Wikipedia:Teahouse

AlanM1, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help

Wikipedia

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)

Help

I need editing help. Possibly adoption. Skoudco101 (talk) 23:09, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Sure, you can check out Wikipedia:Adoption --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:11, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Skoudco101: for a basic guide on how to edit, see Help:Editing. Cheers, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 23:35, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: Adoption really isn't the solution for brand new editors seeking assistance. It's a much longer term commitment by both parties. The Teahouse is a far better way to give immediate support. @Skoudco101: what help do you seek, please? You might find Help:Getting started of some use. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

I just want to edit but have no idea what about? Skoudco101 (talk) 00:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

If you have no idea what to edit about, think of a topic that you enjoy, find an article on that topic or something relating to it, find reliable sources that aren't in the article, and then paraphrase the information in the source. ^{[Username Needed]} 18:53, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Porygon2 and Porygon-Z article publication

Hi! I found somewhat of an article of both Porygon2 and Porygon-Z. I was wondering if someone could help me publish their articles, please. Thanks. UB Blacephalon (talk) 22:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Porygon Pokemon has been submitted for AFC review, and presumably will be considered within a few months. Porygon2 and Porygon-Z currently exist as redirects to other articles. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, there was a previous discussion here, at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1039#Porygon2 and Porygon-Z articles. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:39, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but I would like to publish the Porygon2 and Porygon-Z articles, the evolution of the article of which is currently under review. Could anyone help me with that? UB Blacephalon (talk) 03:35, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I want to publish them but i don't know how. Can someone help me out? UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:36, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Hermetic (album)

Hello, I created the article Hermetic as part of Magne Furuholmen's discography. The article got moved to the drafts section since there are very few references. Unfortunately the release is very old and most of the info I saved back then on my hard drive is no longer available online. How can I improve it? Are all of the official releases suitable for Wiki? How can I make an article better or suitable in this case? Thanks for your help Cat italia (talk) 07:19, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cat italia! Unfortunately, not all albums (or any work for that matter) are notable. That said, sources do not need to be online, nor do they need to be in English. All they need to be, is reliable. If you think you can find independent, reliable sources with significant coverage on the album, you can continue to work on the draft. Otherwise, it may be better to just move on from it, while keeping an eye out for sources that you might come across in the future. In the meantime, you can create a Redirect to the artist's article from the album's title. If you feel like the album might deserve an article of its own even though one can not be created at this time, you can add the template {{Redirect with possibilities}} to the redirect page to mark it as such. Hope this is helpful. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:14, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Usedtobecool! I've added to the draft links to the album on both Spotify and Google Play. I noticed that for some artists there are links to such sites for specific songs (I saw a couple of iTunes links on Lady Gaga's discography). Do you think those could be ok? Cat italia (talk) 14:39, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Cat italia, they are mostly not acceptable, as far as I know. In limited circumstances, they could be though. In any case, they do not add to notability and therefore won't help the draft get published in article space. I am out of my depths on this, I'm afraid. You could wait for someone knowledgeable to hopefully see this; or you might have a better luck asking questions like these at WT:ALBUMS. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:25, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

For a meanwhile published draft—record review time 45 minutes—I checked the WP:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice, and this project apparently allows Spotify links in WP:MUSICSTREAM, but does not mention that again in WP:ALBUMSEL. Wild guess, if there's no template for external Spotify links, stay away from it. –84.46.52.210 (talk) 10:54, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Redirect without leaving a redirect

Hello there!

I would like to understand what the comment "over a redirect without leaving a redirect" means. My understanding is that it would mean a hyperlink directs the user to the wrong site. If that is correct, then I'm not sure why the page I was editing was moved from "Publishing accepted Articles for creation submission" back to draft.

Your help is much appreciate!

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philharmagical19 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Philharmagical19: and welcome to the Teahouse! "over a redirect" means that the new page title had a redirect, which was replaced with the content. "without leaving a redirect" means that the old title is not redirecting to the new one; often, a page move results in a redirect from the old title, but when an article is moved to a draft, there shouldn't be a redirect, so this is nothing to be concerned about. Hope that makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 19:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Philharmagical19: you can ignore that particular message: it doesn't tell you anything about why the draft was moved, it was just a technical detail about how Missvain moved it back to draft space after DGG moved it to main space. As to why: I'm not clear. DGG declined the draft (and said why in the comment), but moved it anyway: I don't know why, but it looks as if Missvain though it was a mistake and moved it back. I can't find any reason either of them gave, but I have pinged them both in this para, so perhaps they will come and comment. --ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

(ec) Philharmagical19, it just means an admin moved the article back to draftspace. Usually moving pages leaves behind a redirect, admins can do that without leaving one. I think it was moved back because the draft was not properly cleaned up after it was moved to article space. Usually, the reviewing script automatically handles that. Perhaps it failed here and DGG didn't notice that, and Missvain didn't check whether the draft was moved by a reviewer or the submitter of the draft, before moving it back. That would be my best guess. You could ask DGG to re-accept it or wait for someone else to review it. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:12, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Ah...back in my old stomping grounds! (I helped create the Teahouse!) Hi - I moved it back to the submission space because it was moved to the article space despite being rejected from Articles for Creation repeatedly. Not sure how it ended up in article space. Thanks for your patience. Missvain (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It appears that DGG moved it, since it was cleaned up. I did some more cleanup and think it looks good enough now to be moved back into namespace. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I just accepted it, . DGG ( talk ) 18:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

DISH Network discussion

Hello, my name is Caroline. As an employee of DISH Network, I presented an edit request at Talk:Dish_Network#Dish_México. The reviewing editor (User:Spintendo) recommended that others engaged in the subject area discuss the issue. I have placed a number of requests on the DISH Network Talk page, and Spintendo has been the only person to reply to any of them, so I am asking editors at the Teahouse how I might get others to take a look.

Briefly, here is the issue: The DISH Network infobox says that DISH owns 49% of Dish México and this is not correct. Dish México is a joint venture between EchoStar and MVS Comunicaciones. I have outlined in greater detail at the DISH Network Talk page, but let me know if I can explain more here. The company now called "DISH Network Corporation" was formerly called "EchoStar Communications Corporation"; but in 2007, EchoStar Communications Corporation split into two separate companies: DISH Network Corporation (the topic of the DISH Network article) and EchoStar (which holds a stake in Dish México). Spintendo has questioned whether the split off companies are really separate, and I'm not sure what else I can share to more clearly show that Dish México is a joint venture between EchoStar and MVS Comunicaciones, as I've already offered EchoStar's annual reports and a secondary source.

Can any editors here contribute to the discussion or correct the infobox? Thanks for your advice! CK-DISH (talk) 20:43, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello CK-DISH, I have removed the claim this one time, as it was added back without explanation while you have been engaged in discussing the issue at the talk page. Hopefully this will cause a discussion to happen at the talk page before it is added again. We'll just have to wait and see. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Delete extra account

How do I go about deleting an extra account "Osvaldo Valdes Lopez"? Thank you! ovA_165443 (talk) 01:51, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Osvaldo valdes 165443: Accounts can't be deleted. Just stop using it. RudolfRed (talk) 04:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

If you can still login to your other account you can replace the content of the user page with #REDIRECT [[USER:Osvaldo valdes 165443]]. Note why you did that in the edit summary, e.g., add a new section on the user talk page explaining your plan first, and link to this section in the edit summary for the redirect.
In theory you can also use your current account to edit the other user talk and user pages, but folks could consider that as suspicious and revert it. –84.46.52.210 (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

how to edit "Dr. R(eginald) Denys Hornabrook"

C._A._Hornabrook contains text "Dr. R(eginald) Denys Hornabrook". the only reference i found is at https://www.adelaide.edu.au/records/university-archives/online-resources/news-cuttings/index-to-volume-21-1934-1935-university#h

should i update it as Dr. Reginald Denys Hornabrook ?

Leela52452 (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion, C. A. Hornabrook as it exists should be deleted and the creator, Doug butler, advised to start over. Articles about a person are supposed to be about that person, not an extended genealogy of every ancestor, relative and descendant. Who his sister married and who drowned and who committed suicide have no part in the article. Even the core content about C.A. warrants deletion or else major work, as most of it is without references. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

In the newspapers of the day, which are a good guide to common usage, this gentleman was commonly referred to as Dr. R. Denys Hornabrook or Dr. Denys Hornabrook, his full name being chiefly invoked for formal use (scholarships, army appointments etc). I recommend Trove to search the National Library of Australia's vast collection of OCR'd newspapers. Thanks for the query Leela52452, and thanks to David notMD for bringing it to my attention; I don't often visit the Teahouse. I hope you found the article interesting and useful. I certainly enjoyed compiling it. Doug butler (talk) 18:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of Page

Hello. I recently came across a celebrity page that false and inaccurate information. I am not the person who wrote it, but would like to have it deleted. Is there a way for it be deleted?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.63.211.221 (talk) 02:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 173.63.211.221. You can find out more about why some articles are deleted at Wikipedia:Deletion policy, but generally articles are only deleted when there's a consensus established that there are too many problems to fix through editing or that the subject doesn't satisfy Wikipedia:Notability. Articles aren't necessarily deleted because they contain false or otherwise incorrect content; in such cases, Wikipedia encourages us to try and fix the problem instead if it is at all possible to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:59, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. Just to add one thing: If the information is seriously wrong and harmful - eg unsubstantiated accusations or allegations of criminality, then you may immediately delete that text (clarifying your reasons in an edit summary). We can arrange to get anything seriously inappropriate permanently deleted. But just a vague story that paints someone in a poor light wouldn't fall under this. Let us know the article title and your concerns, and someone will take a look - or you can post concerns on that article's own talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Alternatives for {{navbox}}

I want to know if there is anything that can serve navigational purposes (just like {{Navbox}}) but can be displayed on mobile view. The Lord of Math (Message; contribs) 02:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Categories are supposed to work on any device. They are technically very different, e,g., you cannot "watch" the items added to or removed from a category, but fine for the purposes of navigation, cf. Help:Categories and WP:Categories, lists, and navigation templates. –84.46.52.210 (talk) 11:50, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Help with draft

I have created an article "Mahatma Gandhi Central University protest" yesterday. At the beginning it was accepted as the article for creation but after few hours it was declined by mentioning " Article us not written in neutral point if view". In December 2019, the same page was deleted by wikipedia due to copy right issue but I have removed all the copied text and write it in my own words. So please help me out. Draft:Mahatma Gandhi Central University protest --Rohitmishra01 (talk) 05:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

• I have not checked the previous version but the current version contains Vice-Chancellor (Arvind Agarwal) had falsified his academic details and had misreported his marks to become MGCU's first Vice-Chancellor, stating a significantly-damaging accusation as fact, sourced to this article which says complaints were received but does not ascertain the truth of the accusation. This alone is enough to reject the article because of WP:BLP.

I believe there is a notable incident worthy to be written about here, but you really must stick with what the third-party sources say and not inject your own interpretation of the sources. For a good example of writing in such cases, see Hurricane Dorian–Alabama controversy, which does in my opinion a fairly good job at sticking close to the facts despite 99.9% of online content pertaining to the incident involving partisan rhetoric. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:54, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Contributing a criique to an existing Wikipedia page

Hello I set up an account based on my e-mail number but when I tried to log in , it wouldn't let me Can you help me to get started as a new editor please ? Many thanks Raymond Marshall — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.7.88 (talk) 09:24, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I assume that by "email number" that you requested an account through WP:ACC? What is the message that comes up when you attempt to log in to your account? Make sure your login information is typed in exactly correct. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, you could be blocked from creating an account if you have previously registered an account already using the same IP or is sharing the same IP. Darwin Naz (talk) 12:50, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

how to use convert for population density for given values

Calakmul contains text "1000/km² (2564 per square mile)" and "420/km² (1076 per square mile)".

can i use {{convert|XX|PD/sqmi|PD/km2}} for the above. if so, how ?

or simply use 1000/km{{sup|2}}

Leela52452 (talk) 10:44, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

I assume the problem is related to either specifying which unit is abbreviated, in which case Template:Convert#Unit_name_or_symbol_(abbreviation):_1_pound_or_1_lb? answers, or how to choose the conversion precision, in which case you should read Template:Convert#Rounding:_100_ft_is_30_m_or_30.5_m_or_30.48_m?

• {{convert|1000|PD/km2|PD/sqmi|abbr=in}} → 1,000/km² (2,600 inhabitants per square mile)
• {{convert|1000|PD/km2|/sqmi|abbr=in}} → 1,000/km² (2,600 per square mile)
• {{convert|1000|PD/km2|/sqmi|abbr=in|sigfig=4}} → 1,000/km² (2,590 per square mile) (but only use this if you really need the extra precision)

In particular, I note that the conversion you copied is not correct: 1000/km2 is not equal to 2564/mi2 at the precision implied by the latter number's significant digit. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Garner Ted Aukerman

This person above was added to notable alumni lists of four institutions. I removed the entries because there was no reliable source. After removing the person on one of the lists, I made this comment here on the Talkpage about sourcing. The person was readded with a source based on the website of the person from their promoter. Also, there were comments about me having "a close personal bias", edit warring and that the source used for readding the person was reliable. Any recommendations on how I should proceed? Thanks. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 13:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

FieldMarine It seems to me that you have correctly interpreted policy, have correctly followed WP:BRD, and have done your best to explain your reasoning to some editors who don't appear to wish to listen to it. The best step forward is to get some additional eyes on the discussion, which you have achieved by posting here but you could also look at posting on a relevant wikiproject, or WP:3O. Hopefully the involvement of additional experienced editors will help settle the debate on one side or another. Ultimately, if users refuse to abide by whatever consensus establishes itself, you can take the matter to WP:ANI for administrator assistance. I have also weighed in on the matter myself. Hug^syrup 13:24, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I really appreciate the feedback, support and recommendations for the path forward. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 13:27, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Example Talk:List of Ohio State University people#Garner Ted Aukerman, because I needed several minutes to figure out what you are talking about based on your recent contributions. Garner Ted Aukerman does not exist, is apparently a stuntman, and I'd always remove red links and plain text persons from lists first, and consider "notable without article" later, it's too unlikely for most practical purposes. –84.46.52.210 (talk) 13:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Requesting an addition to noted professor's bio page

Please help. Professor Theodore Rappaport asked me to add his Wikipedia page that he was recently elected to the Wireless History Foundation's Wireless Hall of Fame. Here is third-party news item on Ted's receiving this honor. I posted the request for this addition to Ted's bio on the Talk tab of his Wikipedia page, and was informed that because neither the Wireless History Foundation nor the Wireless Hall of Fame have Wikipedia pages of their own, such an addition could not be made. But I did discover that the Wikipedia page for Tom Wheeler mentions Wheeler's having been elected to the Hall of Fame (in third paragraph under the "career" sub-head: "In recognition of his work in promoting the wireless industry, Wheeler was inducted into the Wireless Hall of Fame in 2003 and in 2009.") Was the placement of that note on Wheeler's page done in such a way as to allow for the mention? If so, could someone please note this on Ted Rappaport's page as well? Thanks for any assistance on this! Kgberg{{paid}} Kgberg (talk) 15:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Kgberg Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, since you state you are here at the request of Professor Rappaport, you must review the conflict of interest policy. If you are being compensated in any way, you must declare as a paid editor. The compensation does not need to be in money or any material good; say, being an unpaid intern counts.

You are welcome to make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, detailing what you would like to see done, and another editor will review it. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

331dot thanks for clarification. So I should use paid editor not just {{paid}}. I will make a formal request as well on the article talk page noting COI. Thanks very much. And I'll review the COI policy page again.Kgberg (talk) 15:59, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Kgberg: I suggest that you read both paid editor and {{paid}}; the first is the policy, while the second is the template which can be used for the declaration. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Other stuff exists says that finding an example does not necessarily mean a valid precedent. David notMD (talk) 21:38, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

RE: Deep Space Nine Vorta

Hi,

can I ask why you feel that the actor Jeffery Combs's Vorta character "Weyoun" is only one worth mentioning in the Section 31 article?

I'm only asking this because he also played Liquidator Brunt on a number of occasions in the same series (not mentioning the one time character "Tiron").

Regards

Juanpumpchump (talk) 16:59, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Juanpumpchump Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would suggest that if you have specific concerns about an article, you should use that article's talk page to discuss them with other editors that might follow that article and be more familiar with its content. There is a "talk" tab at the top of the article that you can use to access the talk page. 331dot (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

How long do rejected article drafts stay on the website?

Hi, I recently submitted a draft article for review and it was declined on account of notability. I honestly was expecting that however as it was on a musician who recently left their band and forge on solo, but hasn't yet done anything overly notable outside of that band he had been in. I had only submitted it because I new articles can take months before getting reviewed at times, and figured I would spend the between time editing it as the musician released more music and did things that would be noteworthy. So, I was wondering since it was officially rejected so quickly, how long the draft will stay as a draft on the site for me to edit as needed until it's ready for resubmission, or if there were requirements like having to make X amount of edits on it per month to keep it from being deleted?

Also, I had a second question that is just a quick point me in the right direction type question so I hope it can be answered in the same thing and not need a second discussion posted, but if not let me know and i'll submit separately! In the note I got back for the rejection, it said that the page had "been deleted six times previously". How would one check that type of thing? EliotWL (talk) 17:34, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Drafts stay for six months after they were last edited. You'll be notified before the six months are up, giving you a chance to continue working on the draft (in which case it wont be deleted). When you open the article Ashley Purdy you should see a red log showing all the previous deletions. The deletions were all in 2011–2016 so if she has continued her career she might of course have become notable in the meantime. If you don't see the red log you can click on "Check the deletion log", or if the page already exist you can find previous deletions by going to History > View logs for this page. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

More than a nuance: the draft was Rejected, not Declined, meaning that the reviewer was of the opinion that the subject does not meet Wikipedia's definition of notability for music, and no amount of revision will save it. WP:TOOSOON clearly applies, but could be that six months from now AP's career has not blossomed and you should just let it go. David notMD (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. And yes, like I said in my original question, I knew that he wasn't currently yet notable enough, and had only submitted the draft under the assumption that it would be months before someone even looked at it, at which point I would have edited the article significantly more to include everything else he works on in the time, as he's been steadily releasing content since becoming a solo act after 10 years in a band. Of course, if his career peeters out where it is, I'll drop it then, but seeing as the changes were so recent I'm still going to hold onto my original idea of editing the draft for the next few months to see if said career bumps him up to notable enough on his own, though I won't be resubmitting the article until it has reached the notable threshold now that I know how quickly the turn around time on submitted articles can be. Anyways, follow up question, the link you gave for the original article where the logs are located, how did you get that page, other than manually editing the URL? because it's not really possible to search for the page since it doesn't really exist in a searchable way... EliotWL (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@EliotWL: If you put "Ashley Purdy" into the Wikipedia search box, don't accept the default which is the redirect with a different capitalisation but accept the drop down saying "containing Ashley Purdy", that will give you search results at the top of which is "You may create the page "Ashley Purdy", ...", with the redlink to the place where the logs are shown. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Huh, thanks. I didn't even realize there was a dropdown on the search box. I just always typed what I was searching for and hit the enter key. Anyways, thanks for the help! EliotWL (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, EliotWL. Rather than "I would have edited the article significantly more to include everything else he works on in the time", I suggest you think in terms of "I would have edited the article to include what people had published about him". That is what makes a subject notable, and what should go into an article, not more things that the subject has done (though of course some of the things published about him might be about that further work). --ColinFine (talk) 21:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, ColinFine I feel like everyone assumes I don't take this really seriously when they reply to my threads here. To me, "to include everything else he works on in the time" literally means "to include the stuff that was noteworthy and establishes the necessary notability requirements, and has good, accurate, reliable sources that cover it." because those are the requirements of Wikipedia editing. Anything else would just be a waste of everyone's time. I'm just here to try to keep information accurate and available to everyone. That's why I didn't actually mean to have my draft be looked at for another few months at LEAST. Because I knew already that he wasn't yet notable enough to warrant his own page quite yet, as I read the musicians notability page about 30 times over the course of editing his and others' pages. But thanks for trying to help anyways. EliotWL (talk) 22:18, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for making assumptions, EliotWL. A lot of people who post questions here don't have much idea of what is appropriate to an article, so when I see somebody saying something that suggests that they haven't quite got the idea, I sometimes suggest a different way of looking at it. It's not a matter of you not taking it seriously; just not knowing how much you know. --ColinFine (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Updates not possible in Visual Editor

Hi - I would like to make updates to the page SWIFT message types I understand the current version uses HTML markup. Is this the reason Visual Editor is not available? It seemed like the previous table was done in HTML markup and I therefore converted it to a Wiki markup (hope this was done correctly?). Without the VE, I find it quite challenging to make significant updates. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Florian2410 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Florian2410, VisualEditor works fine for me on that page. Does VisualEditor open if you open this link? If not, do you get an error or something else? If the problem was that you couldn't switch to VisualEditor, you might be interested in turning on Preferences>Editing>Editing mode>Show me both editor tabs. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, the link worked and after changing the settings it works for the other pages as well now. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Florian2410 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Florian2410. Upon testing, the Visual Editor was also working on my end for that page. I am, however, curious about the change you made to the settings (if different from the suggestion made by Thjarkur). Maybe it could help other editors if they encounter the same problem. Regards, Darwin Naz (talk) 13:19, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

HELP - project keeps getting declined

I'm making a wikipedia article for a individual named Betsy Sullenger. All my drafts have been declined because the sources are not 'reliable'. Most of thes sources are from old new artilces in print, which mention her by name and are focused on her work, but because they can not be confirmed they are not reliable. But, my article keeps getting rejected because the online sources I am using only mention her in passing. I have reliable sources (from the newspapers) and the subject is qualified for an article, but it keeps getting declined and there are no other online sources I can use for her. What do I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aejudy (talk • contribs) 19:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

You start at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

​Articles from 2008 are not really "old news articles", and they are usually available online or in an open online magazine archive such as Archive.org. Are you sure you can't locate these articles or scans of them online? I would otherwise recommend letting this draft wait for a few months, writing an article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do (not to mention when you have a WP:COI) and we recommend spending a few weeks improving some of our already-existing articles to gain understanding of the process. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:06, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Stuartyeates, Variety (and Daily Variety) archives appear to be available online: the fact that they are paid services does not prevent using them as sources for Wikipedia: if you generate the citation with the {{cite news}} template (or a similar one) you can include a URL, and add a subscription= parameter to note that it is behind a paywall. --ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Cleaned up the draft, but still need to delete all uses of IMBd as a ref and find replacements. AND, you are required to declare PAID on your User page. David notMD (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

It's also worth mentioning that print sources are acceptable if they are reliable publications, and the coverage of the subject is in-depth. Citing the article title and author, as well as the name of the book/periodical, date of publication, issue/volume number and ISBN (if applicable) is advised. See {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, {{cite magazine}} and {{cite news}}. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Are there any women adopters?

I'm new to all this, and would dearly like to be adopted. But all the adopters seem to be men. Is there a way of establishing how many X chromosomes the adopters on the list carry? Thanks Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 20:10, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

There is no way of knowing the gender of most editors, including those on the list of adopters. Some people disclose their gender, for whatever reason, but most of us don't. Some people might tell you if they are asked, some would find such questions inappropriate... it's just like anywhere else in life. Out of curiosity, what makes you believe the adopters are male? --bonadea contributions talk 20:16, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

​The adopt-a-user system is currently not very active, but the adopters that have marked themselves as female in their Preferences are PlanespotterA320, SouthernKangaroo, and LPS and MLP Fan. You can otherwise just ask any question you have here at the Teahouse. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:23, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Maryanne Cunningham, and congratulations on nearly completing The Wikipedia Adventure - just two more badges to collect to get all fifteen! I made my first edit on Wikipedia ten years ago to this very day. And, like you, I didn't have a clue what I was doing, and just stumbled my way along, all on my own, just making small edits at first, learning in small steps as I went. I discovered little bits, and wasn't aware of any of our basic help resources - nor our rules - for ages. Nor did I know I could get help 24 hours a day, any day of the year from editors here at the Teahouse. To be frank, for a complete newcomer, I recommend The Teahouse over Adoption, as you'll get much quicker answers to your questions here from a multitude of editors. Speaking for myself, I tend to recommend Adoption to slightly more experienced editors who can demonstrate they have already tried to edit across a range of topic areas, and who need more complex answers than we can give here. But if you do go down the adoption route so soon, you might like to put together a little list of some of the things you'd like assistance with as adoption takes commitment on both sides, and the adopter really needs to know they can work together with a shared interest. In fact there's nothing to stop you putting a list together on your userpage of things you find confusing here, and then popping over here to ask someone to look through it. (They will answer on your talk page, though) Did you get an answer to how to use your own personal sandbox? - it's reached via a link at the top of every page when you're logged in, and you can use it to either draft a new article, or simply to practice editing, playing with adding references and all sorts of stuff you worry you might mess up if you try to do it on a live page. You can try out our two different editing tools - Source Editor (which you have to use on the Teahouse page, and Visual Editor which is more 'what you see is what you get' - but not so powerful when it comes to some tasks, and most long-term editors prefer Source Editor

I do hope this doesn't put you off, as we not only need more articles about women here, but we also need more female editors too. (Confession: I'm white, middle aged and middle class from middle England - sorry). We even have a project focussing on creating more articles about women - just follow the link to The Women in Red Project to find out more. I read your talk page, and you're right - it's all too easy for us to write guidance from the perspective of someone who already knows what to do. You'll find when people reply to you they'll include links (often as abbreviated letters, mostly starting "WP:xxx") - these are meant to be logically-named shortcuts. So if you click H:GS you get taken to Help:Getting started - a page full of links to lots of other help pages! So may I suggest you visit Wikipedia:Tutorial and follow the different Tabs there to find out more things for yourself?

Because the Teahouse posts get archived within about three days, I'll pop over to your own talk page and expand on this a bit more. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

To add to Women in red, I recently learned there's also Wikipedia:WikiProject Women/Women in Green. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Can you edit articles about subjects that you like personally?

Is the Evil Sith Kitten serving tea?

For instance, If I had a cat and wanted to edit the Cat article, would it be okay for me to do so, or can I only edit things that I'm not biased toward? The Evil Sith Kitten (talk) 23:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Evil Sith Kitten: Yes, this is OK. There is no conflict of interest. Interstellarity (talk) 23:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

I didn't know that. I assume that you should still try to be as unbiased as possible while editing those articles, though? The Evil Sith Kitten (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Right. You should try to keep anything you write here unbiased. So if you feel you were way too into cats to write unbiasedly about them, you should refrain, otherwise personal interest is completely fine. EliotWL (talk) 23:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, The Evil Sith Kitten. Summarise in neutral language what the reliable published sources say that you are drawing on. (You should never insert any information into Wikipedia without having a reliable published source for it). --ColinFine (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Oops. I mean The Evil Sith Kitten. --ColinFine (talk) 23:24, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I'm fairly new here (created account today, been drifting as IP maybe three or four), but I think I'm figuring it out... The Evil Sith Kitten (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@Evil Sith Kitten: I thought you might a) like the photo; b) like to try The Wikipedia Adventure - our interactive tour of Wikipedia, with 15 different badges to be acquired. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Reporting Articles

How to report low quality or incomplete articles JuanGarciaFederalAgent (talk) 01:10, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@JuanGarciaFederalAgent: There is nothing to report. You can make a suggestion on the article's talk page, but it is better to just be WP:BOLD and improve it yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Most problems I see with Articles happen on Controversial Ones. For example, the First Section on Joseph Goebbels has no sources and contains some important things, which, if true, need quite a good bit of sources. JuanGarciaFederalAgent (talk) 01:19, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi JuanGarciaFederalAgent. Please take a look at WP:CITELEAD if by the "first section" of the article you mean the MOS:LEAD. Generally, an article lead is only intended to summarize content that comes later in the article; so, citations are not necessarily required if the content is properly sourced later on in the body of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@JuanGarciaFederalAgent: The article on Joseph Goebbels is actually classed as a Good Article, meaning it has had some serious review by experienced editors prior to it reaching that standard. As has been mentioned, the lead section does not need to have references if expanded upon later. However, if you do ever find other articles where sections after the lead and Table of Contents have no references whatsoever, you are welcome to add this template: {{unreferenced section}} which makes it quite clear and visible that factual statements in that section need better sourcing. Otherwise, just add {{cn}} (citation needed) to key unsourced statements, or tag the entire article with {{More citations needed}}. But beware overtagging an article so that it become a mass of templates. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:43, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Need a Help

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closing this since the IP account who posted the question has been blocked per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oon835/Archive#08 January 2020. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

---

Can you help me to move this Draft:Lego Jurassic World to Draft:Lego Jurassic World (theme). Also please remove the semi-protected from all the draft pages so as I can intend to work on it:

• Draft:Lego Jurassic World
• Draft:Lego Scooby-Doo!
• Draft:Lego Overwatch
• Draft:Lego The Powerpuff Girls
• Draft:Lego DC Super Hero Girls
• Draft:Lego The Lone Ranger

118.100.73.97 (talk) 06:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 118.100.73.97. It looks like many those drafts were protected because they were being disrupted by people using multiple accounts in an inappropriate way. If you want to be able to edit them then you can ask the administrator who protected for suggestions on what you need to do. They were all protected by Jo-Jo Eumerus, so you can post a message at User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus explaining that you want to work on the drafts. It may turn out that only way you'll be able to edit the drafts is to WP:REGISTER for an account and wait until your account becomes WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I have renamed the draft to Draft:Lego Jurassic World (theme) as there is a existing article name in mainspace Lego Jurassic World. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@CASSIOPEIA:How about the other draft pages need to rename it and here are the belows:

• Draft:Lego Scooby-Doo! rename to Draft:Lego Scooby-Doo! (theme)
• Draft:Lego Overwatch rename to Draft:Lego Overwatch (theme)
• Draft:Lego The Powerpuff Girls rename to Draft:Lego The Powerpuff Girls (theme)
• Draft:Lego DC Super Hero Girls rename to Draft:Lego DC Super Hero Girls (theme)
• Draft:Lego The Lone Ranger rename to Draft:Lego The Lone Ranger (theme)

118.100.73.97 (talk) 07:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that renaming the drafts in not going to unprotect them so that you can edit them. You're going to need to request that at WP:RPP or discuss things with the administrator who protected them. I suggest you try the latter before doing anything else. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

making article live

Hello,

I have submitted the article called Jasmin Shojai (Draft:Jasmin Shojai). Wanted to know by when my article is going to get live. Can anyone help me out.Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 06:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Arjunsingh5478 Welcome to Teahouse. The article needs to be submitted for review first and if it passes the Wikipedia notability guidelines then it will be placed in mainspace. To submit the draft for review, please place {{subst:submit}} on top of the draft page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIAThank you!Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 07:09, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

This draft was submitted to AfC on 8 Jan and approved on 8 Jan. In my opinion, the approval was an error, as of the seven references, the first five are interviews (three uses of one interview, and two others). I suggest this be considered as being reverted to draft so that the creator can attempt to approve referencing. David notMD (talk) 19:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

How to create Category?

Hi All,

Can anyone let me know, how to create category? I just created an article Salarpur, Budaun, it is a Block in Budaun district and there is no category named 'Blocks in Budaun District'. This is the resource for justification. DMySon (talk) 06:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi DMySon. Please refer to Wikipedia:Categorization#Creating category pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

My dear friend Marchjuly, Thank you for your help. I have successfully created category now.DMySon (talk) 06:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Acceptable sources for proposed content for wikipedia article

Please refer to this link -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1042#Should_the_section_%22Indian_Government_response%22_of_Citizenship_Amendment_Act_2019_have_content_for_the_official_Government_Response_of_FAQs_on_CAA_?

I am trying to give reliable references for proposed content for this article.

For example, When I put some sources of critique for Government Response in my proposal like sabrangindia and radicalsocialist, they were being rejected as being not "mainstream". However, the Wiki Policy on mainstream has something totally different to say - WP:Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia

I was told that "For sources: linking to a government's wordpress blog in the lead is not appropriate" Please note that PIB source which I was told is inappropriate as a reference, was already referenced in the lead of the article and still is. Here is the link of that reference in the article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#cite_note-PIBPassesBill-2

In light of these things, I would like to know whether some editors are granted special privileges that they do not have to follow Wikipedia policies ? Or do we have to just follow what the involved 2-3 editors and admin are saying at that moment ?

Kmoksha (talk) 09:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kmoksha No one(including admins) has "special privileges". All editors are expected to collaborate with each other to achieve a consensus as to how a dispute is resolved. If that fails, there are avenues of dispute resolution to use. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

As this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inappropriate edits to go undetected; only things that are pointed out can be addressed. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@331dot Thanks for your response. I had gone to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. But the Talk page editor said that there is no dispute (even though he disagrees with my proposed addition) !! And the admin at Dispute Resolution closed that dispute resolution request using the same logic. Please see - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_184#Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#Indian_government_response So, please suggest what can be further done regarding this matter to resolve this dispute and improve the article.

Also, please tell how to decide in reality if a source is mainstream or not. The Wiki policy is saying one thing and the Article Talk page editors seem to be saying another. Can Consensus of editors and admins of Article Talk page overrule a Wiki guideline or policy ?

Kmoksha (talk) 10:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

If you want to refer to another Wikipedia page, please use a wikilink such as WP:Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia, rather than an unwieldy URL like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_a_mainstream_encyclopedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:46, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Done. David Biddulph Would you like to answer the questions I have ? -- Kmoksha (talk) 10:52, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

This has all been discussed at length here. Kmoksha wants changes made to Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, but despite repeated requests, he doesn't say what they are, making any discussion fruitless. Maproom (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maproom I have given concrete proposals. Please see these 2 sections of the Article Talk page. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#Second_line_of_lead_of_this_article_incomplete_and_misleading and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2019#Proposal_for_section_%22Indian_Government_Response%22_to_be_marked_as_needing_improvement_and_inserting_Indian_Government_response_with_counter-points . No one said that the proposal is unclear. Only they do not agree to the proposals saying that the sources are not mainstream. As far as I see, "Mainstream sources" WP:Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia is not a policy of Wiki, it is only a guideline or essay. But even that guideline is saying something else than what the Talk page editors are saying.

According to the Wiki guideline, sabrangindia and radicalsocialist seem to be acceptable. That is why I wanted clarification as to what is the viewpoint regarding sources being mainstream. Please give more information regarding that.

Kmoksha (talk) 12:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kmoksha: you first proposal linked above was to add the text "and who have been exempted by the Central Government by or under clause (c) of sub-section(2) of section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any rule or order made thereunder". You were asked to "propose again by using English rather than Legalese", and replied "The wording is in commonly used English only. There is no legal terminology used in the proposal." I cannot agree with that. "by or under clause (c) of sub-section(2) of section 3" and "any rule or order made thereunder" are legalese, not commonly used English.

In your second "proposal", you wrote "I would like to give the full proposal ...", but you never said what it was. My impression is that no-one is disagreeing with you, they just can't make out what changes you want made. Things could be a lot clearer if you stated what changes you want before stating your reasons for them. Maproom (talk) 13:32, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maproom Please see my first proposal thread. I had edited and given the alternate wording also and who have been exempted by the Central Government under the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or the Foreigners Act, 1946 [1]. There has been no response on that. Is this acceptable according to you ? Please give your detailed reasons.

Regarding the second proposal, I have given sample proposal in the opening of the thread. Maybe, you missed that, so I will put that here -

1. In a series of tweets posted through the Press Bureau of India (PIB) Twitter handle, the government has tried to bust the myths about the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. "Mythbusters focusing on North-Eastern India, especially Assam, surrounding the Citizenship Amendment Act. The 11-points address the most common misconceptions and fears in the region," PIB tweeted. livemint

Critics claim that "The ‘myths’ that the PIB attempts to bust in these posts, amount to little more than the government’s propaganda, an attempt to stifle criticism and generate public support for this anti-secular agenda."sabrangindia

2. In the FAQs released by Home Ministry, it also mentioned that CAA has nothing to do with deportation of illegal Muslim immigrants. However, the deportation of any foreigner irrespective of their religion is implemented as per the Foreigners Act, 1946 and/or The Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920. Mumbai Mirror

The Government has said that "Baluchis, Ahmediyas & Rohingayas can always apply to become Indian citizens as and when they fulfill the qualifications provided in the relevant sections of The Citizenship Act, 1955." Sentinel

But critics have said that "The answers released by the Central Government to FAQs on CAA/NRC are highly misleading and at times totally false, hiding more than they reveal."radicalsocialist

So, the proposals which I gave at the Article Talk page, I have put both the proposals here also for convenience. And request you to please see the full thread opener. The reasons are given there as well. For convenience, I will put that also here -

"The article section says "Indian Government Response" but that section does not have any Indian Government Response in reality. Saying the PM response to be Indian Government Response is incorrect. It is like saying that view of a Wikipedia editor is view of Wikipedia community. Indian Government gives response based on consensus amongst the various ministers and officials of the Government. Hence, the Indian Government Response should be put in that section and not what the PM said on this issue. Otherwise, what is the purpose of the section "Indian Government Response" ?"

"If Government is lying or is contradicting itself, still the Indian Government Response should be given since that is what the section says. To keep the section neutral, counter-points should also be put."

"So, I propose to mark that section needing improvement to include all the viewpoints and counter-viewpoint according to the section title. And then we can build up the section having viewpoints and counter-points by means of discussion here."

Please see all this and tell why this proposed content is acceptable or non-acceptable in your opinion with detailed reasons. Also, please give more information as to regarding my query for Mainstream sources. Thanks.

Kmoksha (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kmoksha: I have no opinion on whether what you want is an improvement. I have no opinion on which sources are acceptable. I don't even know what changes to the text of the article you are arguing for. I shall not make any more contributions to this discussion. Maproom (talk) 15:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maproom It is your wish whether you would like to give opinion. I have put the detailed proposal along with the reasons here also because you claimed that I did not give any detailed proposal. I gave the detailed proposal on the Article Talk page and no-one on the Article Talk page said the proposal is not clear. However, I would like to thank you for giving your time.

I would request other volunteers to give more information regarding what is the viewpoint on "Mainstream media" which was my main question. Thanks.

Kmoksha (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Rejected submission of new article 'Board Software'

Dear all, my article draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Board_software

has been rejected, but I do not understand why. May I ask you for some suggestions to edit a "successfull" draft? Thank you :)

Marco Simionato (Marketing Executive at Board International). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marco Simionato 1983 (talk • contribs) 10:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Marco Simionato 1983: Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Wikipedia articles need to maintain a neutral point of view and they should not sound like PR releases. Majavah ^(t/c) 11:58, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Hello, Marco Simionato 1983. First of all, please notice that by the terms of use of Wikipedia, you are required to make a disclosure if you are editing for direct or indirect monetary compensation. Basically, if you are making those edits during work hours and your boss is fine with it, which seems likely to me from the job title you gave, you must disclose it. See WP:PAID for details about how to make that disclosure. EDIT: never mind, disclosure was already properly made on user page.

DGG left a comment that this is advertising, not a Wikipedia article. I am forced to agree. I can find zero factual information in the first half of the article (before "history"). For example, Board can help different departments and job roles (...) to solve their varied business challenges, enhancing their decision-making processes is a sentence that could be applied with equal (lack of) validity to MS Powerpoint, standing desks, or pens.

That problem can be fixed. However, the more significant barrier is that Wikipedia articles must be about "notable" topics, which roughly means "has been talked/written about at length by independent, reliable third-party sources". I am not inclined to check the current sources or search online for better ones, but 99.99% of company products do not meet that threshold. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Corporate notability

Hi, i need some help why my article about reTyre) has been declined and how can i make it follow wikipedia rules ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryam_Khawaja (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 12:18, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maryam Khawaja: I recommend following the instructions in this guide I wrote. In short, all you need to do is find three or more professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are not connected with, affiliated with, produced by, nor dependent upon ReTyre in any way, but are still specifically and primarily about ReTyre. Once you find three good ones, summarize them (citing the sources at the end of each summary), then paraphrase that summary. Then you will have something that proves right away that the subject is notable and can be readily approved. After that, you can expand it using other reliable sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

How can I change my account name?

How can I change my account name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aodaitt0905353779 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Aodaitt0905353779. As your account has only ever made two accounts, it's simply not worth the bother of requesting an account name change. Simply abandon that account, forget the password and just create a new one, only ever using the new account from hereon in. (Using two accounts at concurrently is not permitted) If you wish, you could leave a note on the old account name to say you've abandoned it, and are now editing under a new name. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

How to provide references for the biography of an internationally renowned 84-year-old scientist who passed away yesterday?

Greetings from Switzerland, I have submitted the English translation of a German Wikipedia article created (by my colleagues and me at the Swiss federal institute for forest, snow and landscape research) a few years ago about Prof. Fritz Schweingruber. His passing away yesterday will be announced in various international fora and social media, which prompted us to translate his German article into English today. This scientist founded Europe's largest tree-ring research lab in 1970 and has been a world-wide leading expert in this field. He published dozens of text books in English and German up until this year (aged 83). He still has a personal webpage on our institute's website (https://www.wsl.ch/en/employees/schweing.html). Since the German Wikipedia article about him was successfully reviewed, I am at loss about providing additional references. Can you suggest any way to do so? Thank you. Michèle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michelekd (talk • contribs) 14:05, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Michelekd Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please keep in mind that other language versions of Wikipedia may have different rules from this one, as each version is a separate project. What is acceptable on the German version is not necessarily acceptable here. Here, the scientist will need to have received significant coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article here. The sources do not need to be online and do not need to be in English (though it helps). 331dot (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Michelekd: The International Association of Wood Anatomists citation in the German article looks like a good independent reference showing notability. Although most Google results are about his publications (which don't prove notability), I did find this reference from the University of East Anglia. There's even this - which, despite being a joke, is from Dendrochronologia, a good source.

It is too soon for obituaries to have been published, but ones in respected publications will also be good sources. Narky Blert (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Michelekd: I'm sorry for the loss of your colleague. If you create it here as Draft:Fritz Schweingruber, those suggestions can be added and others here may review and make enwiki-specific changes to it while waiting for additional sources, before moving it to main article space. You may also find enwiki-specific pointers at WP:YFA. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 19:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

some more specific advice

• Actually,Michelekd, the enWP has a special rule for professors and other researchers, WP:PROF Unlike other fields of human endeavor, we do not require the usual sort of independent reliable sources to show notability. Rather, the principal criterion is being known as an authority in the person's field, and this is normally shown by the influence of their scholarly research, which for books is shown by reviews, for journal articles by citations..(for someone who mainly wrote textbooks, their wide use is thr equivalent) We do require a reliable source in the usual sense for the facts of their life, but for routine things such as degrees and positions it does not have to be an independent source, and their university website is fine for the purpose and is what should be cited.

Biography of academic faculty is somewhat of a specialty field here (as you may have noticed, most of all our biographies are about politicians and sportspeople and performers), so not all reviewers always remember about the special rule. For the last 12 years as an editor and administrator, I've specialized in dealing with these biographies. I do not remember in those 12 years any instance of an academic who is notable enough for an unchallenged article in the German WP who has not been found to meet our standards, unless there were special considerations. I have therefore accepted the article.

It does need some adjustments to meet our usual manner of presentation, and I shall make them in a day or two. I know enough German to be familiar with the problems in translating from the deWP (see our guide at WP:Translating German Wikipedia , and also with the differences between the German academic system and that in the USA or UK, so I translate such articles myself , fix poor quality Google translations, and adjust those that—like this one— just need adjusting

What you will need to do to help is to add reference to obituaries as they become published, and to look for published reviews of his textbooks, which are likely to be in periodicals I will have difficulty locating. If you have any further difficulties, let me know on my use talk page here: DGG ( talk ) 19:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC).

I must have typo'd when searching, because I didn't find Fritz Hans Schweingruber (I assumed it had not been posted yet when I wrote above). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Googling a page

Why doesn't this page show up when I google it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadina_LaSpina. I can connect with the direct link but if I look up Nadina LaSpina's name it doesn't come up. Can someone help me with this? This is the case even if I type in "Nadina LaSpina wikipedia" I made the page almost a month ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elpi19 (talk • contribs)

@Elpi19: The reason why it doesn't show up on Google is because an editor needs to review the page before it shows up on Google. Even if it's reviewed, it may take time to show up on Google because Wikipedia has no control over Google's search results. Interstellarity (talk) 15:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

REQUEST TO SEE PICTURES OF USS CVN 80 BEING BUILT. I WAS ON USS ENTERPRISE CVAN -65 FROM 1967-1969

I was on the USS Enterprise CVAN 65 from 1967 to 1969. I would like to see pictures of the CVN 80 currently being built and progress pictures as it is being built. Lee A Clark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.6.118.234 (talk) 15:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Lee A Clark! This page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. But you could try and ask at the Reference desk if folks there can find out whether such pictures exist, and if they do, whether they are publicly available online. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Obama's Ethnicity/Race

Can you make corrections across the board to omit Obama's ethnicity as African American when he is actually a mixed race, White/African. Describing him as only African American is incorrect and misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.194.127.194 (talk) 16:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Please make an edit request on the talk page of the article if you can't the article yourself. Interstellarity (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

See Q2 at Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ. This is very unlikely to change on WP, but you can think about him how you like. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Relevance of an article

I'm toying with the idea to write a list article about Beatles museums worldwide. E.g. Liverpool, Halle, Siegen, Alkmaar, Dunedin, Stanardsville etc. The list would contain an introduction why these museums exist, the name, location, opening year and 'specialty' (short description) of the different museums.

• Would this kind of article have a chance to be accepted?
• If yes, what should be the title? (List of Beatles Museums? List of Beatles Museums worldwide? List of Museums related to The Beatles? ...)
• Would it make sense also to include special locations (e.g. houses where the individual members lived which are now accessible to the publich or bear an official plate citing that state?

I appreciate rather more information about my plan than too little. Thanx. Pte. Salt (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm writing inbased on my general knoeldgeof how to buld up sections in WP; this is not really my field: we seem to have articles on only 3: Egri Road Beatles Múzeum in Eger, Hungary , Beatlemania Hamburg, and The Beatles Story in Liverpool. I would suggest the first step is adding some information on the others, not at first in separate articles, but as brief mentions within the "museums" section of the various cities so the information can be at least visible. What to do from there depends upon how much information you have. If there are multiple excellent sources showing the museums are known not just in the surrounding area, it will be possible to make an article for each. If not, ad whatever you do have to the relevant sections.

There are then two possibiltities: if good sources have been written about the general concept of "Beetles Museums", you can make an article based on those sources, containing a list of the individual ones. If such sources do not yet exist, for the general idea, just make a list. ( Don't use your own original ideas about the nature of the museums, but rely only on the sources. ) Link it to the existing articles for the individual museums, and to the sections of the other articles in which the museums are mentioned. Then build from there. mention your project on the talk page at [[WP: WikiProject The Beatles}}, and I would imagine quite a few others interested will help you.

There are other ways--and Gråbergs Gråa Sång's suggestion should also work well. DGG ( talk ) 23:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Pte. Salt! Maybe doable (not my area, really). I found List of music museums, which has about 7 Beatles Museums on it. Some redlinked, if you want to try to create articles. Consider starting a section for museums at Cultural impact of the Beatles or Tributes to the Beatles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Note "museums" should be lower-case, e.g., "List of Beatles museums" or "List of museums dedicated to the Beatles". —[AlanM1(talk)]— 23:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

!Thanks so far! I keep searching and have found 13 (more or less) museums; not yet included museums (or exhibitions) which focus on only one of the band members. Cultural impact of the Beatles supplies material for an introduction. Still not decided for the title but "List of museums and xxx dedicated to the Beatles" (xxx will also be "material" like houses etc.) is my favorite.

Follow up question (before I move to WP: WikiProject The Beatles): Where can I find pre-made sortable tables to be used in the article? Pte. Salt (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

How to Make Edits to a Bio

The artist Tye Tribbett is a 2x Grammy Award winner but he is listed here as a Grammmy Nominee...how can this be corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.164.118.130 (talk) 17:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Please sign your posts, like this one. Also, all you can do is click the edit button, make changes, and save. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 17:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@12.164.118.130: His Grammy awards were in the article, just not the lede. I added the info and added sources. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Adding Photos With My Own Copyright

Hi,

I'm recently new to being an editor for Wikipedia and I was wonder how you can upload photos with your own copyright.

Thank you for any help.

FigureSkate321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FigureSkate321 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@FigureSkate321: It seems like you are talking about uploading an image you created. In that case, use the WP:File upload wizard, and tag the photo claiming it is your own work. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 17:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Tobias Hoheisel page in German

Hi all, I would like to create a German and French language page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_Hoheisel Please could someone give me a bit of advice. Thank you Vielen dank Merci Swithun — Preceding unsigned comment added by SwithunWells (talk • contribs) 17:26, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translate us. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@SwithunWells: Thanks for wanting to add to the Wikipedia. See WP:TRANSLATEUS for guidelines on translating English into other languages. Also, note that each Wikipedia has its own guidelines, so you may want to ask at the help desk for those Wikipedias for any other advice, which I think are here [2] and here [3] RudolfRed (talk) 17:33, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Where to get started?

Hello! I am new to (editing) Wikipedia! Please someone get me advice on how to get started good. Thanks! :) NTCloud (talk) 21:54, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello NTCloud! Check Help:Getting started. Much depend on what you're interested in. Try to start with simple stuff and see where that takes you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: I want to be adopted at WP:ADOPT. How do I do that?

According to "Participation" on that page, you look at the list, pick one and ask them on their talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:15, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: This so-called 'inexperienced' editor had some rather unusual first edits, and has just been indefinitely blocked as a prolific sock puppet. For this reason I would rarely ever recommend Adoption to totally new users. I believe we can help them all far better in fora like the Teahouse and not waste the time of earnest adopters who are keen to support committed editors. To find oneself being used purely as camouflage so that a blocked user can hopefully return unnoticed to editing, serves only to disillusion potential adopters and thus harm the chances of genuinely committed users from being given long-term, in depth support by the adoption process. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Duplicate uploaded image

Hi,

I uploaded an image file for the Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover; unfortunately I hit the upload button before completing the fair-use question boxes. I then uploaded the same file again with all the requisite claims for the fair-use of a (likely copyrighted image; however, the second upload is now listed as a duplicate image in the file library.

My question is this: how do I delete the first uploaded image (without the complete fair use claims) and replace it with the second (duplicate) image which has the complete fair use claim?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spotty's Friend (talk • contribs) 22:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

You won't be able to delete it yourself. You can ask at WP:FFD RudolfRed (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:FFD is "files for discussion", if you expect different opinions. For uncontroversional deletions you can pick a WP:SPEEDY template and add it at the top of the file page, e.g., {{db-f1}} "redundant" (file is a dupe), or {{db-g7}} "author request". Put "deletion request" in the edit summary and wikilink the correct image as [[:File:…]] . –84.46.52.210 (talk) 09:05, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Possible Hoax Article

Hello, I am not a new editor but I noticed articles on several different places called Fairview, Maryland. Including one in my county. There is little information on the articles and the citations don’t lead to anywhere. The articles are also all created by the same person. I can’t find any info on the places. I do know the one of the articles is for a legit place. ColinBear (talk) 22:49, 8 January 2020 (UTC) ColinBear

Hello {{}}. I haven't looked closely at these articles but per the guidance at WP:GEOLAND they maybe ok if a decent cite just shows they exist. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Ping ColinBear Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) @ColinBear: They're not hoaxes. The problem is that the citations need to be updated as the website cited has changed. Digging up what the source looked like when it was cited, it would have had the information it was cited for. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Trying to say Thank you

To experienced people Nick Moyes and Clovermoss, but I can't work out how to add to their Talk pages. (I have also forgotten all I learnt yesterday about adding names properly, sorry.) But Nick Moyes and Clovermoss, if you see this, thanks for the helpful posts, it really is appreciated. Could you please tell me how to add to a Talk, if there isn't a button saying: "Click here to add"(or some such)?

Cheers! Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 23:11, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Maryanne Cunningham, and thank you for those kind words. You are most welcome. In this sentence I am going to alert User:Clovermoss to your message, too. She will receive a red alert notification at the top of the next page she views, and I've managed to do that by doing two things in one edit: Firstly, I've included her name in the format 'User:Clovermoss' between double square brackets AND in the same edit I have signed my post with four keyboard tilde characters. This works from any page I edit on, so I could be editing my own talk page, or yours, or even an article talk page, and provided I've used the right formatting, she'll be notified. I'll sign now, then I'll answer your question in a follow up post, which I shall further indent (using two colons, instead of just one which this post has used). Nick Moyes (talk) 23:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Maryanne Cunningham: I'd also like to thank you for your kind words, it's very much appreciated. As for editing talk pages, there's 'New section' for starting a new discussion, but you can also click 'Edit source' next to a subheading (such as Wikipedia:Teahouse#Trying to say Thank you, which is this thread). Usually replies are indented by using the colon - the start of my reply is an example of what that looks like. In the future, a good way to find someone's talk page is by clicking on the link in their signature, or by typing in the search bar User talk:Clovermoss (without the brackets and by replacing my username with the editor that you would like to contact). Clovermoss (talk) 23:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Clovermoss Clovermoss (talk · contribs) (can I also use square brackets to link to you?). As I said to Nick Moyes (talk · contribs), I can find people's talk pages alright, I just can't find the 'Add topic' tab. Never mind, I shall persevere. Later.

(edit conflict) Right, Maryanne Cunningham, back again! You'll see I'm a lot more verbose than Clovermoss, who had clearly been alerted and got here before me. OK, so why don't you give the next bit a try out? Look at my signature at the end of my post. It gives my name which is blue-linked to my userpage, then '(talk)' - a link to my user talk page. That's where you want to go to communicate on my own page, as we don't encourage people to edit on other people's Userpages. Click the link and then, assuming you aren't editing in mobile phone view, you should see a long table of contents - different conversation thread. We always put the latest discussion at the bottom , just as we do here at the Teahouse. So, now, simply click the tab marked 'Add topic' you'll a simple edit window will open up, with space for a subject header and, below it, you type your message to me. Again, please sign at the end with those four keyboard tildes, which automatically inserts a timestamps as well as your username. Just as here, at the bottom of the page you can first 'Preview' your post before hitting the big blue 'Publish changes' button. Because you've posted on my own user page, I automatically get an alert notification - so you don't need to include my name or use any fancy formatting.

Here are some very quick Dos and Don'ts Wikipedia:Talk dos and don'ts, and when you have time, you might like to read through our much longer Talk page guidelines. I could also point out that there are various other ways to notify or 'ping' another editor so that they know you've mentioned them. Don't worry about all this straight off, but sometime you might want to look at Help:Notifications for more ways to alert people.

Finally, a little tip: It's so easy to be told of some useful page, only to forget how to find it later when you need it. You could, if you wished, add a section to your userpage to paste in titles of any potentially useful help pages you encounter and want to remember. I've done that on my own user page in a specially collapsed section so it doesn't fill the page up with tons of links. I could start you off by adding a few for you. But, as it's 'bad form' for one editor to alter another editor's userpage without permission, I would only do that if gave me the go ahead. Why don't you try giving me a 'yes' or 'no' on my own talk page. I'll help you out if you get stuck. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again Nick. User:Nick Moyes. I can get to your talk page ok, but I can't find the 'Add topic' tab. (I may be staring straight at it and not able to see it...). I would LOVE you to add a bit to my userpage with useful links (can you also tell me where to find it?). Cheers! Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 08:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Maryanne Cunningham, at the talkpage (in this case User talk:Nick Moyes), if you are on a laptop, click "New section" near the top of the page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:04, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Maryanne Cunningham Actually, you already know your userpage as you've edited it yourself here. As well as having two different ways to edit and make changes to Wikipedia, we also have two different ways to view it. These are:

• Desktop View Every page url in your browser will begin: https://en.wikipedia.org/....
• Mobile View Every page url in your browser will begin: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/.... (note the extra 'm')

Mobile view is designed for basic reading of Wikipedia, and none of the instructions we ever give here (unless explicitly stated) will refer to Mobile View. Although I edit on a mobile phone a lot, I virtually never do so in Mobile View, but simply switch to desktop view on my tiny iPhone 5. To do so, go to the very bottom of any page and look for the link to switch between Desktop View and Mobile View. Make sure you are in Desktop View.

Now go follow my signature to my Talk Page. Above the big, bold title which says User talk:Nick Moyes there are a line of Tabs. These are:

• User page
• Talk (this is the one you should then be on)
• Read
• Edit source
• Add topic (or New Section) - you want this one
• View History
• a heart symbol (for sending thanks to someone - known as Wikilove)
• a star symbol (Watchlist)
• More
• Wikipedia Search Box

My thanks to Gråbergs Gråa Sång for pointing out there are two different wordings on the same Tab at the top of the user page: either 'Add Topic' or 'New Section'. I've just had to fire up my rarely used (and legitimate) alternative account to send myself a test message to remind myself of this. Sorry for any earlier confusion. I will now pop over to your user page and add a new section for you, as discussed. (In return, could you pop round and help me with my brand new oven? I've just spent 20 minutes trying (and failing) to follow the simple(?) instructions on how to set the time delay to cook a chicken later tonight. I think those instructions were also written by men! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Tag user on Talk page

What is a simple (& polite) way to tag a user on a Talk page, e.g. someone who made a particular edit, or whom I know to be knowlegeable, to ask (tactfully!) for help improving the edit? I tried the common '@' sign but it didn't seem to do anything. See Talk:Hoxton.

I know I can post a message on a User's Talk page, but that seems like overkill in this case, and hypothetically I may want to tag several editors. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi D A Patriarche. There are a variety of WP:PING templates that can be used to do such a thing; you could, however, just post a simple message on the other editor's user talk page to ask as well. One thing about the "Ping" templates is that they have to be properly formatted to work and you need to make sure to sign your post as well. Simply adding "@" before someone's name indicates to anyone reading the thread you're addressing, but the Wikipedia software just treats it like any other inputted character not as a "Ping" template. One thing about "pinging" is that some editors don't like it and will ignore it; so, if you try it once and don't get a response in a reasonable amount of time, you might want to follow up on the editor's user talk page if it's really important. Over "pinging" someone would be the equivalent to repeatedly hit the bell/buzzer at the reception desk of a hotel or office until someone appeared. You might find the response to not be very friendly if you do that kind of thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, that looks exactly what I needed. {{User|NameToPing}} seems like the least intrusive. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 02:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Wrong sources

Hello all, I was wondering how you guys would go about removing a few "sourced" lines in a biographical article. The person has specified that this piece of information about them is not true using social media. When other editors removed the content it was very quickly put back with the reason removing sourced content.

So how do you deal with fake sources and sources that have a few lines un true on wikipedia. Thanks Idan (talk) 05:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Zvikorn: It depends. Can you provide the details please? Preferably, the discussion should be at the article's talk page for reference by future editors to the page. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 05:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Zvikorn. Article content should really only reflect what's found in reliable sources, but this doesn't always mean what's written is 100% correct. So, in cases where, multiple reliable sources provide conflicting accounts of a certain subject, figuring which source or sources are "more" correct can be pretty hard to do and often what is done is to somehow try add content about this "conflict" to the article. In this case, what seems to be happening is a disagreement over content between the subject of the article and sources reporting on the subject. Subjects of articles are considered to be primary sources per WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:BLPSELFPUB. Wikipedia doesn't totally discount a primary source may say and primary sources can be considered to be reliable in some contexts, but at the same time Wikipedia also doesn't just blindly accept everything a primary source says at face value. So, the best the might be able to be done in a case like this would be to present content about both sides; for example, "according to XYZ News, Person A did such and such; this, however, was denied by Person A later on social media" or something like that. Of course, if Person A was some how able to get XYZ News to publish/release a retraction of some kind, then this could also be included in the article. Similarly, if other reliable sources are covering the dispute between Person A and XYZ News from a news standpoint, then content about this could also probably be added to the article.

Just for reference, Person A is not totally without recourse when it comes to Wikipedia as explained in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself, but Wikipedia isn't going to remove article content about Person A just because they want it removed or don't like it. If the content in question has been repeatedly removed only to be subsequently restored, then would at least seem to be some sort of rough consensus that it is in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The then to do them would be try and further discuss whether that's really the case on the article's corresponding talk page or at a noticeboard like Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

How to Move Sandbox Article

Hello,

I already have an article in my sandbox, if i want to create a new article should i move the article to another location or should i keep it that way. Kindly let me know, Thank-You Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 06:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I see that the current content of your sandbox is a draft of an article which you recently created. You can therefore just replace those sandbox contents by whatever you want your new sandbox contents to be; the history will still be there if you want to go back to it, and you've placed the article separately at Jasmin Shojai. An alternative is to start your new userspace draft at User:Arjunsingh5478/whatever your new title is rather than at User:Arjunsingh5478/sandbox. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:31, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank- you, for guiding me!Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 10:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Request for factual corrections

Many thanks for this. I'm not competent to navigate around Wikipedia editing procedures, and hope this reply reaches the appropriate people.

It seems that I am being asked to prove my innocence; is this Wikipedia's practice? I thought that, in general, it is assumed that someone is innocent until proven guilty.

Adding 'according to Hutton' seems to fall short of a solution; if adopted as a general principle, it would still leave it open to people to secure widespread publicity for misleading assertions.

Please advise me!

Yours sincerely Jonathan Clark — Preceding unsigned comment added by HJ2B=! (talk • contribs) 09:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

• This is not a case of you being asked to prove your innocence, it is more that people are often discouraged from editing an article about themselves and are encouraged to find sources. I'd recommend talking about it on Talk:J. C. D. Clark with other editors who can possibly help. ^{[Username Needed]} 10:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Mr. Clark, there seems to be extensive discussion already on the talk page on the veracity of Hutton as a source. Your efforts would be best directed there, as explained above. Note that content in any article must come from reliable published sources that are independent of the article's subject. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Tommy Roberts (sports broadcaster)

I need any help with making this a more neutral article and need to know what flowery words need to be taken out. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monmouth1946 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

How to edit the colours on a map?

Hi!, hope you're doing nice. You know, I want to change the color of a map, in 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis, the map shows Argentina as "No Statement", in light gray, but the government (the new one) switched from recognizing Juan Guaidó to recognize the National Assembly of Guaidó, therefore switching from deep-blue to light-blue. Is that changeable? Have a great day! --CoryGlee (talk) 13:25, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@CoryGlee: The file is stored at Wikimedia Commons and available at c:File:Venezuela president recognition map 2019.svg. One would have to download the most recent version of the SVG file from the File History section there, modify the colour of appropriate polygon part inside the SVG file and upload back the modified version. --CiaPan (talk) 13:33, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan, thank you!, I will try but not assure anything, I'm rather inept with these things lol. :-) --CoryGlee (talk) 13:47, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@CoryGlee: You may also contact User:ZiaLater who keeps updating the map – but before you do, you might want to check their contribution here at enwiki: Special:Contributions/ZiaLater, for example at Talk:Responses to the Venezuelan presidential crisis#Argentina no longer recognizes Guaidó. --CiaPan (talk) 13:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan. many thanks :-) !!!! --CoryGlee (talk) 14:08, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

These like things on user pages that say "this user"

Well, I think that they're pretty cool so I'd like if someone explained how to acquire one please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridiculus69420 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

​Those are called userboxes, you can find them under Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries. For example, if you like hamburgers you would go under "Food" and then add the text {{User:Feureau/UserBox/LovesHamburger}} to your userpage. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:03, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

How can I rename pages?

Hello, I just made an automatic translation on a page in Wikipedia in Romanian. I wanna say how can I rename pages? I don't know since my native language is Romanian, I contribute into the Romanian Wikipedia. Can someone please tell me how can I rename pages? Thank you. The Japanese Toilet 🚽 | Talk With Me 💬 | My Edits ✏ 14:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello JapaneseToilet. On English Wikipedia, the operation is WP:move. I presume it's similar in rowiki. --ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

The Romanian equivalent of WP:Move is ro:Ajutor:Redenumirea unei pagini. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:14, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I will do it anytime if I write the wrong title. The Japanese Toilet 🚽 | Talk With Me 💬 | My Edits ✏ 16:16, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Following categories

Is there a way to watch a category, like you would watch an article? I'd like to know if an article is added to or removed from a particular category. Thanks. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

See Help:Category#Watching_category_additions_and_removals - X201 (talk) 14:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

X201, Exactly what I wanted. Thanks! -- Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Dhaka Subway

Hi,

My article on Dhaka Subway has been accepted as a Start-Class article. Which is fine, thank you.

But if I search for Dhaka Subway, it still redirects me to Dhaka Metro Rail (which also seems to be only a Start-Class article), which WP seems to have accepted is a separate and distinct system to Dhaka Subway.

If Dhaka Subway is an article in its own right, should it not be found directly by any search on the topic?

Thanks and regards,

Martin Ewan Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin Ewan Thomas (talk • contribs) 14:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia search works fine, but Google doesn't seem to have caught up yet. We have no control over the mysteries of Google algorithms. Give their web crawlers a chance to catch up before complaining to them. Dbfirs 15:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Subject Notability

Hi,

I am Vanessa from Anatomage Italy and I am writing because we are interested in publish a new article about our main product: Anatomage Table. Before starting we would like to ask a question with regard to the notability of the subject to be sure that the article will be accepted for publication.

As well as on the company website, Anatomage Table has been described by several Universities website and in a Ted Talk, for example.

Moreover, the Table is already mentioned in the Wikipedia article of the Visible Human Project, where in the "Applications using the data" some educational applications are described. So, starting from that quote we could create an internal link.

I look forward to hearing from you, Vanessa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anatomage (talk • contribs) 15:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Anatomage! Thanks for asking, there are unfortunately several problems. In short, I don't think you can make such an article that "sticks", but I also know nothing about your product.

• First, read WP:GNG. If you conclude, yes, I have those sources, no problem, then proceed. If not, give up.
• Username. You need a new one, see WP:ISU (for example "Vanessa at Anatomage" is ok). Simplest is to abandon your current account and just register a new one.
• Next, read WP:PAID and WP:COI carefully. If you still think this may work, move on to HELP:YFA. WP:PROMOTION will also be relevant. Good luck. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:24, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Vanessa. As well as what Gråbergs Gråa Sång told you, bear in mind that notability can only be established by sources completely independent of the subject. Nothing on your website can contribute to the product's notability. Nor can the TED talk, as Choi says he was part of the group that developed Anatomage. The universities' websites you mention may help, but it depends what they say. If they just mention your product in passing, no. If they repeat information from your publications, no. We require substantial, independent, material to establish notability. --ColinFine (talk) 15:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Minor / Major Change While Editing

I was editing the page on the Centaurus star system and one of the subtitles was repeated, but I'm not sure if removing it is a minor or major change because it says on the page about minor / major changes that removing content is a major change but I'm not sure I'm a repeated subtitle counts as content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astrobot3000 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Astrobot3000, there is no obligation to mark any edit as minor. When in doubt, do not mark it as minor. Alternatively, you can mention minor or just "m" in the edit summary without ticking the box to indicate that you think the edit is minor even if you can't be sure that it is completely uncontroversial. More at WP:ME. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and in this particular case, it was a maintenance edit which didn't change the meaning of anything in the article, so the edit is minor. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:13, 9 January 2020 (UTC)