Wikipedia:Teahouse

Welcome to the Teahouse...                        

A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Click here to
ask a question

GreenMeansGo, a Teahouse host

Question forum

Host profiles

Guest profiles

Experienced editor? Become a host!

Learn more about the Teahouse

Articles to improve

Question archive

Guest archive

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

Help Wikipedia

How to filter for tags AND WikipediaProject

Hi, I'm interested in generating a list of all pages with Unreferenced BLPs (eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unreferenced_BLPs_from_September_2018) AND filtering that against all pages that are part of the WIiiproject:Australia. Does anyone know how to do that?? Cheers, Cabrils (talk) 07:21, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Ping someone more tech savvy than I. GMG^talk 12:38, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I have to say, the amount of times the answer is petscan is surprisingly high..so yeah, Cabrils here's it Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Galobtter. You could be superhuman with skills like this... Another quick question hoping I am not wearing out the welcome: I see in PetScan, under the Categories tab, there is a field for Categories in which you have specified the desired template "Unreferenced BLPs". If I want to make other searches for other other templates, can I just replace "Unreferenced BLPs" with a different template? And if so, where do I get a list of those templates? Cabrils (talk) 22:43, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Cabrils, Unreferenced BLPs is the category you wanted to filter by (see Help:Category and Help:Template); you can replace that with whatever category you want. I suppose the easiest way is to search for your desired category. There are somewhere in the order of a million categories so a list would be rather unwieldy :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Galobtter Thanks again, super helpful! Yes, just starting to make sense of it...cheers Cabrils (talk) 02:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Need help to edit a scientific page

I need help from an editor from scientific background about a inserting a controversy on 2015 regarding Noble prize on discovery of artemisinin. The summary of the matter is here

Extended content

https://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/questions-in-a-petri-dish/295745 The draft write-up is below. Reference will be added later. In 2015, Verma actively criticised the basis of this years Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine award to Tu Youyou for the discovery of the chemical artemisinin and her work on malaria. Artemisinin is an active compound present in a medicinal plant called Artemisia annua that is used for curing malaria. In his social media post, Verma claimed artemisinin was a variant of artemisin that was already known to Indian scientific community . To substantiate his claims, Verma provided a snapshot of an article from a book, "Indian Medicinal Plants" published in 1918 by Lieutenant Colonel K. R. Kirtikar and Major B. D. Basu (ref). The book clearly described the use of "artemisin" in India to cure intermittent and remittent fever (the common phrase for used for malarial fever till 1880). The controversy resulting from Verma's claims was published in many news papers . According to Outlook India's article, "Questions In A Petri Dish: The Nobel for medicine has gone to a Chinese researcher. Has the work of Indian scientists been overlooked", Verma stated “If a minor variant of a well-known compound extracted from a plant found around the world can be given the Nobel, poorer countries will be the losers, as scientists from technologically advanced societies can always find plants with similar chemical compounds elsewhere and extract the ingredient from them. Communities with traditional cures will lose out” . References

The controversy abruptly ended when in contrast to Verma's claims, it was realised that artemisinin is not a minor variant of artemisin and the two are entirely different chemicals. Amrev (talk) 07:44, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Amrev. Without knowing which specific scientific page you're refering to, it's going to be a bit hard for anyone to help you. It's sound like you want to make a change to an existing article. If that's the case, then there are two possible ways to do that: (1) be WP:BOLD or (2) be WP:CAUTIOUS. If you decide to be bold and your change is subsequently reverted by another editor, please follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and use the article's talk page to discuss the matter with others. On the other hand, if you're cautious, then do your best to explain why the change should be made, providing links to reliable sources which support your position as needed, and then simply wait for others respond. If nobody responds in a reasonable amount of time, scroll up to the top of the article talk page and see if the article falls under the purview of a WikiProject. If it does, you can then ask for assistance at the WikiProject if you want. It's important to remember that other editors might be WP:BUSY, and you shouldn't expect an immediate response to anything you post; however, if nobody has responded in a week or so, then you can probably assume WP:SILENT and just go ahead and make the desired change. You don't really need anyone's permission to edit an article, but you need to remember that Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project which means that discussion is the way to resolve things if another editor later disagrees with the changes you make. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Marchjuly,

I wanted to edit the following page with the content above but my edits were reverted - because they didn't read neutral. I just want someone to edit the content above to make it concise and neutral.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Kumar_Verma

Amrev (talk) 08:07, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Since you were already bold and reverted by another editor, you should now use Talk:Sunil Kumar Verma to discuss the changes you want to make. The editor who reverted you probably has the article on their watchlist and may notice your post, but you can post a message on their user talk page asking them to join the discussion and clarify their concerns. Perhaps through this discussion, a neutrally worded version of what you want to add can be worked out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again Marchjuly. The editor of that page who reverted the change now says that my correcting my edit is beyond his/her expertise. Furthermore, he asked me to seek help here and so I am here. All I am requesting now is experts to fix my draft or it doesn't appear vindictive - as it did in the beginning. I can insert all the reference etc here if it help. Please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amrev (talk • contribs) 08:48, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

As Marchjuly told you, and as the editor who reverted you told you in the edit summary of that revert, the place for discussion is on the article talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

For background to this, It may be worthwhile considering that Alt-Med proponents think that this Nobel prize was for work done in TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine) which is of course not the case. She did real science. -Roxy, in the middle. wooF 09:17, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I have a big problem with this section. The text above was first submitted by a User "Chutia verna" immediately blocked for being derogatory (in its most benign translation, "chutia" is idiot or fool, and Verna is the scientist being written about). The text and refs were reverted. Within hours, Amrev posted the identical content. Reversed by W. Carter NOT on basis of the science but because the references were inappropriate. Amrev has also added the criticism of Verma to Talk:Nobel Prize controversies. Amrev has not started a discussion section at Talk:Sunil Kumar Verma, which is what MarchJuly recommended. David notMD (talk) 09:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks all, understood the process. Further discussion shall happen in the talk page. Irrespective of the users who edited the page above, facts should still get incorporated into wiki. One of the editor who reverted the changes, later says it is beyond her/her expertise to edit the article. Furthermore, how come references to published news article where members of Nobel Committee have responded are not credible? Amrev (talk) 09:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I wrote a short version, using one of the references, and added it to the article. David notMD (talk) 14:21, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Above, Amrev has written "it was realised that artemisinin is not a minor variant of artemisin and the two are entirely different chemicals." In Wikipedia, Artemisin is a redirect to Artemisinin, which does not mention the name artemisin. So there's some misunderstanding somewhere. Maproom (talk) 14:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunate coincidence of names. Artemisinin is C15H22O5 and Artemisin is C15H18:04. However, some website content misspells artemininin as artemisin when describing the anti-malarial drug (which is the former, not the latter). See https://arstechnica.com/science/2015/04/how-malaria-is-evolving-to-survive-our-most-potent-drug/. In my opinion the redirect treats "artemisin" as a misspelling, but that is confusing given the existence of artemisin. David notMD (talk) 15:43, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I've created a stub article at artemisin to reduce this confusion Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

artemisinin and artemisin compared

→Thanks for this David notMD. I followed the controversy since it erupted. As you mentioned about the names are quite similar. Verma's main argument was artemininin is a minor variant of artemisin and the latter was known to Indian community almost a century ago. I will talk more about it with the references in main article for you to further edit. Galobtter, Maproom, here is a file showing the difference between the two, if needed. Amrev (talk) 22:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

We already had confusion between artemisin and artemisinin, and now two of you have mentioned artemininin (with three ns and no s). Is this a typo, an alternative name, or a third substance? Maproom (talk) 18:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

My error. I meant "artemisinin". David notMD (talk) 03:16, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

What should I start in wikipedia?

Do you have any suggestions anyone? Any articles I should edit? What people I can collaborate? Thanks I love rpgs (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

There's some good info that was added to your talk page that will help you understand editing guidelines. If RPG is role playing games, you can look at the Role-playing game article, and even the RPG template could give you some editing ideas. Read the talk pages, look at the history, and if you have questions about the articles, leave them on the article talk pages. You can also put some info on your user page, such as adding hobby templates, so your user name isn't red. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

If RPG is not roleplayinggames, see RPG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:55, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Welcome I love rpgs! I would also like to add that your personal knowledge or preference is just a part of it. When editing, you also need to consider the sources that are available to you since you need to cite whatever you add to a page. Regarding the process of editing, if you are having difficulty with wiki markup, you can start with the Visual Editor in the Edit page. There are also pages that you can go to listing articles that need editing such as this and this. You can also try joining WikiProjects such as this one for video games. - Darwin Naz (talk) 23:09, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

How to revert on iPad???

How do I revert edits on iPad. I do not know how to. If you don’t know. I am fine. Thank you very much. Huff slush7264 23:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Undo editing options are still there but you need to manage the iOs differences, if you undo and check and submit it is done. Dave Rave (talk) 03:02, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Huff slush7264: I frequently edit with an old iPhone. I prefer to switch to 'desktop' view rather than mobile view (via The link at the very bottom of the page), and then everything is just as it is when working from the computer. To undo an edit, go to View History tab at the relevant page. Each row there shows each individual edits added. Look for the word Undo at the end of the entry and, if appropriate, click that to revert the latest edit. Hope thus helps. Regards from th Uk,  Nick Moyes (talk) 06:35, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Changing main title of post

How do I modify the title rather than the text of a post? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irarabrams (talk • contribs) 23:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you probably have a conflict of interest; please see WP:COI. You need to add some secondary sources; see WP:PSTS. The title will be changed if and when the article is accepted .... it will be moved (see WP:MOVE) to article space. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 00:22, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

This is about Draft:Ira R. Abrams, Visual Anthropologist and Ethnographic Filmmaker Presumed autobiographical given User name, submitted for review, and unlikely to be approved as is.David notMD (talk) 10:05, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

write

Can you write a article about me, I'm new in the film industry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueLion54 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello BlueLion54 and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that most new people in an industry have not garnered the sort of press coverage needed for there to be an article about them here on Wikipedia. Rest assured, that if you become famous (or infamous) there will eventually be an article written about you, but for now you would be better advised to devote your energies to your work. If you have downtime between gigs, we'd love to have you become an editor here, but we'd expect you to edit in areas where you do not have a conflict of interest. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:44, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

BlueLion54 Welcome to Teahouse. Note that Wikipedia discourages autobiography, please read WP:COI. You must wait a little while someone with no Conflict of Interest may write an article you if you become notable. I hope this helps 6Packs (talk) 02:19, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Innocent Pictures Deleted :(

Hallo! It's Tathariel Amluglain, and I uploaded photos of book covers made by an author I was making a page for. I also uploaded her author photo and a picture of her favorite book character, and they were also deleted.

The claim was potential copyright violation, but I listed the links I got the images from, which were from the official sites of the author and fan art artist. I also listed who made the cover images and what books they were on, as well as the authors name in the description.

I don't know what I could have done to prevent potential copyright issues. Thoughts? Maybe I could've unknowingly done something wrong, or didn't know to do something because I'm so new.

Thanks for your time, TA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tathariel Amluglain (talk • contribs) 04:21, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Tathariel Amluglain and welcome to the Teahouse.

You seem to be operating under a misunderstanding about copyright. You can, at least currently, link to, describe, or otherwise refer to a photo or image or book that is available on the web without violating copyright. But copying, as you did, still violates copyright. Wikipedia is extremely sensitive to copyright violations - if we were not, it could become the basis for an action that would shut us down. Only a very limited set of web content has been licensed in such a way that it can be copied to Wikipedia.

The best advice to follow, for the moment, is to only upload photos that you have taken yourself of natural objects. Taking photos of buildings, people, books, record covers, and other art works is, in some part of the world, going to not be compatible with uploading to WP or to Commons. As you get more experience, or as you get to a specific task, you can ask about what's allowed or not, but it can get very detailed and only a few people on WP can claim to be an expert on every aspect. It's also possible to use non-free content in very limited ways, which you can begin to explore at NONFREE. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:08, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

The article in question is Draft:Willow Marie Perrin It has been rejected for multiple reasons. The most important is that no one has written ABOUT Willow Marie Perrin. Only if there are sufficient numbers of independent, published articles about a person can they potentially meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and hence an article. David notMD (talk) 10:11, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

jmcgnh, it is perfectly acceptable to take photos of buildings as seen from public places, and people appearing at public events, and to upload those photos to Wikimedia Commons. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:55, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Cullen328: True in the U.S. and a lot of other places, but in some countries Commons doesn't know what the c:Freedom of Panorama status is and will take down the photo. I've had it happen to me when I picked up a Flickr photo of a building that otherwise looked eligible but was taken in one of those countries. This is an example of why I've said "copyright is too complex for mere mortals". — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I conducted a newspaper search for "Willow Marie Perrin" and came up empty. Anobium625 (talk) 23:32, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Relisting discussion

Hi Teahouse, How would I go about relisting the merge discussion at Pomona-Pitzer Sagehens? Thanks! - Sdkb (talk) 10:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Sdkb: Since you don't know, then you probably shouldn't. Editors relisting discussions are expected to already know how to do that and be conversant with variety of policies and guidelines. You also commented in favor, so just leave it another editor will come around and do what is needed. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Where can I share a page idea with specific people who might be interested in my subject?

Testing text

Can I create lists here?

Testing Testing Testing

Where are wiki-tables generated, and how do I apply them to a Wiki-page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kuyoti (talk • contribs) 15:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

To find about tables, read Help:Table. To answer the question asked in your section heading but not in your text, try at the relevant WikiProject, as you have been advised elsewhere. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Kuyoti. It looks like you may be interested in WikiProject Video Games, which is a whole community on Wikipedia dedicated to improving our coverage of video games and gaming culture. GMG^talk 16:19, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Requesting to grant me the PERMISSION to share issues related to EDUCATION along with some measures

Esteemed RESOURCE PERSONS,

I would like to draw your kind attention to intimate you that I am SUSANTA SAHOO working as a teacher in SCHOOL & MASS EDUCATION DEPT. (GOVT. OF ODISHA), INDIA. I would like to share my OPINIONS, OBSERVATIONS, ISSUES & SUGGESTIONS related to EDUCATION.

May I kindly be granted the PERMISSION to do the above said work. I'll be grateful for your favourable ACTION.

Regards.

SUSANTA SAHOO (INDIA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LEARN WITH SUSANTA (talk • contribs) 16:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", so in general any editor can edit any article, provided that the content is supported by references to published reliable sources independent of the subject. Your own personal knowledge of a subject is not usable as a source, as it would be regarded as original research. One piece of advice is to reduce your use of capitals; excessive use of capitals is regarding as SHOUTING and an indication of rudeness. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:15, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Protect your page

How do you protect your talk page from being vandalism and to stop people from putting rude messages on there. Northatlantic320 (talk) 18:18, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

From looking at what you have deleted from your Talk page, you have been warned five times by three different editors to not add unreferenced content nor delete content without explanation. The warning language is standard. i.e., neither vandalism nor composed to be rude. While editors are not required to keep all entries to their own Talk, most do, or else create an archive for older entries. More to the point, several of your changes to articles have been reverted, including articles where other editors did not bother to post a caution or warning on your Talk. If you believe your changes were correct, then start a discussion on the Talk pages of articles. David notMD (talk) 18:41, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Northatlantic320 page protection is only done in instances where your userpage, take or an article is being vandalised. In this case, your talk has not been vandalised and therefore you have no evidence to present to an admin even if you wanted protection. The only things on your talk (which you have since removed) were vandalism warnings issued to you like your blanking of 2018 Atlantic hurricane season. Please adhere to the messages left by the editors (they don't mean no harm, but to direct you on the Do's and don'ts of Wikipedia) and learn to not vandalise Wikipedia. That way you will last long. Please do feel free to ask where you get stuck in future. I hope this helps. Cheers 6Packs (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the information Northatlantic320 (talk) 19:31, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

References for translated page

Hi there,

Just a quick question: I have translated a page from the Italian Wikipedia and one of the curators has asked to insert some references to the page, which is only right and just. Since there is only one Italian reference on the original page, what shall I do apart from going around and looking for some more on my own?

Thanks,

SPQP — Preceding unsigned comment added by SPQP (talk • contribs) 20:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, SPQP. If the reference in the original page is a reliable source by the standards of English Wikipedia, then you can use it in the English article: English sources are preferred if they exist of a high enough quality, but foreign language sources are acceptable. As for finding other sources: you might find an appropriate WikiProject - perhaps WP:WikiProject Italy - but otherwise there is no particular technique, and you need to look for them. You might find the template {{find sources}} helpful: it produces Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL.

A few other remarks: if you haven't done so already, I recommend you read WP:Translation. In particular, the licence under which almost everything in Wikipedia is published allows the material to be freely reused, provided the source is attributed. You have just said that you translated the material from the Italian Wikipedia: you need to put a statement of the source somewhere, or you will be violating the licence. It would have been adequate to specify it in the edit summary when you first posted the translation; but I suggest you acknowledge it on the article's Talk page Talk:Prince Giuseppe Emanuele Ventimiglia. Please see Copying within Wikipedia for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 20:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

rusty lake

Rusty Lake is a game developer based in the Netherlands, they recently released their 13th game, Cube Escape: Paradox, I found that they did not have a Wikipedia page and was wondering if they might be a 'Notable' subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cynefreth (talk • contribs) 20:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Cynefreth, and welcome to the Teahouse. It depends almost entirely on whether, and how much, people with no connection to Lake have chosen to write about them, and been published in reliable places. Please see WP:GNG. (WP:NAUTHOR might also apply, but note that to use any of the criteria in that section, you would need to cite independent sources which established that they met the criterion. It would not be enough for you to assert that they did). --ColinFine (talk) 20:54, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Cynefreth and welcome to teahouse. I noticed you have already created Rusty Lake which I must say, I tagged for quick deletion even before seing your post here. This could be discouraging but learn from the advise you receive here. First, the company seems not notable enough, as yet, to have a Wikipedia article. My Google search has not given convincing reasons/reliable sources to it. Also the article you created has one source which is for the company's website. Do wait a while for it to attain notability and then someone will create an article of it. I hope this helps, do feel free to ask where you need help. Cheers 6Packs (talk) 01:15, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Page Naming

How do you rename pages?Oceanian Air Spoter (talk) 01:14, 24 September 2018 (UTC) Oceanian Air Spoter

Oceanian Air Spoter you name pages by moving them to the desired and correct name as said by sources. However, page naming only happens when your account is autoconfimed - meaning after 4 days and 10 edits is done. In cases where a page has been in existence on Wikipedia for years, you need to first start a discussion on the article's talk and having other editors give inputs before renaming it. Renaming it instances without taking that into account will be considered controversial 6Packs (talk) 01:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Going from Draft to Article

I've drafted an article, and it meets the criteria of having more that 10 edits and my account is at least 4 days old. However, it is still designated as a draft. Does it become a full article automatically within a certain timeframe or do I need to do something to activate this? I've read materials about moving articles, but there is no move command as described. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roxaneramos (talk • contribs) 04:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Roxaneramos and welcome to the Teahouse.

No, nothing automatically promotes a draft into an article. Someone has to do that with the move action.

Your account has the autoconfirmed status needed for you to be able to move a page from draft to mainspace. It's probably a good thing that you didn't find the move command yet, since your draft Draft:Eduardo Vilaro does not have the required in-line citations. You have also not formatted it properly for a WP article, so someone will have to fix that. The overall tone of the draft feels promotional to me, so that, too, would likely have to be toned down. If you moved it in its current state, I'd expect a new page reviewer to just draftify it again, if they didn't nominate it for deletion.

Creating a new article on Wikipedia is a difficult task and you've made good progress towards it. If the articles for creation process were not so backlogged, I'd suggest using it to get a more formal review of your draft. One option, that does not require getting a review, is to use the Articles for Creation Help Desk to request a reading on whether your subject meets notability guidelines. To do that, point to the 3 to 5 references that, in your mind, best establish notability according to the appropriate criteria, either as an artist or more generally as a biography. State which criteria is met. If the notability hurdle is overcome, you should be able to move the draft to article space without so much concern whether it will be immediately nominated for deletion. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:10, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Roxaneramos your draft Draft:Eduardo Vilaro sounds promotional in its current state. I undid a few promotional content but it still needs fixing before it can be moved into mainspace. If it was to go live in that state, it will either be tagged for WP:QD as promotional content or be returned into draft space by a reviewer. Fix those changes and give more reliable sources to it and then submit the draft for review. Do feel free to ask any further questions you many need. Cheers 6Packs (talk) 06:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for your feedback, recommendations and editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roxaneramos (talk • contribs) 15:40, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect picture

The picture of my village church is incorrect (it is of another village )and needs replacing . How do I go about this please ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charleswnixon (talk • contribs) 06:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

You can comment on the talk page of the relevant article. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Charleswnixon, and welcome to the Teahouse! In your shoes (assuming you are right, you didn't tell us what article this is about) I would start with searching at "Commons", see [1], which is where most of WP:s images are kept. If there is nothing useful there, consider taking a good picture yourself and upload it to Commons by the process here:[2].

If any of this "work", the new image can then be used in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Charleswnixon: Please link the page where you saw the wrong image. Then we can say more. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:08, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Publish an article

Hello, I'm already registered as a user of the French Wikipedia and have published an article. I would like to publish the English version, however I cannot change the title. Does the 4-day rule apply again when you switch to another linguistic version of Wikipedia? Thank you for your help! --FCDM (talk) 07:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)FCDM

Each language's Wikipedia is independent, and you'd have to meet enwiki's requirements before you were able to move your draft to mainspace. Looking at User:FCDM/sandbox, you'll need to remove the misplaced external links, or convert them to references, and you have tried to call up templates or categories which may exist in frwiki but don't exist here. As a newcomer here, you could usefully read the advice at WP:Your first article. When you think the draft is fit to be published as an article you could submit it for AFC review by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Could someone check User:Lavidav’s removal of interwiki links?

I see that user:Lavidav has been extensively removing interwiki links to Eastern European wikis and cannot help wondering if they have been acting responsibly, or are just campaigning to isolate certain languages. Could a knowledgeable editor please check his contributions? They were warned on the 2018-09-19 on their talk page, but seem to have been active on the 20th. PJTraill (talk) 10:46, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey PJTraill. As far as I know, now that the interwiki links are housed at Wikidata, these links serve no real purpose. Notice that this edit to Kestrel removed the link to ru:Пустельга (значения), but in the side bar the articles are still linked because of the Wikidata item. It also removed the link to de:Turmfalke; however, looking at that article, it seems to be linked to Common kestrel instead. GMG^talk 10:56, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, @GreenMeansGo:. I did wonder about Wikidata, about which I know too little, and ought to follow up. Maybe @Lavidav: is just performing useful clean-up, but it would help if they were to provide edit summaries, perhaps referring to a relevant explanation of Wikidata. I am also curious as to whether Wikidata can be used to make both Kestrel and Common kestrel link to de:Turmfalke; perhaps I can found out for myself. PJTraill (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Suggestions to the time community - complete newb how to

Hi there, I am quite new to editing Wikipedia. I have a suggestion for the time community to discuss, and wondering where to start, is such a big community and I am quite new to this in the first place so not really sure what I am doing at all. I did create a sandbox version of a page, as a developer that made sense, but not sure how to share that, or who to talk to. Could I have some guidance on that please. The sandbox page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Craiglambie/sandbox Thanks in advance. Craiglambie (talk) 11:33, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Craiglambie, I seem unable to get it. Why do you copy the whole article to your sandbox at User:Craiglambie/sandbox? I can't see at the first glance (neither at the second and third...) where your copy differs from the original. Couldn't you just make desired changes right in the Hong Kong Time, so that is's clear what and where you change? --CiaPan (talk) 12:43, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi CiaPan, sorry for copying article, I wasn't sure the best method for this suggestion. Or where to start discussion, so firstly thanks for starting this chat now.

My suggestions are around listing the Timezone Serial in the infobox on the RHS and as a heading, with reference to IANA website and PHP timezone website. Hong Kong Time is just a random timezone that I happened to be looking for the serial of. If I change the original, I presume it needs approval or something if you are suggesting that is best place to do it right? Happy to try that. Craiglambie (talk) 13:50, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Craiglambie. In any case where you feel you are making a improvement to an article, Wikipedia encourages you to be bold and go right ahead. No need for prior approval. If another editor disagrees that it's an improvement and reverts the change, then you should discuss the disagreement on the article talk page and try to reach a consensus about which version we should keep on the article. GMG^talk 14:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks GreenMeansGo and CiaPan I will give it a go, be bold! Craiglambie (talk) 14:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

why does no one like the Americans with disabilities act

im just adding tags to pages that need citations of the information. public entitys hate this for it does not allow for cheating of the consumer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adarequiermentwiki (talk • contribs) 16:09, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adarequiermentwiki (talk • contribs) 16:14, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Your addition of the same one or two links to vast numbers of articles does not appear constructive. There are many pieces of legislation which are applicable to the operations of the subjects concerned, but we don't list each of those pieces of legislation for each subject. Furthermore, if the additions were valid they do not meet the requirements to be defined as minor edits. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

meets requirements bad faith to revisions removing context in wich the systems or product or public entity is governed by desine in the united states — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adarequiermentwiki (talk • contribs) 16:35, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Reply didn't seem to be in comprehensible English, but we can ignore it as the OP has now been blocked for sockpuppetry. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:50, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Control editing

Good day,

Just found out today how to edit our charity page. A first time user. Very surprised to learn the process appears to be open to anyone who wants to add comment.. Is there no way to restrict the access to authorized persons only

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriscrew (talk • contribs) 16:24, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Access is restricted to authorised persons only, which means almost anybody except those (like yourself) with a conflict of interest. You are obviously labouring under a misapprehension regarding ownership of articles. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

If you want to set up a website where you have control, there are many web-hosting service providers, but Wikipedia is not one of those. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:35, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

There is no "our." With certain limits, anyone can edit any article. The limits apply when an article has become a vandalism target, or for other narrowly defined circumstances. David notMD (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

I know this is standard in English Wikipedia, but I think I prefer German Wikipedia’s approach, where anyone can edit, but the result has to be approved by an editor of a certain standing before it becomes the version normally seen by the public. @David Biddulph: do you know whether this has been considered for en.wikipedia, and if so why it was not adopted? PJTraill (talk) 19:04, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't around when the enwiki rules were being made. The nearest to that is the minority of articles which have pending changes protection applied. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:16, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Created an account but can't log in

I think I created an account because I received responses from you but now cannot access my account. Can you help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.222.17.227 (talk) 16:47, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Unless you remember the username AND password, there's nothing we can do here to help you remember it. If you forgot your password, but remember your username, and have registered an email address with that username, you can request a password reset by attempting to log-in first. --Jayron32 16:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Can you remember the user name of your account, or can you remember which articles you edited? If not, you might as well register a new account. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

If you are talking about responses at the Teahouse, can you tell us about the subject of that conversation? Knightrises10 (talk) 17:28, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Original Document

Am trying to update the article about the Warren Thomas Chapel in Hickman, Ky. The curator of the museum housed in this chapel has the original document deeding the property over to these former slaves from the Freedman's Bureau. I have read the info under the copyright, etc. topics in your website but not sure how we could protect a picture of this document from being used by others without permission. Can you point me to the proper place to find my answers? Thanks.--SarahBradyStrange (talk) 17:31, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

If an image has been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, or to en:Wikipedia, it may be used by others without permission. If the copyright holder does not wish it to be so used, then it should not be uploaded. Maproom (talk) 17:57, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

SarahBradyStrange It's worth saying to any curator still nervous about making their museum resources freely available, that it's very often beneficial to the institution to have the extra awareness that sharing this material brings. Whilst Maproom is absolutely right that an image can be re-used by anyone once it's been validly uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, the re-user is still obligated to acknowledge the original source/uploader. So an account name that incorporates the naming of the museum would always be associated with any re-used version of that image. As a retired museum curator with 30 years experience (who regrets discovering Wikipedia rather too late in their career!), I find it frustrating how many of my former colleagues still fail to grasp the immense benefits of sharing their resources more widely, often under the mistaken belief that they'll lose out on some (in most cases, non-existent) income, or that the have to release high-resolution versions. Just make them good enough for online use only, and everyone benefits, but nobody loses. Wikipedia:GLAM can offer help and support to curators and institutions interested in making their resources available. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:12, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

2pac question

On the r u still down page can we get a new picture it looks to me a little too old and outdated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biggiefan1999 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

The image is the cover, so blame it on the record label not us if you don't like it. In any case, it's a photo from 1996; do you really need to have it explained why there are unlikely to be any photos more recent than that? ‑ Iridescent 22:47, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Biggiefan1999: The R U Still Down? (Remember Me) page is about an album, not about the artist, so it presents an album's cover, not the artist's portrait (a portrait being on the cover is just a coincidence). So I'm afraid you'll not see a new cover unless there is a new edition released. --CiaPan (talk) 09:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Changing header of article

I want to change Header of an article. I made a page for a person and the header is not his name. It shows my login id as header and same is the permalink. How to resolve it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.56.233.103 (talk) 06:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi 202.x and welcome to the Teahouse! You probably mean that the title of the article is incorrect. In order to change it, you need to move the page to a new title. That requires you to log in and become autoconfirmed. Regards —AE (talk • contributions) 06:37, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. If the title of the page starts with your Login name, presumably with "User:" on the front, this means that you have not created your draft article in article space, but in your user space. This is probably a good thing, because when inexperienced users create new articles directly in article space, they often don't meet the minimum standards for an article, and get deleted. If the title of the draft is "User:(your username)/(some other name), then this is ideal: you have create your draft in a WP:User subpage, which is one of the recommended places to do it. But if it is "User:(your username)", then you have created it in your user page, which is not what that is for, and you should move it. If you tell us what its actual name is, or what your username is, we can help you better. --ColinFine (talk) 08:15, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

By the way, if you haven't already read your first article, I recommend you do so. Creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks in editing Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 08:26, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Create Article on Wiki for first time

Hi,

I am new to writing articles on wiki, my first article was marked for speedy deletion and that has left me a bit frustrated and now I need help on how to go about it. Anyone available to help please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamszy (talk • contribs) 10:14, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Shamszy. Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not surprised you're frustrated - for a new user, creating a brand new page that meets all the requirements of this massive encyclopaedia is one of the hardest of tasks you can undertake here. I think I'd done 9 months of editing before I felt brave enough to create my first one! Do have a read of Wikipedia:Your first article and try doing The Wikipedia Adventure - there are 15 badges to collect as you learn the basics of editing and what Notability and Reliable Sources mean - these are two really key elements to writing an encyclopaedia page in a neutral, non-promotional tone. I can't see any other edits associated with your account to be able to comment on your past editing. But, just like driving, it's often advisable to move off gently and build up speed slowly as you gain editing experience. Or you stand a good chance of crashing. So, I'd advise you to work on future new article as a draft and submit it to Articles for Creation where you'll receive helpful feedback if it doesn't make the grade at that point in time. You can then work on it further and resubmit it when ready. Hoping this helps, and welcome to Wikipedia! Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:22, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

I would add in addition to the above good advice, that the article was deleted in part because it was a copyright violation, just copied from another website. Wikipedia cannot allow that for legal reasons. 331dot (talk) 10:24, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

(ec) Hi, Shamszy! Probably reading Wikipedia:Your first article first will be a good choice. :) --CiaPan (talk) 10:25, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

How to copy an image (png) from 1 language wiki to another?

As the header says, I've been trying to add an image from the english wiki to other languages. Is/are there a page(s) where this is easily explained? Dutchy45 (talk) 10:45, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Dutchy45. This could be quite easy to do or (on certain language projects) totally impossible depending on the image and whether it is a free file or a non-free file used under a claim of fair use. It would probably help answer your question with more substance if you could link to the image you are working with. GMG^talk 10:49, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Image in question. I hope this is what you mean by linking?! Kudos on the speedy reply (did not expect that) afterthought: looking to copy to Dutch, Portugese and German. Dutchy45 (talk) 11:05, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Dutchy45. Unfortunately that appears to be a copyrighted non-free work used under a claim of fair use. So it would have to be uploaded to each local project individually, also under a claim of fair use. But not every language project allows non-free content as the English Wikipedia does. I know that the German Wikipedia does not allow non-free media. You may have to ask editors on the Dutch and Portuguese projects to see what their local policy is. GMG^talk 11:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

thank you! Dutchy45 (talk) 11:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

How quickly are articles approved after multiple edits

Hello, I have been working on Draft:Natasha Mudhar for several months now, and making the recommended updates to the article. Despite submitting it several weeks ago, it does not seem any closer to being approved. Whilst I know there are several thousand articles for approval, is there any order of priority for article approved which may see it approved soon, or is it dependent on the most recently approved articles? Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DAL123 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

The order in which drafts are reviewed is up to each individual reviewer. It is possible that some reviewers will give priority to new submissions rather than resubmissions after a draft has previously been declined. The age profile of the drafts awaiting review can be seen at Category:AfC pending submissions by age. One thing which you can do while awaiting review is to tidy it up to deal with references used more than once. The tidier it is the easier it will be for a reviewer, and this might speed the process up. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:27, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Editing wiki

I have a problem where I added factual, not bias info to a wiki page but it was taken down — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thothunter (talk • contribs) 13:07, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Thothunter. Edits like this are obvious vandalism, and if you continue, you will be blocked from editing. GMG^talk 13:09, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

To be honest that was obvious vandalism however I only did that because they took down my information on the rotten tomatoes score given to monster house Thothunter (talk) 13:19, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Article submission review

Hello. How long does it take for an article submission to be reviewed? I have one waiting in my sandbox and need to get done with it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Recorder XH (talk • contribs) 13:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps you missed what it says in the brown box on your draft: "This may take more than two months, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4026 pending submissions waiting for review." And from 2 sections further up on this Teahouse page: "The age profile of the drafts awaiting review can be seen at Category:AfC pending submissions by age.". --David Biddulph (talk) 13:27, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

And just an observation that you submitted your draft today. And the references are bare URLs. Is there a reason for the rush to get it reviewed? David notMD (talk) 14:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

The article concerns the chief opposition alliance in that country, where the election will be held in December. The alliance was formed only in the last few days. It is a landmark alliance for it is the first time such diverse groups have come together.--Recorder XH (talk) 15:37, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Recorder XH. I fear that, like many people, you misunderstand what Wikipedia is. It is not a means of promotion, no matter how worthy the subject is; it is also not a newssite, and there is no deadline. If the alliance is only a few days old, then it is unlikely that it is yet notable in the special sense that Wikipedia uses that word: i.e. there is probably not enough independent material published about it yet - for this purpose Wikipedia is not interested in anything published or written by the alliance or its associates, or based on an interview of press release. We require that several people who have no connection at all with the subject have chosen to write about it, at some length, in reliably published places. None of the sources you currently cite in your draft appear to me to be what we are looking for: independent discussion of the subject: they all look as if they are based on interview or press releases. I suspect that it is just TOOSOON for this subject to appear in an encyclopaeida.

Also note that if we have an article about the NUP, it should draw on all reliably-published commentary about it, whether supporting or critical of it: it must not simply report what the subject wants to say about itself. --ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@ColinFine:, how long does it take to give Wikipedia notability to a political alliance of large political parties (with membership between 100,000 and 1 million)? The article is merely a start up and can certainly be expanded by anyone, including for criticism of the group (for example, and this again proves it is not too soon at all, the PM of Bangladesh yesterday said some harsh rhetoric about the NUP). The sources provided are independent, reliable media that are already used in Wikipedia. The sources are the leading headline stories of the past two weeks and not based on press releases and interviews.--Recorder XH (talk) 18:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

The time it takes, Recorder XH is the time it takes for several people unconnected with the subject to choose to have articles or books about the subject published by reliable publishers. That might be quite quick - it is conceivable that it is not too soon for this alliance; but the references you included do not show it. It doesn't matter whether the article is complete or not: if the subject is does not currently meet the criteria for notability, then no article about it will be accepted, however written. The number of adherents is irrelevant. If you want the draft to be accepted, it is up to you to find sources which meet the criteria. Otherwise you are wasting your time.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. --ColinFine (talk) 20:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Administer, crat

I have a doubt. When a user become admin, do he lost his other user rights in wiki(rollback, reviewer, etc)? Is Beurocrat has the right of administrator?--PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 13:39, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Path slopu. All these other rights are included in the administrator toolkit, and so there is no need for a user to have them if they have the administrator permission. The Bureaucrat right is a separate right entirely, and while it is not required by policy that a crat be an admin, in practice, all crats are also admins, since the standard for obtaining the right is similar but with a higher threshold for community consensus. GMG^talk 14:05, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@GreenMeansGo:I have one more doubt. Which one is higher position- admin or crat?--PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 14:49, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Path slopu. Bureaucrat is overall the more advanced permission, as they are the individuals who may assign and remove administrator rights. GMG^talk 14:59, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Path slopu, there is no hierarchy of "higher" or "lower". Admins are people who have been given rights to perform certain operations, because the community has decided they can be trusted with those rights, that's all. --ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Umm...I mean, crat is the more advanced user right, as it is the user right that adds and removes sysop, and with a higher standard for entry. Just as steward is the more advanced user right than either, with all of the access of the previous two, but with additional access, and access across projects (even though community norms preclude them from using that access in many situations). So long as de jure or de facto policy makes sysop a prerequisite to crat, OS, CU, TA, steward...umm...global sysop...(is that all of them?) then these are all de jure or de facto more advanced permissions. GMG^talk 18:09, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, that's not 100% correct. Being a local crat is not a requirement to be a steward. So they're not strictly hierarchical in that respect. But being a local admin is. GMG^talk 18:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@GreenMeansGo and ColinFine:Thank you for your valuable advice.PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 01:45, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Problematic edits

(Are experienced editors allowed to ask questions here? If not, please move this somewhere more appropriate.)

I was doing a search for "You Tube" (incorrect formatting) and came across two edits by Notthebestusername which cited https://www.youtube.com. This, of course, is incorrect, because it's the YouTube homepage. (Both edits were no longer recent when I reverted them.) I have had to re-revert after my edits were undone in both cases: on Mukesh Ambani, because the link was restored without correction for some reason; but also on Tobacco, because the link to YouTube was replaced with a link to an old Reddit post which links to a page that no longer exists. (I provided edit summaries in all four of my reverts; see page histories.)

Furthermore, the talk that's mentioned – presumably [3] – is completely inappropriate as a source (and especially in this context), because although Noam Chomsky could be used as a reliable source in some contexts, in this video he was speaking at a lecture, in 1995; was actually talking about the American federal government's regulation of marijuana; and didn't cite his sources for claiming that tobacco was "the second-most lethal substance". Finally, parts of the text that was cited were clearly directly lifted from the video without attribution, and I removed all of the cited text because it didn't really contribute any actual information to the section.

In another of their recent edits, they were reverted by SamHolt6 for adding incorrect information, using incorrect terminology, and breaking the flow of First Opium War's lead section. (Other various edits: unnecessary talk page creation; general formatting/capitalization issues, citation of primary sources and introduction of obscure and unexplained acronyms.)

Does Wikipedia have a formal process for handling this sort of somewhat problematic editing, other than raking people over the coals? I don't really want to do that if it's not warranted, and I've never really had to deal with this sort of thing before. (Notthebestusername joined in 2013 and has never been blocked. I believe they generally edit in good faith and not all of their edits are like those above, but I'm concerned that errors like these are being made fairly regularly after five years of editing.) Jc86035's alternate account (talk) 15:38, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jc86035 (1). Anyone can ask a question at the Teahouse, it's that most of the people asking questions tend to be newer less experienced editors so the corresponding response tend to be more general explanations/guidance than super-detailed response.

As for your question, basically my approach is to Wikipedia:Assume good faith as much as possible and try to engage the other editor via Wikipedia:Dispute resolution if it's a general content dispute, but also make use of one of the more topic-specific noticeboards listed in Wikipedia:Noticeboards when I feel feedback from others might help resolve or clarify things; in some cases, you might even find out that the other editor is correct. Serious policy or guideline violations (for example, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:Copyright violations, etc.) often require an immediate response, but this can be followed up with a post/Wikipedia:User warning on the user's talk page explaining what the problem was and why it needed to be fixed. You cannot control how others respond to your edits and your posts; so, all you can do is be Wikipedia:Civility and try to explain the problem the best as you can. If the other editors doesn't respond or responds in a Wikipedia:Battleground type of way, there is unfortunately often no alternative other than to seek out administrator assistance at one of the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard or by posting a request on an administrator's user talk page.

In this particular case with respect to this and this, it looks like a simple misundertanding that should be able to be easily resolved through article talk page discussion. You're correct that linking to YouTube's main page is pointless; so, just use the article talk page to explain this and request that a link to the actual YouTube interview be provided instead. YouTube content can be a reliable source in some cases per Wikipedia:Video links and interviews also can also sometimes used per Wikipedia:Interviews, but a link to the actual interview is needed to assess it's suitablity as a source. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:56, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jc86035 (1), just a note here. I am notthebestusername [It is just one person :00]. I live in China, and whenever I find interesting interviews made by reliable sources, I often make an edit in the relevant Wikipedia page. Unfortunately, since you tube and many such websites are blocked in China, I use a vpn to access the same. Trouble is - you cannot log into Wikipedia with a vpn as it's algorithms imagine it to be a suspicious device! My practical solution (used by many of us wikipedans in China) is to do Wikipedia edits on a separate computer and use a vpn on a different computer. While this usually works well, this prevents us from giving the exact url (of you tube / google books) for the citation. Hope that cleared this matter. I can give the you tube url with a little extra work (copy it into a file, then paste it on logging off from the vpn, using the file as a sandbox) - it is a pretty pointless arduous chore for what is a voluntary service being provided by us Wikipedia volunteers.

Hope that clarified the above. Incidentally, often I am able to find better citations which I then use instead of interviews (example: from Harvard, Columbia, Jstor, WaPo, Guardian, and many others, all of which are openly available in China), but sometimes, I look forward to other wikipedans to fill in the gaps by adding the exact url and thus helping each other :) Notthebestusername (talk) 03:05, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Notthebestusername: While your situation might be a bit difficult, the WP:BURDEN is still upon you to provide a proper citation in support of content you're adding to articles (particularly BLP articles); otherwise, there's a good chance that it will either be tagged as a problem or removed by another editor. Moreover, while it might be easier to just simply link to YouTube's main page, that really doesn't help at all per WP:V. So, as arduous as it might seem, you should try to clarify the citations you add better, so that at least others can figure out what is actually be cited. If you have problems adding certain web addresses, try to avoid using {{Cite web}} since that requires a url be added to work properly; perhaps instead you can use another template like {{Cite interview}} or {{Cite AV media}}, or even just follow WP:SAYWHERE. You can also always add a clarification as a hidden note to the article syntax or post something on the article's talk page which explains what the actual url address is so that perhaps someone else can add it instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:22, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@ Marchjuly - Yes, your suggestion of using {{Cite interview}} or {{Cite AV media}} sounds much better. I will do that. Notthebestusername (talk) 09:22, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Range block

Header added by ColinFine (talk) 17:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi administrators.

I clicked on the treehouse because I didn't know what page to tell you what i'm about to say on.

So basically I have been editing a wikipedia page from my laptop, which is the only page I have edited on with it. Then on Sunday, when i was logging on to continue editing my page, it said that my ip had been banned from editing wikipedia pages and that the ban was in place until August 2019, and that i couldn't edit any other Wikimedia article until 2021. I didn't understand what was going on, so i emailed one of the Wikimedia stewards, who explained some things about that my ip had been used to edit other pages and vandalise pages, as well as that lots of innocent users are caught out by this.

He also told me to ask you whether or not i am eligible for the 'ipblock-exempt' group, and that when I am added, that i should check if i can continue to edit. Then the story took another twist.

Today, just before I started writing this help question, I checked the page to see if I could edit, and it turns out that I could, and there were no signs of anything to do with a ban. So I am really confused about what to do.

If it is just my location of where I am now to where I was on Sunday, or any other reason that I am still banned, can you check if I am eligible to be on the list, and add me if so, even if my ip is not blocked anymore.

Basically can you just help me get back to normal on here.

Many thanks,

TheKnowledgeMaster1738 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheKnowledgeMaster1738 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, TheKnowledgeMaster1738. I am not an expert on this; but what I know is that your IP is not you, but the address of where you are currently connected to the internet. (If you only ever edit from a single computer, which is hard wired to the network, you might always have the same IP address, depending on how it is set up; but even then it might change from time to time. And if you move around and connect to different networks, you will certainly have a different IP address each time). So it is not you that have been blocked, but the network you were connected to on that occasion. Last week I was using an open network at the Eden Centre, and was a bit miffed to discover that I couldn't edit, because the IP range was blocked. --ColinFine (talk) 17:19, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

help with a promotional article

Good day please I am having difficulty writing an article on promotional. Kindly assist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mojisolafolorunso (talk • contribs) 17:32, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

As was explained on your user talk page, and in the deletion log for your sandbox, promotion is forbidden on Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:42, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle

I can't seam to install twinkle. I added it to my preferences page and clicked save but can't use it A 10 fireplane (talk) 17:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello A 10 fireplane. Did you clear your browser cache? If not, you must. I have also seen your edit history, which shows you are editing using Mobile. Unfortunately, you can't use Twinkle on mobile view. Instead, you will have to change to desktop view. Then, you can see the Twinkle option at the top. I hope it helps - Knightrises10 (talk) 19:11, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@Knightrises10: ok I got ya, thank you for your help A 10 fireplane (talk) 20:14, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Assistance sought

I've tried to do some minor editing of a couple of pages before and tried to enter new sections in two pages. I often come up against a problem that I then correct only to find out there's still a problem. I'd like to set up a new page for an author/artist. I can guarantee I'll need some major hand-holding from start to finish. Is there someone specifically I can work with, who can set up the page with me?

Thank you!

Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulThePony (talk • contribs) 18:20, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@PaulThePony: Read the guidance at WP:YFA on how to create an article. There is a wizard there you can use to create a draft to work on that you can later have reviewed when you are ready. If you are connected to the artist/author you also need to read WP:COI and WP:PAID. RudolfRed (talk) 18:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

PaulThePony. I'd like to suggest that your choice of words implies that you have a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is for. Rather than "setting up a page for" (which is appropriate to social media, or a business directly), I suggest you think in terms of "writing an article about". The word about is the important one: the article should not be based on what the subject does, says, or publishes, but on what people have written about the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 20:39, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Music album

What is the procedure for create music album wiki page without disturbing already data here ? Exactly which type of references are required for that ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naveensharma1993 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Naveensharma1993. The procedure for creating an article about a music album is the same as the procedure for creating an article about any other topic: first find the independent reliable published sources required to establish that it is notable (the alternative criteria in NALBUM might apply, but if so, you will still need sources to justify that). Please see your first article for general advice about the difficult task of creating a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

DOI and PMID?

When using citation templates, what are DOI and PMID? Anobium625 (talk) 22:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like they're for using Digital object identifiers and PubMed identifiers. More info on how to use them can be found at WP:DOI and WP:PMID. Random character sequence (talk) 22:51, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

That was a quick response! Thank you. Anobium625 (talk) 23:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

:v

v — Preceding unsigned comment added by Takenix (talk • contribs) 23:07, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Is this worthy content - a photo of a handwritten poster from Bar Camp 1

I have a photo that might add value to the following page:

BarCamp

I removed the poster from the walls of Bar Camp 1 - I know the sponsor, Ross Mayfield - I don't know how to handle the copyright questions. File:BarCamp1 poster.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vahekatros (talk • contribs) 08:52, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Make real article from draft

How to make real article from DRAFT: I do not see any possibility to move page in another "namespace". It looks like ability to "move" pages is disabled forme Thank you— Preceding unsigned comment added by LiamTheFirst (talk • contribs) 12:44, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi LiamTheFirst, and welcome to the Teahouse. Most pages can be moved by any editor who has the access level autoconfirmed, that is, has been here for four days and has made 10 edits. Sam Sailor 06:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

LiamTheFirst you have only been here for 11 hours. You can't move anything until your account is autoconfirmed (4 days) and you made 10 edits. Feel free to always ask 6Packs (talk) 09:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia edit blitz?

Hello, Rebestalic here (again).

I feel that it might be time for a big editors' event; maybe it should be in the theme of a one-day or one-week edit blitz in where every editor that has seen the alert is challenged to edit as much as possible, in the same manner of the Great Wikipedia Dramaout and blitz chess.

Is this the right place to ask or should I go to the Department of Fun?

Rebestalic (talk) 04:12, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Rebestalic. There are fairly often such edit-a-thons hosted throughout the world. These are often sponsored and organized by individual WikiProjects, like WikiProject Military history or WikiProject Women in Red, and focus on getting groups of like minded editors together to work on subject areas where they share interests and experience. If you're interested in such events, finding interested editors from an active WikiProject is probably a good place to start. GMG^talk 10:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

How many

How many editors on Wikipedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editmanz (talk • contribs) 07:06, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

see WP:ABOUT and / or https://stats.wikimedia.org/v2/#/en.wikipedia.org Regards, Ariconte (talk) 07:18, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Writing and Editing Pages on Related Themes?

Hi there,

I am quite new to Wikipedia, but I have some knowledge of the Expressionist art movement, and mid-century art in general, so I've recently edited pages (stubs in most cases) on Philip Pavia, Marianna Pineda, Arthur Polonsky, and American Figurative Expressionism, as well as created a draft on the figurative expressionist Mel Zabarsky. I've read a good deal about Wikipedia best practices over the last several days, but I still have a few questions about the process:

1. How much do I repeat information that is relevant to several articles on separate but overlapping and related subjects? Obviously, I don't want to copy and paste from page to page, but some of the information overlaps, and I have yet to find any best practice reference for dealing with that.

2. Is there any way to call for someone more expert than me to do some edits on American Figurative Expressionism, the most important of these pages. It seems in my estimation to get quite a few page views (~600 in 30 days), but it was very incomplete when I took it over — more semi-formatted notes than not. Ideally, someone more knowledgable than me would do a round of editing, too? What are your thoughts on this sort of thing?

3. Finally, I also wouldn't mind someone peeking at these pages to give me some feedback to see if there are any errors I'm making in a patterned way. Most of the stubs were in very threadbare condition, not all of them seemed to be publication-ready, so I did the best I could to improve them, and still keep picking at them. The long and the short of it is I want to make sure someone more knowledgable than I thinks I'm on the right track.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by EditGirl99 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

EditGirl99: if you want people to look at an article, it's helpful and polite to provide a link to it, like this American Figurative Expressionism. I've had a look at the article, and my only comment is that it fails to start by saying what it's about. I think it's an artistic movement. Maybe it's a form of Expressionism. The article ought to say, preferably in its first sentence. Maproom (talk) 08:19, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

WP:NPP/S

Hi! Are there only two trainers at new page reviewer school, or are there some other unlisted ones as well? Thanks, Knightrises10 (talk) 11:01, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Knightrises10. Yeah, it doesn't look like that idea in particular ever really got off the ground. But I've reviewed a few thousand articles, and I'm sure others here have as well, and we'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. GMG^talk 11:03, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@GreenMeansGo: Hi! Thanks :-) I'll ask you if I need some help. Thanks again - Knightrises10 (talk) 11:09, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Contested deletion

Hi there, I had a page deleted before I even had time to put it up properly. I had a long argument with the deleting editor. In short (very short!), it appeared that by declaring a conflict of interest, I had doomed myself to immediate deletion - no quarter given, no questions asked. I feel this is unfair, there was no interest in the content or suitability of the article, the only stumbling block was my own conflict of interest. I have subsequently learned that - despite Wikipedia asking you to do so - declaring a conflict of interest leads to immediate deletion with no discussion. This is really bad. What made it worse was that the deleting editor was rude, insulting and contemptuous, there was no attempt to discuss the merits of otherwise of the article, it was all about attacks on me personally and my own ethics and honesty. I felt as if I had been caught selling crack to pre-schoolers. It was a horrible experience. I still feel, however, that the article has merit as an encyclopedia entry. How do I fix this? Obviously you are going to want more information, but I really just wanted to get the conversation started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niki Moore (talk • contribs) 13:27, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Niki Moore: I'm assuming you refer to The Foundation for Professional Development? I cannot see you having contacted TomStar81 (talk · contribs), the editor who deleted this article. You should try that first. Having reviewed the deleted article, I agree that it was probably incorrectly deleted as unambiguous advertising but probably also met the requirements of not indicating the significance or importance of the subject. If you like, I can restore the article as a draft and you can work on it in peace. Then you can submit it for review once you are done. Regards SoWhy 13:39, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Dear SoWhy, Thank you for your nice reply! I did not have a discussion with TomStar81, the deletion (and the subsequent argument) was with someone called Cabayi. I agree that it most likely did not meet the requirement of your 'not indicating the importance'... etc, but that was because it was taken down before I had the chance to do so! The mistake I made, I think, is that I decided to put the introductory paragraph up first, before I put in everything else. I would be extremely grateful if you could put it up as a draft and you could let me work on it and get it right. Niki Moore (talk) 15:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Ping User:SoWhy. GMG^talk 15:56, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Disagreement of what an article should be called

Hi. I recently moved an article (Chequers Agreement), from it's official long title ("The future relationship ..."), to simply "Chequers plan". Recently, another user moved it to "Chequers Agreement". I think "plan" is a more appropriate than "agreement" of several reasons (more common name, part of ongoing negotiations, etc.), but don't know how I should go about it. Also, the user who moved it is much more experienced than me.

I am considering just moving it back, and notify said user, as per WP:BOLD, but think it might be too aggressive, since he also used BOLD to move it. I can also make a move request, but don't knowhow to do that, or what the procedure it, or how much I will set in motion. Or I can just make a talk-page-comment, saying I think the other name is better, but it might very well just be ignored.

What should I do? Heb the best (talk) 13:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Heb the best. The third step in the BOLD cycle, after Bold and Revert, is "Discuss". When somebody reverts an edit you make, you choices are to accept the reversion, or to open a discussion. From your description, this isn't technically a reversion, but the same applies. (Because it is not a reversion, it is within the rules for you to revert their change, but I wouldn't advise that). Open a dicussion on the talk page, and ping the other user - see if the two of you (and anybody else who chooses to participate) can reach consensus. --ColinFine (talk) 14:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)