Wikipedia:Teahouse

Welcome to the Teahouse...                        

A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

PrimeHunter, a Teahouse host

Question forum

Host profiles

Guest profiles

Experienced editor? Become a host!

Learn more about the Teahouse

Articles to improve

Question archive

Guest archive

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

Clean start

Nearly two or three years ago, I used accounts to edit Wikipedia. I initially used one account, but I made disruptive edits in good faith. Then I had a clean start under a new name with less disruptive editing. However, there were still some serious embarrassments. I then drastically decreased my activity level, editing as an ip (without disruption) sporadically. Both old accounts are fully abandoned. Is this reasonable under Wikipedia:Sock puppetry and Wikipedia:Clean start? Should I create a new account to restart for the second time? Thanks. 211.100.57.204 (talk) 10:31, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor using an address ending in ...204, and Welcome to the Teahouse. It is perfectly acceptable to edit while not logging in, i.e. to use an IP address as your user name, provided that you do not also use your old accounts to edit the same topics, or otherwise edit deceptively. You could think of it as a second clean start, and all the same rules and principles described at Wikipedia:Clean start apply. This is, of course, assuming that you were not under any actual sanctions (as opposed to loss of reputation).

You are in no way required to create and use a new account. However, as you should know, there are some benefits to using an account, including: a useful user talk page, user sub-pages and sandboxes, increased privacy, a watchlist, , the ability to receive notifications, and the ability to build positive reputation. If you therefore choose to edit from an account, you may create and use one if you choose. I would urge you to follow all the advice at Wikipedia:Clean start, and very carefully stay clear of any disruptive editing. DES ^(talk) 12:47, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I have another related question. Wikipedia:Clean start requests one to use {{retired}} in order to indicate inactive accounts. Is this necessary if the account is inactive for the long period of time stated above? (please note that the new IP address in the signature might be different due to address changes) 211.100.57.204 (talk) 09:16, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Sorry, I forgot to use this to notify last time. 211.100.57.204 (talk) 09:42, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Note that WP:Clean start says: To reduce the chance of misunderstandings, you should note on the user page of the old account (while logged in under that account) that it is inactive, by using the {{retired}} tag or leaving some other message. This is never required, although it is a good idea. Whether to use the Retired template or a simple note is a matter of style and preference, the only point is to let people know that you do not intend to return using that account. People have been known to return after breaks of multiple years. Note also that if you do it, it should be done while logged in under the old account, so as not to make any public connection with any new account or IP. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 11:48, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Therefore, no notice on the old user page is strictly required if the old account is clearly abandoned due to the clear lack of activity in the last few years? Thanks. 211.100.57.204 (talk) 11:56, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

• No. I think it is required. It is under the "How to clean start" section and it says you should. If not required, why it is under the section "How to clean start"? BTW why this anonymous user do not want to add this template? 185.197.72.213 (talk) 12:02, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

• No, "should" means "strongly advised", but not required. If it were required, the page would say "must". And if done, it need not be by template, simple prose such as "I have ceased using this account." will do. The page also says If you decide to make a fresh start and do not wish to be connected to a previous account, simply stop using the old account and create a new one that becomes the only account you use.(Emphasis added) And remember that all Wikipedia editors are anonymous except for the few who have disclosed their legal names. The editor with the IP ending in 204 may not still have the password to the old account, or may not want, by editing it now, to suggest a connection to this posting or any about-to-be-created account. Or there may be other reasons. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:18, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
• Not sure. If so, it can be misused or abused. It may be a kind of socking. E.g. when someone is noticed for their disruptive edits and their account become infamous, they can simply abandon them and become a "new editor". By using the new account, they may be target the same articles with the same form of disruptive edits but they be less likely to get banned, since no one will be able to know their past actions. There is something unfair here. It is open to abuse. 92.63.109.253 (talk) 12:34, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, a clean start can be abused. So can editing while not logged in. But in practice, if an editor returns to the same topics after a clean start, the identity is quite likely to be detected, which will not improve the editor's reputation. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:46, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
    • But may not be detected too? Especially on low-profile articles. And does this have a limit? Can an user request a "clean start" second time, third time, fourth time? It is silly, i think. It must have a limit. I think an user has only one right to clean start. Otherwise, it is also very open to abuse. 92.63.109.253 (talk) 13:02, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
    • I agree with DES. Editors are advised to indicate the old account is retired to reduce the chances of accusations of improper socking being levied. If they are willing to take that risk (and consequences) then they're not forced to use any template or message. And multiple clean starts are not disallowed. We don't block an anonymous editor whose IP changes on a regular basis so why should we block someone, editing uncontentiously, who decides to start afresh every so often? It's harder for them, making sure they follow the provisions of a clean start with every new account, but as long as they do, they can edit in peace. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:05, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
      • Question1: If an account gets blocked for socking, can't the sockmaster use this an excuse to escape the block? They may say that the account was not a sock, but a new account for a clean start.This might be very abusive. Question2: Lets assume that i am a disruptive editor. When my disruptive edits are noticed, i request a clean start and continue obviously the same behaviour. Then again, others notice me and i request an another clean start and continue the same thing...This is undermining all the WP sanctions and policies. Based on this, every abusive editor can easily manages to jump from gun. Am i wrong? 92.63.109.253 (talk) 13:18, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
        • Yes, you're wrong. "Changing accounts to avoid the consequences of past bad behaviors is usually seen as evading scrutiny and may lead to additional sanctions. Whether a new account is a legitimate fresh start or a prohibited attempt to evade scrutiny is determined by the behavior of the new account. A clean start is not permitted if there are active bans, blocks or sanctions (including, but not limited to those listed here) in place against the old account." WP:SCRUTINY is key. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:35, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
        • (edit conflict) To save jumping down all the hypotheticals, regardless of an IP (or account) being used as a clean start, if they edit disruptively or in a manner which is clearly not here to build an encyclopedia they'll end up being blocked -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 13:38, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
        • Don't have very much to add other than there's no need to worry about abuse of WP:CLEANSTART, because it's supposed to be an option available only to good faith editors who at least try to abide by policy. Say you're being harassed or something like that, you may abandon your current account and create a new one, and that's fine. When currently blocked/topic banned users try to make a clean start, it's just called sock puppetry. Sro23 (talk) 18:38, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

So the interpretation seems to be different for every person. Thanks to everyone who have discussed their views. (The IP is different this time) 211.100.57.174 (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

No, it is not. WP:SCRUTINY is key as NeilN said and it is only for good faith editors as Sro23 said. 62.109.16.184 (talk) 14:02, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I am facing a difficult decision right now whether to leave a message with my old account (using something like {{retired}}). Some say that it is required where others said that it is a "should" only and can lead to the connection of the two accounts. What should I do? (The IP is different again) 1.180.206.196 (talk) 07:56, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

As stated above, WP:CLEANSTART specifies that "you should note on the user page of the old account (while logged in under that account) that it is inactive", but not that you must. It is highly recommended, but not required. My own view is that you would be well advised to add such a note, because it will help demonstrate that you are acting in good faith. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:04, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

But it is still not strictly required, is it? 1.180.206.196 (talk) 08:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Please read my comment again - I wrote that it is not required. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:27, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

is Wikipedia considered as a social media?

Wikipedia is an inforation business,although Wikipedia is considered as social media by some sources,Wikipedia is actually about information sharing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.250.241.7 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the question. Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia. It is emphatically not a social media site. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

While Yunshui rightly points out that the aim of Wikipedia is not to be a social media, de facto it is a place where people with somewhat common interests discuss and share content, even though discussions should remain germane to the goal of improving the encyclopedia. Said otherwise, while you may make friends here, that is not the goal.

In the future, you should use the Teahouse (and the similar Help Desk) for questions relating to editing Wikipedia; questions about the outside perception of Wikipedia or other subjects should go to the suitable Reference Desk. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:50, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, to the OP, you said that Wikipedia is an information business. Just want to be clear that isn't correct. It's not a business, its a non-profit institution similar to the open source movement in software development where people contribute things for the satisfaction of the work and the experience of working collaboratively with a great community, not for monetary gain. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 02:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

• Please read WP:NOTFACEBOOK. It is definitely not a social media. 62.109.16.184 (talk) 13:58, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Well WP:NOT is a little... misleading to say the least. Many things that "Wikipedia is not" it actually is. It is simply these things incidentally. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:53, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

Claiming a redirect to create a new page

Hello I work for a registered charity in the UK (The Officers' Association) and have joined Wikipedia in order to create a wiki page to represent our organisation. When I search for "Officers' Association" there is a redirect in place that points to the Royal British Legion (RBL) - Another much larger UK charity who we work closely with. As you can see from their page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Royal_British_Legion) it lists the Officers' Association as one of the merged organisations that formed the RBL - This is factually inaccurate.

Can you recommend the best course of action to create this page and remove this redirect? We have a good relationship with the RBL so I could approach them but would like advice on what I should be requesting first.

Many thanks

James

Officersassoc (talk) 11:31, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey Officersassoc. Well first you should register a new account since your current one is a violation of our username policy since it appears to be promotional and implies shared use. Nearly anything will do just fine, including "James at OA" or just literally gibberish.

Second, you should carefully review our policies on conflicts of interest and take care to abide by them, since failure to do so can result in a lot of unwanted attention.

Finally, if you would like to attempt to write the article yourself, and you're pretty sure it meets our standards for notability, you should start it as a draft, which can be done by clicking here -> Draft:The Officers' Association. When you think you're nearly finished, you can submit it to our Articles for Creation project where a volunteer can review it and offer feedback.

You probably also want to check out our tutorial on writing your first article, or consider taking our interactive tutorial at The Wikipedia Adventure. There's a pretty big learning curve in writing for an encyclopedia, and these can save a lot of trouble if get a feel for things first rather than jumping right in. TimothyJosephWood 12:43, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

One more thing, Officersassoc, to add to what TimothyJosephWood says: No Wikipedia article "represents" an organisation, other than Wikipedia. If Wikipedia has an article about your organisation, it will not "represent" your organisation, it will not be owned by your organisation, and your organisation will not have control of its contents. It is basically not your job to write a Wikipedia article about your organisation, because you are likely to find it hard to judge what is and what isn't promotional. This is why editing with a conflict of interest is discouraged. My recommendation would be to drop the idea, and (if you want to contribute to Wikipedia) find other articles to work on. But if you choose to continue, follow TJW's advice. --ColinFine (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I have created a stub here, since the redirect is wrong. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

Can I create this page?

I want to create a page of a celebrity dietician based in India. She is a consultant with NDTV health section, very popular with media - print and digital.

If I create this page will it be accepted?

Shilpa Arora (talk) 13:01, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey Shilpa Arora. This really depends on what types of sources are available and whether or not the subject meets our standards for notability, which is normally shown by demonstrating that the subject has received sustained in-depth coverage in reliable sources. TimothyJosephWood 13:59, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The best way is to create a Draft and then submit it via The article for creation process. There, an experienced editor can judge whether the page is fit for Wikipedia or not. They can then move it to the main space if its OK or suggest you ways for improving it if its not. Regards, Yashovardhan (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Uploading a profile picture for one magazine I work for, creating an entire page for another

Dear Wiki Users,

I am an editorial assistant working for The Magazine ANTIQUES (TMA) and MODERN Magazine (MM). I have two questions:

1. I noticed that TMA doesn't have a header image and I was going to add one. We have the rights to use whatever was on our covers, so I was going to upload our May-June cover. However, since it's the company and not I who specifically owns the copyright, is it ok for me to upload it using my user account?

2. MM has no page. Is it conflict of interest for me to create it, using just basic info (publisher, editor, owner, basic history)?

The magazines have been around for, respectively, 95 and 9 years. I've been working for them for a little over a year.

Thank you. Samg0DD^m (talk) 18:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

(2) Yes, since you work for them it is a conflict of interest not only to create the page but to work on it at all. See the guideance at WP:COI. (1) The image must be released under a free licence that allows for re-use. RudolfRed (talk) 19:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, RudolfRed.

Samg0DD^m (talk) 19:19, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Samg0DD^m you not only have a conflict of interest, you are a paid contributor. You must disclose this in accordance with the instructions at WP:PAID.

When RudolfRed says the image must be released under a free license, that is correct, but you cannot release it. The copyright holder must release it. Once it is released, anyone in the world will be able to display it, sell it, create modified versions of it, or muse it in pretty much any way at all, provided that the source is attributed. See the details at Donating copyrighted material. Oh your employer having the "rights to use" an image would not be sufficient, the actual copyright holder must consent to the release.

Once you disclose your connection, you could use the article wizard to create a draft, under the articles for creation project, which will need to be reviewed and approved by an experienced editor before it goes live. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, DES. I've learned a lot. Will try to familiarize myself with the procedure before attempting anything else. Samg0DD^m (talk) 21:11, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

• |The image could be uploaded under fair use exceptions,provided it meets Wikipedia's requirements see WP:FAIRUSE. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC).
  

How do I change the cascade protection lock icon?

Note: For background, see this discussion.

Hi! Does someone here know how to change the color of the cascade protection lock icon? If so, please let me know. Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 04:09, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Noah Kastin I believe what you need to do is make the change at Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items/content, and specifically:

<td class="mbox-image">[[Image:Padlock-goldturquoise.svg|40px]]</td>

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer, Fuhghettaboutit!

Unfortunately, I can't make the proposed change, due to the fact that Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items/content is fully protected. Can you make the change for me?

I also noticed that both Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items and Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items/content seem to share the gold lock icon. I also noticed that, while Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items/content states that it has the WP:CASC shortcut, this redirects to Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items, which also claims to have the WP:CASC shortcut. Does this affect where the lock icon should be updated?

In addition, should the turquoise lock be added to Wikipedia:Protection policy and updated at Wikipedia:Protection policy/Padlocks? Sub-post added at 03:04, 11 June 2017 (UTC) by Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋).

Thanks for the help!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:50, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Unless I should not make these changes, I will proceed to make all of these changes, except for the one to Wikipedia:Cascade-protected items/content, which I will ask an administrator to do, as the page is fully protected. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Gallery not working in article

At the page Jungfernstieg station, there are blank subsections under "Platforms" titled "Photos of U-Bahn (U1) and S-Bahn (S1/S2/S3) platforms" and "Photos of U-Bahn (U2/U4) mezzanine and platforms." I noticed this, and when I looked into the source code, I found that there were images encoded into the page using the Gallery template, but they were not showing up in the article. There doesn't appear to be anything wrong with the way the gallery is encoded into the page, so how do I make the images visible?

Thanks,

DraconicDark (talk) 22:36, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi DraconicDark. The gallery templates had "state=collapsed", not a documented field, and there doesn't seem to be a way to uncollapse them. I removed the field and now the images are visible. StarryGrandma (talk) 02:31, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. DraconicDark (talk) 14:30, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

how many 'teahouses' are there?Wholecube (talk) 05:31, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

how many 'teahouses' are there ? im wondering if there are many more teahouses with many other hosts.Wholecube (talk) 05:31, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Wholecube There´s several places on WP to discuss different things, if that´s what you mean, see Wikipedia:Dashboard. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:06, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Wholecube. There is only one page called "the Teahouse", this one. To obtain help with using Wikipedia there is also the help desk, and Editor assistance. Beyond that, the dashboard mentioned above provides many useful links. However, please do not ask the same question on different pages. It wastes people's time, and tends to get negative reactions. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Replacing an existing image

I would like to replace the image in the infobox on Tree swallow, File:Tree-Swallow-Portrait-Wiki.jpg, with an image I took myself that I think is of more encyclopedic value (it shows the tree swallow's entire body at rest, sitting on a post). Do I go to Commons, upload a new revision of the file, and change the licensing, or am I supposed to upload an entirely new file and replace the file on the article? If it's the latter, should the old file be nominated for deletion once it's no longer used? --Iiii I I I (talk) 06:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello @Iiii I I I: and welcome to the Teahouse. Images on Commons are usually not overwritten, unless it's a minor technical improvement or bug fix in the original image. More detailed guidance about this is available at Commons:Commons:OVERWRITE. Please upload a separate file and replace the file link in the en-Wiki article, if the new file is considered better. Regarding deletion of "old" files: unless the file is clearly out of scope, damaged beyond repair, or provides false information, it is usually retained. Maybe someone else wants to use it for a different purpose, or other editors disagree with you and prefer the other image. So it's almost always better to keep such images just in case. GermanJoe (talk) 07:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the link GermanJoe – hopefully this is correct (and hopefully the image is better). --Iiii I I I (talk) 07:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Iiii I I I. That's a beautiful image. If you have other interests in this area, you might join or take a look at the resources at Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds (I am a member). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Help

Hi, I had to know if there was any way to view certian google books whose preview were unavailable. For instance, Daisy and Ducky Mallard By Judy Moulton, this book on this link has only few pages that can be seen. However, it contains a lot of useful information. I tried searching it a lot on other places, and was unable to. So, could anybody help me out and suggest where to view such books? Adityavagarwal (talk) 08:17, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Adityavagarwal, and welcome to the Teahouse. The availability that Google provides to different pages in its scans is a decision that Google makes, partly based on its contract, if any, with the publisher. Wikipedia has no control over it, and Google has not published how different search terms may change the result. In some cases you can purchase access to a complete ebook version. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:20, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

In general, if you want extracts to help write a Wikipedia article, you could make a Resource Request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange, However, given that this is a children's story-book, I cannot see that the content would help write in writing or improving one of our articles - we don't provide extracts for bed-time story reading. - Arjayay (talk) 10:57, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Adityavagarwal, as Arjayay says, that is definitely not a reliable source, or in any way useful, for your edits to our article on the Mallard. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:03, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, my bad. I did not know it was a children's story-book for bed-time stories (even though it looks like :P), as there were very few pages in the preview by which I would be able to know if it is reliable (only 2 written pages, two pages containing drawings, a cover page, and a copyright page). I was trying to find resources to information added previously. However, the information present in the second written page is true and also when I tried searching for more about Mallards, in the google search links, this book came up with those lines; however, even the preview was not available for them. So, I thought it would contain a lot more of useful information. Also, how were you able to determine that the source was not reliable? I saw WP:RS again, but it is a published book and also the information provided was true, and not that it was just basic information which would be available anywhere. Consequentially, I would be able to take better care of the reliability issue. Thank you for making me know about that source. :D Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:42, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

If a page is unprotected , how can I make it semi-protected?

The page Dhaka should be semi-protected as far as I think.Wholecube (talk) 08:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Wholecube. You can ask at Requests for page protection. Follow the instructions, and provide good reasons for the request.

By the way, please do NOT include signatures in section headers. I have removed this one. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Wholecube Do you have any references for your removal of pronunciation from that article? Dbfirs 09:34, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Wholecube, After a quick look at Dhaka, I don't see the level of vandalism or other problems that woulds warrant semi-protection, but I only took a brief look and perhaps I missed something. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 10:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes sir I have references as I removed some pronunciations.

I removed pronunciations i Dhaka, because as a Bangladeshi , I can tell that the pronunciations were wrong. Thank you sir .Wholecube (talk) 14:06, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I understand your thinking, but please note that this is the English Wikipedia, so the pronunciation should reflect how the place is pronounced in other English-speaking countries. Dbfirs 14:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

"please do NOT include signatures in section headers."-I did not understand it , please help.Wholecube (talk) 14:07, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

In these two edits you signed twice, once in the heading and again after the question. Only the signature after the question is appropriate. Dbfirs 20:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

What will happen if my edit is not perfect ?Will I be punished for wrong edits?

What will happen if my edit is not perfect ?Will I be punished for wrong edits ?Wholecube (talk) 08:40, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

AS ,long as you are attempting, in good faith to improve the encyclopedia, your edits may be reverted if someone else disagrees with them, but there will be no "punishment". Wikipedia doesn't deal much in punishment even for intentional harm. Blocks and bans are to prevent further problems, not to punish for past ones. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

And again, please don't sign section headers. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks sir for your help. But i did not understand the signing of section headers , what is a section header ?Wholecube (talk) 13:58, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks sir , I am trying to edit articles in good faithWholecube (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Wholecube. Sections and their headers are described in detail at Help:Section. When you ask a new question here, you are creating a new section of this page. The form for asking a new question asks for a "subject/headline". That text will be come the section header, or section title. Using four tildes (~~~~) will add your signature to the header. Please don't do that. On the other hand, using those same four tildes at the end of your question will add your signature there. Please do sign the ends of questions. The section header is used to identify the contents of the section, and should not be too long. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:24, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I should add, you should normally sign posts on discussion pages, such as this one and such as article talk pages and user talk pages. You should not ever sign an article page. Please see Wikipedia:Signatures for more detail on this. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

can I be invited to other places?

As I am invited to a teahouse , can I be invited to such other places ?please give examplesWholecube (talk) 08:42, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Wholecube. I believe that some wiki-projects invite potential members manually. I don't know of any other page that has the sort of semi-automatic invitation process that the Teahouse does. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Once more, please do not sign section headers. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

ThanksWholecube (talk) 14:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

where can i find projects?

I want to join some wikipedia projects to help wikipedia editing , but which projects should I join ? where can i find projects ?Wholecube (talk) 08:44, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Wholecube. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory for a comprehensive list. As to which ones you should join, it depends on your interests, as you will see three are a great many in existence. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:52, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks sir , it helped me very muchWholecube (talk) 14:09, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Profile or Post suggestion

Where is the best place to suggest that someone in the Wiki community should create a post or page that does not yet exist?

Cletus.C "If you can do a half-assed job of anything, you're a one-eyed man in a kingdom of the blind." — Kurt Vonnegut 09:41, 11 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cletus.Cirroc (talk • contribs) 05:41, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, a red link in an article is a tacit suggestion to create the red-linked page. There is requested articles but it is pretty heavily backlogged. Or you could mention it on any talk page where the subject is being or might be discussed. Or you could be bold and just create it yourself. If you plan to create a new article, however, please read Your First Article and Referencing for Beginners and then use the article wizard to create a draft that an be reviewed by an experienced editor before it is moved to the main article space. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:49, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Types of editors are in wikiepdia

Hello, i want to know how many types of editors are in wikipedia. And what should an editor can do to earn privilege editor? WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 10:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi WikiBodhiVamsa. A list can be found here. HillelFrei^{• talk •} 13:55, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, WikiBodhiVamsa. Wikipedia has many permission levels; for example, users become autoconfirmed after making 10 edits and holding their account for 4 days. Autoconfirmed users are able to edit semi-protected pages. If you want more information about the different permissions available on Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:User access levels. --XenonNSMB (talk, contribs) 13:56, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, WikiBodhiVamsa. The general answer to your first question is that there are two types of editor: those who are here to improve the encyclopaedia, and those who are here for some other reason. If you stay here and work to improve the encyclopaedia, then in time you will be able to apply for particular levels of user access (if you have a reason to: I have been editing for 12 years, and made 13383 edits, but I have never applied to be even an admin, because I am not interested in taking on the responsibilities of an admin). Titles and rights like "admin" are not badges of status in Wikipedia, they are simply provisions that some people need to do the jobs they have taken on (think of an office cleaner, who typically has low status, but may have access to parts of the facility that most employees don't). --ColinFine (talk) 15:23, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, WikiBodhiVamsa, and welcome to the Teahouse. All the above comments are correct. One can also classify editors by what sort of editing they do. Some work mon fixing grammar and formatting. Some work on finding and adding sources to articles. Some work on improving articles, filling in missing information. Some work on creating new articles. Some work on keeping article facts up to date. And so on. Many editors do more than one of these, at different times, or mixed together, but many specialize, more or less. All these are editors here to help improve the encyclopaedia, which is the kind that we encourage. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Forgot to add signature

I forgot to add my signature to a saved edit. Can I go back and add it after the fact? Or is it important? LuKesi (talk) 15:31, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, LuKesi, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes you can, and while not vital, it is a good idea. If you don't, an automated script (or "bot") or another editor may provide the information for you. The use and importance of sigs is described in Wikipedia:Signatures. Briefly, in discussions sigs help identify who wrote what and when. Sigs provide a way of contacting an editor, also. Thank you for your contributions. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

LuKesi I think there is a misunderstanding here. Signatures should be added only to talk pages, help desks and the Teahouse. Do not sign edits to articles. The system keeps the record of who added what in the history. The edit summary is to explain why you made the edit. Dbfirs 20:22, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! LuKesi (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Article

How to create an article and get approved by wikipedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexhino Kovaci (talk • contribs) 15:53, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Rexhino Kovaci, and welcome to the Teahouse.

• First read Wikipedia's Golden Rule, Your first Article, and Referencing for Beginners.
• Second, gather a number of independent, published, reliable sources that discuss the topic in some detail. (as mentioend below, if you can't find several such sources, stop here.)
• Third, use the Article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project.
• Fourth, use the sources you have gathered to write the article, in your own words. Cite statements made in the article to the sources using footnotes. Do not include any judgements or opinions unless they are specifically attributed to a named person or entity, and supported by direct citations. Do not praise or blame anyone or anything in Wikipedia's voice.
• Fifth, submit the draft for review
• Sixth, when it is rejected, take note of the comments and improve it until it passes review.

You have now created a valid Wikipedia article. Congratulations. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

• Sixth, he means if it is rejected, people have succeeded on their first attempt. If they took their time and did their "homework" first, it´s not super-easy.
• Second, if you can´t find any, don´t try to write an article on that topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I wrote when quite intentionally, because while drafts are sometimes accepted on the first submission, this is rare, most take two or three to get things in sufficiently good shape, and I want the new editor prepared for that. On stopping if sources can't be found, Gråbergs Gråa Sång is quite correct, Rexhino Kovaci. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:57, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

You´re right of course. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:04, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

. . . .Can you help me please?

COI

I am an employee of a small non-profit historical site. We would like the info about our site to be placed on Wikipedia and I was given the task. Is this a major conflict of interest that will result in our contribution being denied?Folle avoine (talk) 16:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Folle avoine, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is a significant conflict of interest, but it need not prevent the info being included, if it is apropriate, and things are done properly.

• First, review our guideline on notability, our specific guideline on the notability of organizations. Consider whether your organization (or the site it runs) clearly meets the standards listed there.
• Second, read Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, Disclose your connection with the group in accordance with WP:PAID. This is absolutely required, omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, Gather sources. You want independent professionally published reliable sources that each discuss the organization in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop, an article will not be created. Sources do NOT need to be online, although it is helpful if at least some are. The independent part is vital in this case. Not press releases, nor news stories based on press releases, or anythign published by the organization itself or its affiliates. Not strictly local coverage. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the org in detail. But those significant sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in your case with the conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed.
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is rejected, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

• I took the liberty of bolding a very important part of DESiegel's comments. While paid editing of Wikipedia is allowed precisely because people like you are a net positive to the encyclopedia, it needs to be transparent. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

GA for Diamond Foundry

I would like to turn Diamond Foundry (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) into a Good Article. However, I have never used the process before and am totally unfamiliar with it. The article clears (IMO) 5 of the criteria (no images). But before I nominated it, could some experienced eyes take a look and see whether or not that would be good idea? Thanks. d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 17:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC) edited d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 20:11, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

It's a very short article, L3X1, which in my view means it clearly fails the "broad in its coverage" requirement. I would suggest nominating for Wikipedia:Did you know, but it's not new or long enough to meet the criteria for that either. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Cordless Larry. d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 17:40, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

More can obviously be said about some topics than others, L3X1, but take a look at my most recent GA nomination, Tour DuPont, to give you an idea of what passes. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, L3X1. I agree with Cordless Larry that the article is not yet up to GA standards. I read the New York Times article which is fairly lengthy and detailed. It has a lot of information that can be summarized in the article. You do not mention investors by name, except Leonardo DiCaprio. That information is in the NYT. You say that the diamonds are manufactured in San Francisco which seemed odd to me, but the NYT says San Carlos. My hunch is that the offices are in San Francisco but the factory is in San Carlos. Look into that. I suggest that you remove the references which are brief and clearly promotional, and focus on summarizing what the best and most detailed sources say about the company. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

This Google search verifies that the company is based in San Carlos, California. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen, I am now seeing a bunch of contradictory stuff as to what their location is. inc.com says San Francisco based, HQ in Santa Clara (Bay Area), and a design studio in downtown Los Angeles. d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 20:58, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

As a rough guide, the (I believe) shortest GA I've ever encountered on Wikipedia is Automonopoli at 689 words of text, and the shortest FA is Tropical Depression Ten (2005) at 622 words, and those are on as niche topics as could be imagined where it's genuinely likely to be true that there's nothing further to say on the matter. As a very general rule of thumb, if an article is shorter than around 500-1000 words, it's usually an indication that the article is likely either to be incomplete or to be non-notable (if the sources don't exist to write at least that much, that's typically an indication that the sources don't exist to confer notability). ‑ Iridescent 18:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Permission to remove something from this page?

I just have one question to ask about a certain article here: Sailor Moon

Under the "Legacy" part, is it OK if I remove this line: "A reviewer for THEM Anime Reviews also credited the anime series with changing the genre—its heroine must use her powers to fight evil, not simply have fun as previous magical girls had done.[93]"? The reason is because if you actually look at her review, it shows that she didn't get part of her review right, she just becomes biased and claims it "should have ended at R" and just bashes on the rest of the show and in reality she kinda really isn't explaining how Sailor Moon impacted the legacy of TV shows or not.

Please let me know.

Sailor Mercury Fanboy (talk) 17:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Sailor Mercury Fanboy, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would suggest tagging the citation with {{fv}} (failed verification) and posting about this on Talk:Sailor Moon. If in a week no one has come up with a better source or has objected to the change, remove it. Or don't wait, but be clear in your edit summary that you are removing an indirect quote not found in the source, and still post on the talk page. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Sailor Mercury Fanboy, On rereading your question, and then checking out Sailor Moon article, it becomes clear to me that the reviewer did say exactly what the article says s/he said. You just dislike the use of the cite because the reviewer went on to say things you disagree with, things critical of parts of the series. That is not in my view, a good reason to remove the statement and its supporting citation. Wikipedia articles should report all significant points of view on the topic, including critical ones. As long as there is no significant dispute that this reviewer is a reliable source, the statement can and should be used, I think. If you do think it should be removed, explain why on Talk:Sailor Moon and wait for responses. I think you would need a better reason than the one you listed above. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:10, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Where do I find a list of all the contests?

I am a very keen participant in writing contests (not the photography ones). I was very active in the Africa Destubathon. However since then I have not chanced upon any contest - the fixed period ones, not the 10/50K challenges. Today I glanced upon https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/UNESCO_Challenge, though the date had ended by then. Where do I find a list of all the short term contests on different Wikimedia projects? Jupitus Smart 18:04, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Jupitus Smart, Wondering if Contests page will help or inactive International writing contest page. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 19:13, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Therein lies part of the problem @JoeHebda:. The UNESCO Challenge I had mentioned above did not show up in either page. So it would have been futile to add either page to my watchlist. What I need is a more comprehensive list, or some other medium that mentions new events (including Contests). I don't think Signpost mentions such details, otherwise it would have been useful. Jupitus Smart 05:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps the Wikipedia:Contests page should be more widely advertised. A mention at WP:VP, perhaps? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

How do I seek review of improved page of Donald Yates to avoid deletion scheduled Monday, June 12, 2017?

The page for Donald Yates had been scheduled for deletion Monday, Jun 12, 2017, because an editor said the biography was unsourced and the lengthy list of publications listed included pieces in vanity presses.

I copyedited and improved the biography section with sourced references and links as well as eliminated the publications list, which contained books published by McFarland and Co. as well as articles in peer-reviewed journals, as well as others.

Although I'm still learning how to create an accurate publications list and "See also" section, I would like the deletion decision rescinded based on my improvements.

And some guidance regarding the "See also" and publications sections. Thank you so much.Nightdesk (talk) 22:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Nightdesk. Please read the message at the top of Donald Yates carefully. Since you have improved the article, you can remove the proposed deletion yourself. Please be aware that someone may take it to Articles for Deletion, and that an earlier version of this biography was deleted in 2013. You can read that debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Panther-Yates. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Cleaning up article "Maryann Keller"

Hello,

I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm trying to get help cleaning up this article. I was referred to the Tea House by the Wikimedia foundation as a place to get an issue resolved. I appreciate anyone's help with this...

Long story short... I work for the subject, and therefore I'm prohibited from making edits to the article, but I'm trying to get the issue resolved as it could be a problem for our firm if people view the Wikipedia page which discounts certain facts. We believe a third-party contractor for our firm(now terminated) created the page, and subsequently may have hired a paid Wiki-editor, and therefore caused this issue. Since the subject is notable, Wikipedia will not delete the article and instead shows a neutrality statement - a disappointment for all parties. So, while the article is factually accurate, it doesn't appear accurate, and this is problematic for us.

From what I learned from Wikimedia's legal team, I need to invite some editors to review the page and make edits, and I'm looking for guidance on how to do that. Should I contact Wiki-editors that have edited automotive industry articles(subject's industry)? Or should I contact Wiki-admins instead? Any simple help would be super appreciated. Thank you. wikilongislandguy (talk) 23:23, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

For reference: Draft:Maryann Keller (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I take it this is about Draft:Maryann Keller? By using the articles fore creartion process, you are sub,mitting yoiur edits for review by experienced editors. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I apologize, no, the draft was rejected and must stay rejected as I'm partial party and cannot submit articles or edits. My question applies to the live article which was created after. I explained the situation in detail on page the Talk Page of the live article. . Thank you for your help!wikicarsandtrucks (talk) 00:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Convenience link: Maryann Keller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Maproom (talk) 07:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hot political pages need special rules

We all are aware that at this time there is a great political divide in the country. We are aware that there have been many media outlets that have taken liberty with the truth on both sides, and even someone like James Comey stated under oath outright that the New York Times fabricated a story. So the issue covers all people in all media outlets on all sides and we are definitely in a very new paradigm as a country now as far as information is concerned. That is undeniable.

Pages that deal with Donald Trump or James Comey or Hillary's email scandal any member of the current administration NEED TO STICK TO COLD, OFTEN BORING, BUT NEVER ANONYMOUSL-SOURCED FACTS! Wikipedia MUST NOT become a biased player in this by committing itself SOLELY to facts that are not refutable, not because you or someone else BELIEVE them to be irrefutable simply because the Times or Post published them; not because one side or another or one newspaper or another is more legitimate in your view than another, but because the facts are indisputable. Let me explain.

That the Russians meddled in our election is not irrefutable, because no evidence has been put forth yet to the public to prove it. We have the words of Intel officials, three of whom were Democrat appointees who simply got signoffs from the others. Same with the Flynn matter. Now they may be telling the truth; the Russians may have affected our election in some manner or have attempted to do so or the Russians may have had some other interaction in someway that has been different from theusual 24/7 cyberattacks that we launch and the Chinese launch nonstop.

But if there is no dulicumentary proof, it should stay out of Wikipedia

So: For all matters dealing with the administration and the election, and ALL personalities regardless of their party, I demand that a unique set of Wikipedia rules apply given that there has been nothing like this in American history and the sides are so completely and bitterly opposed to each other.

No more anonymously sourced "news" should be permitted in Wikipedia REGARDLESS of the supposed legitimacy of the newspaper or other media source.

I ask all editors to respect this very fair rule given the fact that the current political climate is unlike any other in the past and cognizant that a special, new set of rules are needed right now so the Wikipedia does not inadvertently become a partisan player in this maelstrom.

- Gideon Marx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.115.39 (talk) 01:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Gideon Marx. The Teahouse is not a place to advocate policy changes on Wikipedia. We do not make policy here. Our purpose here is to answer questions from new editors about how to edit Wikipedia. A better place would be Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). I will comment that we have been dealing with highly controversial topics including war, terrorism, genocide and the bitterest nationalistic and religious disputes for 16 years. We have very well established procedures for dealing with such controversies. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am sorry, IP editor, but no. Wikipedia already has somewhat special rules which apply to such pages: Discretionary sanctions. Beyond those, however, if a source is good enough for The New York Times, or for Fox News, it is generally good enough for Wikipedia. Wikipedia depends on the editorial judgement and reliability of major news outlets and other sources. It addresses posisble bias by using multiple and diverse sources whenever possible. It does not impose its own rules on how reporting is done, or refuse to take note of stories that do not fit such rules. To do so would be to fly in the face of a core policy here verifibility. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

User Name/Neutrality

Hello,

I have created articles relating to two notable musicians in Cameroon and their discographies. I use neutral language, no hyperbole, and credible sources. Because I work with them, my neutrality was questioned, understandably. I have learned from feedback and editors how to write about them in a neutral fashion, make sure to use the right type of sources, etc. I was told to change my user name to disclose my role at the record label, which I did. Now an editor said I should not use this user name because it shows indicates a conflict of interest. What is appropriate? I want to do whatever is deemed most appropriate. Thank you very much for your help. Rachel Burks of New Bell Music (talk) 01:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Rachel Burks of New Bell Music: You should either keep your username the way it is or rename to "Rachel Burks". Do not use the name "New Bell Music" for the reasons explained on your talk page. Either way, you should disclose your conflict of interest on your userpage (which you already have) and avoid editing in areas which you have a conflict of interest in except in cases of gross errors which any reasonable editor would correct. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 01:42, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so so much for the advice. It is very much appreciated! Request to change name is submitted. Rachel Burks of New Bell Music (talk) 02:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 02:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Book Creator keeps clearing all my entries!

I just joined the Wikipedia community today and I am having a heck of a time creating my first successful book. I do not know why it keeps clearing out all my hours of hard work! I clicked on Save in the lower right corner of the Book Creator screen part way through so the stupid thing wouldn't crap out on me again like it already had twice. So just like with any other computer document that you save as you go along, my book I am creating has a name and I regularly click the Save button and choose to override the already saved book with the latest version thinking that all was working like it should. But now I get back home after being away from the computer for 3 hrs and the Book Creator was wiped clean but still turned on because it displayed 0 pages in book at the top of the screen! WTH???? So then I click on my user name at the top of my screen to go to my page and hopefully view my previously saved version but instead I get some messed up error messages about that user page not being created. I just created an account less than 8 hrs ago!!! So since my book does not show on that page, I go a waste of time round about way to find it and it shows up and so I click on it to edit it further because I AM NOT DONE YET!! But now while all the pages are still there, the title and subtitle have been erased. WHY??? According to everything I read on here before I created an account, it is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THIS DIFFICULT TO CREATE A FREAKING BOOK! KarlderGrosse843 (talk) 01:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, KarlderGrosse843. Is this the book you are talking about?User:KarlderGrosse843/Books/July 2017 Europe Trip

To find your past contributions, just click the "Contributions" tab at the top of your screen when logged in. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi , i am looking for feedback on my article (currently a draft , waiting formal review )-for libby Birch

Hi , i am looking for feedback on my article (currently a draft , waiting formal review )-please for libby Birch

thank you Beerch (talk) 03:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Beerch. Your draft article is filled with extremely promotional language like "a natural and extremely hard working athlete with an elite mindset", stated in Wikipedia's voice. That violates the Neutral point of view, which is a core content policy. Any evaluative language must be referenced to an independent reliable source. There are also violations of our Manual of Style, such as capitalizing section headers and referring to the person by her first name instead of her surname. I suggest you read Your first article and review our notability guideline for athletes. It is unlikely that this draft will be accepted in its current form. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I see no indication that Draft:Libby Birch has been submitted for review. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:27, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

The indication was in the line {{AFC submission|||ts=20170606043645|u=Beerch|ns=118}} at the foot of the draft. There was, however, an unterminated comment above it, so the submission was not effective. I have corrected the unterminated comment in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

The edit which left the comment unterminated (and thus removed the draft from the submission queue) was this one. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

could i have further feedback on the latest draft Libby birch please thankyou .

could i have further feedback on the latest draft Libby birch please Also is this draft libby Birch submitted in the waiting list for official review please

thankyou .Beerch (talk) 05:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

See the section above. You don't need to start a new section to continue the discussion. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

draft article libby Birch has been modified according to your valued suggestions .please re review thanks

draft article libby Birch has been modified according to your valued suggestions .please re review and if possible provide further feedback on libby birch many thanks Beerch (talk) 07:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps you didn't read what I said above? Please do NOT start a new section when you are continuing a discussion on the same topic. Your draft in now back is the queue for review (along with more than a thousand other drafts). While you are awaiting review, please take the time to read some of the links on your user talk page, and particularly WP:Your first article, WP:Autobiography, and WP:Notability (sports). --David Biddulph (talk) 07:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

The draft in question is Draft:Libby Birch. The referencing is a mess, with no working links to the online sources. Please read Help:Referencing for beginners. Maproom (talk) 07:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

draft review and feedback Libby Birch thankyou

NewYorkActuary many thanks for your suggestions and feedback If anyone else has any further suggestions and recommendations for my draft article Libby Birch than i would be thrilled to receive them also is this draft libby birch in a que for official review thankyou Beerch (talk) 01:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

For reference: Draft:Libby Birch (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:11, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

How many more times do you need to be told? When you are continuing to discuss the same subject DO NOT start a new section. Yes, your draft is still in the review queue, as indicated by the big coloured box at the top of the draft. I have reverted (twice) your removal of the comments which you received. Comments and review feedback stay in the draft to help you and other reviewers; they will be removed if and when it is published as an article. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:08, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I am very sorry for any inconvenience i have caused and deeply apologise as i was not reading your comments as i had not found them re Libby Birch . Thankyou for your help David Biddulph it is greatly valued . Is there anything else i should do as i note my Beerch user name is still in red ?? again Thanks Beerch (talk) 03:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

The reason that your user name is in red is that you haven't yet created a user page. You don't need to do so, but information is at WP:User pages. Please read the advice at WP:Autobiography if you haven't done so already. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:45, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thankyou again , i have red the section on autobiography and this is definalty not an autobiography as i am not the notable person in the article draft Libby Birch and have no bias as such . but thankyou Hi my name is Greg . Also just to check i have also read the section on user pages and dont fully understand the difference between what i thought was my user name Beerch and wha i have ...sorry ...but just to confirm i can still create articles with what i have yes ? again thanks for your help ..Greg Beerch (talk) 04:19, 13 June 2017 (UTC)..Greg I think further reading has helped me understand that i have a user name but not page and that still allows me to contribute ? thanks Greg

Beerch (talk) 04:28, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi , does anyone have any further feedback for the draft article .Libby Birch thanks Greg Beerch (talk) 04:58, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Does a teahouse have a name ?

What is the name of this teahouse ?Wholecube (talk) 05:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Teahouse. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

In need of a quick review of the Draft I created after making Necessary changes.

Hi English Wikipedia help Channel. I have posted an article it's name is "Draft: Taal Inc." 2-3 weeks ago. I waiting someone to review it as it has already been reviewed before twice, necessary corrections have been made. I am looking forward for some to read it and help me before it gets deleted by Wikipedians. Is that possible? I request, not to delete the page. Tell me the necessary ramifications I'll make changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddy sj (talk • contribs) 05:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Do you understand the need to establish that the subject is notable? Draft: Taal Inc. cites over 50 sources, but none of the ones I have checked even mentions the subject. Maproom (talk) 07:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Finding stubs to edit

Hi all, I participated in a Wikipedia class editing project last year and really loved it, so I want to get into editing a little more. While I would love to start with correcting small issues in articles, it's difficult to find those. I was wondering if there's anywhere I could find a list of stubs/incomplete articles/articles with noted issues so I can target my efforts effectively. Thanks in advance! RDvor (talk) 06:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, RDvor, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can find articles in need of help here: Wikipedia:Community portal, including stubs. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:07, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

(ec) Hello @RDvor:, and welcome to the Teahouse. Lists of stub types per topic area, incl. links to these stub categories, are maintained at WP:Stubs. Other types of maintenance are also often covered by specific Wikipedia projects (f.e. copy-editing, disambiguation, categorization, anti-vandal and anti-spam activities, and lots more). Depending on your interests, I recommend to join such a Wiki project for additional ressources and advice from like-minded editors. A quick additional tip: if you are looking for information about a specific Wikipedia-related topic, you can type "WP:topic" in the search field. Usually such keywords are linked to an information or guideline in the "Wikipedia" namespace with additional details and links. Hope that helps. GermanJoe (talk) 08:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Bullying in Wikipedia by Senior editor

Hello sir, i want to know how to get Help from the administrator or supereditors when someone get bullied by senior editor in wikipedia. Constantly removing & reverting the contribution(constructive hard-work) of new user in a targeted manner, and discourages the new users in wikipedia world. Thank you --WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 06:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi WikiBodhiVamsa and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't examined the disagreement in detail, but I see no bullying, only an insult by you, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. If you have a disagreement on content, please discuss it politely on the talk page of the article without making any accusations. I'm not an administrator or "supereditor", just an ordinary editor like you, and we are all equal here, but we all have to learn the rules of Wikipedia about use of sources. If a polite discussion does not result in an agreement, then you can ask for a Wikipedia:Third opinion. Dbfirs 06:44, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi again WikiBodhiVamsa I don't think accusing people of Communist bias is helpful to Wikipedia. Could I just clarify that a content dispute is best discussed on the talk page of the article (in this case Talk:Godhra_train_burning where another editor has already started a discussion). Repeatedly adding disputed content is considered disruptive and is not the way we do things on Wikipedia. Please follow procedure. You might find the essay Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle helpful. Dbfirs 08:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Dbfirs, i think you didn't read my reply correctly in Talk page. I said this is my personal opinion sir, and i ask this in very polite manner. i think i have rights & freedom to speak to other user like You. It was decent conversation. But why are you hackling me here.? is this your 2nd account(Tyler Durden) please let me know. Thank you. --WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 12:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi again WikiBodhiVamsa. I'm disappointed that you ignored my advice. I was trying to help you to avoid getting blocked but I see that you are determined to continue with your war against other editors and I wish to have no more to do with you. Please do not continue any correspondence with me. I have no interest in the article and I wish to avoid any more ridiculous accusations. I have withdrawn my comment above since you think I misunderstood. I get the impression that there is something more going on here, but I have no evidence so I will not comment further. Dbfirs 12:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Dear sir @Dbfirs, i am worried. i don't know what makes you think i am attacks other user. This is very polite and decent conversation. but instead i am sacred using Wikipedia. This is no longer Open source and Free space of knowledge. where other voice & opinion are being suppressed by other user. This is not jimmy wales dream. Sorry if i hurts you. Thank you WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Please do not communicate with me any further. I suspect that all is not as it seems. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a free space for anyone to write what they wish. There are many open sites where opinion can be expressed if this is what you are looking for. Dbfirs 13:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

How do I ask a third party/volunteer to write an article for my company?

I read a lot of content on how to create a page and write an article for your company on wikipedia but all the content is very scary and tells me to not create a page myself, but to submit a request and let someone else write it. Because if I write content for my company myself then it may be biased and I will have a vested interest in it, so let a third person do it who is neutral to the company. How do I submit a request for a volunteer or writer to write an article for my company and where do I submit it?

180.151.8.130 (talk) 06:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. You can visit Requested Articles to post a request that others write about your company. You should be aware that since Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, it may not be done quickly. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

To add to what 331dot said: Requested Articles is indeed the proper place for such a request; but there is a very long backlog there, and no guarantee that anybody will pick it up. An alternative approach is to look through the List of WikiProjects and see if there is an active project relevant to your company. If so, asking for help on the Talk page of that project might be more productive. There is also some useful research you can do: please understand that a Wikipedia article should be based almost entirely on what people who have no connection with the subject have published about it: what the subject says or wants to say is of very little interest to Wikipedia. This means that anybody who does write an article about your company will need to find several independent, reliably published sources which talk at length about the company. Nothing published by the company will be relevant, and nor will anything based on an interview or press release from the company. Nor will mere listings in directories. If you can find several good sources and mention them in your request, it may make the request that much more attractive for an uninvolved editor to pick up. On the other hand, if you cannot find such sources, this is a good indication that your company is not at present notable (in the sense that Wikipedia used the word), and so it is not worth you or anybody else spending time on an article. --ColinFine (talk) 10:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

How do i make my travel company page?

I want to make wiki page for my company My Flight Trip ? How do i make it please guide me.Jasbirsrathore1984 (talk) 07:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Jasbirsrathore1984, and welcome to the Teahouse. You should not, because you have a conflict of interest. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jasbirsrathore1984: (edit conflict) Hello and welcome. It is highly advised that you should not directly create a page about your company. That is what is called a conflict of interest. It means that, no matter your intentions, you are probably too close to your company to write objectively about it.

What many users don't realize is that Wikipedia is a different kind of website from social media; it is not a place like Facebook for every company to get a page. Wikipedia is more selective about its content; it wants article subjects to be shown to be notable with independent reliable sources, that is, what other people who don't work for your company say about it.

If you do have independent reliable sources, there may be ways for you to indirectly create a page about it. You can make a request at Requested articles that someone else write about it, or you can visit Articles for Creation where you can write a draft and them submit it for review before it is posted- however if you don't have independent reliable sources and the page is written as an advertisement, it will be rejected quickly. Those are really the only two ways you can see a page created about your company. I hope this helps you. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I would add that a Wikipedia page about your company isn't necessarily a good thing. It can be edited by anyone and no one, even you, gets to control what appears on the page. If negative information about your company is published in an independent reliable source, it can be added to the page about your company and you can't keep it off just because it is negative. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

How to Improve Credibility

Hi,

I hope some of you can help me.

I am an experienced writer/ editor but relatively new to Wikipedia. I have started making small edits but I would like to develop this to the point where I am helping other editors and possibly overseeing other edits.

Can any of you advise me on whether this is possible and if so, the best way to build my profile to get to that level?

Many thanks,

StephStephRJ (talk) 08:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi StephRJ, welcome to Wikipedia. It's great that you want to help out new editors, and there are a number of ways you can do so, depending on your preferred areas of expertise. Ultimately, we judge people on the strength of their contributions, so if you keep making positive additions to the encyclopedia, you'll quickly become a trusted member of the community.

As a writer, you're presumably fairly proficient with language, so you may want to join up with the Guild of Copy Editors to provide assistance with language and grammar in other users' articles.

If you want to prevent vandalism, this will help you get started.

There are plenty of backlogs which are full of articles in need of attention.

You may also want to look through the community to-do list for ideas of areas that need some attention.

Hopefully this gives you a couple of ideas for moving forward. All the best, Yunshui ^雲_水 09:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Why has the article I've been working on been deleted?

Having worked on this for 6 months, I can't believe RickinBaltimore deleted it. From what I can see he's based this on a query that had already been raised and resolved months ago - namely that he believes that it is infringing copyright. If he'd bothered to read the history he'd know this already. I am the owner of the original content, and as advised, I added the necessary attribution to the original blog, and the request to delete was revoked, now he comes along and deletes it anyway? How does this make any sense?

I've had some incredibly useful advice from DES amongst others, that I am planning to attend to this summer (I'm a teacher and these months of the year are too hectic to devote any time to this), now I cannot. MisterMcHugh (talk) 09:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Mistermchugh, and welcome to the Teahouse. I agree, it looks like the deletion was made in error. The license is clearly stated on the source website. I expect RickinBaltimore to return the page. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 10:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

To be fair to Rick, the text of the licence is pretty hard to locate by eye - it took me a few minutes to find the licencing statement. I've restored the draft, as the text is clearly CC-BY-SA 3.0. Yunshui ^雲_水 11:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both, this is a huge relief! Is there a way to avoid this all happening again, or am I subject to the next person who wants to drag all this up again? Is there no expectation that people review the history before deleting articles? The accusation of copyright infringement was right up there in plain sight.

MisterMcHugh (talk) 11:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't think there is anything you could have done, Mistermchugh, since this mistake wasn't on you. None of us is perfect and even admins make mistakes sometimes. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@MisterMcHugh: I'm not an expert here, but possibly the {{CC-notice}} template might resolve the problem... --CiaPan (talk) 12:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
As fas as I can see, the template can be placed in the first line of a References section (see e.g. Hector Thomas Wood or Raffaele Martelli). --CiaPan (talk)

Thanks for the advice, @CiaPan I've updated the References section as you've advised. Also @Yunshui I've reformatted the text on my original blog post to make the text easier to find. MisterMcHugh (talk) 13:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

References

That will help - though for the record, the place we're most likely to look for a CC-BY-SA template is in the footer of the page, rather than at the end of a post. You can use the codes provided at [1] to create a CC-BY-SA icon in HTML, which also draws the eye. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks @Yunshui updated now. MisterMcHugh (talk) 07:00, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't believe it, now @User:Legacypac wants to delete my draft? What is it with these deletion happy Wikipedians, is there no respect for the work that has gone into articles like this? Am I to face a constant torrent of Wikipedians who are keen to eradicate my work? Is there no way to curtail this flagrant disregard for the work and time of others? MisterMcHugh (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm working a long list of declined older Article for Creation submissions. You can see the speedy deletions I've already put through this month here User:Legacypac/CSD_log Until you work in the backrooms you have no idea the garbage that piles up to be deleted. I think we resolved your issue for now. I'd encourage editing some existing articles first. Creating acceptable pages from scratch is a hard job - like jumping into calculus before learning algebra. Legacypac (talk) 07:33, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm starting my new page again.

I want to make a page for The Harry R Horvitz Center. It's a palliaitve care center in a major Cleveland Ohio hospital. I started out by making a pge for the Harry R Horvitz Center in my sand box last year and moved my drafted Harry R Horvitz Center wikipage over to be a real article last May. It was promptly deleted because I had just copied some information from several published articles instead of using my own words. But since I had the exact references... I thought I could quote the published articles. So do I start completely over... or edit my own first attempt??? B. Hullihen (talk) 10:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, B. Hullihen. It sounds as if you started in a sensible way, but then took a short cut and moved the article over yourself rather than requesting a review. You're perfectly entitled to do this, but as you found, it is risky for a newish editor to do.

You can quote limited material from sources, but you must present them as explicit quotations, and they must be within reasonable limits of size: see WP:Quotations. The bulk of the article should be based on published sources, but summarised in new words. As for whether to work from your draft or start again, I can't tell you I'm afraid. Either is possible, depending on whether you think you can rescue your draft, or it would need to be rebuilt from scratch. --ColinFine (talk) 10:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Exactly! As I have read in the wiki intro... I did move it over myslef which caused the article's early demissal. I want my articel to be just like the accepted ... St Christopher's Hospice... wiki page.

B. Hullihen (talk) 10:48, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing St Christopher's Hospice to our notice, B. Hullihen. I have just tagged it as written like an advert, and completely lacking references. Please do not treat it as a model. It is one of the millions of articles which are seriously below the standard we now require for new articles. If you want a model, find something comparable in Category:Good articles. --ColinFine (talk) 15:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I have reverted this article to an earlier version that I think is both preferable and acceptable.[2] Thincat (talk) 15:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Google search of Wiki article

Hi,

I would like to know why this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parassala_B._Ponnammal is not showing in the google search. Please help.

Thanks

Sriram Venkitachalam 11:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriram Venkitachalam (talk • contribs)

Hello, Sriram Venkitachalam, and welcome to the Teahouse. The article needs to be patrolled by one of our new pages patrollers, or 90 days need to elapse. See Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing#Indexing of articles ("mainspace"). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Finnusertop, thank you very for the clarification. Sriram Venkitachalam 16:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriram Venkitachalam (talk • contribs)

Yonatan Nir - missing article

Hi, I submitted an article for review last week, but it seems to have disappeared. Not sure if I can't view it because it is still in review, or because it was delete. Can anyone help? Thanks Omerh88 (talk) 11:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Omerh88 your draft article is here Draft:Yonatan Nir I have declined the article. Large parts of the article appear to have been copied and pasted though, please re-write in your own words or it will be deleted. Theroadislong (talk) 11:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Merger of previous accounts I've forgotten the passwords to and didn't associate an e-mail address with.

Not an important question, but I have created user accounts on wikipedia before, and all three times forgot the password (so can't use them any more). Is it possible to merge them with my current account? It doesn't matter really, but if it was possible it would be useful for me to keep track of what I'd edited and written in the past. Also, if I make the same mistakes in different places it might be easier for someone to spot the pattern and tell me/fix it/them. The three usernames were: Thankyoubloke, Chessbloke, and Tabloke. You can see I used all three to create and then edit ChessGenius for example. Anyway, just thought I'd ask. Thanks very much. Imnikrist (talk) 12:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Imnikrist, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no way to properly merge them. You can, of course, keep track of your edits under those usernames by accessing:

• Special:Contributions/Thankyoubloke
• Special:Contributions/Chessbloke
• Special:Contributions/Tabloke

You can also turn your old user pages and user talk pages into redirects that point to your current user and talk page. That way people will know whom to contact regarding edits made from those accounts. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Finnusertop. That's very helpful. I'll try and do redirects. Is there are username redirect template or anything? Thanks again. Imnikrist (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

There is {{Former account}} and some others at Category:Alternative Wikipedia account templates, but they look a bit clumsy. I'd simply put a redirect on your old user pages and user talk pages, as you have done at User:Thankyoubloke. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Username Change

Someone invited me to ask question here so I want to ask one question. Is is unable to change the username or what ? I searched in preference menu but couldn't find any option to change my username. Please answer soon.-KW Star 13:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Usernames have to be changed by a renamer - you can kick the request off at WP:CHU. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Yunshui There is no option to request username change there. So I requested a renamer to change my username.--KW Star 02:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

No, that's the page you need to read before making the request. The various venues for actually making the request are listed quite clearly in the last section of the page. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help.KW Star 03:30, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Historic 1888 Firehouse lots of is community interest- flagged and deleted- Why?

Historic 1888 Firehouse with lots of articles -some books have related content but predate digital. Engine House is historically significant- put out of service in 1980 renovated in 2016 for use as gym and design studio. The renovation won design award. How can I get listing started? How can I avoid being flagged? The entire page in the sandbox was factual, historical. We posted in sandbox to get help not get deleted. Help please EngineHouse16 (talk) 14:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

For convenience of readers, they are referring to User:EngineHouse16/sandbox --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, EngineHouse16. It is unusual for a sandbox to get deleted, but the message on your user talk page indicates that in the opinion of TheSandDoctor the content was not only not suitable for a Wikipedia article, but could not be made into something suitable. I cannot see the deleted material, so I cannot comment on that; but your use of the word "listing" suggests that you are under the (very common) misapprehension that Wikipedia is some sort of directory or business guide. As you will find by reading some of the links on your user talk page, Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind, and it does not contain "profiles" or "listings", but articles which summarise what indepedent published sources have said about a subject.

I suggest you read your first article, and try again. Non-digital sources are perfectly acceptable, as long as they have been published by a reputable publisher (vanity publishing less so). But the article should say only what the sources say (though not in the same words) not what you or I or the subject of the article know or think. --ColinFine (talk) 15:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for tagging me ColinFine. While I do not remember the exact content of the page, it was written in such a way that it read somewhat like an advertisement (G11) and appeared to be a not web host violation (U5), which it appears Athaenara agreed with me on (they deleted it with those as the explanation).

EngineHouse16 The advice that ColinFine gave above is good and is pretty much what I would have said as well. I do not recall exactly, but what was the name of the firehall? I debated about reporting the username (EngineHouse16) as a promotional username as (if I recall correctly) the firehouse had a similar name but ultimately decided against doing so as I did not see a strong enough connection to warrant not assuming good faith (AGF). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

EngineHouse16, except for the opening paragraph, the sandbox consisted entirely of a copy of a newspaper article "A Lot of Use Is Left in an Old Firehouse in N. Point Breeze" from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette including the statement "(c)2016 the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette". There were 1175 words of copied text. I would have deleted it as a copyright violation. Wikipedia articles must not include text copied from outside sources (except in very limited circumstances which do not apply here).

An article on this firehouse might possibly be created legitimately, provided that there is enough discussion in Independent published reliable sources to make it notable. But the article must not be a simple copy of an outside source, it must be written in original words. The article that has been copied might well be one cited source. Some non-local sources would be desirable, also.

I would also suggest a change of username, to one that does not appear to be for shared use by a group. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC) @TheSandDoctor: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Article

Can someone help me to create an article in wikipedia and get approved , I've tried so many times but all fail. Please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexhino Kovaci (talk • contribs)

Hello, Rexhino Kovaci You appear to have been trying to create an autobiography on your user page. The lesser error in this is that your User page is not an appropriate place for an article: it is for you to share as much information as you wish about you as a Wikipedia editor. The more serious problem is that autobiography is strongly discouraged in Wikipedia. If you wish to help us improve Wikipedia by learning how to edit and create articles, you are most welcome. If your purpose is to publicise yourself, please find another place to do it. --ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I've just realised that you got a much fuller answer to the same question further up the page. --ColinFine (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

deleted company page

I'm trying to submit a page for my company. I have indicated my conflict of interest and here is the content that I have posted. I'm not sure why it keeps getting rejected. I have reputable sources to back up each of these points. Entripy Custom Clothing is Canada’s first online provider of custom printed apparel [1]. The Canadian company screen prints and embroiders logos onto t-shirts, sweatshirts and other apparel items for businesses, schools, charities and special events across Canada. Entripy was founded in 1999 by Jas Brar. Today, Entripy employs over 100 people and operates out of a 50,000 square foot facility in Oakville, Ontario.  Lisa.Evans (talk) 15:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Lisa.Evans. The reason why it keeps getting rejected is stated clearly on your user talk page: because each time it has appeared to be unambiguous advertising. It is especially hard for people closely associated with a topic to see what is and what isn't neutral or (on the other hand) promotional; which is why editing with a conflict of interest is discouraged. The way I think of it is this: Wikipedia does not care much what a subject says about themselves, and it cares not at all what they want said about them. All that Wikipedia is interested in is what people with no connection to the subject have published about it. Especially for somebody with a conflict of interest, you need to identify the independent, reliably published sources which have said something about the company (note that this excludes anything published by the company, and also anything based on a press release or interview with the company), and then forget everything you know about the company and write an article based solely on what these independent sources have said (though in your own words). If that gives you a substantial article, then you can add some uncontroversial factual information like places and dates from the company's own publications. But if you can't find a published source for some information, it doesn't go in. And if you can find only non-independent sources, you consider very carefully whether the information is open to discussion, and if so, it doesn't go in. And any even slightly evaluative or judgmental words go in only if they are direct attributed quotes from an independent source. --ColinFine (talk) 16:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Can I ask a reviewer to patrol the page I made?

The page is called "Elixir Press." It appears when searched, but I would like it to appear in Google search. Please help. Booksnob (talk) 15:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Booksnob. I am not a regular reviewer, but I have had a quick look at Elixir Press. In my view it has no hope of being accepted as it stands, because it has not a single reference in which somebody unconnected with Elixir Press has written substantial material about the company. Furthermore, it reads like an advert. The question is, what have independent people published about Elixir press? If there is material, it should be cited, and summarised in the article. If there is not, then the company fails notability, and there should not be an article.

I also wonder, from your eagerness for it to appear in Google (which to my mind is a complete irrelevance since Wikipedia has its own search facility, and Wikipedia may not be used for promotion) if you have a connection with Elixir Press? If you have, then you should be aware of the policy on conflict of interest, and possibly on paid editing. --ColinFine (talk) 16:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine, I am not a paid editor, just a newbie at Wikipedia who accesses many pages via Google. The page is quite similar to other small press pages I've seen in the number and quality of references but I will see what can be done. The tone of the page could use some adjustments. Thanks again. Booksnob (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately there are lots of poor-quality articles on Wikipedia, Booksnob. Most of them predate today's standards for inclusion, so it's best not to use them as a yardstick for what is acceptable. Hopefully, with time, these older articles will be improved or deleted, but it's a big task. In the meantime, we should strive to hold new articles to a high standard so that we don't further contribute to the problem. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Booksnob I hope you don't mind my asking, but if you are not a paid editor, why is it so important for your work to appear in a Google search? Google doesn't find much in the way of independent WP:Reliable sources for me, so I'm wondering whether Elixir Press is WP:Notable. Dbfirs 17:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Page for Karen Dionne has been tagged as not meeting Notability requirements

I believe the page for Karen Dionne actually does meet Wiki's Notability standards (WP:CREATIVE) for the following reasons:

1. Dionne did win an international award, please see References section: "Previous Scribe Awards Winners: The Ninth Annual Scribe Awards". International Association of Media Tie-In Writers. May 2, 2017.

2. Dionne's work has been reviewed by multiple "independent, secondary sources" such as Publishers Weekly and RT Book Review. Again, see Reference section, specifically: - "Freezing Point: Karen Dionne, Author". Publishers Weekly. August 11, 2008. - "Boiling Point: K.L. Dionne, Author". Publishers Weekly. November 1, 2010. - "The Marsh King's Daughter: Karen Dionne, Author". Publishers Weekly. April 3, 2017. - "RT Book Review Award for Mystery Suspense & Thriller - 2008".

Please review article again with the above facts in mind and respond with specific details if you find that the article still does not meet notability requirements. Respectfully, FactsForYouFactsForYou (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, FactsForYou. I'm not a reviewer, but I've had a look; and I don't see it. As I read the IAMTW listing, she was not a winner but short-listed (I didn't find an explanation, but in each category there are several works listed one (occasionally two) of which is bolded. I read that the the bold entry is the winner). And short reviews which say nothing about the author are really not to the point. --ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, FactsForYou. See my detailed comments at Talk:Karen Dionne#Notability and sources. You may be on the way, but notability is some distance from being established here, in my view. The tag should stay for now. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Is Any Similar Technology like signalr for Real time Communication?

Is Any Similar Technology like signalr for Real time Communication? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayushjain772 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ayushjain772: Welcome to Wikipedia. The Teahouse is for asking questions related to Wikipedia. Please ask your question at the Reference Desk. RudolfRed (talk) 20:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Weird question about RFC

Once an RFC is closed, is it acceptable for an involved editor to re-open the RFC, change the outcome, and then re-close it? For example, imagine an RFC was closed appropriately (after the requisite 30 days and comments from other editors) by an uninvolved administrator or volunteer with the comment RFC has been closed with a strong consensus to add xyz detail. Would it be acceptable for an editor involved in that RFC (one who had voted), to reopen the RFC, immediately change the result so it said RFC has been closed with a strong consensus to REMOVE xyz detail (with the edit summary comment "I disagree with this closure and am changing it") and then immediately re-close the RFC now with an entirely different result? I realize we are supposed to ignore all rules, but the wikipedia I remember has changed a great deal. Something like this I just don't think would have happened 5 or 10 years ago. Is the above simply an example of being bold, or I am correct in thinking this is pretty egregious behavior and should t least be brought to someones attention (whose I have no idea) 23.114.214.45 (talk) 23:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, IP Editor. That would be, in my view, drastically inappropriate behavior, on several grounds. It might well be grounds for a block of the editor changing the close. This would be true even for an UNinvolved editor, and doubly so for an involved editor. If this is not a hypothetical case, could you please provide a link? Or send me one by email if you prefer. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

user:DESiegel Here is the link to the reversion per your request. Here is the link to the editor changing the outcome. Just an FYI, the situation has been handled, I reverted it back. I was more curious if this was something that was appropriate or not. It was frustrating to me because I was also involved in the RFC, and I went through the proper channels when I had a question about the closure. Then to see someone unilaterally change the result of the RFC when they disagreed with it - well that didn't sit well with me. 23.114.214.45 (talk) 23:42, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

user:DESiegel Curious if you had a chance to look at the edits. I might be involved in another RFC and wanted to make sure that this was indeed something that is frowned upon, or at the very least discouraged. On the other hand, if the edit falls within the policies of Wikipedia I apologize for suggesting that something improper was done. Cheers. 2600:1012:B02B:5986:B88B:FC24:9E8C:BE42 (talk) 00:54, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I did look at the edits. I was, in fact, tempted to take the matter to WP:ANI. But since the original close had been restored, and you indicated no desire to proceed further, i decided not to do so. This sort of change of a close by another editor is very unusual in my 10+ years of Wikipedia experience. I do not think it was appropriate. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your attention to the matter. To be frank I was willing to let the whole thing go (and to some extent still am) except for the fact that ArtW has essentially made me a target for his wrath, going so far as to harangue the volunteer who closed the RFC (see his user page). If the reverted closure is an offense that you personally feel should be reported to ANI please do so (I don't even know how). On the other hand if you think it better to let sleeping dogs lie, I'll defer to your judgement either way. Keep in mind this editor (ArtW) has a history of tenditious and aggressive editing, particular toward those who don't know the system as well as he does. Like I said Ieave the decision in your capable hands and won't pursue it any further if you feel that is best. 2600:1012:B02B:5986:B88B:FC24:9E8C:BE42 (talk) 01:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Correct way to create an article about my company

Hi - I wish to create a page for my company. The purpose is present a history of the company (not an advert) we've been business since 1969 and are a record label... but I saw in the guidelines "do not make a page for your company" so I wonder, how do these pages get created and how do I do so within the rules. Much of the historic info would come from interviews with the owner/founder. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. MDMathews (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

MDMathews - Don't. That would be the correct way. Interviews are seldom an acceptable source for an encyclopedia, which by definition is tertiary. In other words in an encyclopedia, we do not write about a given subject. Instead, we write about what is written about a given subject in reliable published sources. You may list your company at WP:Requested articles, but before you do be sure to properly disclose your conflict of interest exactly as instructed in WP:COI and WP:PAID. John from Idegon (talk) 00:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Translation and new articles

Will you please translate these articles so the English wikipedia can have its own versions?

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E4%B8%96%E4%BB%A3%E3%83%AD%E3%83%9C%E3%83%83%E3%83%88%E6%88%A6%E8%A8%98%E3%83%96%E3%83%AC%E3%82%A4%E3%83%96%E3%82%B5%E3%83%BC%E3%82%AC

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8B%87%E8%80%85%E8%81%96%E6%88%A6%E3%83%90%E3%83%BC%E3%83%B3%E3%82%AC%E3%83%BC%E3%83%B3

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%96%E3%83%AC%E3%82%A4%E3%83%96%E3%82%B5%E3%83%BC%E3%82%AC2

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%96%E3%83%AC%E3%82%A4%E3%83%96%E3%82%B5%E3%83%BC%E3%82%AC_%E6%96%B0%E7%AB%A0_%E3%82%A2%E3%82%B9%E3%82%BF%E3%83%AA%E3%82%A2

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E4%B8%96%E7%B4%80%E5%8B%87%E8%80%85%E5%A4%A7%E6%88%A6

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%87%8F%E5%AD%90%E8%B7%B3%E8%BA%8D%E3%83%AC%E3%82%A4%E3%82%BC%E3%83%AB%E3%83%90%E3%83%BC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtarvin (talk • contribs) 00:44, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Jtarvin and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see Wikipedia:Translation to learn how such translations can be requested or done. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, OP asked essentially the same question at OTRS. I have fielded some variety of this question dozens of times and typically give an answer almost exactly the same as that given by DES. In this particular case, the answer didn't sink in, after responding again and again and again (if you think I'm exaggerating the ticket has 15 back-and-forth emails). In frustration, I suggested that they try the teahouse. I have a lot of patience, but not this much. If anyone wants to try, more power to them but I'm done with this request.--S Philbrick(Talk) 11:40, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

How to add the photo of Joep Franssen wiki page - English?

You see a photo of the Dutch Composer Joep Franssens in all his Wiki pages in different languages. In the English page this picture is missing. There is no frame/template. How do I get this done? Or perhaps somebody can add this for me? This would be super!!! Kind Regards Ieke van der Huijzen - HollandIekevanderHuijzen 06:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by IekevanderHuijzen (talk • contribs)

Hi IekevanderHuijzen. I added a photo of Franssens found on Commons to the article and also did some other minor cleanup. I just used a very basic image syntax. If you'd like to add an WP:INFOBOX to the article as well, then try asking for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music. I believe there are specific infoboxes for composers such as Template:Infobox classical composer which may work well in an article like this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Addition of reference

Hello

I want to enquire about the technique and process of adding a reference (address of source material) in regard to any comment added by me/edited by me.

Kindly help !!

Warm Regards Satyaketu Mallik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyaketu Mallik (talk • contribs) 07:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Satyaketu Mallik - Please see Help:Referencing for beginners - if, having read that, you have any questions, please come back here and ask. - Arjayay (talk) 08:21, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Do I have to reference every edit that I make?

When is a reference needed and what sort of sites can be used as references - e.g. can it be a news website? Edward1612 (talk) 07:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Please see Verifiability - "Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it."
In general anything that could be questioned, or may need to be checked, must be referenced. So, a claim that "X went to school Y" or "the population of Z was 12,345 in 2017" would definitely need a reference.

News sites can be used provided they are "reliable", but some tabloid papers and similar sites are generally not considered reliable sources. Scrolling news sites are particularly difficult to reference - as the news will have "moved on" and not be available to subsequent readers. Please note that as stated at Template cite news {{Cite news}} is normally used for offline (paper) sources as it includes issue= and volume= parameters, whereas {{Cite web}} is best for online sources, as it generates a missing URL error when no URL is provided. - Arjayay (talk) 08:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

How do you show WP code in plain text?

For example, if I wanted to describe how to add a reference how would a prevent the text from becoming a normal reference but keep it as it would appear in the source? So in such a way that does not appear as it appeared just now but for it to literally be < r e f > w w w . g o o g l e . c o m < / r e f > (without the spaces). Edward1612 (talk) 07:28, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

You use "nowiki" tags, like this: <ref>www.google.com</ref>. Maproom (talk) 07:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Which, if you are using the "enhanced editing toolbar" is the "W with a red circle and strikethrough" button on the "advanced" tab - Arjayay (talk) 08:00, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Thanks a lot Edward1612 (talk) 06:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

New to Wiki and confused

I am a newbie to trying to use the Talk page, but seem to be doing it wrong. I submitted an article and did get a reply, to which I tried to reply, but I have not had an answer since, and I do not know if I did the Talk page correctly.

Could someone please give me a very short example of what the text on the Talk page should look like? How do I know it is going to the correct user? I cannot see anywhere what the talk page intro should be like.

My reply was to @JamesBWatson, but I do not know if he had received it or not.

Ilseolive (talk) 08:31, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I see the message that you posted to JamesBWatson; I believe the only thing that needs to be changed is that the talkback template should be placed on his user talk page, not yours. Currently his talk page is protected from editing, but there is a link to an alternative that he placed at the top of the page. That said, since JamesBWatson posted on your page, he is likely following it in his watchlist and so you don't need to post a talkback on his page. 331dot (talk) 09:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ilseolive: You can also use {{ping|JamesBWatson}} to get his attention on any talk page. It will notify him when you use it, no matter which talk page it's used on. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

How to create an article on a famous personality.

Hello,

I am new to wikipedia articleship. I would want to know, how are we suppose to make a page or article for a famous personality.

Awaiting for your quick reply.

Thanks Donesh Protectmediaonline (talk) 08:47, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Protectmediaonline: Hello and welcome. I would first note that you use "we" above; please note that usernames must only be used by one person per the username policy, and that usernames cannot be that of a group or organization. If your name is that of an organization, you will need to change your username so that it indicates only one person is using it. "JohnDoe of Protectmedia" would be acceptable if that is the case(you don't need to use your real name). You can request to change your username by following the instructions on this page.

Regarding creating a page, it depends on what you mean by "famous personality". On Wikipedia, notability is used as a test for whether a subject merits an article. Not every subject does, and being notable is not the same thing as being famous. What notability means is that the subject must have been written about in independent reliable sources(sources that are not written by or associated with the subject in any way) that indicate why they merit inclusion in this encyclopedia. The best way for a new user to create a page would be to visit Articles for Creation and use the process there. Note that successfully creating an article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia; it may be best for you to start small by just making changes to existing articles first to get an idea of how things work here. If you have further questions, please post them here. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello Protectmediaonline, and welcome to Wikipedia.

I would advise strongly against trying to create a new article until you have more experience making edits to existing articles. Creating a new article is difficult, and involves many different skills. But if you are determined to try to create a new article, your first two steps should be:

1. Check whether Wikipedia already has an article on that personality, maybe with a difference spelling. If not,
2. Find several reliable published independent sources that include significant discussion of the personality (reports of interviews with the personality won't do, they won't count as independent). You will need to cite such sources to establish that the personality is notable enough to warrant an article.

If you can't manage these, stop. Any more time you spend will be wasted. Maproom (talk) 09:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict): ello, Donesh. Reading your first article is a good place to start. However, judging from your user name, I would like to make some particular points to you:

• Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind.
• If you are thinking of creating articles about any of your clients, please don't. Editing with a conflict of interest, while not forbidden, is strongly discouraged; paid editing even more so.
• If you do go ahead and create an article on a client, you must make the required declaration (see the link to "paid editing" above), and you are strongly advised to use the article wizard to create a draft and submit it for review. You need to understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article (or their associates) have said about them, and no interest at all in how they wish to be portrayed. An article in Wikipedia is not a "profile", does not belong to the subject, and may be edited by anybody at all in accordance with Wikipedia's policies. It should be based almost entirely on what people who have no connection with the subject have published about them, not on what they or their associates think or say.
• I'm afraid that your user name is not acceptable, per the Username policy: user names which imply that an editor is editing on behalf of an organisation are not permitted. Please either change it (via WP:CHU) or abandon the account and create a new one with a name which is personal to you (it does not have to be your real name: I use my real name, but many editors do not).

If I am wrong in my assumption, and you are here to create articles about subjects where you do not have a conflict of interest, please accept my apologies. But you still need to do something about your username. --09:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Upload article from draft

Hello!

I am a new user and I wrote my first article NEUSREL in Draft (Draft:Neusrel‎) and now I want to upload it.

On the help pages it says that there is a little arrow beside "View history" where the option to upload the article should be at. My Problem is, there is no arrow. It only says "Read, Edit source, View history, star"

I have searched alot but can´t find any resolution. Thank you very much, kind regards Crónk (talk) 09:19, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Crónk, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think you're misunderstanding something: there is nothing to "upload". Your draft is already in Wikipedia, but it is in the Draft: space and not in the main article space. You could just move it to main space (though as a new user, you will need to make at least four more edits, anywhere in Wikipedia, in order to have access to the "move" facility). But I would strongly advise you instead to submit the draft for review. This may take a while - there is a backlog - but if it passes review, the reviewing editor will move it to the right place, and if it doesn't they will give you feedback as to how it can be improved. You submit it by inserting {{subst:submit}} (with the double curly brackets) anywhere in it - usually at the top. --ColinFine (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

... whereas, if you move it to main space in its current state, it is likely to be deleted as promotional and lacking evidence that its subject is notable. Maproom (talk) 09:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

OK. First thank you very much for your nice help!

Why would it be deleted while for example this article about this tool is online? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SmartPLSCrónk (talk) 11:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia has an article on SmartPLS, but it has not been reviewed. I will soon consider proposing it for deletion. It's certainly not a good model to follow if you want to create an acceptable article (I see you've copied the grammatical error in its first sentence). Maproom (talk) 12:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

.. and the first two sources cited don't even mention "Neusrel", and therefore do nothing at all to establish that it's a notable subject. Maproom (talk) 12:14, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Upload Denial Due to Promotion and COI

Hi Teahouse!I have been doing some extensive research on the sport betting industry/ gambling industry. I have identified many sport betting companies on Wikipedia that have helped me greatly with my research however, I noticed there was no page on Playtech BGT Sports. Therefor I have attempted to create my own article to help other researchers out. (It is the first timeI am doing this) Shortly after I wrote a simple overview of Playtech BGT Sports I received a message that it was promotional. Could you please assist me in finding out what information leads to such an assumption? I specifically used reliable sources and online articles that have not been written by the company itself. I think many people would benefit from this article. Here is the exact URL of the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playtech_BGT_Sports — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thombinder (talk • contribs) 07:46, 9 June 2017 (UTC) I can also provide yopu with my email adress if you would rather discuss it there. Thombinder (talk) 12:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Note to hosts that as well as the now-deleted Playtech BGT Sports, we also have a draft article at Draft:Playtech BGT Sports, written by a paid editor. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:39, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thombinder, since Playtech BGT Sports has now been deleted a number of times, can I suggest that you work on the draft version instead. When you're happy with it, you can submit it for review. Drafts are usually much safer from deletion than live articles. I can't see the content of the deleted article as I am not an administrator, but I suggest reading Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for general advice on avoiding promotional language. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:45, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

How fast is speedy deletion?

I noticed an article on Brian Graden Media that was tagged for speedy deletion at 21:30 12 June and then deleted at 22.36, barely an hour later. (I hope I'm reading the times right!) Is this normal? I didn't think the original author, who was notified, had time to react. I have nothing to do with the article, but I was interested in the topic because of looking into Joseph Gordon Levitt, and became curious when I saw the article deleted. How fast is speedy deletion? I would have thought 1 hour is too fast, but I'm here to learn! Soniamaddox (talk) 12:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Soniamaddox: The time taken to delete a CSD tagged article can range from a couple of minutes to (probably) days - there's no set guideline on how long a CSD tag should remain before the article is deleted, but there are some for how quickly an article can be tagged with a CSD after creation. As with most things on Wikipedia, an article being deleted doesn't mean all the content has disappeared forever, as there is always places like Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 13:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, the frame in the lead titled This page in a nutshell.
It says:

'without waiting for any discussion.'

CiaPan (talk) 13:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion is only for articles that are pretty much unredeemable. They are either legal problems (copyright, libel), so undeveloped no one can help the author improve them (A1, A7) or completely unsuitable (advert). So giving the original author time to respond isn't really a big deal. John from Idegon (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both! So if I want to see the original article, I have to request an undeletion? I don't have a good reason except I'm curious as to why it wasn't marked for improvement, exactly. Or even proposed for delettion (rather than speedy deletion). It's a proper topic (I was looking for it) so as an editor I would have asked for improvement to the article. But I need to see it to understand the actual reason for deletion. Thanks. Soniamaddox (talk) 13:16, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

The reason for deletion was CSD A3: no meaningful content. It consisted of a link to the company's website, and nothing else. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:19, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for all your answers. I appreciate them (and I posted my previous reply before John of Idegon posted, sorry). So I understand it's not important to wait for an original author to react, even though they were notified of the intended speedy deletion. Soniamaddox (talk) 13:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Soniamaddox. I would disagree slightly with what John from Idego said above: Speedy deletion is only for articles that are pretty much unredeemable. In fact, articles tagged for A7 (No credible claim of significance) often can be improved, by finding and adding sources that make such a claim, and establish notability. It is more that experince has taught us that in practice, for particular kinds of articles, the creator often won't do this, and in many cases there are no sources to be found. So instead of taking a long time to look for sources, often to no avail, we delete and tell the creator to try again, explaining why the topic belongs here (or might belong at least). In many cases the creator does not try again. Similarly, many pages speedy deleted for being promotional are about subjects where a valid article could be written. But the page in front of us isn't that article, and won't contribute much to possible future valid article. And we don't want promotional pages to hang around, so we delete it. Besides, while many topics deleted as promotional could have a valid article, many more never will have: they just aren't notable.

If you simply want to see the content of a deleted page, ask here, or ask any admin in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles, or ask at WP:REFUND. But Refund is mostly for those who actually want the page restored on a long-term basis. I am one of those in that category, by the way, so I am one of those who could be asked. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Fixed a broken reference in one article, find and fix same broken reference in other articles?

Hi there, Sometimes I spend some time fixing references on a specific article. Then I realize the same references are used on other articles, and I feel like it would be great to propagate that change across other articles.

Are there any tools for doing this? Is there any goal to centralize citations on wikidata or similar?

Thanks

Cdiesh (talk) 13:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey Cdiesh. If an edit is exceedingly simple, like Take all instances of this hyperlink and replace it with this one, and involves usually something on the order of hundreds or thousands of instances, often a bot can be made to do it. Requests can be made at Wikipedia:Bot requests. But most of the time, if it involves several, or a few dozen pages, often it's easier to fix it manually. TimothyJosephWood 14:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, Cdiesh it is a bit unusual that the exact same citation will be present in more than two or three articles, althoguh it does happen. AWB can be used in the dozen article cases. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:21, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Well... I can't remember exactly what it was, but I do remember a pretty big shake up that happened I believe last year at WikiProject MilHist, where an entire I think it was a navy related site was going down completely, and something like tens of thousands of instances had to be archived and then have their links updated in a short amount of time. Good stuff. TimothyJosephWood 15:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

This was kind of the use case I saw also where certain entire URL domains will go down, so if I ever see a URL from domain X then I know it will need archiving. It might be interesting to try to write bots for this type of case. I have some programming chops, kind of just wondering whether I should use some existing tools or try and tackle making bots myself! Thanks for the pointers though, I may try and register for autowikibot to see how it goes Cdiesh (talk) 16:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Order for career in a BLP

In Qian Tang which I recently approved through the AfC process, the author of the article originally listed the subject's career in reverse chronological order, with the most recent position first. In my cleanup before approval I changed the order to be chronological. The author has since changed it back. I would like to direct them to the relevant guideline, but I can't find the relevant reference in MOS. Can someone point me in the right direction? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:10, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Curb Safe Charmer. Wikipedia:Narrative flow says Readers expect biographical details of a subject's life to be laid out in roughly chronological order.. However that is an essay, not a guideline. I cna't find anything in the MOS about this, although it is the almost invariable format. Perhaps a question at the Biography project would help? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:58, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey Curb Safe Charmer. I believe DES is correct, and although this does not appear to have been officially codified in our policies or guidelines, it is clear or near universal practice to follow roughly a chronological order without a compelling editorial reason for doing otherwise, such as a section with an otherwise prescribed position according to MOS:LAYOUT. In fact, it is so universal that if you wanted to open a discussion on the matter at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies, I expect you wouldn't have difficulty finding strong consensus on the issue. TimothyJosephWood 19:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both, that's helpful. I have explained the convention on the editor's talk page and will restore the article to using chronological order. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk Page Headers?

I have been trying to use a header for my talk page to make it seem less boring. When I try to add one, nothing changes, any suggestions or help?

DolotheDolphin (talk) 19:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello McStyx anfd welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know what kind of header you have in mind. I don't see any edit in which you added any sort of header to User talk:McStyx. Could you explain a bit more what saort of header you wanted to add, and how you attempted to add it? Perhaps then I or someone here could be of more help. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I have a talk page header, at User:DESiegel/TPHdr. I am not sure if that is the sort of thing you have in mind, however. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@McStyx: If you mean {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis}} in [3] then it's a broken attempt to request a bot to archive the page. It isn't meant to display anything, even if it was formatted correctly. See {{User Talk Pages}} for some of the possibilities to display a header. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:40, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

The creation of an article

Hi, I'm new here and i would like to know if The creation of an article doesn't need an account ?? 21:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)21:25

Hi IP user. You must have an account to create an article straight into mainspace, but anybody can create a draft. It can then be moved to mainspace by a registered user if it's suitable for inclusion. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:35, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I would advise you to use the article wizard to create a draft, under the Articles for Creation project. Done that way, an account is not required. However, having an account has some benefits, and few costs (no financial costs). See Wikipedia:Why create an account? for further information about the benefits of using an account. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:49, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

My page proposed to deletion

Hello, my page is proposed to deletion. The problem was in references. But I got extralinks with information from science journals about this person. please help meBairakimov (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Bairakimov, and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you mean Dyusembaev Anuar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). First of all, it is not your page (except in the sense that you wrote the initial version). It is Wikipedia's article, and as described in WP:OWN you do not own or control it.

Dyusembaev Anuar is not currently proposed or nominated for deletion, but it has some significant problems. The only sources now cited are two papers written by Anuar himself. A Wikipedia article needs sources that are independent of the subject, have been published, and are reliable. Please read Your First Article and Wikipedia's Golden Rule.

The article needs to better explain what it is that Anuar is known for; what he has done that makes him more than an ordinary professor of mathematics. It needs to show that other people have written about him. It needs to establish his notability. If this is not done, the article will probably be deleted sooner or later. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:08, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

When to use the "small" parameter for templates

This is just a minor style question. The Unreferenced section template includes a parameter "small" for when the template applies to something "smaller than a section." Does this include subsections? What about sub-sub-sections? Thanks! GreatBigDot (talk) 21:44, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi GreatBigDot, welcome to the Teahouse. It includes all sections. Subsections, sub-sub-sections and so on are still sections. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

So I shouldn't use the "small" parameter then? GreatBigDot (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

GreatBigDot, The small parameter is for use when the template applies to something within a section, but not all of the section. In particular, when a table or graphic has no cited sources, and should have. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks a ton! GreatBigDot (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

The feature to replace the word "section" was removed 19 January and I have removed it from the documentation. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

how to publish sandbox article live

I have created an article in sandbox, how to make it live ?

Mark95036 (talk) 22:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Mark95036. I have marked User:Mark95036/sandbox as a draft, which added a blue submit button to the upper area of the page. However, if you were to submit it now, it would surely be rejected. You would first need to find and add Independent, published, reliable sources that establish the notability of the subject (In the special sense in which Wikipedia uses that term). Currently no sources are cited in the draft at all.

Please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule, Your First Article, and our guideline on the notability of organizations. If you then decide to go ahead, please also read Referencing for Beginners.

If you have further questions, feel free to ask them here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:36, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Save lost.

After a lot of hard work and changes the page Shah Jalal got back to it's previous form https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Jalal how can I restore my changes? Please help. SpeakTruth! (talk) 22:39, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, SpeakTruth!. If you look at the history of Shah Jalal, you will see that User:Kashmiri reverted your edits, with the edit summary "Please do not use honorifics. Please do not add unconfirmed/unsourced information." The information you added is still there in the history, and could easily be recovered. However, for you to add the information again would be edit warring, which is regarded as disruptive. What you should do is open a discussion with Kashmiri and any other interested users on the talk page Talk:Shah Jalal. But please bear in mind the principle that everything in Wikipedia should be verifiable - you removed information which contained references, and replaced it with different information without references. --ColinFine (talk) 23:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

SpeakTruth!: same reasons as in my earlier revert of your edits to Lal Shahbaz Qalandar – see my edit summary: [4]. — kashmiri ^TALK 07:35, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

what to do if consistant speedy deletion on my user page?

what to do if consistant speedy deletion on my user page?(Supriyapejavar (talk) 00:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@Supriyapejavar: You have a greater problem, namely that you are misusing multiple accounts to evade your block and copying others' userpages without the required attribution. You have got to realize that Wikipedia is not for promoting you or your app.--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:07, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jasper Deng: User:Kailash29792 is not a blocked or banned user, is a copyright problem. SA 13 Bro (talk) 01:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@SA 13 Bro: Kailash29792 is not, but Supriyapejavar (talk · contribs) is a blatantly obvious sockpuppet of N R Pavan Kumar (talk · contribs). There's a pending SPI.--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:24, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I have put the tag at the userpage. SA 13 Bro (talk) 01:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

creating articles

This is umptheen time trying to ask this. Should I create an English article by translating a German article. Is Wikipedia considered a reliable source? User-duck (talk) 00:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, User-duck. You can translate articles from other language Wikipedias into English, but they must comply with our policies and guidelines. One Wikipedia article is not a reliable source for use in another Wikipedia article. Please read WP:TRANSLATE. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:11, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, User-duck. What Cullen says is correct. To spell it out, you are welcome to make such translations, but the final article requires citations to reliable sources just as if it had been created here from a blank start. The fact that it came from the de wikipedia (or any other) in no way changes the required sources. Different Wikipedia editions have different policies and customs, and what is fully acceptable in one may not be in another. If the source article did not contain needed sources (by the standards of the en-Wikipedia), they must be added here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I realize I need to include citations and I consider the ones in the German article reliable.

Thank you, I realize I need to include citations and I consider the ones in the German article reliable.User-duck (talk) 01:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

That is fine, User-duc. In the past, a number of translated articles came with very few citations. The most recent and extreme case in point is Villa Di Poggio a Caiano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Take a look at the history if you care to. Do read WP:TRANSLATE if you haven't already, as suggested above. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

PW reset without email

I appear to have forgotten my password, or at least I'm afraid of trying to guess it again for fear of being locked out. Unfortunately, I'm now realizing that the email address I had for this account was my Verizon one. As you may or may not know, Verizon has recently shut down its email service, so that email address no longer exists. And I'm unable to change my account email address without verifying my password. Thus, I'm locked in a loop where I can reset neither my email address nor my password. Suggestions? Tfocker4 (talk) 01:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Tfocker4, and welcome to ther Teahouse. Start a new account, and redirect the user page of your previous account to the new one. Save the new PW in a password manager or some other secure location, to avoid the problem in future. I am afraid that without access to the email saved with the account, there is no way to do a password reset. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone know how many times I can try my password before I get locked out? Tfocker4 (talk) 02:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Tfocker4. You are logged in properly now, so I am not sure what the problem is. Just do whatever you did to log in. You must have used the right password. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't know whether it still applies but it appears from https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/email/migrations.htm that Verizon customers can keep their email address at AOL. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:44, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Google Search

Why some of the articles dont appear in google search even when we enter their exact name ?—Big Hero 03:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The reason is explained at #Google search of Wiki article above, and at Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing#Indexing of articles ("mainspace"). --David Biddulph (talk) 04:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your answer.—Big Hero 04:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Ariana Grande manchester.

Vinnylospo (talk) 04:09, 14 June 2017 (UTC)Hi, I tried to add a link to the manchester bombing article to the Ariana Grande template. However, when I came back, it wasn't there. Is there a problem with it? If not, then why am I not allowed to add it? I mean I know it's a sad event, but she is part of the bombing story.Vinnylospo (talk) 04:09, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you please give us a link to the relevant template and to the relevant edit? I see nothing relevant at Special:Contributions/Vinnylospo, so perhaps you didn't save your edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:15, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vinnylospo. If you look at the discussions on the talk page for the template, Template talk:Ariana Grande, you'll see that the consensus is not to include the bombing article in the template. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 04:22, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

How to improve an article prior to submission (Wear it Purple Day)

Hello,

I'm drafting this article, and I'd like to know of any suggestions prior to submitting it for possible approval. I think I'll need to remove the category for the other "Wear it Purple Days" at the very end, and make that into a separate article.

But I'm not sure how much more to add, or what would be of most benefit! (please be gentle!)

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

Thank you for your time.

SunnyBoi (talk) 04:28, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

A Wikipedia article should start by making it clear what it's about. This draft lists, near the end, eight other "Wear it Purple Day"s; but it's about an annual event in Australia. So "Australia" should be specified in the first sentence. Maproom (talk) 07:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Updating the "Institute Ranking" info box.

How does one update the "Institute Ranking" info box to reflect the current rankings of a business school. For example, this business schools page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faculty_of_Management_Studies_(Delhi).Metalpriest (talk) 04:51, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Metalpriest, welcome to the Teahouse. The source when you edit says {{Infobox India university ranking .... This means that Template:Infobox India university ranking is used. See the documentation there. Come back with a more specific question if you still have problems. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

A cluebot is hampering my edits , what can I do?

Please visit my talkpage.I edited the topic Bangladesh with good faith. But a cluebot took it as vandalism.It also threatens to block me . I need help. The bot is not intelligent enough to understand that my edit was good. help please. Wholecube (talk) 05:39, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wholecube. I agree that your edit was not vandalism, but on the other hand, you did not provide a reference for your claim that "bhat" is rice in Bengali. I believe you, but our policy on Verifiability indicates that you should provide a reference. Please take a look at the references in our articles Panta bhat, about a Bengali rice dish. Perhaps one of those references can also be used in Bangladesh, if it verifies the meaning of the word. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:23, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wholecube: This dictionary doesn't seem to use "bhat" as "rice". I can find "bhāta" (ভাত), but that's as close as I can get. This text seems to indicate "bhat" is a prepared food, but it never says what it is very clearly. Here is a search to find all instances of "bhat" in the text. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

oh thanks. I provided the information on my personal experience as I am Bangladeshi.I knew that Bhat is the correct Bangla word for [white rice]] in Bangladesh.Now should I edit it with reference ? I am scared if the bot blocks my accountWholecube (talk) 07:31, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

What is a reference ?

Each article has many references at bottom. What does these mean ?Wholecube (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wholecube. References give the sources of information in articles. See more at Help:Referencing for beginners. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

How do I edit a draft Wikipedia Page name

I want to rename my draft from "Draft:1902 Software Development Corporation" to "Draft:1902 Software Development". Note that this is only a draft. Please help. Thanks!Pam wiki2017 (talk) 08:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done, though the name of a draft never really matters. If the draft is one day reviewed and accepted as an article, the reviewer will choose a name for the article. Maproom (talk) 08:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Request: Review - World Café article

In my sandbox I've played around with a slightly amended version of the World Café article, mainly trying to explain what these entail. I also added that these events are used by a variety of organisations, although refrained from listing these, which was a criticism of a previous version of the World Café article. I wondered if you would mind casting your eye over this draft version to see if it would be acceptable in the main space? David Biddulph, ColinFine,  DGG, Justlettersandnumbers Fbell74 (talk) 10:05, 14 June 2017 (UTC)