Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

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.

Read the newest questions
Skip to bottom

Most recent archives
1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 1233, 1234, 1235, 1236, 1237, 1238, 1239

Change Table Box Background Color in Visual Editor

I've been on Wikipedia for 3 and a half years, but I figured this would be a good place to ask this, because I can't figure it out. How do I change the background color of a box in a table in visual editor? Additionally, how do I center text in visual editor? Are these possible or do I have to switch to edit source every time and then switch back? (See my sandbox.)

Thanks, AvRand (talk) 18:53, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: My question is still unanswered, someone help me with this? AvRand (talk) 19:33, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Avrand6, I tried switching to the visual editor and I wasn't able to change the background colors in the table at your sandbox. It looks like you may have to use the source editor. --Habst (talk) 17:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article Not Approved - Appears to match other existing articles exactly

I am trying to add to the set of Wikipedia Pages for The New York Times Non-Fiction Best Sellers by Year. Wikipedia currently has pages for 2000-2018, and a few years scattered between 1931 - 2000. I submitted a page for 1999, following the same style as the pages for years that had previously been reported and apparently approved. The reviewer denied the page saying 'Lacks significant coverage in multiple independent verifiable secondary sources'. The currently existing pages for 2000-2018 have very few references, all from the NYTimes itself and no other independent secondary source. How can I improve the page so that it's approved? Should the pages that exist now include more references? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charmquark2 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look at your offering, but you should also read WP:OtherStuffExists. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:16, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I looked at your proposed list and also at some of the other years in that series, and, sure enough, none of the articles that I examined had independent reliable secondary sources. That doesn't mean that your article will be accepted, but it might mean that all or most of the other articles should be deleted. I would suggest trying to create a different article concerning one of your other interests. WP is always looking for new (but verifiable) material. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Parmar Agro Agency

agricultural shop in bhiwani — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikas Vir S. (talk • contribs) 01:07, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTWEBHOST Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:22, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are your thoughts on this article?

Greetings,

I recently submitted an article and I was wondering does this article demonstrates the subject's notability? What are your suggestions for improvements? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aduf10 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Success_Rate_(in_Sports) is about a statistical measure of success. To establish that it is notable, you will need several citations of reliable independent published sources with in-depth discussion of the measure. The draft cites seven sources, but none of them discuss the measure. Maproom (talk) 07:12, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question on citing my own website as a reference

I am a historian of early rock and roll artists (1954-1963) and, at one time, published a fanzine containing first-hand interviews and articles written from first-hand interviews with these artists. Some of the detail of these artists online is very sparse, even though their songs may have been hit records and still played on the air today. I am slowly converting these print interviews and articles to digital format and featuring them on my website. I would like to add data that will be corroborated by these first-hand interviews, and it appears that in order to do that, I need to cite the source. I see some guidance that citations should not be of one's own website. I intend no self-promotion, but would like to see some that some of these artists whose careers are not well-documented receive some recognition by having accurate biographical information available on wikipedia. Please advise so I can follow through on this endeavor without violating rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmirrione (talk • contribs) 03:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jmirrione, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is, Probably not. It's not just the COI issue - if that were all, the recommendation would be to make suggestions on the article's talk pages and ask for somebody uninvolved to decide what edits to make. But unless you are a recognised authority on the subject (at a minimum, have had several artices on the subject published by mainstream, reputable publishers), your website is not regarded as a reliable source: please see WP:SELFPUB. Furthermore, even if you can establish reliability, information from interviews with the subject can only be used in limited ways, as it is regarded as a PRIMARY source. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 08:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jmirrione. There is some advice on this at WP:SELFCITE, but as Colin indicates, the main issue is likely to be whether your website is considered a reliable source according to Wikipedia's standards. You could ask for opinions on that at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Fringe"

You can't have a leftist edited narrative where people who disagree with progressivism are labeled as "fringe". You will lose all your credibility regardless of your donors. It's as simple as that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.245.63 (talk) 05:15, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.

Wikipedia has a number of acknowledged systemic biases that editors need to be aware of and work to properly balance in the spirit of neutral point of view. If there's a specific area where you feel like NPOV is not being respected, please bring it up on the talk page of the article in question and, if there's no satisfaction there, to the appropriate noticeboard. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First article! Several questions and request for feedback

Good evening to the Teahouse,

I'm excited to say that I've just created my first wikipedia article, Monoswezi! And now I'm a little bummed to discover that it was already written in the french wikipedia. But anyways, I've got a few questions regarding this article as a beginner editor:

1. Do I need references for the music genres?

2. Can I get basic band details (members, instruments) from their website as a source?

3. Is pulling a picture from the band's facebook page legal from a copyright standpoint? I read up on copyright, but am still not really sure how to apply the rules yet.

Thanks in advance and I appreciate any feedback you may have!

--Everydaycurious (talk) 05:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Everydaycurious, and welcome to the Teahouse. Well done for writing an article - don't worry about it already existing in the French Wikipedia: each Wikipedia is a separate project, and while it is common to create an article from translating another one, it is often the case that they are written completely indepedently. To answer your particular questions:

Yes, I think you do need a reference for the genre. Sometimes it will be obvious, but when it is more controversial, putting your judgment in would count as original research, which is not allowed. You might like to look at WP:GENRE.
Yes, you can take uncontroversial factual data from a non-independent source, as long as the bulk of the article is from independent ones.
Probably not. Normally all images used must be freely reusable for any purpose which means they must either be in the public domain (either explicitly, or by reason of age) or have been explicitly released by the copyright holder under a suitable licence. You need to check the copyright on their image, but it is unlikely that it will be suitable. Sometimes we can use non-free images under "fair use" rules, but one of the conditions for this is that there is no practical possibility of ever obtaining a free image, so this is hardly ever relevant for images of living people. Sometimes people have had success asking public figures to release images in this way: but you would need to make them aware that they are giving permission not just to use the image on Wikipedia, but to release it so that anybody may use it for any purpose, including commercial. See WP:DCM. --ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you supply a citation in an article when mentioning a subject's appeared on a major magazine cover?

An editor recently mentioned a "sky is blue" type standard re: adding facts to an article, in that not every, commonly verifiable thing must be cited when it appears on Wikipedia. Which leads to my question:

In the existing paragraph closing the Early Life and Family section on actress/author/socialite Brooke Hayward, I added the second sentence, which I have emboldened here:

<< Hayward attended Vassar College and studied acting with Lee Strasberg at the Actors Studio.[13] While taking acting classes she worked as a fashion model, appearing on the August 1959 cover of Vogue magazine. >>

The initial editor in the above quote cited the Actors Studio association, which is understandable to me, as enrollment info at that institution is not readily available to the public (to my knowledge.) But if someone has appeared on the cover of Time, Life, or Vogue or some such widely circulated and catalogued publication, does one need to provide an inline citation for it if adding a mention of that? I am guessing that if someone doubted the statement in question they could do a quick image search for "brooke hayward vogue cover" and the cover would come up as part of the Getty Image Collection, and the verification would be complete. I do not see it as being particularly contentious, but I'm not sure of the Quality of Care in such things.

TLDR: Do I have to look for a reputable source that specifically mentions Hayward was on the cover of Vogue, and then actually reference that?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts on this, and wishing all a good weekend.

Codenamemary (talk) 06:41, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Codenamemary, I think the simplest option would be to cite the copy ofbthe cover at Getty. A media appearance isn't quite at the level of "sky is blue" obvious, finding a copy of a particular magazine is not as effortless as looking at the sky. BTW Vogue is published in multiple editions in several countries, so you should specify which one (US, UK, Australia, etc) is relevant. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Okay...I'll try to find an example of a Wikipedia article that uses a URL to a specific Getty Image as a reference, and follow that format. I wonder, as another option, if I had a copy of that issue from a library in front of me, I could list all the info for that magazine itself (using particular issue's publication date from cover, etc.), just like you would list a book. (Though then you'd have to pick who to put as "author"...perhaps the then-editor-in-chief?) I've adapted the sentence in article to read as "appearing on the August 1959 cover of American Vogue magazine." I'd think since the American version of Vogue is the original, and the international editions are really Italian Vogue, British Vogue, etc., one wouldn't have to identify the American aspect when discussing it...but I guess loading it up by mentioning the country in this case would remove any uncertainty for readers. Codenamemary (talk) 06:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Table creation

How an information table is created? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anand Raj Baghel (talk • contribs) 08:08, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Anand Raj Baghel, and welcome to our Teahouse. I'm afraid as a new user you may find tables a little difficult to come to grips with at first. However please read Help:Tables and the introductory links at the top of that page for an introduction to how they work. I would advise you to do any testing in your sandbox, rather than in a live article, as it's very, very easy to make a mess of things. Previewing and regularly saving your table edits is really useful. Another good tip is to find an existing article with a simple table that you do like and view the source of that page to see how the table is constructed. It is always best to start off by making small edits to existing tables first. Hoping this helps, and good luck on your Wikipedia journey. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anand Raj Baghel. While Nick's answer is correct, I have a suspicion that he may have misunderstood your question, and you may actually be asking about the table of basic information that appears at the top of many articles. That is called an Infobox, and you can find information about using them at Help:Infobox. --ColinFine (talk) 09:43, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Anand Raj Baghel (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Is this spam?

Please help me about the draft Draft:Antony Coia I created. In Nominations and Criticism section I added some quote as references for helping reviewer to understand if subject is notable or not. Are the quotes ok or are they spam? Thanks (Marion994 (talk) 08:14, 21 July 2018 (UTC))[reply]

How can I take the Wikipediholism test?

I came to know about the Wikipediholism test. I want to take it and see how I am in Wikipedia. Can anyone guide me how can I take part in the test Map Collector (talk) 09:32, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Wikipediholism test, Map Collector. --ColinFine (talk) 09:48, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I have saw the article but no piece of info is given about taking the test Map Collector (talk) 09:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the lede there is a Wikilink to an automated version. David notMD (talk) 10:59, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

My name is clank and nobody welcomed me. I need someone to welcome me because I just joined today.--MrClank (talk) 11:20, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MrClank: Being welcomed is not inherent. If you want a sincere welcome message, then consider making useful or constructive contributions. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again

I do want to become adopted as I am seeking adoption. --MrClank (talk) 11:55, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, MrClank. You've asked about adoption. Might I suggest that you first demonstrate your interests in simple editing, including introducing yourself and your interests on your user page? So far, apart from trouting another editor for reasons that elude me, you've not yet made any edits to articles. Most new editors now find they get the help they need and very quick replies to most simple questions by asking them here, rather than entering into a 1:1 relationship with a single editor via adoption. (It's a big commitment for both parties involved) My personal view is that adoption better suits the committed new editor who has already been editing for some time, has demonstrated their broad commitment to this Project, and now needs more structured support and guidance. So, if you do have specific questions, why not just ask them here to start with? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:30, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you nick, I am just seeking adoption because I don’t know how to become a Wikipedian. But thank you for your advice --MrClank (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as suspected sockpuppet. David notMD (talk) 09:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to suggest a change to a Wikipedia article?

Regarding the article on Mercy Otis Warren, there is a reference (#10) which links to my old domain name (samizdat.com). The content referenced is now at my new domain seltzerbooks.com Also there is a wealth of imaterial by and about Mercy Otis Warren at seltzerbooks.com/warren You can reach me at seltzer@seltzerbooks.com Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.138.182 (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 24.45.138.182, and welcome to Wikipedia. I've made the edit you pointed out, but next time, you can simply click the edit button on the top of the page, or at the corresponding section header and add what you want yourself. Editing is open to everybody, and we are always happy to meet new users who want to make improvements to the encyclopedia. — Alpha3031 (talk | contribs) 13:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is a better idea for you to suggest, rather than directly make, edits when you have a conflict of interest (as you do, when it is a link to your own website that's involved). The talk page of the article in question is usually the best place to place the request, and you can post the template {{request edit}} followed by your request, on the talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 15:35, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Who is the founder of Wikipedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmomin (talk • contribs) 17:42, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Wales Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 18:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't forget Larry Sanger - co-founder. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Where i open move option in my page for move article page ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmomin (talk • contribs) 17:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jmomin. I realise you have been blocked from editing, but should you ever return, you might find Wikipedia:Moving a page answers your question. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:03, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category : Alumni of UniversityName vs Category : UniversityName alumni

Please which of the two format above is the consistent and best-practice format for creating categories for alumni of a University on Wikipedia? HandsomeBoy (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HandsomeBoy: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Apologies for the long delay in getting a reply to you. I'm not sure I can give you a definitive answer, but the folks at Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities probably can. Looking at Category:Alumni and its subcategories such as Category:Alumni by university or college, I would conclude that "Alumni of UniversityName" is much more frequently used, though there are a few exceptions. It seems logical to put the keyword or keywords on which a category is listed at the front of the title, as this assists with alpha-sorting, but you may wish to read the definitive guidance at Wikipedia:Categorization and Wikipedia:Category names. I hope this helps a little. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:48, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Logo

How can I change the Wikipedia logo on my userpage?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 19:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thegooduser and fancy seeing you here in the Teahouse again!

Are you referring to the Wikipedia glob logo in the upper left hand corner that is an image link to WP:Main Page? That's not an option for users to set on the Wikipedia side. At the level of your browser's presentation, you might be able to use a user script to swap out the image for another. If you know Javascript, there are a great many changes you could make to the way pages appear. You can add stuff, make stuff disappear, and swap some things around.

While I'm usually up for interesting challenges, I think I'd need some justification before putting time into figuring this one out. What would you want to change it to? — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:51, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Posting references

I have no clue how to do so. If anyone would be so kind to walk me through that it would be lovely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1015:B110:8484:BC5E:136F:5D8A:1F76 (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP editor. Start by reading Referencing for beginners and come back here to the Teahouse if you have specific questions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:10, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Difficulty with an admin on Wikimedia

I have a problem on Wikimedia Commons with an admin that is unfairly pursuing me and has placed a 3-month block on my account, with no means of appeal. The supposed offence is disruptive editting, which I refute, in fact I claim that I was merely rectifying disruptive edits by other editors (mates with the admin, I suspect). How do I go about appealling this nonsensical block when the Admin in question leaves me nowhere to post an unblock request or appeal to other admins?--Petebutt (talk) 21:04, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Themightyquill You may wish to comment here.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Petebutt

Investigating...Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:10, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I found this on your Wikimedia Commons Talk Page, Which Explains it:"Please stop your disruptive edits.

The unidentified/uncategorized aircraft categories are under discussion. Please do not move them again. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Your disruptive behaviour has continued as you have emptied Category:Unidentified propeller-driven aircraft. If these edits continue, you will be blocked. Please consider this your last warning. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)" Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:12, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This board is for assisting new users with using Wikipedia. We have nothing to do with the operation of Commons. If they have blocked you and removed your talk page access there, there is nothing we can do here. You will just have to wait out the block. I don't know if they have an off-wiki appeals process like the WP:UTRS for Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 21:15, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That said, if anyone has specific questions, I'd be happy to answer on Commons. But I should think the commons user talk page, his contribution list and block log say it all. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to add that you were saying "Why don't YOU stop YOUR disruptive edits!!!!--Petebutt (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)" Which I don't think you should do, as this shows you are yelling (Caps). On the English Wikipedia this is considered uncivil(WP:CIVIL). I am not sure about Wikimedia Commons. (But I am sure they have the same rule) Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

Petebutt Wikimedia Commons is a separate, albeit related, project to English Wikipedia. It has it's own set of conventions, rules and admins, different in many ways. You need to address the reason you were blocked on Commons through Commons procedures, coming here is completely useless or nearly completely useless.

@Thegooduser: It's not a good practice to copy other people's comments, complete with signatures, from one project to another. We have perfectly good tools for making and following links and that's a better way to achieve your purpose. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Forgot about the Link Part.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:28, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

jmcgnh I thanked your edit, because you helped me remember to not do that againThegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question

How do I nominate a page for deletion? RickAndMorty2003 (talk) 22:15, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse. WP:CSD Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:16, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also PROD and Articles for Deletion. David notMD (talk) 09:42, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help me to properly link external and internal links.Integral59 (talk) 22:26, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Thank you for your kind invitation. Earlier I tried to learn how to write the correct article for Wikipedia, but I did not succeed. Now I'm determined to learn how to write articles for Wikipedia, but I still can not solve some problems. For example, I could not correctly link references and bibliography in my draft article. I do not understand what my mistake is. Please help me correct errors in the article and edit it correctly. Thank you in advance for your kind help. Sincerely, Integral59 (talk) 22:26, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Integral59: Internal links (links to pages within the site) use [[two brackets like this]] around the article title, using a "|" between the title and what the link displays, [[like|this]] if that is needed. External links (links to other sites) go in a pair of single brackets with the address first, then a space, then the title for the link, [http://www.example.com like this]. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:30, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

However, @Integral59:, I'm seeing further problems with your attempted draft. It reads like a resume/CV (which we do not host) put up for the purpose of promoting Khalilov's career (which we do not allow). If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything, here are the steps you should follow:

1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.

2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.

3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.

4) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.

5) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.

6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.

7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.

8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:32, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And there were copyright violations. Had to delete it. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for your prompt and detailed response. Regarding external and internal links, I think I understand everything and try to fix it. As for the subject of the article, I want to consult. I have cited several references to external sources and ask you to kindly see which of them are considered authoritative:

Extended content

1. MAIN PUBLICATIONS

Khain V.E., Khalilov E.N. Cyclicity of geodynamic processes: its possible nature Scientific World, 520 p.Library of Congress USA
Khalilov E.N., Bagirov R.A. Natural zeolites, their properties, production and application. Elm, 350 p.Library of Congress USA
Mehdiyev Sh.F., Khalilov E.N. Rhythms of Earth’s catastrophes.Elm. 1988 Library of Congress USA

2.Bibliography

Elchin Khalilov biography in Book: Dictionary of International Biography. 1995. Twenty third edition. Who Will Be Who in the 21st Century.International Biography Center, Cambridge, UK, p.308. ISBN 0948875410.

Elchin Khalilov biography in Book: Men of Achievement. 1995. Sixteenth Edition. 1994 by Merlose Press Ltd, Cambridge, UK, ISBN 0948875461

Elchin Khalilov biography in Book: Famous Scientists of Azerbaijan.Baku, Adiloglu, 2003, p.62. ISBN 9952250145

Elchin Khalilov in Book by Frederic P. Miller, Agnes F. Vandome, John McBrewster. Alphascript Publishing, Feb. 16th, 2011, USA, ISBN 9786134280105

3. External links Publication on the UN website; Publication on the NATO website; Publication in the State Information Agency of Azerbaijan; The show is on the central television channels of Turkey.

I would also like to ask, if in the text I'm talking about a member of a particular organization, for example, the International Academy of Sciences, can I link to the official website of this Academy? Thank you for your kind help. Yours faithfully, Integral59 (talk) 23:09, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Integral59. I'm afraid you're missing the point of references. Wikipedia is basically uninterested in what Khalilov (or any other subject) has done, been, said, or published, except as discussed in reliable published material, wholly independent of him. Once such an article has been written, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual material may be added from non-independent sources such as the Academy's website, or his own, and a selected (not comprehensive) bibliography may be added. The biographies in those books that you cite might be suitable, depending on their depth and how independent they are of him and his employers or associates. --ColinFine (talk) 10:35, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: Article creation date

Useful information about the articles or pages, is the creation date, although they have the last edit date. I suggest that the text line w/ the article date should be changed from "This page was last edited on ___." to "This page was created ___ & last edited ___.".104.178.189.70 (talk) 01:02, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP user. The WP:Village Pump/Proposals is the place to make suggestions like this. --ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Featured anthem article

Are there any articles about national anthem that had obtained the featured article status?--Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 02:50, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeromi Mikhael: National anthem of Russia ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See List of national anthems. Most are Start or C-class, a few are B-class. David notMD (talk) 10:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeromi Mikhael: Belarus' anthem is also featured. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 15:32, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Biography

How can we post a Biography on wikipidia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohit9639 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rohit9639. Please start by reading and studying Your first article. Please be aware that we have very stringent policies regarding biographies of living people. Familiarize yourself with our Notabilty guideline for people. That should get you started. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question, is my wiki page accepted for my "Sammin" draft?

Look at title — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1kwwisjwksek (talk • contribs) 04:05, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why not any reasons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1kwwisjwksek (talk • contribs) 05:22, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Bananaman was reverted because you didn't supply any references to reliable sources, verifying the information. We can't (or shouldn't) add just anything to an article, we must back it up with citations. Please read our Reliable Sources and Referencing guidelines. Rojomoke (talk) 09:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rojomoke: You really need to read the title one more time. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 12:50, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sammin was deleted as G3 (Blatent hoax or vandalism). It does not show up as a contribution by 1kwwisjwksek, which is why Rojomoke guessed this was about Banananananananaman. David notMD (talk) 13:14, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

how to get images uploaded here, which im looking for is the Jdp or jpd

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Abboushi4 (talk • contribs) 05:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Abboushi4, welcome to our Teahouse. I'm sorry you had to wait so long for a reply. I suspect none of us quite knew what you were asking. Can you explain what you mean by "Jdp or jpd"? Did you really mean ".jpg"?

I see you have been trying to add a non-existent file (named Raúl de Tomás celebrating his goal.jpg) from Wikimedia Commons to the article on Raúl de Tomás. You can only add an image into an article if it already exists on Wikimedia Commons, or (providing you own the copyright to the picture) have one you want to upload and then use yourself. I must stress that you are not allowed to take a picture from any other copyrighted website and pretend you own it so that you can upload and use it, as it will swiftly be deleted unless, that it, it is clearly licenced from free commercial re-use.) From the warning on your talk page, it looks as if that is precisely what you have been trying to do. So please don't try that again. You might wish to read Wikipedia:Uploading images for more information. Note that if you are trying to add an existing photo into an Infobox in the field beginning "image=" then you should remove the "File:" from the start of the filename. Oh, and please remember to sign future talk page posts with four keyboard tildes, (like this: ~~~~). Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:21, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First article not approved

I write first Wikipedia article but it's not approve. What's wrong in it i can under stand.....Please Help Me !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saksham90 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 22 July 2018

@Saksham90: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You were told the reason why the article was not accepted- it does not have independent reliable sources that have in depth coverage of the subject and indicate how it meets the notability guidelines for companies at WP:ORG. Please review the guidelines. The sources you did provide are basic announcements, which do not establish notability. I would also ask you if you are associated with this business in some way. 331dot (talk) 07:49, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Black Sarcophagus

Can someone make an article about a recently discovered black sarcophagus in Egypt, it has been on the news everywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.148.155.196 (talk) 10:14, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Requested articles. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 12:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP user. While Abelmoschus Esculentus is right that the correct venue for such a request would be requested articles, the backlog there is so huge that the chances of you listing the idea there actually resulting in an article being written any time soon are pretty small. The best thing to do would be to collect sources and start an article yourself, following the guidance at Wikipedia:Your first article. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent change of information by an unregistered user on disputed information

I am having an issue in a article that I am looking after where someone without a wikipedia account keeps changing information every time. Unlike registered users I cannot really use the talk page and I don't think this person knows how wikipedia work. When I requested the page to be Semi-Protected, my request got declined saying "Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection., the only edit this week which looks like possible vandalism is presumably a failed attempt to add valid info to the template". I was wondering what I can do to stop this since every time I change it that editor keeps changing things back - LionCountry25 (talk) 11:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this about Edwin Wijeyeratne? — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 09:19, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, who is this? - LionCountry25 (talk) 14:42, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LionCountry25. First, you need to stop edit warring, and discuss the matter, according to WP:BRD. You can't ping an IP user, but you can put a message on their talk page - I would suggest you open the discussion on the article's talk page, and put a message on their talk page to point them to it.

Secondly, just because you disagree with an edit, that doesn't make it vandalism. You may be right, you may be wrong, the truth may be a mixture.

Thirdly, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "I am looking after", but it can be read as implying that you believe that you own the article. I apologise if that's not what you meant to imply. --ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine, thank you for getting back. If I go backwards, what I meant was it's in my watchlist and this is one article that I pay more attention to this article than others. It's not that i'm saying the information is right, there is conflicting information from different sources, so what I did was remove the information every time the editor added information since I thought it might be fruitless to put it in the talk page, but since you suggested that I might do that. Also that editor has used incorrect formats, eg: the person used order1 instead of office1 - LionCountry25 (talk) 02:44, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is my article good to go?

Hi! I'm relatively new here. Just wrote my second article. (I had to link it as an external link for some reason--perhaps because it's such a new article?) Can someone take a look at it and confirm it's good to go? Or should I go somewhere else with such requests? Thank you. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DiamondRemley39, welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry for the delay in giving you a reply. Your new article on Doral Moore has already gone (into mainspace that it), though it had not yet been reviewed. It's actually very well constructed, and looks well-referenced, though I do wonder about their ability to meet WP:NSPORTS with respect to the NBA Draft (which I know absolutely nothing about). At a glance the only thing that struck me was the difference in stated metric height in the lede and the infobox - probably a conversion accuracy issue you might like to investigate and ensure you cite. I've now marked the article as reviewed, and eventually decided against adding a 'notability' tag, but other editors are, of course, free to add one if the criteria are not met. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:53, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image inquiry

If an artist has used NASA picture as his/her album, what should the first sort be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liljoewiz (talk • contribs) 12:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Liljoewiz, I've no idea what you're asking. What do you mean by "used NASA picture as his/her album", and what do you mean by "the first sort"? --ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Grammarly and Formatter citing?

I just recently used Grammarly and/or Formatter while copy editing an article. I spotted an error and asked Grammarly if it was right or not. It showed me a few more and I decided to accept those as changes also. Now, do I have to cite Grammarly or Formatter for being the englighter for changes to be made? If so, How should I do it? (And also, Is it allowed to use Grammarly in Wikipedia?)Katariasuman00 (talk) 13:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have used a tool to find and correct various grammatical errors. Nothing creative was involved, and you don't need to give any credit. I'm sure what you did is allowed; judging from the results, it should be encouraged. Maproom (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Katariasuman00, I agree with Maproom. Citations are needed for sources of information, not for how we word our sentences in writing and editing. What you did is similar to using a dictionary to verify the spelling of a word. Eddie Blick (talk) 20:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to create the english version for previous chinese pages

i have create a history pages https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%A9%AC%E5%85%AD%E7%94%B2%E4%BF%9D%E5%AE%89%E5%AE%AB , but i now plan create a english version for this pages, the issue is they allow me to use the translation tools i found alot of translate words/ grammar no correct , i plan do my own, but how it will link within this 2 pages? and how can i inside the photo / upload the photo to the pages? previously i can upload but now it show i'm no confirm user so cannot upload.

please help. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pohkwan (talk • contribs) 16:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pohkwan, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can create an English article by translating the Chinese, or from scratch, or as a mixture of the two; but if any of it is a translation of the Chinese article, you must credit it, under the terms of the licence - saying in the edit summary where you took it from will be adequate credit. What you should not do is simply rely on machine translation - that I think is why English Wikipedia has disabled this option. Note that the English article, however you write it, will be reviewed according to the policies and rules of English Wikipedia, in particular about referencing: I don't know whether zhwiki's rules on this are the same or not. Please see Translation for more information about all of this.

When you have created the article, and had it reviewed (this is not compulsory, but I strongly advise you to use the Article wizard and submit your draft for review), you can add a link to the zhwiki version by picking "Edit links" under "Languages" in the sidebar.

If the photo on the zhwiki article is in Wikimedia commons, you can use it in an enwiki article exactly the same way. If it has been uploaded to zhwiki instead, you will not be able to use it directly in enwiki. If its copyright status is appropriate for Commons (i.e. it is free for anybody to use for any purpose) then you can upload it to Commons and use it. Otherwise you may be able to upload it to enwiki, but only if it and the way you are using it meet all the criteria in WP:NFCC --ColinFine (talk) 19:23, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality: American vs. United States

In the most recent revision of Al Hirschfeld, an IP user has changed the "nationality" field of {{tl:Infobox artist}} from "United States" to "American". That's the only change in this diff, and I'm pretty sure it's in good faith, but is there a standard or preferred usage? I've looked at America (which redirects to United States, Americans, American (word), and Names for United States citizens and their talk pages, which mostly consist of a lot of argument over what is "right" and why. But I haven't been able to locate any standard or preferred usage on Wikipedia. Is there one? My own preference is for "nationality" to be described as "American". Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 18:12, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This was discussed here just a few days ago, Thnidu: see #I'm American too above. But I don't think it reached a clear conclusion. --ColinFine (talk) 19:30, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thnidu, ColinFine, although I technically may be referred to as an American citizen and a United States citizen, I refer to myself as an American; I also hear other United States citizens refer to themselves as American. Based on this it would be safe to say that in the English WP, we should be able to refer to United States citizens as Americans and have it understood to mean just that. While those from other North American and South American countries would be referred to as North Americans or South Americans. There is broad usage of the term American in the United States which is automatically understood by those referred to as such, so it could be safe to say that American would be the preferred or at least completely acceptable. Coryphantha Talk 21:26, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thnidu, There is some material on the use of the term American in the article American ancestry. Gab4gab (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gia manek

This user's name matches a well known person and is making edits to "their" Wikipedia article. Soft Block?--Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thegooduser: I've blocked them. They are allowed to make a new account (to save us the trouble of renaming their current one). I'll add the article to my watchlist to see if they do. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:23, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

What does it take to be an Admin? Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:25, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thegooduser::

General knowledge of policies and guidelines (or an attitude that would allow one to guess what the community would want)
No recent blocks (I had a short edit-warring several block years ago that was a non-issue during my RfA)
No long-term problematic behavior or especially noteworthy "bad days"
At least a few articles created by the potential admin (to demonstrate their ability to write as well as their understanding of relevant policies and guidelines, such as WP:NOTE, WP:NPOV, and WP:COPYVIO)
A history of mediating disputes and solving problems for other users, especially at WP:ANI (some would say that an admin should behave like an admin before they ever get the tools)
At least a year of activity and many edits (there's no actual number for this but a lot of people will oppose an RfA by anyone with less than 10,000 or so edits)
A WP:CSD log, preferably one generated by Twinkle or some other automated script (to demonstrate that one understands our deletion policies)

Ian.thomson (talk) 20:35, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When do you think I will be ready?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:36, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Thegooduser. In practice, it requires significant and productive contributions to the encyclopedia over time, combined with a good understanding of our policies and guidelines, participation in the "behind the scenes" maintenance work, and a helpful, collaborative attitude. A candidate must pass a one week Request for administratorship, where hundreds of editors assess and critique the nominee's work. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:39, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser, you might find it useful to read the request for adminship advice essay. Gab4gab (talk) 21:02, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I'm afraid I don't know, although I don't think I was ready when I was nominated. Users who seek to become admins are less likely to be accepted, while users who just let it happen to them are more likely to be accepted whenever someone else nominates them.

I think you've proven that you can handle welcoming and warning users. I've never seen any problems with WP:CIVIL from you.

You have about 2130 edits. If you went to WP:RfA right now, most of the !votes would be "oppose" with the reason "WP:Not now," just because of the number of edits (especially a lack of edits to article talk pages).

You would need to create a CSD log, like I have here and get at least 100 entries (preferably 150), with at least a 90% success rate during the RfA

You would need to write some new articles. I got by with maybe three or four articles and several re-writes, so maybe five new articles, or three or four articles with six or seven re-writes.

It would help a lot if you had a reputation for solving problems at WP:ANI. This can possibly cause trouble, though. Sometimes people at ANI don't want their problem solved, they just want a problem to favor them instead of having it fixed in a way that everyone gets something out of. It's sometimes called "the drama board" because some users are more concerned with "winning" than fixing things. And some of those dramatic users will hold grudges.

Overall, if we were to take you to WP:RFA right now, it would not succeed -- but that's not from anything bad. With some extra work tagging new articles for deletion, writing some new articles, and ending fights at WP:ANI, you could probably be ready in another year or two. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I am under the Majority age. Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:10, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I remember we used to have a few underage admins, so unless policy has changed I think we allow it. (It has been several years since I've seen them, though). There probably would be some folks who !vote "oppose" just because of your age, but I think the powers-that-be ignore !votes that are not based on policy or good reason. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thegooduser: I don't think age would be an issue for me if I saw good admin potential in a young editor. And I do in you. But I also agree with the above commenters that you don't seem quite ready yet. I'd respectfully suggest that you still have a fair bit more to learn here (as I think I probably do, too). But, goodness, you have impressed me with your keenness and willingness to contribute here. But what concerns me more right now is the impact of your time spent here on Wikipedia versus your school studies and personal life. We have a responsibility towards all our young editors, not only to ensure their online safety, but also that they get their Wikipedia/Real-life balance correct. I know that you and I had both flippant and serious discussions not only here but also on your talk page earlier this year about getting that balance right. And I am a little concerned that this amazing site might already be eating up too much of your time. So you probably ought to ask yourself whether making further commitments right now would be a good idea or a bad one. I wonder - did you ever have that chat with your parents or trusted adults about your previous concerns over spending too much of your time here? I'd like to think you did, but we are always here to give support in whatever way we can, even if that sometimes means getting you to ease back on the throttle a little. (Remember you can always talk to fellow hosts on our talk pages, or direct email our admins if you still have concerns of getting that balance right. But, as I also said before, chatting to real people - friends and family- is by far the best thing to do, as they're the real people who really care most about you, your welfare, and how you spend your time online. Regards from a fellow 'wiki-holic', Nick Moyes (talk) 00:32, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook sharing

I am wondering if there is a way to share Wikipedia articles on my Facebook page? If so how? If not, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.37.11.113 (talk • contribs)

You can post a link. Saint Jut (talk) 21:26, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CSD Log

How Do I make a CSD log?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:13, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you go to Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences, then check the box next to "Keep a log in userspace of all CSD nominations." It would also be a good idea to check the box next to "Keep a log in userspace of all pages you tag for PROD." Ian.thomson (talk) 21:37, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dinu Li page

I have now re-written this page. Can someone remove the warning sign/advice box? I can't work out how to do it thank you! Vicarage bobby (talk) 22:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)Vicarage Bobby[reply]

Hello, Vicarage bobby, welcome to the Teahouse. Any editor can click 'Edit source' at the page about Dinu Li and remove the template that's forms the first line, right at the top. However, I'm not going to do that myself right now as I feel further work needs doing to the article. The lede is over-detailed in my view, and needs only be a short summary stating who he his, where he's from and why he's notable. Lists of exhibitions and their citations should go in a separate section further down, and you only need state that he has exhibited in the UK and other named countries in that first paragraph; you can provide all the citations you need later on. The "Life and influences" sections seems unnecessarily detailed to me, too. I see no need for the quotation to be there at all, nor the rather waffling minor details. Just cite the references that allow you to give a concise and helpful summary. Try to remember this is an encyclopaedia, simply summarising known references, not a detailed summary of every photo exhibition he's done. It's not meant to be like an exhibition or gallery label, full of what my former museum colleagues used to call "art bollocks" in verbose and promotional retrospectives of artists' lives. Try to work on the 'less is more' approach and it could be a good, succinct article. Hoping this helps, Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks Nick for advice - I'll have another go at it in a day or two Vicarage bobby (talk) 12:54, 23 July 2018 (UTC)Vicarage Bobby[reply]

Communion and Liberation page

Hi everyone, I've already reported this and got a suggestion of reporting it, but I'm not sure how to do it properly and well...this seems a good pace to ask.

I subscribed a few days ago, after discovering the aforementioned page is extremely biased and reports accusations as facts, with several other problems:

all citations are in Italian
some citations are used instrumentally i.e. they don't contain what's written on wikipedia
some citations are old and information which is now "wrong" (i.e. reporting trial results which then changed)
all citations have a negative perspective on the issue
there's talk like "many workers in Italy" and related which shouldn't appear on wikipedia

It really is low quality, just look at the page.

I made these (and more detailed) observations on the talk page and started working on the page. I found many sources in English, tried to do my best with keeping a balanced perspective etc.

Yesterday evening a user reverted all changes (including the warnings about POV and factual accuracy I put and one about citation some more experienced user put) and stated my changes were not at wiki standards level. Now, I would be fine with that observation, had it not been about the whole page with such generic statements.

In the talk section I asked again for explanations: which citations are not good and why. He never addressed any of the points I made, just used generic statements (some of them not really kind) about the work I made and restored.

For comparison here's the current page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communion_and_Liberation ) here's my last edit ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communion_and_Liberation&oldid=851445699 ).

I honestly don't know what to do: I would be fine talking with someone who takes into consideration my observations, but I feel like hitting a wall, like everything I say it's water flowing away (just look at the talk page).

What should I do?

Thanks, best, GioA90 — Preceding unsigned comment added by GioA90 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GioA90. I can appreciate your frustration. Wikipedia is a collaborative project and there is no way around discussion, but that can be difficult when the other party isn't genuinely interested in reaching a consensus. At this point there are a number of means of dispute resolution you could try. First and foremost I'd suggest trying to bring the discussion to the attention of other editors interested in the topic. You can do that by posting on the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects (e.g. WP:ITALY, WP:CATHOLICISM) or noticeboards (WP:NPOVN). Ensure you keep any messages there concise and neutral: just say where the discussion is and what it's about, don't try to put forward your side. Failing that, there are more formal processes like WP:3O and WP:DRN.

One small point, though: the language of sources is not something to worry about. Our policy is that English sources are preferred all other things being equal, but if there are better sources in Italian, it is fine to use them. – Joe (talk) 10:34, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. I've posted a message on WP:CATHOLICISM, let's see what happens (I'm not too hopeful and think this sort of methods won't work, but at least let's try).

Thank you for your point on the language: I also used Italian sources, but not if two "comparable" sources are present in both languages (i.e. article on an online newspaper). Thank you again! Best, GioA90GioA90 (talk) 10:49, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This case was also discussed in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Lzzy303 reported by User:Jasmir54 (Result: ) Matthew_hk t c 01:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About Publish The Wiki Page

how w publish the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arvind Akela (Kallu Ji) (talk • contribs) 11:27, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arvind Akela (Kallu Ji) and welcome to our Teahouse. I hardly know where to start, as you've done so many things that aren't OK here. Not to worry - we'll try and sort you out. It's clear you've come here to Wikipedia expecting Wikipedia to promote an article about you. This is a common error that people who think they're famous in some way make. You have created Draft:Arvind Akela (Kallu Ji) in which you appear to have written about yourself in glowing terms (just look at the image caption to see what I mean). You then have a sandbox at User:Arvind Akela (Kallu Ji)/sandbox with similar content, and you have repeated the same promotional information on your own user page at User:Arvind Akela (Kallu Ji). The first thing I would like you to do is delete all the content in your userpage before another editor puts a deletion notice on them. Your userpage is only there to say a few words about yourself and your interests in editing Wikipedia - not for writing an article about yourself. See WP:USERPAGE for guidelines on what's acceptable there and what isn't. The quick solution is just to blank the page and then save it (i.e. hit the big blue publish changes button)

In fact, you need to be aware that we have a policy called Conflict of Interest which requires editors to declare their connection with the subject they are writing about. I am assuming you and the subject are one and the same? If not, then it's totally not OK to pretend to be someone you are not. I advise you to read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, and especially this section, as we strongly advise people against creating pages about themselves. They are hardly ever likely to be neutral in what they write, and we prefer unconnected editors to write in a neutral manner, based on independent sources that have written about them. So, on that point, where are the references in the media that talk about you in such a way that show you meet our obligatory criteria for WP:NOTABILITY? Please read WP:NACTOR to understand how a person is judged to either meet, or not meet, those notability criteria.

Now, as to your draft article, I see you have already submitted it for review at Articles for Creation, and there's a notice at the bottom saying it's in the queue. (This can take some weeks as we're all volunteers here). I can guarantee it will be rejected as being over-promotional and undersourced, requiring independent sources to substantiate how handsome - or otherwise - you really are and how many awards and appearances you have made. So rather than sit back and wait to be turned down, why not address those issues now? Of course, if we don't see clear evidence how any person meets our notability criteria, then that person will never have a Wikipedia article about them. That said, do also have a read of WP:TOOSOON - it points out that a person might not merit an article today, but may well do so in the future when those criteria are fully met. I hope this helps, and in future posts might I also ask you to sign your comments by adding four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~) which automatically adds a username and timestamp to every comment that an editor makes. It makes replying to people so much easier. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:33, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting question

If you look at User:Deisenbe/sandbox it comes up filling the left of the page only. It didn’t use to and I cannot figure out why it does. Platform is Safari on iOS. Thanks. deisenbe (talk) 13:57, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Helloe Deisenbe, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm unable to see anything wrong with it. Your sandbox does have a long contents section which only ever displays left-justified on the left side of the page, but everything looks fine below that, and text wraps across the entire page perfectly. I've checked it in Chrome on a Windows desktop, and in both classic and mobile view in Safari on iOS10. Sampling your sandbox page from a few months ago looks just the same to me. I'm unable to suggest what setting on your own device you might have altered that causes it to display incorrectly. Have you tried viewing it on any other devices? Nick Moyes (talk) 14:14, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It does the same on my iPhone. I haven’t turned on my Windows laptop in months so will have to live with it unless the reason pops up some day. There have now and then other Safari rendering problems. Thanks. deisenbe (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find anything online about it, Deisenbe. What happens when you visit other user or sandbox pages? Try mine at User:Nick Moyes/sandbox -it's almost as long as yours. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:42, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yours comes up fine. No other page does it. deisenbe (talk) 18:09, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Deisenbe that is weird. I've looked for weird templates that you might have used on your page, but apart from {{this}} and {{Muscogee}} I can't see anything unusual. But, you still have two other options. a) Post a description to WP:VPT (and maybe upload a screenshot to Commons too) for the boffins to ponder over, or b) simply accept that your IT kit hates you. LOL. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Deisenbe: Solved it! Your issue has been bugging me, so I revisited your sandbox page today and spotted something I'd not noticed yesterday, either on my laptop or iphone, and which you didn't mention - namely, a huge but inconspicuous horizontal scroll bar! So, whilst your sandbox displayed fine on both devices, it was actually possible to scroll rightwards into lots of blank space, but then downwards to find the cause of the problem. It was simply a very long url which you'd pasted in back in mid-April without the http: in front of it. (see diff) So the text didn't resolve as a url, instead appearing as a very long line of continuous text which for some reason didn't wrap round the page, but increased the displayed page width considerably, thus causing your problem. I've now taken the liberty of editing your sandbox and have added the http, now making the page display normally again. (All major credit cards accepted!) Nick Moyes (talk) 01:02, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki tags

Hi Teahouse folks, it's good to see you again. I think I've gotten involved in an edit war on a moderately popular article... and since it concerns the wording of just one sentence, I find it faster to just redo the edit once every 24 hours in order to stay well clear of WP:3RR, than to go to the talk page. However, I think the other involved editors are somehow getting notified for my edits, which is surprising given that I'm erasing the automatically generated edit summary, which tags their usernames, and writing a new summary each time. Does this have to do with tags, specifically an undo tag, that's getting applied every time I use the undo button? If so, how can I get around this tagging process which is only drawing the whole issue out - should I just rewrite the sentence each time instead of using the handy undo button? Thanks! 96.78.136.154 (talk) 14:08, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should stop edit warring and discuss the matter on the article talk page. Edit-warring is not permitted, whether strictly violating 3RR or not. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:14, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Giving you advice how best to carry on edit-warring and is not something we would ever do. You should either walk away from editing the article, or have the confidence to log in under your username and address the issue directly on the Talk page. Carrying on as you have been doing does no-one any favours, and is liable to get you blocked from editing. WP:3RR does extend beyond the 24hr period if it's clearly one editor trying to game the system like you have been. If you think you're right in your editing, as you clearly do, have the confidence to explain why and come to some consensus with other editors before they seek to have you blocked. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Need to revert a page ASAP!

I work for an author who asked me to do the Wiki coding in order to expand a philosopher stub. I did this in a few steps (a couple not logged in). He was dissatisfied, wanted more time to think about his entry, and asked me to revert (remove any changes I'd made). I attempted to do this several times, both logged in and not--by clicking on the earlier date, clicking Edit, and publishing changes. I see the earlier page pop up, but every time we go back into Wiki, my published page shows up again as if I didn't do anything. I'm baffled and need help please. EDB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eboepple1950 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Eboepple1950: and welcome to Wikipedia, and the Teahouse. First things first: please make sure that you always log into your account to edit. It is also important that you read this information about editing with a conflict of interest, and that you make the required disclosure - please read that information and make the required disclosures on your user page (User:Eboepple1950) before making any other edits at all.

The article in question is Fred Dallmayr. My immediate impression is that your substantial additions to the page are a bit too substantial and detailed, and it might be a good idea to roll the article back, or at least cut down quite a lot on the level of detail, but as I say that's just my impression at first glance. There does not appear to be any content that violates Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people, and so there is no actual hurry; my advice to you would be to edit the page more slowly, and not remove large parts of the page - and again, please don't log out to edit. What has happened here is that various editors and anti-vandalism bits have seen an anonymous IP removing most of an article, which is a common tactic for vandals, and that's why the removals have been reverted. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 16:40, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to procure images for my article

Hi All, I created a new article with title List of India national football team hat-tricks. I have ensured to conform by the rules and regulations of Wikipedia while creating the article. Now, I want to improve it and for doing so, I want to insert some images. Can someone, please, guide me about the rules & regulations to insert an image? Is it fine to use an image from another wikipedia article or do I need to get prior permission for that? Regards, DipanjanDatta1974 (talk) 17:01, 23 July 2018 (UTC)DipanjanDatta1974[reply]

Hello DipanjanDatta1974 and welcome to our Teahouse. Thank you for your question. With only a few minor exceptions (such as 'fair use') which we probably need not concern ourselves with here, it's fine to use an image that has already been legitimately deployed on another Wikipedia page. You're free to change the caption, of course, to suit its use in your new article. I should add that you are not allowed to take copyrighted images off the internet and upload for use on Wikipedia. You may upload images you have taken yourself and are happy to release for anyone else to use, even for commercial purposes. For more guidance on using using photos, see the helpful links at WP:IMAGES. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes Thanks a lot for your response with an accurate example of an image. This is what I had in mind. Regards, Dipanjan Datta DipanjanDatta1974 (talk) 18:56, 23 July 2018 (UTC)DipanjanDatta1974[reply]

Proper Upload of Images

hi there!

I am interested on doing a bibliography for an artist but I am having a problem uploading image, I believe it is because I do not know how to properly cite or reference the images, the images are upload from the artists websites and social media. I would a appreciate your help please and thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnpaultubig (talk • contribs) 18:07, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Johnnpaultubig: and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately it is almost never possible to use pictures found on official websites for an artist, or on social media, in a Wikipedia article - such photos are usually copyrighted. More information here. If you have pictures where you own the copyright, or one that is acceptable under any of the other conditions described in the link above, you can upload it - there is a guide here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:32, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Johnnpaultubig. Images that you find on an artist's website or social media accounts are almost certainly copyrighted and cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Low resolution images of paintings can be used in specific articles only if there is sourced critical commentary about the painting style in the article. Please read our policy on use of non-free images, paying attention to item #7. Such images must be uploaded here to English Wikipedia. Fill in all relevant fields in the upload wizard accurately. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:41, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting harassed via wikipedia pages

I have a cyberstalker who has been harassing online me since September 2017. Violent threats via email, fake ads using my private facebook details and likeness, typical stalker stuff. Recently I found out two to three dozen edit to various wiki pages, referencing my name. All of them are violations of Wikipedia terms of service against harassment and vandalizing.

Is there a way to regex block text edits containing my name? Freeze edits to a page?

Banning usernames or IP does not help, because he simply creates a new one elsewhere or moves to a different wifi spot.

I really don't know where to begin with this kind of stuff. Is this even the right place to ask? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacenacho (talk • contribs) 18:43, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Spacenacho. Sorry about the harassment. Usernames that impersonate a real person should be blocked indefinitely. Report them to WP:UAA. Vandalism should be reported to WP:AIV. Follow the instructions at the top of each noticeboard. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:53, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi, Spacenacho! That's awful, I'm sorry you're being harassed. As far as Wikipedia goes, there are mechanisms to do the things you're asking about, and normally administrators (I happen to be one) would be the people to ask, perhaps at a place like the administrators' noticeboard. However, since your privacy is affected, it's probably better to email your concerns, rather than post further details about them publicly on Wikipedia itself. Probably the best thing to do is to email the oversight team: Special:EmailUser/Oversight. Oversighters are highly trusted users who have the ability to suppress things like personal details from even administrators. If you use the email form to give Wikipedia-relevant information, ideally including the diff links of the specific edits in question, they should be able to help you out expeditiously. Note that, in order to use that email form, you'll need to attach an email account to your Wikipedia account; that can be done from Special:Preferences (at the bottom of the user profile tab). Please feel free to reply here or on my talk page if you need more help. Thanks, and I hope it works out! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:56, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

copyright permission

HI!

How can I prove that I am given the permission to use a photo of a celebrity I personally know. My other question is how am I supposed to know if an image can be use by anyone(free-use). thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnpaultubig (talk • contribs) 18:47, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnpaultubig: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. For your first question, if I understand things correctly, you can't. The person who owns the photo(which is probably the photographer or agent of the celebrity) must be the one to grant permission for its use to Wikipedia themselves, it cannot be done by a third party. They may do so by following the procedure at WP:DCP. I assume this has to do with Monika Jensen? 331dot (talk) 19:15, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnpaultubig: Looking at the article further, I have tagged it with some concerns that need to be addressed. IMDB is not usually considered a reliable source as it is user-editable; the other two sources are both primary sources and not acceptable for establishing notability. Please review the notability guidelines at WP:NACTOR. I would ask you if you work for or represent Monica Jensen. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing

Hi There!

I've recently published an article/biography for an artist in my area, but I am worried if I created the page in the right way, or reference/cite it in the right way. Are there anyways I can assure that it will be active and will not be deleted due to referencing errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnpaultubig (talk • contribs) 19:21, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article in question, Monika Jensen, has two main problems. The first and foremost is lack of proper sourcing. The basis of every good article is reliable third party sourcing. A subject's own web site, social media presence, blogs, paid advertising or press releases are not considered reliable sources. Here's more extensive info: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. I did a quick search for coverage to help you out and could only find this: [[1]]. Interviews are only just barely better than a self published source, because the subject can say whatever they want, and the editorial standards are typically not so high. There's no overcoming this hurdle - the article will most likely be deleted. I recommend saving the text and in the future if Ms. Jensen gets more media coverage, you can revisit. The second issue is that the content is written too promotionally - it's not encyclopedic. Phrases like "She is nationally and internationally published around the world" and "These exclusive works are rarely shown in public but are the center of conversation with any art collector" are out of place here. The latter statement cannot be substantiated with any amount of sourcing. So, in the future, find good sourcing, and be cautious with using promotional language. Regards. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:39, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've also replied to Johnnpaultubig on my user talk page where they contacted me. 331dot (talk) 19:40, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) (And I've just CSDed it!) Hi, Johnnpaultubig, thanks for posting your question at the Teahouse about Monika Jensen. It's never reference errors that result in deletion, it's inadequate references that are the problem, or breaches of our policy, like copyright violation. Because of the latter, the best thing you can do is to rewrite the page completely and add an independent and reliable reference after every statement of 'fact'. We call these inline citations and they evidence what's said about a person. So please read Wikipedia:Inline citation for how to do this. In your case you've used two sources written by the subject. This isn't sufficient. Not only that, but I now see you have simply cut and pasted this directly from a copyrighted source, one of which is this IMDB wiki page, which anyone can edit, and is not regarded as a reliable source, but it's content is clearly copyright. See WP:COPYVIO. For this reason I felt obliged to unreview the page and flag it for [[WP:CSD|speedy deletion] as unambiguous copyright infringement (G12). There's nothing to stop you recreating the page if you write in your own words based on good independent sources. But if you cannot find independent sources that talk about her in depth, and write about her in your own words, then she won't ever meet our Notability Criteria, and a future page may just as swiftly be deleted, I'm afraid. Sorry I can't bring you more hope, and I'm really sorry that in the course of responding to you I've had to propose her page for deletion. It's not something I set out to do, honest. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:57, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources

Hi There!

I'm creating a wiki page for an actress but I'm not sure if my sources will be considered by Wikipedia as a verifiable and reliable source. The actress I'm writing a wiki page about is Monika Jensen and I was wondering if the following sites are considered as verifiable.

I'm sure they're all verifiable. BUt if they're to be used to establish that the subject is notable, they'll also need to be independent. Wikipedia doesn't care what anyone has said or written about themself, it's only independent articles that count.

http://www.gallerydir.com/art-web/ARTIST/data/ID/176

This page is headed "Artist Statement", and so is not indpendent of the subject.

https://calgarysbusiness.ca/calgarys-movers-and-shakers/monika-jensen-secret-to-success/

This article is based on an interview with her, and so is not independent.

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/celebrity-artist-monika-jensen-premiers-on-tlcs-say-yes-to-the-dress---dec-5-516450131.html

This page gives as its source "Monika Jensen Productions". Again, not independent.

http://www.abstractartistgallery.org/monika-jensen/

begins with a long paragraph by the subject.

Thank you for all the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnpaultubig (talk • contribs) 20:25, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So, none of those sources helps to establish that she is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. Maproom (talk) 20:46, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnpaultubig: yes, I'm afraid I do agree with Maproom. Maybe it's just WP:TOOSOON, and worth waiting a few years until she's been written about by people other than her own production team. Sorry about that. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:00, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do bicicles work?

I hope I spelled the title right... :P

If a bike is standing still then it will fall (if it's not supported by anything), but if the bike is moving at a fast speed it will not fall unless if it slows down.

What is the physical law that if an object is moving as a fast speed the object's area of support (that thing that will make the object fall if the center of gravity is over it) will increase

What is the formula for this magical bike physic change? Has anyone thought about it in the past? Never heard of Eistein riding a bike and thinking about "But why doesen't it fall if i move the center of gravity over the wheels?"

SpaceMAXUE (talk) 20:57, 23 July 2018 (UTC) <- Note: Lazy ket that only questions and looks at how people think about stuff I say[reply]

@SpaceMAXUE: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia, and is not for asking general questions. You may try the Reference Desk or the article on Bicycles. 331dot (talk) 21:02, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Read Bicycling Science by David Gordon Wilson, pretty sure it's in there (my copy is packed away). Guy (Help!) 21:21, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might read our article Bicycle and motorcycle dynamics. Deor (talk) 21:37, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Account Globally Blocked

Hi There!

My question is about account that is globally blocked? what are the reason why account can be globally blocked and how can we unblocked it? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnpaultubig (talk • contribs) 21:18, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnpaultubig: - you can review the information at WP:BAN and WP:BLOCK for data on blocks, and read and follow instructions at WP:APPEAL for information on how and why to appeal a block levied by administrators on you. Stormy clouds (talk) 21:24, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnpaultubig: as your account is not blocked, nor ever has been, it may help if you can you tell us which account you're asking about? Your use of the word 'we' suggests that you or your promotion agency is running more than one account, and probably for the wrong purposes. Doing that really does breach our policies and may swiftly lead to indefinite blocks of IP addresses. I think global blocks apply only to IP addresses, not registered users, and are applied only when there has been severe disruption caused. I doubt that applied to you, so blocking on just one language wiki would seem more likely. The more you can tell us, the more we can guide you.Nick Moyes (talk) 21:41, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article Deleted

Hi there! I created my first article without logging into my account; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Ondo_State_Wealth_Creation_Agency. When I discovered this, I moved the page some days after, into the main article space, and it got deleted yesterday; https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Ondo_State_Wealth_Creation_Agency&action=edit I don’t know how to rectify this. Please help. Thanks! Wikkyexpert (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikkyexpert, and welcome to the Teahouse. Ermm, your draft does still exist. It's at Draft:The Ondo State Wealth Creation Agency where I think it was moved back from mainspace because it wasn't ready. So when you ask about rectifying this, does this answer your question, or are you seeking help as to what to do next? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:30, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nick Moyes, thank you for your response! I was wondering if the fact that I created the page without logging in would delay its review, and if I could l recreate it through my account

Wikkyexpert (talk) 09:32, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Biography of an unknown/unpopular artist

Hi There!

I was just wondering if it is possible for someone to write a biography of a person that is just starting out as an artist. What kind of sources should I use for this artist since she/he is not really popular and doesn't have much popularity. Johnnpaultubig (talk) 21:46, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnpaultubig: If you have follow up questions, please just add them to an existing section(click "edit" next to the title of this section). I gave you a reply to your question on my user talk page if you haven't seen it yet. As I indicated, Wikipedia is not for promotional purposes like helping to make someone more well known or to advance their career. Someone must already be well known in order to merit an article here. In the case of an actor or actress, they must meet at least one of the notability criteria at WP:NACTOR as shown in independent reliable sources. If they are not popular or well known, such sources probably do not exist, which would mean they do not merit an article here at this time. I would remind you that as you seem to be a paid editor, you must formally declare this per WP:PAID, which is mandatory per Wikipedia's Terms of Use for paid editors. If there are not appropriate sources for the person you are writing about, you may need to give them their money back as you won't be able to create an article about them. 331dot (talk) 21:54, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted

Regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Illustrated_Daily_News&type=revision&diff=851567356&oldid=851206795, I can't figure out how to appeal the deletion of an image, even though I have BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 23:59, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BeenAroundAWhile. That diff just shows a bot removing a link to a file which has already been deleted. You can find the delete log here: Explicit speedily deleted the image giving the rational "WP:F7: Violates non-free use policy". I don't know if there's a way to appeal a speedy deletion, but I've pinged Explicit, and you can discuss it with them. --ColinFine (talk) 08:18, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page with conflict of interest

I call to your attention to the page of Nieca Goldberg who is a practicing physician. Dr. Goldberg's page was written by an editor called JOHNSONIENIENSIS. This editor claims no scientific or medical expertise. The editor does not list biography as one of his/her specialties although this article falls under the biographical heading. I believe the entire page is just a form of medical practice advertisement. This physician has NO outstanding achievements that would separate her from many other academic cardiologists. I speck as as a retired Board Certified Cardiologist, Fellow of the American College of Cardiology who held an academic position for nearly 30 years, and and someone who has published multiple papers in peer reviewed journals. I believe that this page should be removed. We both know writing this on the page's talk page will yield a very slow resolution to the problem. If you look at the page you will see that "Multiple Problems" etc. are noted which there has been no attempt to correct. Who do you suggest that I contact in the labyrinthine network of Wikipedia to expeditiously deal with this problem? Thank you for your effort on my and Wikipedia's behalf. Nicodemus (talk) 00:39, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Separate from the merit of the article, it was created by User:Ildar2013 who on own talk page denies conflict of interest, or even knowing Nieca Goldberg. At the article's Talk page, you have not made an attempt to question the article. There are several paths to deletion (Speedy, Prod. AfC). If you are so professionally outraged by the article, all of those paths are open for you to start. David notMD (talk) 01:23, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editors do not need to have scientific or medical expertise in order to write an article. Wikipedia only summarizes what appears in independent reliable sources. Quickly looking at the article, in my opinion it seems valid and I would oppose deletion if it were brought up. 331dot (talk) 01:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Oldsilenus. I share your concern about the quality of this article but some of the things you say are incorrect or unproven. For example, there is no Wikipedia editor called "JOHNSONIENIENSIS" and there have been no edits to that article by anyone with a name anything like that. The article was originally written by Ildar2013, and the article was discussed at User talk:Ildar2013, where that editor specifically denied a conflict of interest. What is your evidence of COI? You also have a misconception about editor expertise. This is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, as long as they follow our policies and guidelines. Literally anyone can edit and we do not check credentials, or even ask for them. All we expect is that editors accurately summarize what reliable sources say.

The first step is to discuss your concerns - accurately - on the article's talk page. You say this will be too slow, but what's the rush? This is your first step. You can also edit the article yourself to remove promotional language and make the article more neutral. If you truly believe that this person is not notable, then complete an Articles for Deletion nomination.

My final suggestion is to avoid going around telling people that you are a retired cardiologist. First of all, that means nothing to other experienced editors, and secondly, we have no way to verify that your claim is true. All we really care about here is the accuracy of your editing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Minor point, but there is an editor User:Johnsoniensis Vexations (talk) 01:42, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Sorry if I misread the original author. While anyone can edit, they better know what they are writing about. My statements about myself may be checked via online databases such as those run by NY State. I believe that you are correct. Rather than assume, it would be better to handle this as a not notable person. That I am sure about.Nicodemus (talk) 13:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your qualifications are not germane. Scores of editors have MDs, PhDs, etc. after there names. What counts is the quality of the references, not the person finding the references (or opining about the article). David notMD (talk) 00:42, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nicodemus, the correct venue for conflict-of-interest concerns is WP:COIN. I suggest you bring your concerns there. Also, if I may, I suggest that you change your username to match your desired name, as your signature is very confusing. To change your username, go here: WP:RENAME. -- Softlavender (talk) 02:57, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All be please to join

Been waiting so long for that... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minas12345 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Minas12345 and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please note that you have not asked a question about editing Wikipedia. That's what the Teahouse is supposed to be for. This is another in a sequence of edits you have made that do not appear to serve any useful purpose. Again, I say straighten up and fly right! — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:05, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Any possibility that Minas12345 and Mikepipo are sockpuppets or tag-team vandalizers? David notMD (talk) 05:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

archiving

I have an automatic archive on my talk page and came here and asked how to stop it from archiving a section I wanted to keep. It apparently didn't work because that section is gone now. Can someone tell me how to keep what I want to keep? Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:54, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jenhawk777, it's good to see you at the Teahouse again.

It seems you did not follow the additional instructions given in response to your earlier Archivebot question. The template {{DNAU}} needed to be substituted or it doesn't work. If you need help, with your permission, I'm willing to fix this for you: undo the archive, fix the template. I know there's a big scary warning at the top of the archive not to edit it, but there are some things one is allowed to fix. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:54, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this an acceptable use of the userspace?

I'd like to create a page to act as a pronunciation guide for Pokémon names. I know this isn't suitable for the mainspace—though I intend for it to be informative, it's not up to notability standards. So my question is, would such a thing be acceptable in the userspace, as a subpage of my user page?

I'm looking through the userspace policy, but not finding a clear-cut answer. Would it be considered a "personal writing suitable within the Wikipedia community", or closer to "extensive writings and material on topics having virtually no chance whatsoever of being directly useful to the project, its community, or an encyclopedia article"? ("No chance whatsoever" seems to me like it'd have to be a tad more extreme.)

The reason I want to have this on Wikipedia is because I think it would benefit greatly from Wikipedia's pronunciation-related templates, particularly {{IPAc-en}} and {{Respell}}. If, say, Bulbapedia had these templates, I'd be looking into putting it there instead, but I'd like to know if this is an option first.

— Randomwaffle23 (talk) 03:10, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Randomwaffle23 and welcome to the Teahouse.

I think you could create such a page for your own reference if it were presented as a tool for ongoing work adding to Pokemon articles. As soon as you started to refer to the page in your userspace in postings outside of WP, you would run into the policy about abuse of WP as a webhost: WP:NOTWEBHOST. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:02, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to switch a new watchlist off?

Can I switch a new watchlist off globally? I mean to do it once, effective on all languages Wikipedias, Wikibooks, Commons etc. Or do I have to go to preferences and click the checkbox at each site separately? --CiaPan (talk) 06:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CiaPan. Special:Preferences has a link Set your global preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:36, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, PrimeHunter! I've been there countless times and never noticed that link! --CiaPan (talk) 10:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CiaPan: It's only two weeks old: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 167#Global preferences came to the Wikipedias today. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:50, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Yeah, but I managed to switch that new watchlist interface off and on, and once again off at enwiki, plwiki and commons, also looked at my Prefs at some Wikipedias in other languages, so I think I should have noticed it at some occasion! But I did not... Must sleep more. 🙂 Thanks again. --CiaPan (talk) 12:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Subcategories not appearing.

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia. So I made some editing and I think I have a problem. I created a new category (ex: category:1) and then made it a subcategory for another category (ex: category:2). Everything was normal during and after the process but when I had logged out I no longer see the editing I had just made. In the "category:2" page does not have the "category:1" I created and added even though everything is normal when I logged back in. Does anyone know what might be the problem? Gyokei (talk) 09:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please give us a diff to the edits in question? Your contribution record shows no edits from this account prior to your question here. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:26, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My most sincere apology. I created those in the Japanese Wikipedia. I was able to do that thanks to basic Kanji understanding (as those titles were purely in Kanji). My Japanese, however, is less than basic (and I can only grasp the texts partially thanks to the Kanji), making it unrealistic to ask this question there. As I am more fluent in English I decided to ask it here as I came across a similar question on Mediawiki, which unfortunately did not have a respond. Gyokei (talk) 09:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gyokei: You have created four Japanese categories [2] and added all of them to other categories. The page histories show that some of the added categories have later been changed by another editor but it's hard to follow without knowing Japanese. Please be more specific with links to category:1 and category:2. Maybe you just have to bypass your cache when you are logged in or out. You can also examine the page history. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:57, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. Gyokei (talk) 14:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a dab page

Hi Teahouse,

I am unsure of the best way to publish a dab page I have in draft. There are multiple Richard Vogt articles (different people), and I think a disambiguation page would be useful. Would it be possible for you to give some feedback, or to help me publish it if it is deemed suitable? Thanks for your help - sorry, I find these types of pages the most tricky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Richard_Vogt

SunnyBoi (talk) 09:23, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any issues with your draft, but as Richard Vogt is currently unavailable, I've moved it to Richard Vogt (disambiguation) for you. If you want to move it to Richard Vogt, then you will need to start an WP:RM, and to identify a new page name for the current article there. Iffy★Chat -- 12:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Place of birth - country?

I'm aware of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Place_of_birth

but according to that, Albert Einstein is born not in "German Empire" (as he was) but in (current) "Federal Republic of Germany". I think there should be a general rule for all languages. living and dead personalities. Is there already a ruling on that? I'd prefer always to use the the name of the country at the time of the birth, otherwise it would be a changing variable and it would never work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.237.8.20 (talk) 09:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some guidance at WP:BIRTHPLACE, but I know that there are cases, like Nikola Tesla, that has been heavily debated and earned a place at Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you say that according to Place of birth, Albert Einstein is not born in the German Empire but in the Federal Republic of Germany. Place of birth does not mention Einstein at all. His article both in the prose and the infobox clearly state that he was born in the German Empire. The Federal Republic of Germany nor Germany are linked from his article. You will need to better explain your concerns. ~ GB fan 12:28, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The only guideline regarding "country of birth" I found was the one saying: "As a general rule with respect to passports, the place of birth is determined to be country that currently has sovereignty over the actual place of birth regardless of when the birth actually occurred". If we would enforce that guideline for Einstein, then we would have "FD Germany" for Einstein, and that would be ridiculous. What I'm saying is there should be a guideline for all languages saying that next to the place of birth, either no country or the country at birth. Right now there is chaos, some are using one logic. Issue with Tesla was his nationality, not POB. POB is correct and precise (both, country then and present country are entered). English language is mostly correct, but on other languages you always have different people try to push their agenda, only because there is no top guideline for that. I think having the original country gives a lot of context for the biography and hate to see it missing/wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.237.8.20 (talk) 12:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If Albert Einstein were to be alive today and he was applying for a passport he would need to put Federal Republic of Germany. That has absolutely nothing to do with what an article says about him. If other language Wikipedia's put the current country name rather than the name when the birth happened then that is a concern for that language. The English Wikipedia has no control over the operation of the other languages. ~ GB fan 12:49, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh OK, I wasn't aware of that. I though there was some standard guidelines that would ensure the same quality across all languages. At least a guideline we could all upon so we would avoid unnecessary discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.237.8.20 (talk) 12:55, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that you're wrong, but the different language WP:s are pretty autonomous. Actually, on en-WP per MOS:ENGVAR and similar, the guidance is often: be consistant within a specific article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:03, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

autoconfirmed

four days passed and more than 100 edits taken but not able to open upload wizard , am I not autoconfirmed yet , what may be the possible reasons! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crispgatoglitz (talk • contribs) 12:53, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your account was created 1800 (UTC) on 20 July. It is now 1302 (UTC) 24 July. You will become autoconfirmed in a little under 5 hours. ~ GB fan 13:02, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) As https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&limit=1&username=Crispgatoglitz shows, you are not autoconfirmed yet. The 'autoconfirmed' rights should appear in parentheses like this:

Crispgatoglitz (talk | contribs) (autoconfirmed) (Created on 20 July 2018 at 20:00)

or as (confirmed user). --CiaPan (talk) 13:06, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure, @CiaPan:? I didn't think that the autoconfirmed right was shown there (or at least not to non-admins). Has it changed recently? --David Biddulph (talk) 13:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@David Biddulph and Crispgatoglitz: Nope. And now I found I was wrong – autoconfirmed status does not appear there. However, this tool confirms the autoconfirmed status:

https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Crispgatoglitz

--CiaPan (talk) 14:09, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another way to look at userrights without leaving Wikipedia is Special:UserRights/Crispgatoglitz. Autoconfirmed shows up as "Implicit member of: Autoconfirmed users" under the username in the "View user groups" section. ~ GB fan 14:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Autoconfirmed doesn't show at all in that log. I looked at different user accounts from both my admin and confirmed account. Editors that are autoconfirmed only and not autoconfirmed show up exactly the same, no rights shown. ~ GB fan 14:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All of your edits to date are for one article Manjari Fadnis. Do you have any connection whatsoever (family, friend, employed) to this actress? If so, represents a conflict of interest that needs to be stated on your User page, and perhaps the Talk page of the article (if PAID, must be stated). The article as it now exists is extremely promotional, with many statement about the subject that are not referenced. Frankly the article as it now exists should be nominated for deletion or else radically rewritten. Finally, what references there are, are not all appropriate, and not in a good format. David notMD (talk) 14:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On my Talk page, Crispgatoglitz declared not COI or PAID for this article. David notMD (talk) 00:45, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

If someone's on itune and has lots of online published articles about him, and written interviews online, is he notable? Just want to check before I create the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayabks (talk • contribs)

@Nayabks: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Merely having music available on iTunes does not necessarily make one notable, though articles in independent reliable sources may do so, if they show the person meets the notability guidelines as WP:BIO.(there are also more specific guidelines for some career fields like musicians, politicians, etc.) It is difficult to say more than that without knowing who it is you are talking about. I would note that if you represent this person, you will need to read about confict of interest.

I would suggest that before you dive right in to article creation, which is probably the hardest thing to do successfully on Wikipedia, that you take some time to learn about how things work here and what is looked for in articles. You may wish to use this tutorial as well as read Your First Article. You will also be much more successful if you first make small edits to existing articles in your area of interest, which will help you learn about editing. Once ready, you should use Articles for Creation to submit a draft for an independent review by another editor, so you can get feedback on it before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia, instead of afterwards. Please keep this in mind. 331dot (talk) 13:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maintenance template removal

Hi there! I was wondering if I was allowed to remove a maintenance template on an article I created, as I have fixed the problem. Thanks! Wikkyexpert (talk) 15:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikkyexpert and welcome to the Teahouse.

Yes, if you've resolved the problem, you are welcome to remove the template. Just don't get into an argument or edit war if another editor thinks the problem has not been satisfied. Discuss the issue on the talk page of the article to try to find out what is needed and to try to come to an agreement. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much jmcgnh!

Help needed

Earlier today (July 24, 2018) I posted an addition on the following wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guitar_wiring#Manufacturers

Here is what I added to the end of the list in this section:

AweSome Musical Instruments (pickup switch upgrades for electric guitar)

However, the addition was removed.

Can you tell me what I am doing wrong?

Thanking you in advance for your kind reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2018awesome (talk • contribs) 17:00, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2018awesome: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your edit was reverted because it was a spam link, which are not permitted. See WP:SPAM and WP:NOTLINKFARM; Wikipedia articles are not meant to list any and all websites or links about the subject. 331dot (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware that the other guitar component companies listed at Guitar wiring are notable enough that there are existing Wikipedia articles about them (hence blue and Wikilinked). Not true for Awesome. Hence reverted. Secondary problem is that your User name suggests you are affiliated with Awesome. David notMD (talk) 00:56, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

upload wizard

I am a autoconfirmed user now but the upload wizard still doesn't respond , is that because of android ? Crispgatoglitz (talk) 18:00, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You did not become autoconfirmed until 18:00 UTC, which was the time of your message above. Anything you tried before then would be before you were autoconfirmed. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:04, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that was an odd timing if it wasn't deliberate. Exactly the four required days between account creation [3] and the above post [4]. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:56, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

help

In 2012 i made an account called "Suzyparker" when I lived in mexico. i moved to ohio shortly afterwards and five years later i want to edit again but do not remember the password to my old account. When I search for "Suzyparker" nothing comes up either. Is this because I was editing on the Spanish Wikipedia? S̶U̶Z̶A̶N̶N̶E̶ ̶L̶E̶E̶ ̶P̶A̶R̶K̶E̶R̶ ̶|̶-̶/̶ (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No such account on the Spanish Wikipedia either. David Biddulph (talk) 19:30, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to create a new entry using a Sandbox entry?

I've been preparing an entry for Wikipedia in my sandbox. I believe it is now ready, although of course the name of it still needs to be corrected. How can I make it an official Wikipedia entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Publius1909 (talk • contribs) 19:46, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Publius1909: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would regretfully tell you that your draft is not yet ready to be formally placed in the encyclopedia. If you were to submit your draft for review, it would be declined. It contains only one source- and that source is a user-editable wiki(much like this one). Wikipedia requires that article subjects be shown to be notable with independent reliable sources that have in depth coverage of the subject. In this case this person would need to meet the guidelines at WP:BIO. A user-editable site would not be considered reliable. (Wikipedia isn't, either) If this person is not written about with in depth coverage in independent reliable sources, they would not merit an article here at this time. Please review Your First Article to learn more about the process and what is being looked for. You may also find it helpful to use this tutorial.

I will add the appropriate template to allow you to submit it for a review by another editor before it is placed in the encyclopedia, but you will need to locate appropriate sources first. Again, if you submitted it now, it would be quickly declined. I don't know if the person merits an article here or not, but I do know that the current draft is not ready. I'm sorry that this might not be what you want to hear, but you can keep working on it. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Biography, familiy lines

Hey I'm newish and doing a bio on someone. Is it ok to use info from a family tree on Ancestry.com or is this to iffy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeoSample (talk • contribs) 20:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GeoSample, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately the answer is probably No, because the information on ancestry.com comes from all sorts of sources, many of them unreliable. See the discussion at WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 150#Ancestry.com (the most recent of several discussions). --ColinFine (talk) 20:32, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was a little worried about that. Thanks for the info.--GeoSample (talk) 23:51, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi From Mango #0X0A #googledevs #mangodevs

Hi, I am new editor an I am Interested if https://google.com/search?=Aman+Tugnawat+Sundar+Pichai in every way possible. how can i be an good lad on en.Wikipedia.org

I am the own and founder of mangodevelopers.com || Mango LLC.

Aman Tugnawat is a really big fan of Google.nwr as of now.

But he is a kid and a good kid per say.

He needs mentoring from Google search X ATAP in short [Legacy]

--MangoX0XA (talk) 22:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MangoX0XA. Welcome to the Teahouse, which exists to answer questions from users with problems that they may have in editing or working with Wikipedia. Unfortunately, what you wrote above makes no sense to me whatsoever, nor does it seem relevant to the purpose of the Teahouse. If you do have a question, could I ask you to rephrase it so we can assist you? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that, as you appear to be Aman Tugnawat, you are strongly advised not to attempt to write about yourself as you did at Draft:Aman Tugnawat. You may wish to learn a little more about how Wikipedia works by first reading, Wikipedia:Introduction understanding that everything said in articles must be supported by relliable sources that are independent of the subject being written about. Please use LinkedIn or other social media to promote yourself. You may then wish to read Wikipedia:Autobiography to appreciate how we take a sceptical view of those who do try to write about themselves here. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:02, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The new googler looking for mentors

Nick and I have also contributed to the pages of Prof. Duncan Moore.

I am not that self obsessed. I am a kid for for sure.

But the only problem with the kid Named Aman TUGNAWAT is he knows a lot and he doesn't understand how to use that knowledge so it benefits everyone. And not just himself.

P.S. Thanks a lot for you reply Nick.

MangoX0XA (talk) 01:31, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a forum for requesting help. I'm not able to determine what you need from the subject and text you just posted. To save everyone else a hunt, Duncan Moore is Duncan T. Moore, and Amnan is User:Aman S. Tugnawat. You'll be as puzzled as I was on that user page. Probably a violation of the terms of use - this isn't Github. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 01:46, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think there are some childish pranks going on here, and probably one user creating multiple accounts, one of which (User:Aman S. Tugnawat) might be designed to impersonate or embarrass a real person, so this is worth an admin looking into and considering blocking. Either worth CSD U5-ing or reporting to WP:UAA, I think. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC) [reply]

@@ Line 645: / Line 645: @@
 :::: Sorry if I misread the original author. While anyone can edit, they better know what they are writing about. My statements about myself may be checked via online databases such as those run by NY State. I believe that you are correct. Rather than assume, it would be better to handle this as a not notable person. That I am sure about.[[User:Oldsilenus|Nicodemus]] ([[User talk:Oldsilenus|talk]]) 13:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 :::::Your qualifications are not germane. Scores of editors have MDs, PhDs, etc. after there names. What counts is the quality of the references, not the person finding the references (or opining about the article). [[User:David notMD|David notMD]] ([[User talk:David notMD|talk]]) 00:42, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
+*[[User:Oldsilenus|Nicodemus]], the correct venue for conflict-of-interest concerns is [[WP:COIN]]. I suggest you bring your concerns there. Also, if I may, I suggest that you change your username to match your desired name, as your signature is very confusing. To change your username, go here: [[WP:RENAME]]. -- [[User:Softlavender|Softlavender]] ([[User talk:Softlavender|talk]]) 02:57, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
 == All be please to join ==