love to say involved with Wikipedia.

I checked it over with some other wiki editors in the live chat before submitting and they all came back with some helpful tips and even said it was fine to submit. If anyone can help me I'd be extremely grateful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jennings_Motor_Group_(2) Scr81 (talk) 10:56, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@Scr81 Welcome to the Teahouse. You would find many of us quite helpful. I see no issue with references or the article in general, although the content maybe briefed and written more formally.JugniSQ (talk) 11:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I have written it as factually as I thought I could. Can you perhaps give me an example of where it might appear to be overly favourable? As I've been looking at it so long I think I may have gone a bit blind to it! Scr81 (talk) 11:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Can I edit my own username to start with a lowercase letter rather than a capitalized letter?

My username is nothingimportanthappenedtoday. Can I somehow make it so the first letter ("n") is in lower case?Nothingimportanthappenedtoday (talk) 08:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes you can nothingimportanthappenedtoday: I got my lowercase signature by going to Special:Preferences and entering —[[User:teb728|]] [[User talk:teb728|t]] [[Special:Contributions/teb728|c]] in the Signature textbox and checking “Treat the above as wiki markup.” —teb728 t c 09:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

And I got the titles of my user page and user talk page to display lowercase by adding {{lowercase}} to the wikicode of each. —teb728 t c 09:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

What that doesn't change is that the url bar and the edit history still say Teb728 with an uppercase T. —teb728 t c 10:15, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

It seems that you can change the way your username displays, as teb728 outlines, but that you can't officially change the username itself to start with a lower-case letter. See Wikipedia:Changing username, which states "Although your username cannot begin with a lowercase letter, try placing {{lowercase}} on your userpage in order to display it that way". Cordless Larry (talk) 10:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for your answers, let's see if I can navigate through the suggestions here.Nothingimportanthappenedtoday (talk) 15:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

What to edit?

I like the idea of Wikipedia, in that anyone can edit, but how do people find things to edit? Pages already seem to exist on my favorite topics (and ones I know most about), I haven't been able to find anything to create... Whispered (talk) 05:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Whispered. Yes, we already have five million articles but a very significant percentage of those can be expanded, better referenced and better written. That being said, there are many opportunities to write new articles. State and provincial legislators through history deserve biographies, and you could spend years writing them. Olympic athletes through history. Billboard hit songs of the 1930s and 1940s. There are broad areas that need enormous work. We also have a group of lengthy lists at Wikipedia:Requested articles that are full of ideas. I even have a short list on my user page. Please read Your first article for detailed guidance. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Whispered, for your enthusiasm. But please don't assume that "edit" means "create". Only a small fraction of the edits made to Wikipedia are part of the creation process. Most are corrections, expansions, and improvements to existing articles. Article creation may be the most obvious form of editing, but it's also one of the most difficult. Maproom (talk) 08:44, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

What Maproom said, Whispered. I sometimes get frustrated because new people come and instantly try to create new articles. I always advise people to get some practice improving existing articles first, partly because creating an article that stays is difficult, and partly because we have so many articles which are in need of improvement. I have been an editor for more than ten years, and made 11 thousand edits: looking at my contribution record, I see that I have created 11 articles in that time, and some of them were actually just moving existing articles to a new name. If more people spent time improving existing articles, we would have a higher quality encyclopaedia than if they created new ones. --ColinFine (talk) 09:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Whispered. I agree with the comments above. Creating articles is good, but much editing can be done on existing articles, also. I can't comment on science articles, which your user page indicates is your main area of interest. My main interest is in old-time radio, and I have found many articles that need additional material, additional citations or both. My method is to bookmark such an article in my browser when I see it. When I have time, I search for valid material on that topic and add the information and/or citations where appropriate. Each person has his or her own approach, but that one works for me. Eddie Blick (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Late understanding

Hi there! I am new here! Previously, I started an article named "Japan Prize Awards", but was deleted instantly. It was because an article about the same topic already existed. I recently dug into the policies of this community. I realized that Wikipedia is the same both outside and inside (I thought logged in users used this as a social source). But it all ended up being a learning source. In addition to my duplicate article, I also did some other unaware edits. But I am pleased that I was given a leeway for turnaround in the interim instead of being blocked. I sincerely apologize for my wrong understanding. I truly did not expect this logical display from me and therefore, I am shocked. I had taken my very first visit in this honorable place as an apology instead of questioning. Cheers! Gabi360 (talk) 04:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being willing to learn, Gabi360. Wikipedia is a huge beast, with a lot of different activities - there's probably nobody who knows about all of it (not even Jimmy Wales!) I spend a lot of time here on the Teahouse and Help Desk, and the Reference Desk; recently I went to a meetup and met several people who are active in governance and training for editors here in the UK, and assumed that they would all be familiar with the Help Desks - but no, they had hardly been here. That was a surprise to me.

So, well done for plunging in, and being willing to be corrected and to learn more. I hope you have a long and fruitful involvement with Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 08:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

And you don't need to apologize for making mistakes, Gabi360, as long as you learn from them. We are here to help and don’t get mad unless someone is intentionally disruptive or willfully refuses to learn. —teb728 t c 10:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to get connected with a foreign language editor?

Hi there! I'm discovering that a lot of the work done in the subject I'm editing was done by Germans. Unfortunately, all I know of German is what Google Translate can do for me. I do know enough about other languages to know that machine translation is fraught with problems. There are a number of articles that exist on the German Wikipedia that do not exist in the English. How could I go about finding someone from the German site who's fluent in English and might be able to assist me in translating pages missing from the English site? Hi-storian (talk) 03:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hi-storian. You may be able to find the information you need at Wikipedia:Translation, Wikipedia:Translators available or Wikipedia:Translation/German/Translation advice. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:47, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks much! That's perfect. Hi-storian (talk) 06:58, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Unable to edit due to conflict of interest

I have a lot of information that needs to be submitted. However, unable to edit due to conflict of interest.

How can I submit updated information for a celebrity that I represent? Joey Dee 01:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello. It is hard to give advice without knowing which celebrity. If there is already an article about them, post the information and sources on the talk page to be assessed by other editors. Happy Squirrel (talk) 01:36, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

If there is already an article, then, as mentioned, you can provide the information, preferably well-sourced, on the talk page. Requested Articles is an option, but is very very very backlogged. If you have well-sourced information and are certain of the notability of the celebrity, you could write an article draft at Articles for Creation, but declare your connection by putting a {{coi}} template on the article, and probably you should state your connection on the talk page of the draft, and that you will not be further editing the draft. That is, let other editors edit the draft relentlessly until it is neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

By the way, I commend you for being aware of the conflict of interest policy and for asking how to address it. I wouldn't normally even advise creating a draft, but you seem to be a reasonable good-faith editor, as too many editors with conflict of interest are not. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The article in question is Joey Dee and the Starliters where JoeyDee123 had been adding promotional content. Please use the article's talk page instead. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:58, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Are you Joey Dee? If so, you don't represent the celebrity because you are the celebrity. If not, then signing yourself as Joey Dee is misleading. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Need Help Uploading Images

I am new to wiki. I am not sure how to upload images or create the footnotes. Is there someone that can assist me with these matters? Thanks 679699sof (talk) 23:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The question must be about footnotes about images, because the footnotes on Adriana Sanford are satisfactory. Can someone provide the guidelines on uploading images? Robert McClenon (talk) 23:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi 679699sof. Please refer to Wikipedia:Image use policy and Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/1 for some general information on uploading images to Wikipedia and using them in articles. Also, please try and understand that using images can be tricky due to copyright issues. Even though you may find that you can download images from other websites or social media pages for "free" (in other words, without any monetary cost to you), it is very likely that these images are still protected by copyright and therefore would be unsuitable for upload to Wikipedia, except as possibly non-free content, without receiving explicit permission from the copyright holder. Since you've said you are new to Wikipedia, I suggest that you ask specific questions about specific images at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions (WP:MCQ) before uploading anything to just to play it safe. It's easy to mistake copyrighted images for freely licensed images if you're not too familiar with what to look for and there are experienced editors at WP:MCQ who are more than happy to help you figure out which is which. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it would a be a great idea for you to try the Wikipedia Adventure. Happy wiki-ing! Ramthecowy (talk) 18:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

A question about the use of "actor"

Does Wikipedia style call for using "actor" to refer to both men and women?

My reason for asking is that I recently created an article about Staats Cotsworth, which had two categories that included the word "actor" and two that included "actors." Today I was notified of a revision that added the word "male" to all four of those categories. ("American radio actors" became "American male radio actors," etc.)

The new versions seem redundant unless we are to use "actor" to refer to both men and women, thus eliminating use of "actress." Eddie Blick (talk) 21:07, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Many female actors object to the use of "actress", but I'm not sure what Wikipedia's policy is on this. Dbfirs 21:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Eddie Blick. Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Gender-neutral language recommends the use of gender-neutral language where possible and I note that while Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film does not address this issue, it features multiple mentions of the word "actor" but none of "actress". Cordless Larry (talk) 21:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hey Thanks! I appreciate those insights. Eddie Blick (talk) 21:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hey Eddie Blick. I was unable to find any one discussion to point to where all this came to a head, nor could I distill from them any clear rule of thumb without a lot more work, but it seems this issue of differentiation between male and female categorization started at the end of 2012 and there were numerous discussions into 2013. See (in date order, and by no means a complete list but enough for more context), these CfDs: 1 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't realize the topic had been discussed for that long. Eddie Blick (talk) 03:26, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup Advice

Hello, I am a new editor and I would like some advice on the Wiki Cup, I've edited a few articles and created a list but I've never really wrote an article from scratch, and some of the people competing have multiple Featured Articles, it's rather intimidating! Some friendly advice would be welcomed. Zamorakphat (talk) 20:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

@Zamorakphat: First off, welcome to Wikipedia! Wikicup is just a fun way for Wikipedians to compete against each other and hopefully improve Wikipedia along the way! The way it works is that editors create and improve articles and images then they get points by getting that content through some of the peer review processes on Wikipedia.

You don't need to create the articles from scratch though, you just need to significantly contribute to them and get them through whatever process you choose. I recommend Did you know? as a good starting point. All you need to do is create a new article (or fulfill one of the other requirements) nominate it, and voila it can appear on the main page! The other category I would recommend starting out on are Good Articles. But most importantly, just do what you want to do. If you need help, feel free to ask me on my talk page or here at the Teahouse. Winner 42 Talk to me! 03:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip! Zamorakphat (talk) 13:57, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Unsigned comments

Is there a way to get a signature to appear on an unsigned comment by another user who it seems forgot to log in e.g. [1]? YuHuw (talk) 20:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, YuHuw. Yes, there is. Take a look at the template {{unsigned}}. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Cordless Larry! :D YuHuw (talk) 20:21, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Greetings YuHuw} and Cordless Larry – There is an example of unsigned at April 5 Tip of the day. Regards,  JoeHebda (talk)  20:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, JoeHebda. Is there a reason the tip doesn't tell people to include the timestamp? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Good question Cordless Larry – I see that it is explained at Template:Unsigned. If including the timestamp is important, feel free to edit the tip & include that info. Cheers!  JoeHebda (talk)  21:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Done. Hopefully it's not now too complicated. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! YuHuw (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

{{Xsign}} is a convenient wrapper for {{unsigned}} or {{unsigned IP}} that parses input copied and pasted directly from revision history. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

to to re-classify a photo as free

I uploaded a photo to a band's wiki page < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blimp_Rock >, but apparently I messed up in answering the questions on the Upload Wizard, as I am now being informed of imminent deletion. I took the photo; I own copyright; I intended the photo to be used on the band's wiki page, for free, under the terms of Creative Commons. But... somehow I got a notice from B-bot saying the picture would be deleted because ... "the image is non-free..." I did not understand the other details in the notice about the image being in other articles. It is not in any other articles. How do I correct this error, and get the image classified as free - which it is... and how do we prevent deletion of the image?Fernleigh-23 (talk) 19:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Mary Malone in London, Canada em: (Redacted) wiki ID : Fernleigh-23 Fernleigh-23 (talk) 19:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Mary, the easiest solution is to ask for this file File:Blimp Rock live in London, Ontario.jpg to be deleted as you have correctly uploaded File:Blimp Rock.jpeg to the Commons and it is currently used in the article Blimp Rock. There isn't any need to have the two identical images. If you want File:Blimp Rock live in London, Ontario.jpg deleted from here let me know. -- GB fan 20:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes Please! If you could delete the superfluous non-free photo of the band, at your end, while leaving in the photo under the band's name, in the info box on the right... that would be great. I had a feeling, as I was fumbling through the process, that it was happening twice -- once with a torturous inquiry process about copyright (which I did not fully understand, and hence answered incorrectly); and again much more quickly (that must have been the Creative Commons-designated one -- which will now stay). Thanks for much for cleaning this up. How will I l know when the B-bot threat has been circumvented?Fernleigh-23 (talk) 21:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

And thanks for redacting the info I (now know...) that I should not have added.Fernleigh-23 (talk) 21:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Mary, the image you uploaded here (under wrong license) is now gone and the one at the Commons is still there and in the article. That should fix everything. You are welcome about the redaction, see it all the time with new editors. -- GB fan 21:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much! This has been fun and instructive, and reminds me why Wiki is a global treasure.Fernleigh-23 (talk) 21:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Same name, different people!

Hello, I noticed someone had credited my book , More of Me by Kathryn Evans, to the british stage actress Kathryn Evans page. We are not the same person. I deleted the entry on her page but tried to establish new page to avoid it happening again - unfortunately I have no clue what I'm doing and barely any brain to learn and the new page was declined due to lack of citations - what do i need to do? 217.34.98.165 (talk) 19:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Your edit above is the only current one from that IP address. I have repaired the damage to Kathryn Evans' page - "I deleted the entry on her page" is NOT the way to create your own page. I cannot see whether you have created another page as well, if so, what title did you call it? and what address were you using when you created it? - Arjayay (talk) 19:30, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

• Are you aware of just how angry you seem to be coming across at the moment? --MurderByDeletionism^"bang!" 19:36, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
• ... and it was User:SangSorenson who confused the two people, User:Mrsbung only tried to remove the confusion. Dbfirs 19:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, User:Mrsbung,

You were correct to remove the wrongly-attributed material from the actress's page, but you accidentally removed other information at the same time. There is some advice at Draft:Kathryn Evans (writer) given by the reviewer. He advises you to remove the text about confusion between names (we'll deal with that later), and to find some reviews of your book, and perhaps some details of sales to establish that you are notable in the Wikipedia sense. I think you might have to wait until the book is published before you submit the article again. Dbfirs 19:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! The book isn't released until 1st Feb, was amazed to find it here - will leave well alone unless it gets put back up - feel mean when someone has gone to the effort of adding it. Arjayay - I'm not that dense! Mrsbung (talk) 19:38, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

btw what damage did I do? sorry, just deleted incorrect entry, didn't mean to do no harr guvnorMrsbung (talk) 19:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't want to write a biography - I just want to stop my books being credited to someone else - think the best thing is delete it when it happens, hope no one shouts at me, and stand well back Mrsbung (talk) 19:41, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

You accidentally removed the infobox (because it then contained wrong information). The correct procedure would have been to revert the mistaken addition by User:SangSorenson, but all is well now, and no permanent harm was done. Dbfirs 19:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh I see! Thank you User:Dbfirs - can't even work out how to talk to people - very sorry User:SangSorenson - thanks for trying but the books are written by me of www.kathrynevans.ink and though I was an actress, I was not that actress. Sorry for mucking up your lovely page, I'll stick to books!Mrsbung (talk) 19:53, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Mrsbung to communicate with Dbfirs do what I did if you want the person to read the message here (click on edit to see how) or go to User talk:Dbfirs. Same for SangSorenson.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I added a hidden note to editors saying "British stage actress Kathryn Evans is not the same person as British children's book writer Kathryn Evans" at the top of the article. That should minimize the likelihood of the same mistake happening again. If the notability of Kathryn Evans (writer) becomes great enough to justify a wikipedia article for her, that can be handled by a disambiguation page. Carl Henderson (talk) 22:25, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much - I shall leave you clever bods to it!Mrsbung (talk) 23:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Requested articles: Computer science, all of the links on article names have been removed

Wikipedia:Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet

In the requested articles section on computer science all of the links on article names have be removed from the whole section. Making it impossible to know which articles now have links to them. - Dough34 (talk) 17:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I believe that what were removed were redlinks; links still exist where the article exists. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of reformatting your question, so that instead of a url to an edit page (with the link not clearly displayed because it exceeded the available line length) it now shows a wikilink to display the page. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The removal was done with this edit, by AlexTheWhovian using a script. In my view it was a mistake. Redlinks are very useful in a page of Requested Articles: if someone feels like creating an article on AlphaEase FC, a redlink will help them. Maproom (talk) 19:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Indeed - surely the whole point of a list of requested articles is that the links are red? Cordless Larry (talk) 19:01, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

It was tagged under Category:Wikipedia red link cleanup with {{Cleanup red links}}. I was just cleaning the backlog, not my fault. If you think they should be reinstated, then revert my edit without the cleanup tag. Not that hard. Alex|The|Whovian^? 00:07, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Submission of a new Article (gulp!) " H. Paul Prigg"

Hello, I am a future contributor and I am having problems with my references. I don't have any editing experience so it has not been easy. The person I am writing about had a record breaking off shore motor boat racing career that began in the 1920's. I have his career documented in an expansive scrap book that he compiled over the years containing actual newspaper, magazine articles for verification of his achievements.

Problem is some of the articles are identified by the name of the publication and or date of the article, not necessarily both. I have not been very sucessful in obtaining archieved copies from a couple of the newspaper companies due to not being in business today, bought out etc. Any suggestions or direction you can provide?

Thank you very much! Nancy RawlsNancyprancy12 (talk) 17:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Unless you can provide more detail, it doesn't look as if your sources are verifiable, so your draft doesn't meet the requirement for a Wikipedia article. Your first step is to fix the garbled way you've presented the references, see WP:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:21, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

For attempting to get fuller citations on newspaper articles, try The Library of Congress Newspaper Database (free) or if you want to spend a bit of money, subscribe to Newspapers.com, which has an even more extensive database (including many newspapers still under copyright). Using those sources, you can search either "H Paul Prigg" or—if you want to find a specific article, enter a fairly unique string of text from the article (e.g., "Prigg won the XYZ Racing Cup last night in a stunning come-from-behind victory over John Smith". And definitely, read WP:Referencing for beginners and then go on to some of the pages linked from that. Carl Henderson (talk) 23:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Henri Hauser

I reviewed Draft:Henri Hauser. I declined it because there is already an article Henri Hauser in mainspace, although the draft is much better. I tried to advise the author, User:Atalante88 to get the crappy stub deleted so that the draft can be moved into mainspace. However, he apparently didn’t understand. His post to my talk page, acknowledging his limited English, seems to imply that he thinks I declined it on notability grounds.

“Dear Robert, I confess I am lost with your comments. First of all, I am a French-speaker and not an English Native speaker. This is certainly where I need some help and certainly in others fields I admit this with no problem. But, the situation is as follow : Henri Hauser was French as well and was a main Economist with a huge influence in France but widely above in UK, England, US, Germany etc.. just before WWI and between WW1 and WW2. I thought that it would bring some values to some English Wiki readers to have some pieces of knowledge about Henri Hauser even if he was a French Economist. He even brought a huge influence to famous English Economists as well such as Willam Beveridge, Edwin F. Gay wich was the Dean of HBS or R.H. Tawney from LSE. He had a long run friendship with those people. Then two researchers such as SA Marin and GH Soutou collects many testimonies from many personalities well known such as Natalie Zemon Davis who can speak and write in French , Paul Gerbod, Paul Claval, Laurent Vissière, Jean-Paul Poussou, Philip Benedict (it is in English in the book), Henri Heller, Herman Van der Wee, Jean-François Bergier, Jean-Marie Mayeur, Christian Morrisson, Eric Bussière, Isabelle Lescent-Giles, Claude Fohlen, John L. Harvey, François Chaubert, Luiz Felipe de Alencastro, Myriam Yardeni. A preface from Professor René Rémond from Académie française and put it in a book called Henri Hauser edited from Sorbon. In my article, I linked nearly all those names to external links to referencial French websites such Sorbon or CNRS in order to get to know those Professors or reseachers ... The Sources as you require for, are mainly written in French but by researchers. The Sources and the link are the BNF (National French Library), (Sorbon edition), Gallica (for old newspapers or documents for France), Leonore database for Legion d'honneur etc...those institutions are Official and known everywhere in the World. So, what can I do if documents are mainly in French or in German and no many in English ? I tried the best I can to link to English link. So, I don't know what to do more as this presentation took much time and if you are not interested by knowing better French Economists just let me know. I can't find all sources written in English if it does not exist. I stay at your disposal in case you would be still interested to provide an overview on Henri Hauser's work as a unique Economist to your English readers. Best regards, Frederique Bailly”

In looking the draft over, it still needs a lot of work, because its English is not good, but I would still like to get into article space because it is better than the stub. What procedure should be used for the purpose? That is, should I tag the stub for speedy deletion as WP:G6, or should I propose the stub for deletion citing that the draft is better? Also, since the author doesn’t understand my comments but is requesting advice in good faith, can someone please explain to him or her or their talk page, in French, what I was saying? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Robert, there's no need to delete the current stub Henri Hauser. All the editor has to do is paste their version into the article as an expansion. As that editor is the only author, it won't require a history merge. Alternatively, you can do that for him and add Template:Copied to Talk:Henri Hauser. Then redirect Draft: Henri Hauser to Henri Hauser and add Template:R from merge to the redirect page. Voceditenore (talk) 17:16, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

It has gotten more complicated. It seems that the author of the draft did try to copy it into the existing stub, and it was reverted as unsourced. What he did copy was unsourced, but was still an improvement, so it seems that an editor does want to maintain the integrity of the stub. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the draft, Robert, I can see that there are big problems with the referencing. There's a massive biography on him published by the Sorbonne, large parts of which are available on Google Books here. Perhaps he could be encouraged to use that to source the material that he wants to add. The stub has no inline citations either, and the only two sources listed are both broken links, a rather poor show. Voceditenore (talk) 17:55, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I've nominated the stub for AFD. Can someone explain to Atalante88 in French on their talk page what we have been saying, since they are working in good faith but don't seem to know enough English? Also, can someone suggest to them in French that they might do better to edit the French Wikipedia? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I've just posted a long, friendly and detailed analysis of the situation in French on their talk page. Give that they have 74 edits to fr, I would say they know where it is. I would tend to trust them to become more active on the French side if their English does not improve. Happy Squirrel (talk) 21:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Nothing has been said about the French references. Someone should have told User:Atalante88 the French sources are all right to use on English Wikipedia.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I did, in French. I can post a full translation of my message if you want to know exactly what I said. Happy Squirrel (talk) 23:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear all, I perfectly got what you all explained about the stub and my draft on Henry Hauser and so, despite my assumed lack of English (!). Actually, I previously expanded this stub but someone rejected it and replaced it by this current stub. So, I rewrote the article in my sandbox. Anyway, I tried to improve Henri Hauser draft by addition of links, references and corrections always despite my supposed "limited English". Thank you Happy Quirrel for your kind message in French :-). I know that the best I have to do is to respect Wiki En Rules. Please would you mind to give your feedback on it ? I could find others reference and I thought to send an email to Severine-Antigone Marin author of the book "Henri Hauser" in order to check it and perhaps give us photos. with regards. Ãtalante88Atalante88 (talk) 11:20, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Service awards:Vanguard Editor

I have a quick question on a less serious topic. Looking through the service awards, I noticed that the requirement for a Vanguard Editor includes sixteen years of service. Given that Wikipedia is approaching its fifteenth birthday, I am struggling to see how that is possible. Yet several editors have it on their User pages. Am I missing something, or are they just kidding themselves, and it is really something to aim for in the future... Gronk Oz (talk) 14:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I guess it's a joke. (I wonder how you would "aim for" it? Maybe give up smoking, drink less, take more exercise?) Maproom (talk) 14:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

In the back of my mind (where the stranger thoughts live), I wondered whether that requirement might be dynamically updated, so it is always one year more than the age of Wikipedia. Or maybe it's only my mind that works like that...--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:36, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps the phrase "Unobtainium Editor Star" gives it away? - Arjayay (talk) 14:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

It's been at 16 years' service for several years now, so unless it gets revised upward it will become at least theoretically attainable in a year or so. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 14:50, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

It is currently used on 8 User pages and 2 user talk pages - almost all with less than 200 edits - one user awarded it to themselves with the explanation "The awards below reflect the combined edit history and edit time of multiple accounts" - but they only have 175 edits in 5 years on that account. - Arjayay (talk) 14:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

It's worth noting that while such uses are patently false, they're also basically harmless. Wikipedia:Service awards is explicitly stated to be an unofficial scheme that shouldn't be enforced one way or another. A useful skill in Wikipedia (and possibly in life) is to know which battles aren't worth fighting. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 15:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I cannot be bothered to find the discussion, but I know for a fact that this was once brought up when a new editor added it to their userpage, and the consensus definitely was "do nothing." There are some positions, if you will, that you are not permitted to present falsely about; the admin flag is one of them; but there is no penalty for doing so with the service awards, nor should there be. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Indeed. I was awarded the Invisible Service Award. It's swell! _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 17:50, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Orphan

Hello, how I like to do everything as well as a template {{Orphan|January 2016}} to hide the template, ie that the article would be arranged? Because Google's search engine on my site where fitted orphan, is the only contact information, more links are available. What to do?--L.ukas lt 13 --TalkLukaslt13

Hello, Lukaslt13. An article is called an "orphan" if there are no other Wikipedia articles that link to it. Looking at your article, which I assume is Ignalina Česlovas Kudaba Progymnasium, click on the link "What links here" under "Tools" on the left hand side. This will give you a list of all the other articles which are linked to this article. In this case, there are no articles; just User pages, project pages and a redirect. In order to remove the Orphan tag, first fix that problem: what other articles should properly link to this one? Edit them to incorporate that link. Once those are in place, the Orphan tag can be removed.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:18, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Just to be crystal clear, these are incoming links not outgoing links.--ukexpat (talk) 17:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Very thank you Gronk Oz, and very thank you Ukexpat.--L.ukas lt 13 --TalkLukaslt13

I found these articles: Wikipedia:Baltic States notice board, Wikipedia:WikiProject Lithuania, but much I doesn't upload, because I do not want, that you don't exit the reason that I put the most important. Next there image, file search, etc. It is possible to put these two? And write external links yes?--L.ukas lt 13 --TalkLukaslt13

My submission keeps getting rejected

Hello! Ive edited my page three or four times now, and though it very much feels and sounds like the other pages on wikipedia, it keeps getting rejected. Can someone please help? I have it sourced and referenced and its accurate. Why is it still not being accepted?

Thanks Fos FoscaF (talk) 10:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi FoscaF - Do we assume you are referring to Draft:Teisseire ?

Hi from me too, Fos. I've had a look at your draft. In my view it should not have been rejected. There is multiple coverage of this company in French newspapers. I'm going to replace some of your references with the ones in the French papers and then move it to article space. Voceditenore (talk) 13:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Way to encourage paid editing bro _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

No, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, it's a way to encourage the coverage of a famous French company whose history goes back to 1720 and which has had an article in the French Wikipedia since 2006. And, as a woman editor, I'd appreciate you not referring to me as "bro". Voceditenore (talk) 16:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

No problem sweetheart. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

So is this how Wiki rolls? Woman asks for her sex not to be presumed as male, so in reply she gets a dose of sexism sent her way? Last bastion....?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.50.198 (talk • contribs)

No, it was wholly inappropriate.--ukexpat (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Need an editor to edit my article

Hi the reviewer of my article has suggested that to request an editor to rework on it. How can i get help from other editor? Thanks MelitaFernandes (talk) 06:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello MelitaFernandes and welcome to the Teahouse. You may not have noticed that the reviewer included the following link in their recommendation: WP:REQUEST. If you click on that blue link it will take you to the page which describes the process for requesting an editor help out. If you have any questions which it does not answer, then please feel free to come back here and ask.--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Inquiry Regarding Possible Conflicting Editing Commentary

Greetings! I've been working on an article. I have used an accepted article for Chef Jose Garces as a guide for my contribution for Chef Naomi Pomeroy. I have received a couple of rejections for my Pomeroy draft. The first rejection noted that I had established Pomeroy's notability but had used a promotional tone (link to draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Naomi_Pomeroy). I really valued hearing this feedback and removed promotional language (I have also removed the name of Pomeroy's restaurants to avoid promotional tone there). I resubmitted the article with a more neutral tone; I have been rejected again due to my inability to establish Pomeroy's notability with sources. My references are more in number and similar in style/genre/medium to those used for the Jose Garces article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Garces

I feel as if I'm receiving conflicting information from the editing process. Any advice you can give would be greatly appreciated. Please let me know what questions you may have. I thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you for the opportunity to be a part of this dynamic community. I wish you the best for a wonderful 2016.MagdalenaKillion (talk) 04:22, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Just as the commentary says, the subject appears to be notable, but the tone of the draft is promotional and non-neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, yes. However, the second editor indicated that the subject's notability had not been established and the first editor indicated that notability had been established. On the second submission, I made the tone more neutral, and the second editor didn't indicate that tone was an issue. The second editor specifically noted the lack of notability. I appreciate your feedback, and I am grateful for this opportunity to communicate with experienced editors.MagdalenaKillion (talk) 16:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, the problem seems to be that notability criteria have some subjective wiggle room and your subject is right on the more notable end of the grey zone. You have done an incredibly good job on the tone so I believe that issue is dealt with. On the notability front, SwisterTwister is judging using the criteria for creative professionals while Onel5969 used the general criteria. I would tend to agree with Onel5969 but it is borderline. If we go with the general criteria we are just looking at reliable, in depth, third party coverage. You have several sources, but some like the one from her college are not fully independent (they gain advantage from making her look good). There are also some broken links. Again, this is a very borderline case. I think one more quality source would definitely tip the balance for me. I might even lean to accept as is. Hope that at least makes sense. Happy Squirrel (talk) 21:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much, HappySquirrel. I really appreciate the clarifications and guidance. Thank you especially for the note about the broken link. I can definitely find some additional, suitable source. I truly appreciate your time and consideration.MagdalenaKillion (talk) 04:47, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Melville Electronic Library

The Melville Electronic Library (MEL) is an NEH-funded critical archive that, when completed, will include a scholarly, "fluid text" edition of all versions of Melville's works. A fluid text is any written work that exists in multiple versions: for instance, Moby-Dick first appeared in an American and an expurgated British edition. MEL is hosted on Hofstra University's server, and I am its director. I am wondering if a Wikipedia article on MEL, fluid text editing, our editing tool TextLab, and MEL's other projects would be acceptable.173.56.30.69 (talk) 23:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the TeaHouse. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a tertiary source, as such it is built on secondary sources. So the answer to your question hinges on the availability of secondary sources on the Melville Electronic Library. We're looking for in depth coverage in independent secondary sources, as per our general notability guideline. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

And as director of MEL you have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, which means that you and your staff should not be writing articles on the subject. —teb728 t c 01:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I've read the guidelines and COI section and figured I would not be the writer. We should have plenty of secondary sources to validate notability of the project, and then there's Melville. I've always admired Wikipedia, and I've been even more impressed looking through the guidelines and understanding the editorial process.173.56.30.69 (talk) 03:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Use of Obscene Lanuage by Admins

Are Wikipedia Administrators permitted to use obscene, profane, and abusive language when dealing with other editors? I was very surprised to come across this, since this kind of thing would never be permitted in my workplace environment. SimpsonDG (talk) 23:23, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

• Hi SimpsonDG simple answer no its not. Wikipedia:Civility applies to all. However sometimes what one person calls "obscene, profane, and abusive" may not be seen as such by others, and without context (diffs), we can not say if the language used was out of order. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 00:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

As KylieTastic said, we can't tell what you're talking about without diffs, SimpsonDG. If you think the admin was truly acting out of line, you can report it to WP:ANI. Wikipedia has a strict no personal attacks policy and such behavior is definitely not condoned. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 00:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Basically, this Admin told an editor (on the Admin's Talk Page) to "F**k off" and in his edit comments, "Go f**k yourself". [2] I can tell you that kind of language would not be tolerated in my workplace at all. SimpsonDG (talk) 00:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

White Arabian Filly, in referring someone to ANI, you maybe should refer them also to WP:BOOMERANG, because frequently there will be bad blood between the questioner and other person which will come out at ANI. —teb728 t c 01:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

@SimpsonDG: You might want to check out this discussion to see how others have weighed in on this topic before. Some editors argue that Wikipedia should not be like a workplace, or that such terms are not OK to direct at folks personally, but that it shouldn't be a profanity-free zone. I'm an admin, so if you'd like me to talk to the other admin in question, feel free to get in touch with me. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 02:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I did report this to WP:ANI, and the response was to have a couple of other admins pig-pile on me for reporting the abuse -- as if I was the problem. One administrator advised me to just drop it, since this particular Admin has had this issue for years, and nobody will do anything about it. I get the sense that admins are circling the wagons to defend their own, and nobody is going to do anything. I dropped my complaint. There's clearly just too much corruption going on there to expect that anything will be done. SimpsonDG (talk) 03:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

On the one hand, I do think that Wikipedia should be a profanity-free zone, and I strongly disagree with those editors who think that it need not be. They may feel repressed because they are not allowed to use profanity at their own workplaces. On the other hand, it appears that this ANI report was more than a year ago. Waiting a very long time and then trying to re-open a matter is not useful. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:05, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the AN/I report is current, Robert McClenon. See here. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The previous diff was to a 2014 discussion. User:Cordless Larry is right that there is a current discussion. However, now that the original poster has currently filed at WP:ANI, bringing this also to the Teahouse is forum shopping. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

That seems to be a similar discussion about a different user. Anyway, Robert is right that this only needs to be discussed in one place! Cordless Larry (talk) 17:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Talk about being taken for a ride. This discussion is taking place in at least three simultaneous areas now, all because no-one got their pound of flesh at AN/I; which, it has been correctly stated, is the proper place for such reports. Some would define trolling as asking questions to which one already knows the answer... _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 17:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Since this is the Teahouse where we welcome and encourage newer editors. SimpsonDG may not be aware of forum shopping and that having a discussion in three different areas is against the 'guidelines'. Implying that this new editor didn't get their 'pound of flesh' is insulting, because this newer editor 'may not already know the answer'. This newer editor may not be aware of how to search the archives for previous discussions. if you go to the user page of SimpsonDG you will read his/her announcement that they are no longer editing. This is unfortunate because this person described themselves as a physicist. He/she created three articles and hundreds of other edits. I usually don't share my opinion about anything on WP (mostly because this is not the place for such things) but this a very bad case of biting, insulting and creating a semi-hostile editing environment for this now past-editor.

  Bfpage |leave a message  13:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@Bfpage:, The editor has been around since 2007, so about as long as you. Do you consider yourself a "new editor"? Also, they have had that retirement message on their user page since 2011, so it has nothing to do with this thread at all. It would suit you to do at least a minimal amount of research before you accuse other editors of "newbie biting".--Atlan (talk) 16:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Any limit to the number of articles I can submit

I just joinned and want to have a feel of the teahouse (haven't seen any choco here though. lols). So I want to use the opportunity to find out if any limit exists as to the number of articles to submit per day; per week; per month, etc. I expect to have a nice contributing time here. Feels good.NigEditor (talk) 21:47, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, NigEditor. Unless you are planning to use an automated software bot to create new articles at industrial speeds, there is no practical limit to how many articles you can create. However, please keep in mind that quality is much more important than quantity. Even a brief but well-referenced article on a notable topic takes time to research, write, cite and illustrate. Please read Your first article for a detailed description of how to write an article that is useful to the encyclopedia, and won't get deleted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Any limit to the number of articles I can submit

I just joinned and want to have a feel of the teahouse (haven't seen any choco here though. lols). So I want to use the opportunity to find out if any limit exists as to the number of articles to submit per day; per week; per month, etc. I expect to have a nice contributing time here. Feels good.NigEditor (talk) 21:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

There is no limit, NigEditor; but writing an acceptable article is not easy and takes considerable work, so you're probably going to be limited by your own time. Submitting a large number of very poor articles might be taken as disruptive. --ColinFine (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Blocked on commons?

how can I be blocked on commons wiki for having an inappropriate username, when I have the same name on wiki Encyclopedia? doesn't make sense to me.Hot Pork Pie (talk) 21:43, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, one reason is if a name that is innocent in their own language is offensive in another language. (I've no reason to suppose that is the case here, though it occurs to me that some people might imagine there was a sexual connotation to your name). The more general answer is that they are administered by different people who might make different judgments. I see that you have appealed the block at commons:User Talk:Hot Pork Pie: we'll see what happens. --ColinFine (talk) 22:18, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

@ColinFine: yeah I guess we will. thanks for getting back to me. Hot Pork Pie (talk) 22:29, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

oh.Mao06840 (talk) 09:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Mobile and desktop views of diff are not the same

I am puzzled and confused by some differences between the mobile and desktop displays of the diff in Tony1's most recent edits to Independence Mall (Philadelphia). I have no issues with the edits themselves.

The mobile diff shows spaces deleted after </ref> and after the word "allée", but the desktop diff does not; and the page itself shows spaces there:

The first block closest to Independence Mall was completed in 1954. The design for the first block was developed by Wheelwright, Stevenson and Langren, a Philadelphia Landscape Architecture Firm. By their design, the block featured a central lawn surrounded by terraces, walkways and a formal allée of trees.[4] The next block featured a central fountain and a square reflecting pool. It was also surrounded by terraces and two brick arcades to mimic the first block.

This is not the only part of the page with these anomalies, just an example. Please, what's going on here?

My mobile device, which I have been using to access all these pages:

• Model: SM-G920V
• Android version 5.1.1
• Baseband v. G920VVRU4BOK7

(Lots more numbers, will provide on request.)

--Thnidu (talk) 17:31, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The desktop diff system (on my machine at least) does not highlight where number of spaces has changed, although the relevant paragraphs are displayed in the diff. In each of the cases to which you were refer, there were two spaces in the previous version and one space after the edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:55, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Thnidu, I do most of my editing on an Android smartphone, but always use the desktop site on my phone, which I consider superior to the mobile site in every way. I have written an essay User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing about this topic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:09, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: This is a bug in the Mobile Frontend, then. I'll report it on Phabricator.

@Cullen328: Thanks for the advice. I'll read your essay soon.

--Thnidu (talk) 00:30, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

• Please let me know if you decide there was an issue with the edit. Thanks. Tony (talk) 13:50, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Referencing

one links the same "reference manual" in several places but is gives it a new number every time How can one force it to give same number as on previous usage JP Labuschagne (talk) 17:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi JP Labuschagne
To use the same reference again, it has to be given a name, using the "Ref name" parameter in the citation template, or <ref name=selectedname> if you are doing this manually, instead of <ref>.
You then only need select the name from "Named references" on the cite section of the edit toolbar or type <ref name=selectedname /> to use it again.
Please see WP:REFNAME for a fuller explanation - Arjayay (talk) 17:42, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

JP Labuschagne, another option is to use shortened citations, which are described at WP:SFN. This format has the advantage of allowing you to use different page number from a single document, without having duplicate citations. If you want an example of the usage, see Mary Docherty, for instance. Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

A third option is to use the {{Rp}} template, which appends the page number to footnote superscript, and use a generic citation that doesn't specify page numbers. So I can cite like this.^[99] 71.41.210.146 (talk) 00:04, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia 15

Hello guys, It is good to know to know that Wikipedia is turning 15 years old this Friday, to celebrate I have created a GIF but I do not know where to post it? Can anyone tell me? Komchi^✉_☆ 16:40, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd sugegst uploading the image to Commons, then discussing it as meta:Talk:Wikipedia_15. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:21, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

How Am I Doing So Far? My very first article (HELP)

Good day Wikipedia teahouse patrons! I have begun creating an English version of a German article about a noted technology CEO. I know everybody is swamped like I am, but could Vanamonde93 or another expert please take a look at User:Philbutler/sandbox and give me some feedback? Being new to editing is exciting, and humbling. TYSVM. Philbutler (talk) 14:04, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome, Philbutler! I'm no expert on first articles, but I've been editing for a long time and I'm a member of the Guild of Copy Editors. I've just visited your sandbox and done some editing on your draft there. Some of it is typo fixes, some of it is adjustments of what seems to be fairly literal translation from German into more idiomatic English, and some is more general copyediting.

One piece of advice that I seem to give to a number of novice editors is that you don't need to mention the subject's name every time; in fact, it gets pretty tedious to read if you do. So I've changed many of your users of the subject's name to simple pronouns. This doesn't mean that I'm yelling at you for not noticing that. It is very hard to proofread your own work as if you had never seen it before.

In "Early Life and Education" I've piped a couple of links to educational institutions to condense, e.g.,

Higher Technical Institute HTL (Höhere Technische Lehranstalt)

to

Higher Technical Institute HTL

which provides the same information without cluttering the page with a title useless to the non-German-speaking reader, who after all is the main audience.

--Thnidu (talk) 17:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much Thnidu , I so appreciate the feedback and advice. I also appreciate you taking your valuable time too. The point about repetitive use of the man's name is well taken. I noticed it in the translation I got back from our translator. The typos, I only have myself to blame for (always a blight on my writing work). Again, I so appreciate the help, really. Philbutler (talk) 17:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

• • Philbutler, welcome. This is a very creditable effort for your first article. I would make a couple of minor points. First, try to clean up the reference formatting a little bit; the "Cite" option at the top of the editing window can be very helpful. Second, you've made a good start on the sources, but a couple more from newspapers/magazine articles will be helpful. I would also pay attention to the tone of your writing, which is at times more appropriate to a magazine; but this is a very minor concern, and will improve as you stick around here. On the whole, good job! Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Wow Vanamonde93, I'll take this as praise to make my week. Thank you a million for your help. I am finding the experience both fun, and challenging too, to be honest. As you suggest, I will read and try and emulate some of the better articles for tone etc. 20 something thousand magazine or news articles must have left an indelible mark (as did the typos propensity Thnidu alluded to). Thank you both again, I know you have better things to do, and probably zero time. Philbutler (talk) 11:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser

What special edits can I do with AutoWikiBrowser, that can't be done manually? Marvel Hero (talk) 09:08, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Marvel Hero (what a great name!), and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer to your question is - nothing. The longer answer is - it can allow you to make some types of bulk changes more quickly, easily and accurately than if you did them by hand. As an example, where I live in Australia many places have aboriginal-based names, and some of them are frequently mis-spelled. I have used AWB to find and fix some of the common mis-spellings I have come across, in whole categories or sometimes across all articles. So like many things, it's a matter of choosing the right tool for the job you are doing.--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:20, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Marvel Hero and welcome back to the Teahouse. WP:AWB is a semi-automated tool to make repetitious editing less painful. Last night I set it loose on my Watchlist and it went to work on nearly 6000 pages to look for common spelling errors like e before i and double words like 'the the' and 'at at', etc. About every 10th page had a mistake which AWB fixed and highlighted and I was given the option to save, skip, or edit the page. Mostly I just hit save. Sometimes I edited. It had an 'alert' section but on this round it did not highlight the alerts, so I could not easily find the source of the alert, so I just skipped over dealing with the alerts. AWB wanted to change somebody's last name and I sensed that might be a mistake so I left it be. I set up AWB to make a sound when it was ready for me to review a page. Every 45 seconds it would beep and I would hit save mostly. This spell check feature is a simple checkbox within the AWB dashboard.

A couple of weeks ago JoeHebda used AWB to set up a list of all the tips in the WP:Tip of the day library (366 of them) and he configured AWB to insert a new template within each tip called totd nav. It was actually a find-and-replace task as Joe set AWB up to remove some old code before inserting the new template code.

The following week I used AWB to insert a new WP:category in to each tip. I want to learn to use AWB for performing regular expression (regex) searches.

Here is a tip of the day about AWB: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/February 24 Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 14:04, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation clean up.

Is there a nice and succinct way to clean up the disambiguations and distinctions at the top of the Karait page? YuHuw (talk) 09:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I've made the first step with this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:42, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh I see now! Thank you David Biddulph :D YuHuw (talk) 09:56, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Sources

What do you do if a source is cited in an article, but the source is deleted when traced back (i.e it does not exist anymore)? Does the statement said by the source become irrelevant as it is not backed up by a source? Thanks for the help and thank you for doing this :) Rabt man (talk) 03:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rabt man. Reliable sources need not be available online so just because a source is not readily available at an old URL does not mean that it should be removed or that it no longer exists. Often, simply googling the title of the source will yield a copy at an updated URL. Our guideline says "Dead links should be repaired or replaced if possible. Do not delete a citation merely because the URL is not working today." For complete details and other ways to repair broken links, please read WP:DEADREF. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:29, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you :) Rabt man (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

@Rabt man: Try https://archive.org/web/ aka "The Wayback Machine". Paste the dead URL into the big address field you'll see there, over the "Browse Web" button, then click the button.--Thnidu (talk) 00:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Marcoartnyc/sandbox

I reviewed User:Marcoartnyc/sandbox and declined because it is a duplicate of Draft: Marcoart, and commented that the author had apparently created two copies. I also commented that the submission of autobiographies is discouraged due to conflict of interest. User:Marcoartnyc then replied on my talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARobert_McClenon&type=revision&diff=699036039&oldid=698977702

In particular, he wrote: “Hi Robert I just read your comment: Comment: This draft is an autobiography, and the submission of autobiographies is strongly discouraged due to conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2016 (UTC) what I don't understand is how this article differs from innumerable other Wikipedia Pages about individuals. So my question is what specific criteria does my article fail to meet, or said another way what attributes would my submission need to possess so that it would be, in form, structure, tone, and content equivalent to other neutral articles about notable individuals on Wikipedia, and as a part B to the question what specific types of corrections or modifications do I need to make to my submission in order to make it qualify as an acceptable article about an individual?”” How your draft differs from innumerable other Wikipedia pages about individuals is that it is an autobiography, and so is not written from a neutral point of view. When a reviewer includes a blue-linked phrase in a review, it is likely to be a link to a policy or guideline. Please read the policies and guidelines that are included in reviews. In particular, please read the autobiography policy and the conflict of interest policy. I am not ready to give specific advice on how to improve your draft. First, I am not certain that you meet biographic notability guidelines, but, second, most individuals, even if they are notable, are not likely to be capable of writing a neutral article about themselves (or a family member or their business). Maybe other experienced editors can also comment. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I read the draft, and it's not very good but still not as bad as some of the submissions I've seen. I think the main issue here is notability. A person who is traveling around New York City in a "Marcoart-mobile" is not likey to meet notability standards for living persons. When and if they are given broader coverage, somebody can help them mainspace the draft. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 22:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Marcoartnyc. You should be aware that Wikipedia has a specific notability guideline for artists, which says that an artist is presumed notable only if at least one of these standards is met:

1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.

2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.

3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

4. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

In all honesty, I do not think that you meet any of those standards. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Carlos Miranda

I reviewed Draft:Carlos Miranda and declined it as not having adequate in-line citations for a biography of a living person. User:95.210.108.58 then posted to my talk page: "Please be so kind to be more specific on your objections and I'll be too willing to comply when you illuminate me more on what is missing, what is not good enough, etc." I had mentioned that the first three paragraphs of the draft have no footnotes. Can some other experienced editor either explain to the author in more detail about the strict rules for footnotes in BLPs or explain to me why I am being too strict? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Personally, I would have accepted that draft in its current state (or at least not declined it for failing WP:MINREF, I haven't looked closely at the sourcing). In my opinion, the purpose of that decline template is to see if there are any moderate or serious WP:BLP violations or unsourced quotes that could pose copyright problems. A general rule I use in AfC is, "If it can remain in mainspace without any significant, immediate changes and I would be willing to defend it in a deletion discussion, I will accept it. Winner 42 Talk to me! 04:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Use of "space" for duration of time

In the article Jacobite rising of 1745 (as well as others) "space in time" has been used to describe the duration of time. Some of the edits that I have made have been reverted based on the premise that the previous "sounds better". Space measures volume vs. time measures duration. A calendar takes up space but the time on it takes up duration. Now I understand that "space in time" has been used liberally but it seems that when the wrong use of word has been made that regardless of how it sounds the wrong use of a word persists. What is the policy of WP?Srednuas Lenoroc (talk) 17:30, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't know what the relevant policy would be here, but "in/within a short space of time" is a well-established phrase. See here. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Col. Saunders, I agree with Cordless Larry. Describing time in spatial terms is a major underlying metaphor in English and many other languages. Consider:

• You have been called before this court... / I have to be there before ten.
• Jill came tumbling after / Repeat after me.
• I'll go on ahead / the days ahead
• We're approaching the end of the year.
• Christmas is coming.
• a short time, a long time
• This week has just whizzed by in a blur. / My days crawl by when you're away.

See Conceptual metaphor for further discussion.

--Thnidu (talk) 00:55, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I find your reference to my name offensive and I am certain that you would be the first to understand that you have absolutely no right to do so. It disrespects me, can on some levels be found to be derogatory and makes my name a mockery.

Space is measured by volume and time is measured by duration. The phrase to non-English speakers can be very confusing because it is not logical. I had always thought that its use was a sign that a person was either confused or just plain ignorant. If there is some special exception then for those that persist to use are justified to do so. What newspaper of record is willing to use it in their publication, and if they do is it only as a direct quote? What legal action has it within its text or does the profession regard its use merely for literary use. I would not regard WP as a literary pursuit. It is an act of encyclopedia that to a certain extent is a measurement of an absolute/definition of something. It is not a novel.Srednuas Lenoroc (talk) 05:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Srednuas Lenoroc. You can find an example of "space of time" used in newspapers here and here, and there are plenty more if you search. "Space in time" is perhaps less common and it's harder to find examples, because searching for that throws up many results along the lines of "Tim Peake blasted off into space in time for Christmas". What is the context in which you have encountered "space in time"? Cordless Larry (talk) 08:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I checked Jacobite rising of 1745, and I see you've made two edits to it recently. The first one changed "red silk with a white space in the centre" to "red silk with a white period in the centre" and appears to have been made in error - "space" is clearly correct there, not "period", as the sentence is describing the design of a banner. The second changed "in so short a space of time" to "in so short a period of time". Both of those are correct, in my view. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The problem with both examples cited of "news" reporting is that one is a reader asking the question which the newspaper then poses to its readers. It is not a "news" story to be found on a front page. The second example is an op-ed piece contributed to the newspaper and not written by the newspaper staff. So again, where are there examples of a contemporary newspaper that has its reporters write original verse with a phases such as would use volume to describe duration--and it is not a direct quote? If it cannot be found in an example of legal actions such as an opinion/ruling or legislation then the inherent confusion to be found by the incompatible comparisons found within the phase. It may be fine and dandy for novels but not works that are used to establish credibility such as encyclopedias.Srednuas Lenoroc (talk) 10:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I doubt that the writer of the letter wrote the headline of that article, Srednuas Lenoroc, but if you want more examples, there are thousands here. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:53, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

An advice column is not of the same writing importance as a front page above the fold current events report. Novels make great reading but they are fiction. Wikipedia is not a novel.Srednuas Lenoroc (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I haven't said anything about a novel, but I have provided a link to a list of lots of newspaper articles that use the term, as you requested. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:45, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

All varieties of English use idiom and synonym which may be illogical and appear to be imprecise. "Short/long space of time", note the qualifiers should be included, is a widely used British English synonym and if even English use guides like Fowler's Modern English Usage use it (example - read the entry on Google) then it's use on Wikipedia isn't an issue to me. Perhaps it's a term that should be added to Wiktionary but and absence of definition there is not reason to eradicate it's usage across Wikipedia. Nthep (talk) 11:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

There must be some misunderstanding here. I am not for an across-the-board eradication of the term at hand in WP; only its use as an original composed contribution to WP articles outside of a direct quote. Grammar exists to provide a logic that is not framed well with the phase at hand regardless as to how any "authorities" sustain it.Srednuas Lenoroc (talk) 08:22, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

The first definition of space in the Oxford English Dictionary is "denoting time or duration". Its use for denoting area or volume while not a secondary definition is not the first listed. Yes, grammar does exist to provide a logic and in British English space as a measure of time is perfectly acceptable. While it might grate to the ears to some or seem illogical to others, it's an acceptable and logical form in any Wikipedia article where British English is the form of English used. Wikipedia isn't here to create an international form of English and the variations are accepted, even welcomed - see WP:ENGVAR. Nthep (talk) 12:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

how can my article will be approved?

Please check if I have made the right choice of content to be posted. I have been asked by the person to create a wiki page for him. I have now put up all the available references as per my knowledge. Please help me out.11:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShahnshahGupta (talk • contribs) 11:12, 9 January 2016‎ (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. It is always useful if you tell us which page is worrying you; in this case I guess it might be Draft:Praveen Nischol? What you need to do is to read the feedback which you have received in a number of messages on your user talk page, and also in the feedback box on your draft. The words in blue are wikilinks to pages with more detail to help you. In this case particularly you need to read Help:Footnotes and Help:Referencing for beginners. On a formatting matter, you also need to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, ShahnshahGupta. If you have been asked by Nischol to create the page (which should be an article about him, not a page for him) then you should carefully read Wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest; and if you are in any way being paid to do this you must declare this fact. --ColinFine (talk) 12:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

ColinFine Thanks For reply, First I am not getting paid for it. I went through some of the articles about how to create a page. I have been trying to collect enough resources to make this article work for him. I do not find much news and refrence material about him on the net. can you suggest me how else I can put up the refrence and verify his article? ShahnshahGupta (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Language links are unrelated to article

Police district on the English wikipedia has 6 links to other language wikipedias, supposedly about the same thing. However, the French and Italian articles appear to be about a film. How can I fix this? I was going to just remove the fr and it links but I was taken to wikidata.org when I clicked edit and now I'm not sure what to do. If I remove the links from the wikidata page do those articles no longer have a wikidatapage? Please help, I'm having a hard time figuring out what the best course of action is Thanks! Maestroso simplo (talk) 06:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Maestroso simplo. A Wikidata editor incorrectly merged two Wikidata items about the concept of a police district and a French television series called Police District. The Wikidata item has to be split again so the French and Italian articles about the television series are still connected and keep the data about the series at Wikidata. I rarely edit Wikidata and don't know how to best do it. It's complicated by edits since the merge. If nobody replies here within a couple of days then I will post a request at Wikidata and link the request here. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:32, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

@Maestroso simplo:I have posted a request at wikidata:Wikidata:Project chat#Bad merge of Police District. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Thanks! Maestroso simplo (talk) 01:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Jason Mann

I reviewed Draft:Jason Mann, a filmmaker, and declined it because there is already an article on Jason Mann, a filmmaker. I received the following from User: Jasonlmann “Hi - I created the page for a filmmaker named Jason Mann. I see that you pointed me to the Wikipedia page for a different Jason Mann. They are, indeed, two different American filmmakers. For evidence, here are their IMDb pages: The existing Jason Mann: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2643355/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 The other Jason Mann (the page I am trying to create): http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1157607/?ref_=fn_al_nm_2 Also, please note that Google is also confused about this. Their Knowledge graph has a bunch of the biographical info for both men combined, but that is inaccurate.”

On the one hand, I would suggest finding reliable sources to verify that they are definitely two different people (e.g., with different dates of birth and places of birth). I would also suggest disambiguating the existing article and the draft, perhaps by the use of middle names. (If you need advice on renaming, known as moving, it is easier to ask one of us to do it than for us to explain how to do it. In particular, one of us will be glad to create the disambiguation page.) Do other experienced editors have advice on how to deal with two people who are easily confused?

However, I now notice that I apparently rushed through my review and overlooked an issue. It appears that the author is Jason L. Mann. If so, this draft is an autobiography, and the submission of autobiographies is strongly discouraged due to conflict of interest. If the author can persuade other editors that they are notable, they can ask other editors to assist them in developing a neutral draft.

The author has resubmitted, and I have declined again, and have requested a filmography, and a link to a reliable source that states that the two Jason Manns are different people. Comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:15, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

This will be kind of difficult until the section is archived, but this refers to this section, which has a duplicate section title. I could fix that if no one minds, until the archiving is done. The two sections will likely go in different archives.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:16, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Now archived.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:13, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

What to do to use a special character

I have need to use a combining acute accent and a combining dieresis (two superscript dots, in Spanish used over theu), in the article tilde. In this help page I cannot find how to do it or even where to go to to find out how to do it. The page on "Inserting Special Characters" does not help. There are lots of interesting characters in the Insert menus at the bottom of my edit screens on WP, but not those. I am using the Safari browser on IOS 9.1. I imagine I have to type in something like { {Unicode|some hex number}}, but I don't know what. deisenbe deisenbe (talk) 19:05, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: Hey Diesnbe, thanks for your question. Are you referring to ü? If you are using "edit source," It should be under the "special characters menu" under the Latin subheader; there is a scroll bar on the right side to show more characters in the list than the top set (starting with Á, á, À, à, etc.) As you said, there is also Template:Unicode which has relevant documentation page there. At worst, there you can always open up word processor and copy-and-paste, but the character is definitely available in special characters. Take care, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 19:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: Ah, I'm sorry, I misread the combination aspect of your question, my apologies. Give the template a try if you're aware of a hex code for the character first, I'd say. Alternatively, a copy-paste may be the way to go if you're aware of another source where this character appears. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 19:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Deisenbe! It looks as if you want to use one of these   ́ and one of these   ̈ . You might find one of these ´ and one of these ¨ easier to handle, though. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Greetings Deisenbe and I JethroBT, another somewhat backdoor solution would be to click on Wikipedia Main page, then on left sidebar-Languages section click on Español link which will display the entire page in Spanish. From there you can choose the special characters you are looking for. Regards,  JoeHebda  talk  21:30, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Deisenbe, I may be missing something, but I JethroBT's first answer appears to me to be correct. The ǘ character is indeed available if you select "Latin" in the drop-down menu below the edit screen. Just place the cursor where you want the character to go and click the character. Deor (talk) 22:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

The characters I need are at Combining diacritical marks. But I can't figure out how to insert them in a WP article. deisenbe (talk) 04:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: Do you mean a stand-alone combining character and not combined with a letter? Most browsers can copy-paste characters but I don't know Safari on IOS. If you know the Unicode number like U+0308 then you can write the html entity ̈ to produce ̈. Help:Special characters#External links links to http://shapecatcher.com/ where you can draw characters to get their Unicode number. There may be a lot of suggested matches. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:36, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry I wasn't clearer. Yes, I do want the two dots and accent without the characters underneath. This for an article on typewriter keyboards. See if you're interested Tilde#Role of mechanical typewriters.

In the table at Combining Diacritical Marks, the first line, undef the 8. That's the two dots (dieresis). Exactly what do I type to use this character in a WP article? How browsers display it is irrelevant. Then I'm going to put it on the Help Special Characters page because it sure ain't there.

I looked at the code for that page and all I found was a template and I have no idea what to do.

In fact, I also need the 1/2 and 1/4 symbols. Much too obsolete to be on the Symbols or Mathematical menus. Anybody know how to do them? Funny to think of characters becoming obsolete, but I think they are, just like Bell and Blink bytes. deisenbe (talk) 11:59, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: Actually, 1/2 and 1/4 do appear under symbols: ½ ¼. Is the toolbar not displaying correctly or something? This is what it looks like for me. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 12:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

They're definitely not on the Symbols menu as I see it using Chrome on IOS (iPhone) 9.1. I'll double check Safari but I'm pretty sure the toolbar is the same. I can't see yours. I get a pop-up menu with options about what to do with a .png file, but "view it" is not among them. I don't understand this as the iPhone uses .png for screenshots. Seeing the code of what I'm writing and what you wrote above it, the characters 1/2 1/4 appear, not the code to produce these characters. Unfortunately blocking and pasting on the iPhone is a pain in the ass. deisenbe (talk) 12:35, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Deisenbe, apparently the Unicode number for a combining dieresis and a combining acute together is U+0344, which produces ̈́. It doesn't (with the font I'm using) look exactly like the combination of diacritics in the ǘ character, but I can't find anything closer. Deor (talk) 13:14, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, I got it . It's &#x followed by a 4 digit hex number followed by ; gives me the character I want, which is 308: ̈ . Since I'm pretty sure Unicode has more than FFFF characters, this can't be the whole story, but it's good enough for now. I see now how to use the Template:Unicode. Thanks to all who helped, I'm amazed at how hard this was. deisenbe (talk) 13:29, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

The article has been fixed. All I need now is the code for non-breaking space, if there is one; hopefully the browser will honor that before the character, since it won't honor spaces. deisenbe (talk) 13:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Dependable WP has an article on the non-breaking space. It's Unicode 00A0. I was too old for Morse code (used for telegraph and primitive radios), but I sure did know the MT/ST. Which means you know of characters like that. deisenbe (talk) 13:50, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: The simplest way to input a non-breaking space is

 

No arbitrary numbers to memorize. See List of XML and HTML character entity references.

--01:16, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, KylieTastic, I see it is working now. You Rock, and I promise not to break it again.

Additionally, the image is now flagged for speedy deletion, and I am about to post a defense of the image to the file's Talk section. in uploading it, I researched all non-free fair use rationales that pertained to a publicity photo, and attempted to place the rationale correctly in the Upload Wizard. But apparently I did not do it correctly. Any advice? A2Ypsi (talk) 23:12, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Adding an English language version of a German Wikipedia page?

Hello Teahouse. I have had our translators create the texts for an existing Wikipedia page about a notable technology innovator. I have been involved many times promoting Wikipedia etc. but have never officially rendered a page, either for myself, or an associate.

I would deeply appreciate any help or suggestions for putting up the English version of this page with updates. Thanks so much, and Happy New Year too. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Tweraser

Philbutler (talk) 15:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Does WP:TRANSLATE help?--ukexpat (talk) 15:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, this is very helpful ukexpat, thanks very much. I already have the certified translation, but am (sadly) inexperienced at editing Wikipedia. I have denoted that you guys have made it much easier than when I joined years ago. I hope you will forgive if I revert back again with questions. TY very much. Philbutler (talk) 16:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Philbutler: Comments on English in your paragraph just above:

• denoted should be noted or noticed or observed.
• revert does not mean return, and in fact has a very specific technical meaning on Wikipedia.

(By and large, your English is quite good.) --Thnidu (talk) 01:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

A request regarding fixing of errors from some files

Hi! I am SWASTIK 25. I'm an editor in Wikipedia. I'm facing problems regarding these files and seeking help to solve them. I am requesting someone to kindly fix the errors/problems from these four files given below:

File:Mohun Bagan other logo.png, File:Dadagiri Unlimited.png, File:CESC Logo.png, File:Mohun Bagan A.C. Logo.png

Please fix the errors from these, before they are deleted. Thank you. — SWASTIK 25 (User talk) 08:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

@SWASTIK 25: Along with the license, for non-free (i.e. copyrighted) images, we've required an explanation of where the image is used and why it's permissible to use someone's copyrighted image in that way. What you should look at is Template:Non-free use rationale logo which has the details you need. I'd suggest looking at image pages for other logos as well since the exact language is pretty standard. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:16, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I have replaced the images above by wikilinks, because it is never permitted to use a non-free image in a non-article. --ColinFine (talk) 10:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Kindly fix the errors from File:Mohun Bagan Logo.jpeg too. @ColinFine: Are the above files now permitted in the articles connected with it? — SWASTIK 25 (User talk) 12:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

SWASTIK 25. I have no idea. I have merely fixed something on this page which I know to be forbidden. I haven't looked at anything else. --ColinFine (talk) 17:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

@SWASTIK 25: I have provided non-free use rationales for Dadagiri Unlimited.png, CESC Logo.png, and Mohun Bagan A.C. Logo.png. But in my opinion no help is possible for Mohun Bagan other logo.png or Mohun Bagan Logo.jpeg. The solution I used for the other logos does not work for these because they are used in a gallery, and the use of non-free files is almost never acceptable in galleries. —teb728 t c 09:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

physics

how aging can be slow down at very high speed ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.118.24 (talk) 08:05, 13 January 2016‎ (UTC)

Hi 119.160.118.24. It sounds like you are trying to get us to do homework for you. We won't do your homework, but I can tell you that you may find a clue at time dilation. —teb728 t c 09:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)