Wikipedia:Teahouse

AlanM1, 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

Updates and corrections to FDR and Polio List in general

I am not sure if this is where to discuss this or not, But, I'm sure you can point me in the right direction. I did some updates because of the new information reaffirming that FDR did have Polio. And, I see that some people are missing from the Polio Survivors List, and need to be added. I hope to be able to do that. Thanks for any help in this matter! OB93 (talk) 21:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Need Your Advice for Draft "CityU MFA"

My first attempt to have my draft titled "CityU MFA" approved is I believe on hold and I wonder whether I am on the right track moving forward.

Originally, I planned to submit partial content of CityU MFA to Wikipedia for approval, and generate more content along the waiting, and once the initial content is approved and the page is published, I could just "edit" and add new content to the page. But this approach appears not a good idea. According to editor Robert's comment (Thank you, Robert for your time reviewing the content.), the amount of content in the draft is too small to become a stand alone article and I should either add the content to an existing page or consult in Teahouse for further inquiries.

So here I am, seeking your advice: Should I come back with the full length draft of CityU MFA? What other options do I have in order to make "CityU MFA" a stand alone page?

Thanks a lot!

Knoxtennessee (talk) 18:55, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Knoxtennessee. In my opinion, it is not appropriate to have a freestanding article about a university degree program. Instead, degree programs should be listed in the main article about the university. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:54, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

The article in question is Draft:CityU MFA. As the author noted, there isn't enough content for an article, and, as User:Cullen328 noted, a degree program really doesn't merit a stand-alone article anyway. I don't see the need for a "full length draft" about the degree program. Edit the article on City University of Hong Kong. More information about the controversy about the program and its termination would be useful, but still probably belongs in the parent article. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:04, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

It occurs to me that the original poster may, like some other new editors, think that it is important for new editors to create a new article in Wikipedia. While creating new articles, when appropriate, is a very useful contribution to Wikipedia, it is hardly the only way that a new editor can contribute. It is the hardest task for any Wikipedia editor, whether new or experienced, and there are many other ways that new and experienced editors can contribute to Wikipedia. In this case, I would suggest expanding the existing article. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:07, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Permission to edit Jamaica article

Hello,

I teach composition at a community college in New York State, and one of my students wrote an excellent article on LGBT history in Jamaica. I'm wondering where to place it since I don't have permission to post it to the Jamaica article and that specific subject seems thoroughly covered in another article. Any guidance or permission to post would be helpful. Thank you.

Sarahmander Sarahmander (talk) 16:24, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@Sarahmander: You might start by creating it as a draft (Go to Draft:Article name, replacing your article's name after the colon), and from there submitting it for AfC. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 16:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Sarahmander. I am sorry, but you cannot add article content written by someone else to Wikipedia. You can only add what you have written yourself. If your student wants to contribute to Wikipedia, then they should consider registering an account and editing themselves. As for the specific content you mention, Jamaica is semi-protected because of problems with vandalism. As you mention, we already have an article LGBT rights in Jamaica, and your student may wish to edit that existing article in compliance with our policies and guidelines, cooperating with other editors interested in that article. We do not create new articles which are redundant and cover the topics of existing articles. Instead, we improve those existing articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:59, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

The original poster says that she doesn't have permission to edit the Jamaica article. The original poster is an autoconfirmed editor of long standing. The Jamaica article is semi-protected forever (which is a long time, and it should perhaps be considered for unprotection), but that should not stop her from editing it. If she tried to edit it and was unable to do so, she might have been logged out by accident. (General advice to registered editors: If you surprisingly are unable to edit an article, check whether you may be logged out. If so, the semi-protection was good because it prevented the logged out edit and permits a registered edit.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

More generally, as noted above, you should not add article content written by someone else, because they should and may create their own account. In the case of your student, she will need the ten edits and four days to be autoconfirmed, unless the article is unprotected. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

User:Jujutsuan - One should only submit a draft to Articles for Creation if there is not already an existing article. AFC is not for the review of improvement to existing articles. Some editors, in good faith, submit rewritten articles to AFC, but they have to be declined. Please don't advise someone to use AFC for improvements to an existing article. It causes confusion. It is for new articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I must have understood the OP differently from you, thinking "LGBT history in Jamaica" was sufficiently different from "LGBT rights in Jamaica" to possibly get its own article (and not aware of the stub already at that name), in which case AfC would have been appropriate. (I admit I skipped right over the part about it not being the OP's own content; that should have been a red flag.) Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 17:44, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft:TPConnects ‎

Hi, I have been twice asked by Raju Dubai on my talk page for a review of Draft:TPConnects submitted 8 June 2016‎. I believe it's probably notable enough, but not sure enough and hate to accept an article just to have it AfDed or PRODed... so just thought I'd post up and see if anyone else had an opinion. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:22, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Seek the assistance of any members if they have any opinion or can help me to tidy the references to be consistent to complete the process. You may also refer to this url http://www.thebeat.travel/post/2016/06/03/No-GDSs-Or-TMCs-Are-NDC-Capable-Yet-Based-On-IATA-Certification.aspx. Thanks in advance for any help Raju Dubai (talk) 18:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

User:Raju Dubai - There is a common belief among new editors that it is very important for a new editor to create a new article as their contribution to Wikipedia. While creating new articles about notable subjects is very important, it is not the only way that new editors can help, and it is the hardest task for new or experienced editors. In this case, you, a new editor, are pushing quite hard to get your draft article reviewed. The Articles for Creation review process is backlogged. However, you have gotten two comments, one that the company does appear to be notable, and the other, from me, that the references need to be made consistent. You haven't made the references consistent, and, if you are asking for help in making the references consistent, that isn't obvious. If you need help with the references, this is a good place to ask for help with the references, but ask clearly for help; don't just ask to have your draft reviewed again. When you ask so persistently to have a draft reviewed, it causes some of the reviewers to think that you have a conflict of interest. You have said, in response to my question, that you do not have a conflict of interest. So be patient. In Wikipedia, there is no deadline. We are all volunteers. Please do not annoy us by asking too aggressively for another review. Thank you for understanding that you need to be patient (a little more patient than you have been). Robert McClenon (talk) 20:44, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Deletion Policy Removed Mathematical Proof and Violate Deductive Argument.

Why a Mathematical proof requires Secondary source at Wikipedia!? I think for a Mathematical proof (in math or physics) Primary source is even more than enough!, Because it is base on deductive argument. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neophysics (talk • contribs) 11:42, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

• Hi Neophysics, there are a lot of 'proofs' put out by people/groups (i.e. a Primary source) that others disagree with or find fault with. So a good Secondary source would be need to validate the claim. If no Secondary source exists for a 'proof' then maybe its not valid. Ask any professor of mathematics how many poofs they get sent - I've seen multiple on YouTube (such as on numberphile) that have joked about the number of emails/letters they get claiming to have proven conjectures. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

please note: When something is base on deductive argument, It could NOT be wrong, In any way for example 2 + 2 = 4 {\displaystyle 2+2=4} 2+2=4 could not be wrong because of deductive argument. Neophysics

• Your question was for a "Mathematical proof", 2 + 2 = 4 is not a proof, it is a statement/declaration/definition. If your question is on things that "It could NOT be wrong" then your talking about definitions not something that has a "Mathematical proof". KylieTastic (talk) 15:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I partly agree and partly disagree with User:KylieTastic as to 2+2 = 4. Although for most people, that is simply a memorized fact, it can be proved using the Peano postulates. However, Wikipedia does not publish new mathematical proofs, which are original research. It is true that a mathematical proof "cannot be wrong" if it is correct. However, as noted, many proposed mathematical proofs, especially by amateurs of unsolved conjectures, but even by professional mathematicians, contain subtle (or not-so-subtle) errors, and Wikipedia does not have a peer review process. For a history of how difficult it may be to prove something (which cannot be wrong once proved), see Fermat’s last theorem. Fermat was almost certainly wrong in thinking that he had a proof that would not fit in the margin, but even the first proof by Andrew Wiles contained a subtle error that had to be fixed on the second proof. Wikipedia cannot accept unpublished mathematical proofs because they have not had the formal peer review process of published mathematical proofs. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Linking a page

Recently I edited a page and I wanted to link other pages in the edit. I added the URL but it didn't come up as the page but the link. How do I fix this ?? Thanks, STHTHEYCHEHE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sththeychehe (talk • contribs) 11:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sththeychehe and welcome to the Teahouse. To link to another Wikipedia article, you put the name of the article in between square brackets ( [[ & ]], for example, [[Wikipedia]] links to our page about Wikipedia. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Creating new articles

Can I create the Wikipedia page "Wings of Fire: The Dragonet Prophecy"? It's basically the book summary.Mango the RainWing (talk) 20:17, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mango the RainWing, it depends on how notable the book is. Has it been reviewed by critics? A book article should include a plot summary, but it shouldn't be entirely plot. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Mango the RainWing. I suggest that you begin by improving the biography of the author, Tui T. Sutherland. That article lists the "Rings of Fire" series of novels but says nothing else about them. Please read our notability guideline for books. Perhaps an article about the series of books might be appropriate, with a paragraph about each novel. It all depends on the reliable sources that you can find. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:02, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

First-time Edit: Expanding "Situations and Names of Winds"

I just went through the Wikipedia Adventure tutorial, and I'm excited to start contributing to Wikipedia, as I've benefitted from the site for years. The article I wish to expand is called Situations and Names of Winds which describes an excerpt from Aristotle's treatise of Meteorological Signs. The article is a stub. I first came across the article during my own research, trying to find the complete text. I did eventually source the full text, available online at the Loeb Classical Library website.

My question is this: for the sake of others like me, is it proper for me to copy the full text into the article (with citation, of course)? Since it is available for free, and (I assume) in the public domain, would this violate Wikipedia's guidelines? Should I simply include a link to the external website instead?

Thank you for your help — I'm new to this, and in my attempts to be helpful I want to make sure I'm doing things right! Jared Evans (talk) 20:07, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Since anything written by Aristotle would undoubtedly be in the public domain, I don't think it's inappropriate to include it. To me, including the original work (only if it's free, of course) just saves people from having to track it down somewhere else. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:31, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response! I'll find another article that includes a work's full text as reference for my formatting, and then get to work. Jared Evans (talk) 21:18, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I disagree with White Arabian Filly, Jared. Hosting the text of works is not what Wikipedia is for (if the translation is out of copyright, it could be hosted at Wikisource). A Wikipedia article on the work should summarise what reliable published sources have said about the work. It might quote from it, but the bulk of the article should be about the work, not reproducing the work. --ColinFine (talk) 22:00, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree with ColinFine. The work is pd, which means you won't have to tread carefully in terms of length of quotes, but the article should be a discussion about what secondary sources say about the work, not the work per se. Such a discussion is likely to use quotes, possibly extensive, but it is not likely that the entire work should be included in the article.--S Philbrick(Talk) 01:59, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm just going to clarify that I've never read the work being discussed, and my comment about including the full work was aimed more at short things like songs or poems. Obviously, it's impossible and impractical to include a 10,000 word work in an article. However, I do think it's fine to include the full work, if it's free, in articles like The Star-Spangled Banner. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 15:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Is Facebook considered a reliable source?

I have made a page about a social blogger who is a British convert to Islam and want to know if his facebook page is a reliable source of information about him? Socialmediaobserver (talk) 18:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Sometimes. Generally if it's basic info that isn't self-serving. See WP:SOCIALMEDIA. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 19:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Help me

I wrotea report for my IT project at school called 'the evolution of mobile phones', it was redirected to 'the history of mobile phones'. I coudnt save it to my computer and i really need it back. PLEASE,PLEASE,PLEASE HELP ME GET IT BACK!

HarrySharples12 (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, HarrySharples12. You can find your school project here. Please be aware that this is a collaborative project to build an encyclopedia, and that anything you contribute will most likely be edited by others. That includes redirects, which was the right thing to do in this case. Please never blank an article in anger. You can be blocked if that behavior contunues. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:51, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Totally frustated with Wikipedia's bureaucracy ....

Hello there, I am totally frustated with Wikipedia's bureaucratic and "dumb mind set" so it appears, in trying to get an article posted on the Fulwood Barracks site on wiki. It's all too excessively complicated administrative speaking and a procedure nightmare. Clearly I need assistance, is there anyone able to assist please or take ownership. The article refers to the Junior Bandsman's Wing Fulwood Barracks 1961-63

Yours faithfully Charles Dobson Also known as ... CD0060576 CD0060576 (talk) 15:17, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

The article in question is Draft:Junior Bandsman Wing Fulwood Barracks 1961-63. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

First, your draft was declined because it doesn’t have any references. Read Referencing and referencing for beginners, and the verifiability policy and the reliable source policy. Second, you have come to a good place to ask for help, but complaining about bureaucracy and a “dumb mind set” are not helpful; we are willing to overlook those as simply evidence of your frustration. However, the problem, as noted by the reviewer, is that you didn’t provide references. Third, when you ask for someone to “take ownership”, what do you mean? No one has ownership of articles in Wikipedia. If you mean that you need help, you have asked for it. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:27, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I can appreciate the feeling of frustration for a beginner. I had similar feelings a couple of years ago when I began creating articles for Wikipedia. My initial efforts were rejected, and at one point, I thought, "What's the use?" and gave up.

After a few weeks, I tried again. Several experienced WP editors gave me valuable feedback, which I heeded. I also paid more attention to WP guidelines, especially those regarding references and structure of articles. As I applied what I learned, my work improved and so did my enjoyment of writing and editing on WP. I still have much to learn, but the writing and editing are a lot more fun. Eddie Blick (talk) 18:37, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Eddie Blick, and thank you for telling your story. I am glad that you continued editing, and please stop by the Teahouse any time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:24, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

how do i delete my page

how do i delete a page i createdPooper pants (talk) 09:33, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Pooper pants and welcome to the Teahouse, I assume you were talking about Charles caluste; which is deleted already(A1, A7, and A11). Next time, you can place {{Db-author}} on your own article if you want to have deletion, Happy Editing. - INVISIBLE^-Talk! 09:42, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

This editor has been blocked for an inappropriate user name. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:23, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Publishing my First article on Wikipedia

I published an article QueryHome on Wikipedia main-space but the the article has been nominated for deleting now the article is been discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QueryHome. I have replied to the users. Please some one suggest what to be done to make my first article published without been rejected or deleted.

@indra 08:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atindrakn (talk • contribs)

First, you have been asked whether you have a conflict of interest in ownership of the site. If you do, please reply. Second, try to use Google or other means to find independent reliable sources that have described your web site. Third, your article needs copy-editing, and I will be tagging it for that. Fourth, your article has overlinking to ordinary words. Native speakers and writers of English find that distracting. (I don't know if it is helpful to editors for whom English is a second language.) Fifth, I am trying to find guidelines and essays on arguments to use and avoid in deletion discussions. Can someone help me? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:15, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello Robert McClenon. Please see Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. The shortcut is WP:ATA. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:56, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. That is what I was looking for. It is true that it says more about arguments to avoid than about strong arguments (where it directs to the introduction of the essay), but there are very many ways to make bad arguments. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:16, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

An apology for my former disruptive behavior at the Teahouse

Hello. this isn't a question about editing Wikipedia, and I am sorry about that. But I felt the need to come here to apologize for my disruptive and uncivil behavior on the Wikipedia Teahouse a year and a quarter ago. I am sorry for all the rude things that I said to the Wikipedia community and aboutt falsely accusing you of having an adgenda against hate groups, pseudoscience promoters, and pedophiles. I wasn't thinking clearly then. To be clear, I do not support or advocate these group's ideologies, "especially those of pedophiles who view adult-child sexual relationships as healthy and safe", on-or-off Wikipedia. Editors who hold viewpoints that support the ideaologies of hate groups, and pedophiles who promote pedophilia, or edit articles to support their views must not be allowed on Wikipedia. Please forgive me. Frogger48 (talk) 07:04, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination ready to go—now what?

This is my first time being involved with a DYK. It looks like it's ready to go. What's the next step? Who has to do it? Thanks. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 02:57, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jujutsuan and welcome to the Teahouse. As highlighted by me at that nomination, it needs an independent reviewer to say that it's good to go. After that, and admin will add it to the prep/queue area (not sure how long that will take, it sometimes takes 2 hours and sometimes a few days), where an admin typically checks it again (although it's almost always fine), and then it'll be run when that queue is selected by the bot. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:03, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@Joseph2302: Thanks! Is there any possibility of it being left too long for review and breaking some time limit rule? Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 19:11, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

No. Once it's nominated, it won't break any kind of limit, no matter how long the review takes. If you nominated within 7 days, as you did, you don't have to worry about time. Nominations don't expire, and it often takes a while for somebody to get to them. However, I got to it. 😊 White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:35, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@White Arabian Filly: Thanks. FWIW, I was a creator, not a nominator, but same difference in this case I guess. (?) Anyway, thanks for reviewing the nom. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 11:39, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Same note needed several times

Hi, I'm wondering if there is any way that I can make notes with a { { notelist } } like when we use the same reference several times so that the same note doesn't have to be shown several times. If it works with some other notelist I would use that as well.*Treker (talk) 23:08, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, *Treker. Please read about named references, which allows you to define a reference once and invoke it many times. Take a look at an article I wrote, Harry Yount, where a reference by William Supernaugh is used 23 times throughout the article, and several other references are used two to four times each. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328. But I guess I can't use notelist notes like that?*Treker (talk) 03:05, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Named references are supported by Template:reflist, which is to my knowledge, by far the most common way to display inline references. In all honesty, I do not recall seeing the notelist format used even once in my seven years of editing here, but it is supported by the software. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:11, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Wait. Wut. I've been around, but is there a way to implement something like <note></note>/{{notelist}} in the same way that <ref></ref>/{{reflist}} is used? That would be a super improvement on the way I've been using notes. TimothyJosephWood 03:37, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

~ `

If you want to use {{notelist}} then you have to use shortened footnotes and use {{efn}} to populate the notelist. If you want to use use named references then use <ref name=whatever group= Notes/> and {{reflist group=Notes as well as your regular reflist. Personally shortened footnotes are what I use whenever I can. Nthep (talk) 07:04, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Would you consider jacket cover blurbs published material?

My article about poet Bruce Isaacson has been rejected twice. Quotes about him from Allen Ginsberg and Jack Hirshman were published on the back of an Isaacson book, published by Zeitgeist Books, in which Isaacson is a partner, in a publication of 2,000 copies. Would you consider those quotes to be published quotes?Argotmerchant (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Judging from what you say, they are published, but they are not independent, and so cannot be used to establish that Isaacson is notable. Maproom (talk) 21:23, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Argotmerchant. Relevant to this discussion is the following sentence from our notability guideline for books: "This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book". What you call "jacket cover blubs" is the same as "flap copy". To me, it seems clear that material which cannot be used to establish the notability of a book also cannot be used to establish the notability of the book's author. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:14, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

The Keg : I am the co-founder together with George Tidall of The Keg and I would like to correct the record. How do I do this and what do you need from me as support documents? (108.63.241.7 (talk) 18:47, 24 June 2016 (UTC))

I wish to edit/correct the record on the Wikipedia page "The Keg" and need your advice as to what support documents you need from me so that I can proceed. History: On December 7, 1970 I co-founded and incorporated Keg n Cleaver Restaurants Ltd together with George Tidball, my financial partner at the time. I was the founding President and CEO of the company and all subsidiary operating companies. Keg n Cleaver Restaurants Ltd was the original company and the predecessor company of Keg Restaurants Ltd (formerly Westward Leisure Concepts Ltd into which Tidball and I exchanged our shares, which we then took public, and which later changed its name to Keg Restaurants Ltd). I wish to add my name John R Luttin as co-founder on the main page as well as on the side-bar to correct the record. i attempted recently to edit a couple of times but was rejected. Something about being promotional or otherwise/unsure of protocols. As support documents I can provide copies of the following:1) Incorporation documents with myself as President, co-founder & co-shareholder 2) November 30, 1972 Public Offering Document (Canarim subsequently renamed Cannacord) showing my shareholder/co-founder position and status and stating that I co-founded with Tidball. 3) LRJGlobal.com website with supporting facts regarding my Keg co-founder status 4) John R Luttin Linkedin with supporting facts regarding my Keg co-founder status. I would be obliged if you would advise me how to go about this edit so I am onside with your protocols and procedures. Thank you for your assistance. John R Luttin, June 24, 2016 108.63.241.7 (talk) 18:47, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, John R Luttin. Because you have a conflict of interest, you should not be editing The Keg directly. The legal documents you mention are primary sources and are of limited use here. Much better would be newspaper or magazine article mentioning you as co-founder, which can be used as references. The article really needs more such sources, as it is very poorly referenced. I suggest that you register a Wikipedia account, and discuss the matter on the article's talk page. When you have some references, notify me and I will help you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I am also notifying I dream of horses, the editor who reverted you several times. Perhaps they have something to add. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

how to write an article about myself for public information117.221.251.62 (talk) 17:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

how to write an article about myself for public information117.221.251.62 (talk) 17:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I suggest you read Wikipedia:Your first article, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Autobiography and come back here if you have any questions. Rojomoke (talk) 18:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

HOW CAN I START A TOPIC

OK, I TRIED TO WRITE SOME THINGS AND I KNEW THAT THEY ARE ALREADY KNOWN BY OTHERS ,SO I WANT TO COME UP WITH THE ARTICLE THEN OTHER FOLLOWERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN IT MY COMMENT OR RESPOND OR EVEN EDIT MY ARTICLE ,SO HOW CAN I DO THATBRAEN B STAN (talk) 16:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

First of all, turn off the Caps Lock. Writing in all upper case is seen as shouting and considered rude. Next, read the articles WP:Your first article and WP:Notability and come back here if you have any more questions. Rojomoke (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Title of a wikipedia page

How do I change the title of wikipedia page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Heights_Education_Group. Instead of "Education" group, it should be "Educational" group. Thanks Atchopra (talk) 15:39, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Atchopra. I have moved the article to the correct title for you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much Cullen328 ! I appreciate it! Atchopra (talk) 15:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

external links

What kind of external links are acceptable on Wikipedia? My recent entry of external links on New Heights Education Group was removed and I am not sure why? Atchopra (talk) 13:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Atchopra. You have been reverted several times because you have added blocks of text copied and pasted from other websites. This is a copyright violation and is not allowed here on Wikipedia. Brief attributed quotations are allowed but they must be presented as quotes and referenced. You are also trying to remove maintenance tags without resolving the issues or reaching consensus with other editors. These are the issues leading to reversion of your edits, more so than external links. Those may be more appropriate as "Further reading". Please discuss your concerns on the article's talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:24, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. Atchopra (talk) 15:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Can i create a page about Architectural Magzine which provide information about Architecture community?

I want to create a page named 'Building Giants', which source for the architectural community . Content of Building Giants includes very informative and important information about Conservation of architectural monuments, practicing architecture and design within the legal framework of Indian Government, Gap bridging of Theory and Practical form of architecture and design. Henna Honey (talk) 11:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Henna Honey. Whether or not to create an article about the magazine depends entirely on whether it is Notable in Wikipedia's special sense of the word. This is not about your opinion or mine, not about whether it is famous or important or popular or significant, or even about its quality. It is almost entirely about whether people who have no connection with the magazine have published substantial material about it, and published that in reliable places. If you can find several places where people who have no connection with the magazine have written about it (that excludes anything at all published by the magazine, interviews with its staff, or anything based on press releases from it) and been published by reputable publishers (such as major newspapers or books from reputable publishers), then you could write an article about it. Use the article wizard to create a draft, and then write entirely from what these independent sources have published about it (but in your own words, so as not to infringe their copyright). Do not use any evaluative language (eg never describe anything as "important" or "informative" unless you are quoting an independent source). I suggest you start by reading your first article, and then spend a few weeks improving existing articles, to get the feel for how Wikipedia works, before you embark on the major project that is a new article. Good luck! --ColinFine (talk) 11:54, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Greetings Henna Honey – In addition to ColinFine's answer above, for more information here on Wikipedia, so I would suggest checking out Portal:Architecture for all things "Architecture-related" and also WikiProject Architecture where editors collaborate together creating & improving architecture articles. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I have submitted tons of third-party sources for my topic and the Editor will now allow them.

Hello,

I was just reading the rules for third-party sources, those being ones who are known for fact-checking and are independent or have no ties with the subject/article being created. I am trying to edit the article Naam Yoga and I have listed many reliable third-party source references that keep getting rejected. The editor seems to have made an opinion that the text is promotional but the text refers to actual meditations for global peace that took place that are a part of history and recorded in many newspaper articles. When I try to improve the article, the editor Ronz goes in strips the article bare, even though the information that he took off stayed on wikipedia for many months without any editor having a problem with it.

I would greatly appreciate someone helping me to document a part of history that really happened with the many articles that I have. Can someone please help me?

Much thanks and grattitude, BobrilkensBobrilkens (talk) 20:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Talk:Naam yoga is the place for the discussion. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:18, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello Bobrilkens. On that talk page, Ronz has analyzed the shortcomings of the sources you tried to use. Here on Wikipedia, we insist on the highest quality academic sources for any medical claims. Please read WP:MEDRS for complete details. Also, we do not allow Wikipedia articles to be used for promotional purposes, and insist that articles be written from the neutral point of view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Greetings Bobrilkens and thank you for your visit to the Teahouse. Medical articles have 'stricter' requirements on the use of sources to support content. I am an experienced medical editor and would be glad to take a look at the article. I can probably use plain English to help you through the process of finding good sources but in a nutshell your references to support medical content must be from: A review article from a journal, a government health related website (like the CDC), or medical textbooks. There are exceptions, but not too many. So you can begin to search for journal articles, if you don't know how to do that, I would be glad to help! Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  09:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Error on Manual of Style/Trademark page

I didn't want to edit a Manual of Style page. I thought I would leave that up to a higher-level editor. The mistake is on Manual of Style/trademarks. I believe it should read "word" rather than "world."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Trademarks

"The ampersand (&) is frequently used in business names (e.g. AT&T), and the plus symbol (+) occasionally (as in Springer Science+Business Media), as substitutes for the word "and". A long-standing trend has been to drop the WORLD entirely (along with commas sometimes) in long, multi-party business names, especially after mergers or the addition of a partner (for example, Harcourt, Brace & Company became Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, later part of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)."
Vmavanti (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Done. Good catch. But it never hurts to be WP:BOLD. No one's going to get uppity about obvious errors, regardless of what page it is. TimothyJosephWood 20:00, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Changing my user name?

I am absolutely raw here, though a developer and publisher other ways for ages.

I have not changed anything yet because I noticed my username should be Defending All. Should I simply abandon this one or is there another preferred method?

Thank you! I look forward to improving the wiki within this amazing community and getting to know you all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddfending All (talk • contribs) 14:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello Ddfending All (sic), and welcome to the Teahouse. You can request that your account be renamed at Special:GlobalRenameRequest. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

How to reference an article of a living person when there is not much on internet to reference it all

I am creating an article for a Kenneth Raydon Sharpe. He is quite a big personality but most of what is available on the internet his negative. I want to put out the neutral staff for people to see the real man behind that name. Unfortunately i can't find referencing or citations for him. He has a personal website and some online newspaper articles written about him197.211.216.75 (talk) 14:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. An article about this person was deleted as a copyright violation of biographical information on his own website. Any Wikipedia biography must be based on summarizing what independent, reliable sources say about him. I see that he is mentioned in coverage of the Panama Papers scandal, so that must be part of any article about him here. Any article you write will be edited by others. You will not be able to control it for the purpose of covering up or minimizing negative information that is reliably sourced. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Datestamp settings

Hello fellow Wikipedians. I'm curious why the time stamp in page history is different from what people have written when they pass GA reviews. An example of this is located here. Is it a problem on my side or a problem on the GA reviewers side? If it is a preferences issue, where can I fix this problem? MrWooHoo (talk) 13:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@MrWooHoo: The date and time stamps of others edits or comments like the one you refer to will always be shown in UTC unless you say otherwise. There are two preferences you can change. The first is you local time (although this might already be set). In Preferences -> appearance you can set you preferred format and also set your time offset from UTC. The other is Preferences -> gadgets -> Appearance where you can set "Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time" Nthep (talk) 14:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

How to add cites

U412329 (talk) 11:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Hello, I am editing the Netherthorpe Airfield wiki site. I need to add a citation (5) for the information entered, please advise the process to add the citation to the text? Thanks Colin.U412329 (talk) 11:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, U412329. Help:Referencing for beginners provides all of the information you should need on adding citations. If you still have difficulty doing so, please do let us know here. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I need help with my references

I am writing an article about the steel company, William Cook. It has been declined twice due to issues with my references. If anyone could help me out a little bit with which references are standing out as inadequate, I would be very grateful. The article is not yet live, so unsure how you will be able to find it (I am very new to wikipedia, and learning lots with the help of others!). Many thanks in advance.

TreacleTurtle (talk) 10:12, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

The article is Draft:William Cook Group. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Robert McClenon.

TreacleTurtle (talk) 13:23, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

It seems pretty well sourced to me, TreacleTurtle, although I think there issues with the tone being promotional in places. MorbidEntree, could you explain your concerns about sources in a bit more detail? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello TreacleTurtle. I agree with Cordless Larry about the references. Most of these the references appear very solid to me, and the article does not seem very promotional to me. Given that this heavy industrial company is nearly two centuries old and is the largest of its type in the UK, I feel confident in concluding that it is notable. Can you please explain your thinking, MorbidEntree? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I'm so sorry. That was an error on my part. Not exactly sure how, but I must've misread the sources or something like that. I'll do my best to be more careful in the future. --MorbidEntree - _{(Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)}^(Contribs)(please reply using {{ping}},^{(unless this is on my own talk page)} otherwise I may not see your reply) 21:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

That's great news, thank you. Do I just need to resubmit the article as it is? Or does the refusal get reversed? Apologies, I am still very new to this. Thank you all again.

TreacleTurtle (talk) 09:07, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I have just seen that the article has now been accepted. Thank you all so very much for all your help and contributions.  :)

TreacleTurtle (talk) 09:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

speed delition

I have created article about new technology called E-auction 3.0 which has been created in Ukraine. My article was deleted, can someone describe why it was deleted and provide to me some feedback. Thank you! Pasha1443 (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Pasha1443, Wikipedia isn't an advertising site, and we only cover what reliable sources not related to the subject have said about a topic, not what the subject of the article says about themselves. You need to demonstrate that newspapers, magazines, major websites etc consider this technology significant.

From your comments here where you say that you're the creator of the company's logo, I assume you're an employee of this firm. While it's not absolutely forbidden to write about yourself provided you do so neutrally, we very strongly discourage it, and have a number of rules which you'll have to follow if you want to write about yourself. ‑ Iridescent 09:35, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Edits to templates not appearing in articles

Hi. How long does it typically take for edits to templates to show up in the articles where the template is used? I just reformatted Template:Paul, but even though it's been a few minutes the old version still appears on several articles. Thanks. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 06:18, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You are probably looking at a cached version, so you would need to purge the articles concerned. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:45, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Thank you very much! Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 09:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

My article Earth April got a speed deletion tag,Who can review my contest

I responded the tag on the talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Earth_April I am just wondering where can I find someone to review my response and remove the tag.Fn2gf3431 (talk) 03:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Fn2gf3431. It is not enough for you to assert that this group and its projects are notable. You need to prove it by providing references to significant coverage of the group in reliable, independent sources. At this time, the sources in the article are not independent as they are affiliated with the group. Please provide much better sources since otherwise it likely that the adticle will be deleted. Read and study Your first article for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

thank you, projects of the group, such as the film, have independent sources. Can I just add some info about the projects and the sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fn2gf3431 (talk • contribs) 04:46, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

If those sources devote significant coverage to the film but not the group, then Wikipedia should have an article on the film, not the group. Please add independent, reliable sources that give significant coverage to the group, if you want this article to survive. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:00, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia already has an article about the film The Superior Human? for a long time.I've edited Earth April Can you have a look see if it is ok? Also can you take part the AfD discussion of The Superior Human? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Superior_Human%3F

Fn2gf3431 (talk) 05:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

For some reason, you asked the very same question on my talk page, and I answered in detail there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:39, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Park City Mining District (split question)

I reviewed Draft: Park City Mining District, and declined it with the opinion that it should be added to the Park City, Utah article. User:DanielVGarcia then asked me on my talk page:

I saw that you had turned down our draft for Park City Mining and was wondering how I could put that in the Park City page? It is quite a lot of information and would absolutely ruin the flow of the page, however most of it is quite important, what would you suggest?

My question is whether other experienced editors agree that the information should be added to the History section of the existing article, or whether it is the opinion of other editors that the amount of detail is sufficient to warrant a split. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

It is not clear to me whether the mining district is completely enclosed within the city limits, or whether the mining district is larger than the city, or includes places outside the city. If it includes places outside the formal city limits, then I would consider that a good argument for a separate article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I looked at the sources and believe that Park City Mining District just referred to the area before it was incorporated as a city (and apparently the name Park City was already in use by early settlers even before there was any mining). I really don't think it is distinct from Park City. I think Park City Mining District should redirect to Park City. This draft article could be merged into Park City, or kept as a separate article named Mining In Park City. There is enough info for it to be a separate article, but combining them would work also. Mb66w (talk) 05:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

It seems that the author removed the decline tag that I had applied, and resubmitted the draft without changes. I will be advising the author that removing the AFC history is not permitted; maybe they didn't know any better. The draft was then declined by User:MorbidEntree as reading like an advertisement. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Is this footnote a mistake, or does it mean something specific?

I noticed this footnote: [2]:24 in the second paragraph of Hard bop. The reference is a book:

Rosenthal, David H. (1992), Hard Bop: Jazz and Black Music 1955-1965 , New York: Oxford Univ., ISBN 0-19-505869-0

I am thinking that perhaps it means "page 24 in the referenced book." Is that accurate? And, if so, is this an acceptable footnote style?

Many thanks,

Mark - Mark D Worthen PsyD 02:02, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Markworthen. Template:Rp was used for that particular citation. This template can be used when multiple pages from the same reliable source are cited at various points in the same article. I've used it before and as far I am aware it's usage has not been deprecated on Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much Marchjuly. I like the reference as it provides an economical way to direct the user to the precise location of the information, without having to create a separate reference for each page in a text. Kudos to the template authors. :O) Mark D Worthen PsyD 06:14, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Another option Markworthen which some editors prefer is to use shortened footnotes using Template:Sfn or Template:Harv. I used these before as well and they both work OK. Before you make any changes to the article's citation style, however, you should read WP:CITEVAR. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:36, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Article rejection

Hello my name is Kwaku and i had an article rejected due to lack of adequate sources. The article in question regards to a magazine called A2.O Magazine which has been working with celebrities from around Africa and young individuals within the continent to create some pretty cool stuff for the entertainment industry.

All the celebrities are popular and most of the same celebrates that featured on the cover or in the magazine feature in wikipedia articles. Was it because there weren't enough sources because I would assume that with the celebrates and new coverage that would have been enough. Ghanaeditor123 (talk) 12:41, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ghanaeditor123 - you seem to be misunderstanding our idea of Notability
We are not at all interested in the celebrities, or articles the magazine includes, what it says, or what its Press Releases, website, editor or anyone else connected to it, in any way, say about it.
Notability is solely based upon what reliable, independent sources, who have no connection whatsoever with the magazine, have said about it. Without references showing that the magazine has had substantial coverage, there should not be an article about it. - Arjayay (talk) 13:17, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@arjayay I didn't mean to say everyone cares about celebrities it was a used as a point of reinforcement to show credibility (I thought since they have been in wikipedia it would help) i wrote my first article on this company because i genially think what they are doing is cool I have no connection to it what so ever, neither do the media outlets that have reported on it.

Wikipedia is a great tool not just for individuals but for companies and I plan to write a few more on other companies. Unfortunately African media is still very pay us and we'll report on you so not everything can be trusted it's unlike more modern first world media where if an individual is doing something great they seek you out and report on you to help build your image. They are a lot of great companies who have local appeal but it's tough for them to get on sites like this.

but if you say the sources are no good they are no good.

Thank you Ghanaeditor123 (talk) 17:24, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@Ghanaeditor123: I was reading through the Teahouse questions and happened upon your question. While I do not have an answer to your question, I would like to warn you that Wikipedia has several policies about writing an article purely for promoting the company talked about within the article (see WP:ARTSPAM and WP:NOTPROMO), as well as policies regarding conflicts of interest (see WP:COI). Note that writing an article like an advertisement is not allowed (because Wikipedia is an information platform, not an advertising platform), while having a conflict of interest is just strongly discouraged (because it may affect the neutrality of the article).

I realize that I may be scaring you, but I'm honestly just trying to help. I'm trying to keep your article from getting deleted. (You'd be surprised how many users sign up just to advertise themselves or their companies.) Also, while I said no advertisements for companies can be on Wikipedia, that doesn't mean there can't be a page about them on Wikipedia, provided the page is well-cited with reliable sources, is notable, and is written from a neutral point of view. I've left a message on your talk page with some more resources you may find helpful.

Also, if you want to "@" somebody (as you seemed to be trying to do), just type {{ping|USERNAME}}, replacing USERNAME with the username of the person you want to "@" (ex. {{ping|Gestrid}} is replaced with "@Gestrid:" and notifies me when you click "Save page". -- Gestrid (talk) 07:51, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Copyright Question

I am looking for a portrait of a mid 1800's gentleman for an article. After much searching I understand there is a portrait of him while he was a judge in 1859. This portrait is handing on the wall in the Judge's chambers of a courthouse and I have been unsuccessful at getting permission to enter and photograph it. However, in 1960 a centennial book was written that has a picture of his portrait from 1859 in it. This book is out of print and the author has since died but they can be found in law libraries. What issues do I need to be concerned with if I take a digital picture of the picture in the 1960 book that is a picture of a portrait from 1859? Craig (talk) 19:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Craig.cgc. My answer is based on US standards. If the portrait was originally published before 1923, then the image in the 1960 book is free of copyright and can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Otherwise, it can be uploaded here on Wikipedia for use only in the biography of that person, under our policy on use of non-free images, criteria #10. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

It's likely the 1859 portrait was commissioned by the State to hang in the courthouse which he presided over. Although I can not be sure, it's unlikely this portrait was published before the inclusion in the 1960 book.

Craig (talk) 22:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

In that case, go with the second option I mentioned. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Side question - what constitutes "publication" in the case of a work of art? Does the act of hanging the original work on a public wall amount to "publication", or is reproduction in a different format (such as a photograph printed in a book) a neccessary precondition for "publication" to have occurred? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:20, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

The Berne Convention talks of the work being "... "fixed", that is, written or recorded on some physical medium, ...", rather than about publication. David Biddulph (talk) 09:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

From the US government copyright website "To publish a work is to distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. Publication also includes offering to distribute copies or phonorecords to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display. A public performance or display of a work does not of itself constitute publication." Nthep (talk) 12:41, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Nthep, so it's the distribution of copies that is the critical act. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:27, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

So it would appear - this is quite a useful primer for US works. In this particular case the portrait itself is now probably public domain assuming the artist, if known, died prior to 1 January 1946. If the original artist is unknown then it is definitely public domain. So anyone who can access the courthouse, can take a photo and licence it accordingly. Appreciating Craig's original comment that he can't get access is why we need to know more about the image in the book, otherwise Cullen's suggestion of loading under NFCC is not a bad idea - although some NFCC purist might argue it fails NFCC#1 in that a free image could be obtained i.e. by getting access to the courthouse. Nthep (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I will be making a trip to the library in the next couple of weeks to evaluate the contents of the 1960 book. I'll report back with my findings. Very helpful information, thanks again. Craig (talk) 23:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you all Craig (talk) 11:46, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I have uploaded the picture to file space and added additional information to it's talk page. Cullen328 Nthep Craig (talk) 14:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

References

I'm having trouble with the references in the page I am writing on Eugene Lion. I've nearly fixed the format. The feedback from the reviewer tells me the references are vague. Most are reviews of productions Lion directed or wrote and directed. Two are scholarly comments on one of his plays. I cannot figure out what is wrong with them.Wendy Burton 05:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendyeb (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wendyeb. All that "author unnamed" stuff in your draft is strange and unneeded. We do not point out that some articles are unsigned. But your references lack far more important bibliographic details, such as the titles of the articles. You render names of publications in quotes, while our Manual of style calls for italics. Publications with generic names should include the city of publication. Page numbers should be included if the source is not available online. We do not cite authors just by surname, but include the full author name. You have previously been referred to Referencing for beginners. Please read and study it, and follow its excellent advice. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:23, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wendyeb This is the same advice I already gave you several days ago at User talk:Dodger67#Request on 22:27:14, 18 June 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Wendyeb, more than this we cannot do as we don't have access to the sources, you do. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Your signature appears to be broken, Wendyeb. I suspect this is because you have "Treat the above as wiki markup" ticked in your preferences. Try unticking this box. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that suggestion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wendyeb (talk • contribs) 05:51, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I have studied the Referencing for beginners. I continue to study this document. I continue to correct the errors I have made. I asked my questions here because a friendly note from User talk:Dodger67 suggested I might find the Teahouse a friendly place to ask some questions. For example, I have, in my editing, chosen Italics from the choices to render names of publications. In the Read version I see Italics. In the Edit version I see quotation marks. Cullen328 has helpfully pointed out I should be using italics. Thing is, dear friends and helpful editors - I am using italics. Wendy Burton (talk) 04:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

May I suggest using the visual editor for the time being to add your references? (Instructions to enable it if it isn't already enabled are at the linked page page under big text that says Enable Visual Editor.) While the visual editor can't currently be used for everything and the source editor is still widely preferred, it has a great feature that generates the reference after you put in the correct information. I recommend against using the automatic generation in favor of putting in the information manually. After you put in the information (the form comes up on any page after opening Visual Editor by clicking Edit at the top and then clicking Cite.), click Insert, and then click Insert again. After you're done adding all your citations, click Save page and add an edit summary (such as "added refs"), then click Save. -- Gestrid (talk) 17:18, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Dispute resolution and IP adreass that changes

I made a request for page protection but was told to do Dispute resolution but the IP address that edited the article keeps changing how do i do dispute resolution with a ip address that changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flow234 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Flow234. The first step is to discuss the matter on the article talk page. Have you tried that? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:57, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Deletion policy Bypass

Most of Wikipedia's Physical & Mathematical Articles with Secondary Sources are Completely Wrong because of Deletion Policy's Bypass:

A large number of scientific articles (even with Secondary source) on wikipedia are completely wrong, They bypass Wikipedia's Deletion policy. Wikipedia's scientific articles need to be reviewed by professional scientists, Wikipedia's Secondary source policy was useless in this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neophysics (talk • contribs) 16:04, 26 June 2016 (UTC)