Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Colonel House (talk | contribs) at 01:19, 10 August 2012 (→Finding templates and WikiProjects). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

This is the teahouse
Shortcuts

Marchjuly, a Teahouse host

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

File:WP teahouse logo.png by Heatherawalls CC BY-SA 3.0
File:WP teahouse logo.png by Heatherawalls CC BY-SA 3.0

Experienced and want
to help at the Teahouse?
Become a host...

Dear new editors, no question is too basic for our Q&A board. If you need help, just press the button below! And if you have some helpful advice for someone else, go ahead: be bold! Click [edit] to the right of his or her question and start the conversation.

Ask a question

Finding templates and WikiProjects

Hello. I am new to the user side of Wikipedia, and looking to get involved. I have a huge personal library, and tons of documents as well. I am active, love to read, love the power of information, and have a well established network in business and politics. My favorite subjects are economics and foreign policy. I am already established in the Economics WikiProject. (Their page hasn't been updated in a long time!) Is there a WikiProject for international affairs / foreign policy? Also, where can I find a template/banner that is useful for students saying that they are busy? thanks! Colonel House (talk) 00:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, Colonel House! We do have a WikiProject International relations and a WikiProject United Nations. Both are listed as "Active". There is also a template called {{Education wikibreak}} which is probably what you are after. Thank you for wanting to share your interests with us! hajatvrc @ 01:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Hajatvrc, thanks for helping me out! I hope to contribute to Wikipedia after it has helped me out all these years. --Colonel House (talk) 01:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also I must ask, is there such a template, saying "This user is not a member of Facebook [anymore]?" Because I am not anymore, and am relishing in that.--Colonel House (talk) 01:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

articles without references

hi i wanted to know that content on Wikipedia that is original and cannot be cited as it has not been quoted from anywhere, how does that work then?Rafia (talk) 20:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rafia. Wikipedia is a work in progress and there are sadly many pages that are not yet properly referenced. We need more editors to help fix these.--Charles (talk) 20:57, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, Rafia! As Charles said, Wikipedia is a work in progress. However, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking - is there something specific we can help with? Theopolisme TALK 21:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SAI Submission question

Hello, thank you for your assistance. I am currently developing an entry on the Sociology association of Ireland (SAI), and I seem to have covered all of the items required by my editor. Is this enough to have the entry published? Thanks, Liam Leonard Liamled (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why does my article keep getting declined?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/David_Wayman I have included independent references now yet the article has once again been declined. What's going on here??

The following artist page has far less references included and yet has been aproved: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Stark

Poacher64 (talk) 13:48, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Poacher64, and welcome to the Teahouse! It looks like your submission because your submission does not include enough reliable sources. All articles need to include reliable sources that are independent from the subject. An independent source is like a news article or a book, for example. You can also read Wikipedia's notability guidelines and the general notability guideline. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 13:53, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Poacher64, and thanks for starting to write for Wikipedia. Most experienced editors have heard the general type of reasoning many times that goes something like this: "Why are you criticizing the article I wrote when there is another article on Wikipedia that is just as bad if not worse!" We even have an essay on this line of thinking, called Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Well, we all agree that there are other bad articles on Wikipedia. Every day, we work to improve them, or if they are hopeless, to delete them. Oliver Stark has been tagged for lacking references, and clearly has problems. It is far better to try to write excellent articles that comply with our policies and guidelines, than to try to defend a draft article with problems by pointing out the shortcomings in other similar articles. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmission help

Hello, I wondered if someone might be able to review my article before the resubmission is re-reviewed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/James_S._Economou

Any advice would be helpful. I'm new to Wikipedia and would love to get this first article accepted. Thanks in advance! Uclaovcr (talk) 22:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Uclaovcr, welcome to the Teahouse! I looked over your submission and some things stood out at me. First, all Wikipedia articles need to have reliable sources that are independent from the subject. Other editors need to see the information in the article is consistent with the sources, according to Wikipedia's verifiability policy. You can also read Wikipedia's policy on notability to see if a subject should have their own article. If another host spotted something I didn't say, sorry about that. I hope this helps you! -- Luke (Talk) 23:30, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! This person is an academic, renowned surgeon and cancer researcher. I added some more external sources. If you have a chance, would you please take another peek? Uclaovcr (talk) 17:47, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Listing a bibliography

Thanks, if I may, for the answers to my question about editing. Here's another. The existing bibliography lists only the latest editions of certain books, which seems misleading. Can one give the first editions too, so the order of composition is truer to life? A related problem is that there seem to be no google listings for the earlier editions, so how can they be supported or documented? I know they exist because I have the books. Skameikin.70.20.43.130 (talk) 19:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a bibliogrpaphy of the books you've used to reference an article then it should refer to the editions you used. If we're meaning a list of works by an author I'd use the title and the year of publication. Additional identifiers, for example, ISBN are useful if people want to use them to find a copy of the book - that these might link to the latest editions I don't think is a problem. NtheP (talk) 19:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saving edits

I am trying to edit a short article to make it longer and more accurate, but I don't know how to save the edits until I can continue on another day (I'm informed that if I hit "save" the article will be submitted, but I'm not ready yet). Meanwhile if I hit "help" or any other command, I'm told I "might" (whatever that means) lose my entire text, so I'm terrified of closing my computer down. How do I save the edit page with my new edits so I can return to it tomorrow? Skameikin70.20.43.130 (talk) 18:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Skameikin, welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse! Unfortunately, I don't think there is a good way to do what you're trying to do. What I would do in such a situation is copy your changes from the edit box and paste them into a text file on your computer, and then you can save the file on your computer. If you do that, though, you'll have to be careful about edits that might come between yours. Sorry I don't have a better answer for you... Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:56, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I use an external text editor to do all of my major article revisions. This allows me to always save what I am working on. But yes, you have to make sure others have not made changes before you submit! hajatvrc @ 19:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Skameikin, you can always save even if you're not finished. Add {{Under construction}} to the top of the page to indicate that you are in the process of expanding the article. NtheP (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to view a Wikipedia help page while editing an article, you can always open it in a new window or tab, too (right-click the link and select the appropriate option). This allows you to leave the editing page open in one place while reading help pages in another. We also have this handy Wikipedia cheat-sheet that explains how to use some of the most common wiki markup functions, such as text formatting, inserting images, and using templates. There is even a printable version of this cheat-sheet available for you, so you can keep it nearby when editing without having to have a separate window open for help.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 22:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Private wikiMedia

Hiya Guys, Theorectically, if I set up (with outside help!!) a private wikimedia programme to handle basic admin tasks for my company would there any reason why this would be a non-starter?. If I were looking to recruit someone with Wikipedia experience is there any such portal/ service/list of wikipedians looking for work? Tommy Pinball (talk) 10:26, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Tommy Pinball, welcome to the Teahouse! I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question. What do you mean by "a private wikimedia programme" and "basic admin tasks"? If you're asking about paying editors to write an article about your company, then I should tell you that paid editing is a very divisive issue on Wikipedia, and many people are vehemently opposed to the practice, so I would recommend that you don't pursue it. Otherwise, I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe he is asking about using the media wiki software to create a private wiki for his own company. Then he'd like someone to help explain the wikimarkup. If that is the case, you can always go to mw:Manual:Installation guide to learn about installing it. I don't know about wikipedians looking for work. I'm assuming they would have to have experience in both Wikipedia and in whatever administrative tasks your company is planning on using it for. If that is the case, I feel like you'd be better off creating a job link externally with requirements that the applicant be experienced in mediawiki. Then you could post links to that at the village pump here and at some of our sister projects (meta might be a good one). Ryan Vesey 17:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya Guys, thanks for replying; Writ_Keeper you cold, Ryan Vesey, getting warmer. "Theoretically" the wiki is up & running; my personal edits there number 338,643 - very very useful but resulting in neglect to other areas of the business. A couple of staff use it but they don't really "geddit" the way any wikipedian would. Ideally I would like to stick a note on my user page such as "Fancy earning a bit of cash editing a (non-public) wiki from home? - all above board HMRC read wikipedia too - send me a wiki email for full details." My own Wikipedia contributions have been and will continue to be for pleasure and I do not want to get blocked or banned from my hobby for the sake of my business - My email is not up yet and I wont put it up if this is not within the rules/spirit of the project (ie this message is not a subtle way to shoe in the "advert"). Tommy Pinball (talk) 23:56, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there would be anything inherently wrong with doing that - as far as policies go. Obviously, you wouldn't want to spam up the Wiki (your signature, for example) with links to apply or whatever - but something on your userpage doesn't sound wrong to me. What, if you don't mind me asking, is this MediaWiki install used for? Internal/corporate stuff? Theopolisme TALK 20:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya Theopolisme, pretty wild yeah! Thanks for you reply. I don't mind you asking and I will try to answer. My answer would be "everything" which probably does translate as Internal/corporate stuff. As an instance we are a construction company and need an ISO14001 accredited Environmental management system inorder to get building work from Goverment Departments. Consequently we have a page ISO 14001 Environmental management systems - similar to (ISO 14000) on Wikipedia but it allows me to strip out stuff that is simply not relevant our company and add stuff that is...without the need for references! Basically ISO 14001 has four chapters and a couple of annexes. For chapter 1, I have a page that branches off called "1 Scope ISO 14001". An employee might get a letter (Pdf) referring to "ISO 14001: 2004, Clause 1" - in the old days they would ring me up saying "what does this mean?" These days they would simply cut & paste a redlinked ISO 14001: 2004, Clause 1 onto my talkpage which I subsquently redirect to "1 Scope ISO 14001" giving them the info they need. In an ideal world they would do a search for say 14001 and make their own redirect. Tommy Pinball (talk) 22:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

cannot edit first section of my article

Hello. I am creating an article and I clicked save. Now there is no "edit" link next to the first section of this article. I was not finished linking words to wiki articles and now cannot get back in there. Can anyone tell me how to get back into the editing mode for the first section of my article?

thank you!Swoodness (talk) 16:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Swoodness, thanks for dropping by the Teahouse! You can edit the entire page by clicking the edit button that occurs at the top of the article (next to the search bar and view history tab). Otherwise, you can turn on an edit link for the lead section by going to My preferences→Gadgets→Appearance Section→Click "Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page" then click save at the bottom. Ryan Vesey 16:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful! Thank you. Swoodness (talk) 16:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Using references and .wav files

Starting over again. My question is three fold. I have run across a few articles which have difficult or foreign words in the article. Can we link to other articles that refer to the word in question. As for the reference can we use another dictionary as a reference, i.e.; Miriam Webster? Can we insert .wav files for pronunciation of the word in question. The Wikipedia is such a large site. So I thought I would try to abbreviate my search here at the Tea House. Thank You Cmurdock1955 (talk) 16:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cmurdock! I'll answer the sound pronunciation question. We have a specific template {{Pronunciation-in}} for linking to a pronunciation sound file. So yes, you can do that. Ryan Vesey 16:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Cmurdock! Welcome to the Teahouse! As far as linking to other articles that refer to the word, I don't think I exactly understand what you mean.. are you saying have the word appear as a blue link (like I did with "word"), and clicking on it takes you to a page about it? Or something else? Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 00:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I began creating a Wikipedia article describing my IntroNeuro course at Georgia Tech, in which students create or fix up neuro Wikipedia articles. It got moved to my "name space". Where does it belong? Here is the work in progress: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Professorpotter/GeorgiaTech-IntroNeuro Professorpotter (talk) 15:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It belongs where it is now, in your namespace. Article space is where anything that would go in a regular encyclopedia would go, such as Cougar or Dragon. Wikipedia-space is where anything that is not enyclopediac but could be used by all users, such as Wikipedia:WikiFauna or Wikipedia:The five pillars of Wikipedia, would go. Your namespace is anything that would not belong in an encyclopedia and may only be needed to a smaller group of users. Sometimes this group of users is just a portion that likes to have fun on Wikipedia, such as with User:Raul654/Wikipedia the Movie, and sometimes it is just for you, such as your personal sandbox (which would be located at User:Professorpotter/sandbox.) Works in progress should also go in your namespace, such as the aforementioned sandbox. Your article is and will always be in your namespace, as it is currently a work in progress and it will not apply to all users. Brambleberry ☾of RC☽ 15:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I believe there is a new education style namespace. I saw it referenced in the village pump a while ago. I'll try to find a WMF member to ping. Ryan Vesey 15:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Professorpotter! Good to see you again (so to speak); welcome to the Teahouse! (I don't have any more information since our first conversation, just wanted to say hi).  :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! What you may be looking for is the Education Program. In particular, you may wish to add your course to the US education program, but to do that you will need to get in touch with Jami Mathewson via jmathewsonwikimedia.org. The education program would be a good choice, as that way you gain support from the online and campus ambassadors, who will assist you and your students. I gather the number of courses is limited, as a lot depends on who is available to assist, but it is a very good program. - Bilby (talk) 15:56, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I asked a question about references and .wav files

Some how I really managed to mess up my question about references and using .wav files??? Put in a short summary and somehow it ended up in a ? header. Not sure what happened here.Cmurdock1955 (talk) 15:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Cmurdock! What happened is that you put a space at the very beginning of the new line; this causes Wikipedia to go into "preformatted mode" for that line, which is why your question looked like that. Just one of the vagaries of wikimarkup. :) I've fixed it for you; you can see what I changed in this diff, although it might be hard to see, as it's just the deletion of a space. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Telluride Blues & Brews references

Hello! I tried to model my wikipage after existing music festival pages. These included a brief description and a list of past year line-ups. However, the only references I have for the line-ups are from the festival's own website and past pamphlets. Do I put a footnote next to every year with the same source? Not sure how to provide more references when there aren't many that I can find. Thank you!


71.216.91.187 (talk) 15:32, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. If you reference the same source in many different places, you can follow these instructions:
# The first time you reference it, you would put: <ref name="something short you want to call it">Your reference goes here.</ref>
# Every time afterwards that you reference that place, you would put: <ref name="What you named the reference before"/>
Not everything has to have many references, though I would check with others to make sure that it would constitute as notable, as when there are few references it may not be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Brambleberry ☾of RC☽ 15:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article Review

Hi everyone! I am very new to Wikipedia editing and I would like to kindly ask you for some help - my recent article on Kento Masuda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kento_Masuda#References) was declined with the statement "unreliable sources". Could you give me some hints on what reliable sources would be for an artist/composer article? Thank you so much in advance! Cheers, Olga Orugoro (talk) 13:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What's the timeline for article review?

I submitted an article on 26 July and it was declined the next day, by a very un-qualified reviewer, I might add. I updated the article, per the reviewer's advice, and resubmitted very shortly thereafter. The article is still awaiting review, but a few other people have also contributed. I'm concerned since the article was first reviewed in a single day, and now it's been over two weeks. Stephenpnock (talk) 13:23, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Stephen, welcome to the Teahouse. First: I'd recommend that you don't throw in things like "very un-qualified reviewer"; we're all volunteers, so the only qualification that's necessary is the willingness to spend the time. I'm not sure why you call Czarkoff unqualified anyway; he's seemed knowledgeable enough in my interactions with him. (I'd also add that, looking at the revision of the page he would've seen, I'd agree with him.)
Anyway, AfC is a rum go; it's entirely volunteer-driven, as I said, so the wait times are always going to fluctuate, depending on how many new articles are being created and how many people are working on it. It's just the nature of the beast; you gotta be patient. Thanks, though! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you're right, and my comment was a bit inappropriate, but obviously my personal opinion from reading his personal page. I find that Czarkoff is very knowledgeable also, but in the self-identified fields of software and Yugoslavia-related topics. I just felt that it seems more appropriate to receive feedback/approval from someone with knowledge related to bio-materials and/or innovation in materials technology companies. I recognize the nature of Wikipedia as a volunteer operation, but I find it more fair and efficient for articles to be reviewed by amateurs with a passionate interest in the specific topic. We can argue the importance of cross-discipline review, but Czarkoff has specifically published [essay] with a bias against business notability. I find there to be a conflicting argument: Czarkoff argues that businesses should have made a notable impact on their industry, but discredits awards, which often come from an industry to recognize the impact of the business. Will this article be passed on for further review? Is Czarkoff expected to review it again? Or will it simply wait until someone picks it up? Stephenpnock (talk) 14:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undo or tag this page?

I've come across this page which has had a lot of info added to it, but the info is generally incohorent even though it seems to be some sort of folklore. Should I undo it or tag it with an incohorent tag in the hope that someone can clean it up? The page is Manbhum Sesamevoila (talk) 12:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Sesamevoila, welcome to the Teahouse! After looking at it, I went ahead and removed it; not only was it incoherent, but it didn't appear to be particularly relevant to the article's subject, either. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion Tag

You all were so helpful when I came here recently - I am back! I am doing a lot of needed minor edits on Alexander Litvinenko’s article. There is an expansion tab under the section “Flight from Russia and asylum in the United Kingdom”. The tag has been there since 2009. Does it still apply? Is there a fast way for me to find out if it’s been fixed (thru “view history”)? May I remove such a tag once it looks ok? If so, do I discuss it on it’s talk pg first? Here’s the link in case you’re interested: Alexander Litvinenko#Flight from Russia and asylum in the United Kingdom Related to those questions, I plan to fill out another section there which is similarly tagged (section is “Arrest”). How will I know if it’s enough info to remove the tag?

An unrelated question: I’ve noticed that it doesn’t seem to matter that I put the usual two spaces between sentences and after colons, etc. It appears to turn into one space. Should I not bother to put 2? Yes, I'm still reading the wonderful wealth of help pages! In advance, thank you kindly! Albeit27 (talk) 04:30, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Albeit, and welcome back. Regarding the spaces, the MediaWiki software automatically merges multiple spaces, so there is need to enter them. For example, after this I will put five spaces: (or so). Regarding the tag in question, you may want to post on the talk page first. Personally, I think some of the subsections are really short and should thus be merged. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:34, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Crisco! Did I somehow goof this page up? It is looking all broken up to me and I'm stressin' over it. If it looks funky to you, will you fix it please? Thanks for your above very fast response! I hope I didn't break anything,,, Have a good night (or day).
Looks ok now. Whew! Albeit27 (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Crisco and thank you for the sugg reading. I just skimmed it and am moving it to the top of my reading list for a more thorough reading - very informative and interesting! Albeit27 (talk) 18:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Albeit27. There's really not not much you can do to break Wikipedia. I mean, we have people deliberately trying to break it all day long and they fail. Caution is good, but you can be bold too. We need people like you, willing to roll up their sleeves and wade in.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:01, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Fuhghettaboutit! I very much appreciate your encouragement and kind words :) Albeit27 (talk) 18:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick note about spacing: placing two spaces after a sentence is a relic of the typewriter era, when all characters were the same width. This provided more visual distinction, so that sentences could be more easily identified and "isolated" visually. Nowadays, it is considered unnecessary, and it is even listed in one of my favourite articles, the list of common English usage misconceptions.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 06:09, 8 August 2012 (UTC) [reply]
Thank you Dalahast. Besides the great page you've referred me to, which I didn't know exist, I must say you have good knowledge about this subject. I am also putting it to the top of my reading list for a more thorough study - looks very informative! Albeit27 (talk) 18:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS - I left brief "you have messages" for this posting on some of your talk pages to let you know I have new messages for you here. I'm unsure if the Teahouse system automatically informs you of this. I will be back to see if anyone has left info about this for me here. Thanks again! Albeit27 (talk) 19:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Lawrence Tenney Stevens Page?

I say again, the Lawrence Tenney Stevens page is inaccurate. I am the director of the Lawrence Tenney Stevens Trust and the foremost authority on Lawrence Tenney Stevens. As a courtesy, I provided accurate information to the person who submitted the LTS page to Wikipedia. It is unfortunate that she submitted the page without first asking me to review it for accuracy. I understand that there are reviewers who decide whether to accept these pages. Please, read the text of the LTS page and compare it to the quoted sources. You will see that in attempting to paraphrase the sources, the submitter has made very simple mistakes and leaps that are not supported by the sources. Thank you hajatvrc for your input. If the goal is accuracy, this will be best achieved by removing the page and allowing me to submit one that is accurate, non-libelous, and non-copyright infringing. To rewrite the current page and make additions and corrections will take longer. I do not have the time to learn the ins-and-outs of Wikipedia and have no idea how to communicate with others except through this teahouse. 4.254.163.75 (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The answer is to correct the existing page. You say it would be quicker for you to submit your own new page but that would require learning to edit just as much as repairing what is there now. If you mean you want to substitute a corporate press release or something of that nature it would infringe copyright apart from issues of conflict of interest and closeness to the subject of the article.--Charles (talk) 20:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Are you talking about pending changes protection or about the Articles for Creation process? Electric Catfish 20:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Login & New Article

Hi! I am new to Wikipedia. I just got my login a week ago and have created an article in my "sandbox." But the article is not visible yet. I have saved the article. How long will it take for the article to be visible? The topic is Leigh Bale (a national award-winning author). I've read through copious amounts of "instruction guides" on how to do this and have cited the sources and when I "view" my article in my sandbox, it looks great and the sources and weblink to Leigh's website work great, too. I'm just wondering if I need to do something else to get it to go "live" or if I'm jumping the gun and need to give it a period of time for inspection by the powers that be before it goes live, or what. Sorry for the newbie questions! And thank you. ClaraClara Bale (talk) 18:40, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you have made the article in your sandbox, but you have not submitted it for creation at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. I can tell by looking at your contributions. All you have to do to request an article for submission is to add {{subst:submit}} under where it tells you to edit. Brambleberry ☾of RC☽ 19:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anarchopedia

Hi everyone! Hope everyone is doing good. I wanted your help on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation. It is a draft article which i had started almost three months ago but haven't completed it till now. I just want to make sure that the draft article is able to meet all the minimum requirements of a stub or anything else or also if all you can improve it much more than that so that there is high chance that the article reviewer accepts and approves it to move it to article mainspace. I started this article originally after seeing it on Simple English Wikipedia and some part is based on it, but i have just learned that unfortunately it has been deleted there, (see simple:Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2012/Anarchopedia). I am not sure what needs to be done now, should i continue with all of your help to create the article or just get it deleted ? Regards. TheGeneralUser (talk) 17:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TheGeneralUser, hi and welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at the deletion discussion at simple it looks like the overwhelming factor was Notability and looking at the draft you have at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anarchopedia I can see this being refused for the same reasons. There is a specific set of notability criteria for web content at Wikipedia:Notability (web). To meet the guideline the site should have been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. At the moment it doesn't manage this as the only references are to itself and some Alexa informatiom, what is needed is reviews of the site saying how useful it is (or indeed the opposite if you want to base notability on how bad it is) or how significant it is. Unless you can find this type of information I'm afraid it's always going to be a non-starter. NtheP (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message Nthep. I came here and asked for help because i am not a professional article creator or content writer, so i was expecting/asking if someone could help write and expand that draft article because right now it does not even meet the basic requirements of a stub article. If it can be improved by someone else, that's great. If not should i keep it idle as it is or just get it deleted if it's of no use ? TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:21, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are not many professional article creators or content writers around, for one I don't think anyone who volunteers here at the Teahouse falls into that category. But I don't think the quality of writing ability is the problem here - it's the lack of reliable sources about the website that holds it back. NtheP (talk) 18:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

how to userboxes

How do I add userboxes to my user pages? Also, how do I make them on the right? Cubist 10101 (talk) 16:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Cubist 10101! Userboxes are naturally on the right when you group them, so you don't have to worry about that.

So here is how you group them:

Find a few userboxes that suit you. So if you are a user that likes Animal Farm, wears contact lenses, and has Celtic ancestry, you would write:

{{Userboxtop|About Me}} {{User:DWP17/Userboxes/Animal Farm}} {{User:Brambleberry of RiverClan/Contacts}} {{Template:User Proud Celtic}} {{Userboxbottom}}

Now, to get individual userboxes (since I doubt that you like Animal Farm, wear contact lenses, and have Celtic ancestry, and even if you do you'll want more), you go to Template:WP:UBS, where you get categories of userboxes. You pick a category, say "Animals" under the Interests row, and look at the userboxes. If your favorite animal is the African wild dog, you would go to "Wild Dogs, Wolves, and Foxes" and find African wild dog. The code will be on the left. You copy that using right-clicking and then paste it into part of your userbox chart (which is the Userboxtop and Userboxbottom shown earlier.)

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask me. Brambleberry ☾of RC☽ 16:18, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upload picture and create fact box

Hi I work in the Danish cable company, YouSee A/S. I have placed some information on the company and would like to 1) ad a picture of our logo, 2) create a factbox instead of the present table, that was easier for me to make. I have read the Manual of Style and Cheatsheet, but still cannot find out how to do it:-( As for the logo the reason can be, that I am not autoconfirmed? I need a step-by-step instruction on how to upload a picture/logo and create a factbox. Can anybody help me? Thank you in advance. Hannah A68447 (talk) 13:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hannah, and welcome to the Teahouse! You are right in saying that you can't upload an image until your account if autoconfirmed. It needs to exist for 4 days and have 10 edits to be autoconfirmed. However, you can place a request here. As for the infobox (what you call a factbox, but what we call an infobox) I can handle that for you for now, as it involves pretty complicated stuff, but I can explain it to you on your talk page, as there would be too much to cover here. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 14:20, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I can cover the infobox thing here. You use the template called Infobox. You type 2 curly brackets at the beginning and end of the template (like {{Infobox}}), then you add a pipe (which looks like | <- this). After that, there are sections called parameters that you can use to type information. Hope it helped! FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 14:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hannah, you don't need to create an infobox as there are many preformed templates based on {{infobox}}. The one you probably want is {{Infobox company}}, if you follow the link you can see all the parameters and how to use them in the article on YouSee. NtheP (talk) 16:01, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How long is a piece of string?

Hi there. Just contributed my first article. How long does the approval process usually take? Cheers MattMppulford (talk) 13:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mppulford, i take it you mean User:Mppulford/sandbox? I'm afraid there are currently 1,000 pending AfC submissions, so it may take a week or so before your article is reviewed. While you are waiting, you can edit it further or contribute to other articles. :) benzband (talk) 13:40, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I need help with my article

My article has had this response This submission is not adequately supported by reliable

Can you help? ZDinally (talk) 09:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thinktank Planetarium. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 09:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! If you get the message "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources" on top of your article, it means you need to add sources to back up what you're saying. Examples of reliable sources include newspapers, magazines and other published trustworthy content. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 09:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Etiquette of WikiLove

Hey.

I don't exactly know the etiquette of WikiLove. So, in terms of context applicable, what is the different between a barnstar, a drink/food and a kitten? When should I send each? (Actually, I myself don't feel comfortable with any of them.)

Thanks in advance.

Best regards
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, and thanks for dropping in. Wikilove is a lot less formal than you may expect—basically, barnstars are a sort of award. Anyone can give them to anyone else, for whatever good work they did / are doing, etc. There is a plain one, as well as several "themed" barnstars intended to be given to people for specific types of work (e.g. reverting vandalism). The rest of them (the drinks, cats, and all that) are even less formal than that; they have no special significance unless you attach such significance to them yourself. They're just fun, lighthearted ways to encourage people, brighten their day, say "thank you", whatever. Hope that helped!  dalahäst (let's talk!) 08:28, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lisa, I tend to use wikilove just to thank someone for helping me with a task, or to cheer someone up who has had a rough time editing, and sometimes, just a random act of kindness to a good editor who may have been overlooked for all the good things they do. It is a small kindness, a virtual "gift" and a bit of recognition, like buying a friend a cup of coffee. Or, if I've goofed, it's a way to say "I'm sorry". Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 08:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just another view. If you don't feel comfortable with them, don't give them. Wikilove is just a twee way of reminding us that we should be nice to each other, but if you think that you can do the same with a comment, then do that! The comments mean much more than the yellow rectangle and attached image. WormTT(talk) 08:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
Thanks everyone. I appreciate this.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 09:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do I remove an inaccurate and potentially libelous page?

-redacted as much as possible-, wrote a page about Lawrence Tenney Stevens that is inaccurate and potentially libelous. This is a poorly researched, poorly written article. I manage the art archives of Lawrence Tenney Stevens and want the page removed. 4.254.162.102 (talk) 02:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey 4.254.162.102! We do take libel very seriously on Wikipedia. We would be able to help you much more quickly if you point us to a particular section that is inaccurate. In many cases, we can just remove the stuff that is potentially libelous and it will be gone. This is often easier than nominating the whole page for deletion just because that process can take up to a week. Any more info you could give us would help us help you. hajatvrc @ 02:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 4.254.162.102, Welcome to the Teahouse. Whatever your issue, "outing" is not allowed: "Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia." I did not see this information on the user's page, please be careful. heather walls (talk) 02:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know if you are allowed to change a redirect?

Example: Alex Wong (dancer) redirects to the ballet company he worked for and has only a single mention of him. I would like to add a page of his own seperate from the company. He achieved much since leaving the company. Not to be confused with another Alex Wong (producer, musician) they are not same person. So you think you can dance TV constest show American idol TV contest show Released a single titled "Crave" Produced the music video for the single Also has lead role in new movie "The ballet dancer" Should I just creat a page Alex Wong (dancer, singer, producer) ? Or did Alex Wong himself create the redirect? Sorry for being such a noob. Thanks for any help.Zolvera (talk) 22:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, and thanks for stopping in at the Teahouse. From what I understand, you are looking to take a page that is currently just a redirect and make it into its own article. There are two main approaches you could try: the first is to be bold and simply edit the redirect page, replacing the content on it with the article you would like to create in its place. If someone disagrees with this, or finds that there are problems with the article, they will probably revert your edit, which means it's time to take the discussion to the talk page—this method of deciding what to do with pages is used often enough that it actually has its own name: the bold, revert, discuss cycle.
The second approach is good if you'd like some help writing the article, or would like to get some more opinions before doing this: you can use the {{split}} template (click "split" to see it) to propose that the page the redirect leads to be split up, with a separate page for some of the topics already in it. The template page shows you the code to use it.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 00:50, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, Zolvera. Don't apologize for being a noob. We all were once and I'm still pretty new. You asked a GREAT question with lots of answers.
  1. Create your article about Alex Wong (dancer) in your sandbox. Just click the My sandbox at the top of every page and start typing. Since this is your first article, read through the tutorial or work with an adopter to get started. A couple of Teahouse Hosts are active in the Adopt-a-user program, Ryan (talk) and WormTT (talk). Click on their (talk) and leave a message saying you would like to be adopted. You will get a reply on your talk page.
  2. When your article is ready, go to the ballet company page. On the left under "Toolbox", click on "What links here". In that list, you will see Alex Wong (dancer), the current redirect. When you click on Alex Wong (dancer) there, you will go to the redirect page rather than directly to the ballet page. Now click "Edit" at the top of the page and do a copy-and-paste of the following code just above the redirection in that existing redirect page: {{db-move|Alex Wong (dancer)|Current redirect to be replaced by full article}} That will list the page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. An administrator will delete the redirect so your article can be moved into mainspace and become the definitive article on Alex Wong (dancer). You will be an auto-confirmed user by then and can do the move yourself.
Thanks to your question, I see that there are now 4 "Alex Wong" articles, the singer SingleTrackMind to which a bare Alex Wong goes plus "Alex Wong (dancer)" about whom you are concerned and "Alex Wong (singer)" from American Idol and "Alex Wong (musician, producer). When there were only two Alex Wong articles, a Hatnote was added to each page to direct readers to the other page that they might have been seeking. I now see two Hatnotes on pages. When more than two articles with the same name or title exist, there should be a Disambiguation page to help readers find the article in which they are interested. I'm still pretty new and have never created a Disambiguation page and worked through the process of deleting Hatnotes that are no longer needed and other clean-up so that the Wikipedia is improved rather than just further confused and cluttered. So I'm off the learn about Disambiguation pages. Hope this answered your question. Take care, DocTree (talk) 01:50, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do I print a Wikipedia article?

68.35.221.241 (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, 68, welcome to Wikipedia! On the left sidebar on the screen, in the menu labeled "Print/export" (it's towards the bottom on my screen), there's a link that says "Printable version". If you click on that, it'll take you to a (more) printer-friendly version of the page you're on. You can then print the page by using the appropriate command in your browser (for most Windows browsers, I believe you can hit Ctrl and P at the same time, or go to File and select Print). Hope this helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.. Can I get??

I am stuck at one place in wikipedia.. Can I get the skype ID of any specialist... ARK (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ARK. I am not saying someone wouldn't do that, but typically we give advice on the wiki directly. Couldn't you tell us what you're stuck on here? Alternatively, there is an internet relay chat forum for Wikipedia help: #wikipedia-en-help – click here to connect. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's an IRC channel for the Teahouse as well: #wikipedia-teahouse connect FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 16:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Quick correction :) The channel for Teahouse help chat is #wikipedia-teahouse-help connect (it was announced in the host lounge, changed from wikipedia-th-help). See you there! heather walls (talk) 16:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I've struck my comment so there's no confusion. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 16:56, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware of that. From a practical standpoint though, pointing anyone there is problematic because of low attendance at this point in the Teahouse's life – right now it's completely empty, whereas the help channel has 77 people in it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article Resubmission

Hi All, First time editor/poster/everything here at Wikipedia. My article has lastly been reviewed and rejected. The reason for the decline was that it appears to read more like an advertisment. Following all the advices on 'Wikipedia en help' I tried to improve it and I think the article has made a good progress. But before to ask for a re-subsmission I wanted to get a new feedback from you if possible. Do you think other things need to be changed? Many thanks for all your help. Just one more question, I cannot find anymore the button 're-submission', does anyone knows where am i supposed to click to re-submit it ? Cheers

Article : Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tatratea

Many, many thanks for all your help

Tatratea (talk)

moved new question to top of page. NtheP (talk) 10:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! I can review articles and will be reviewing yours shortly. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 10:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the advertising seems to be gone, but there is still a problem, namely your English. If you do not mind I can make some changes to the English in the article, because it doesn't seem to be your first language. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 10:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Floating Boat, Many thanks for your answer. I am effectively not English but French, this mainly explains why it looks difficult to read for you. Sorry about that ! Feel free to change whatever you think useful to improve the article ! Many thanks again. Tatratea (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I'll get started! FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've corrected some of the English, and added a source from the Independent (a well-known British newspaper). It should be good to go! FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the page to Tatratea. Congratulations on your new article! There's just one last thing to do. Your username could be seen as being promotional so I would advise you to change it here. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Floating Boat, First of all I deeply want to thank you for all your help ! This is amazing, i did not expect to see the article already broadcasted ! So happy !! This is ok, I'll change my username right now !! Many thanks again Floating Boat !! Cheers ! Tatratea (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What to do?

What do I do about this article. I think the subject of the article may have also written it, and even if not there are some serious problems. I'm not sure what the protocol is for handling this. AutomaticStrikeout 00:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Strikeout, and welcome to the Teahouse! While there is no hard and fast rule against creating autobiographies, it is strongly frowned upon. If you come across one, like the now-deleted article you linked above, you can see if it fulfills one of the criteria for speedy deletion (for blatant advertising, copyright infringement, or whatnot) and tag it with the appropriate template. This one was advertising, which falls under {{Db-g11}}. An administrator will then come along, review it, and possibly delete it. If the administrator declines the deletion, you can then go to articles for deletion. Note that some autobiographies may pass the general notabilities guidelines with referencing and whatnot, so you should double check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, thank you. I've just started with the speedy deletion stuff, and I wasn't sure if this article met that criteria. AutomaticStrikeout 03:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    If you're uncertain, AFD may be the easier route (takes longer, but it generally reaches a fairly solid consensus) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget that there's also WP:PROD for articles that are fairly clear-cut (i.e. non-controversial) candidates for deletion, but don't meet any of the criteria to be speedily deleted. If anyone removes the proposed deletion tag from the article, that counts as an objection, and then it's time to either drop the issue or take it to AFD.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 03:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article nomination

I've been working on a major revision of an article that I'd like ultimately to nominate for GA status. How would I go about doing that? Also, is there a way to ask for a peer review along the way, so I don't make an idiot of myself? Thanks in advance for any advice.Jburlinson (talk) 18:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jburlinson! For good article nominations, you can read the nomination process. First, you have to choose the most appropriate subsection (a list of subsections are located here). Now, go to the talk page of the article you want to nominate and place {{subst:GAN|subtopic=name of the subsection on this page where the article is to be listed}} on the top of the talk page. For example, if the subsection is "Transport", then you'll put {{subst:GAN|subtopic=Transport}} on top of the article talk page. For a peer review, add {{subst:PR}} to the top of the article's talk page. When you save the page, you'll see a link to create a new peer review discussion page. Complete that page as instructed and sign the discussion page. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 18:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, just perfect!! Thanks so much.Jburlinson (talk) 18:53, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletation

i created page named http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charudatta_aphale&pe=1&

but it was deleted i don't why on above given link it says something about A7

Please help me create this page again i have enough info to create this page

Thanks Worldvinwiki (talk) 07:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for dropping in at the Teahouse. "A7" is a kind of shorthand here. It refers to one of the reasons an article can be deleted quickly—specifically, your article was deleted because it didn't explain what is notable or important about the subject, using reliable sources so that people can verify that the information in the article is accurate. All Wikipedia articles need to have sources to prove that the things they're about have received coverage in other media, such as books, newspapers, other websites, and television. These sources are also used so that other people can make sure the information in the article is accurate.
When you're ready to create your article again, try reading this page first, which will tell you everything you need to know about starting your first Wikipedia article. Instead of saving it as an article right away, consider submitting it to Articles for Creation. There, other editors can review your article before publishing it. If it is not ready to be published just yet, they can provide you with helpful feedback that explains the kind of improvements you can make to it first. Thanks again for visiting, and let us know if you need any more help!  dalahäst (let's talk!) 08:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How to be neutral?

Please send me tips to be neutral when writing for Wikipedia. I am open to alot of feedback. Thank you. Khyati Gupta (talk) 06:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Guptakhy! That's an excellent question to ask. I'm sure some other editors will give you some more in depth answers, but I'll start with a simple solution. One of the keys to neutrality in Wikipedia is to find a new subject that interests you. Your edits should always be to things that interest you (otherwise Wikipedia would become a chore), but you should attempt to find something you aren't invested in. Some of my best articles are about ships. The topics were very interesting and I enjoyed writing the articles, but I didn't have an opinion on the matter. Attempting that as much as you can is the best way to be neutral. I look forward to seeing what some of the other hosts have to share with us both about being neutral when you do have an opinion. Ryan Vesey 07:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can also try reading carefully through your edits before you save them. Write whatever you were planning on writing, then click the preview button and read through what you've written. If you notice that some phrases sound biased, go back and rewrite them to have a more neutral tone. The Wikipedia Manual of Style has an excellent page of words to watch out for in your writing. They are broken up into a few sections, such as "words that may introduce bias". That section, in particular, has lots of suggestions on how to avoid writing in a biased tone.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 07:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

autoconfirm status

do deleted edits count toward the 10 edits necessary for autoconfirmed? RHSN (talk) 23:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, and thanks for stopping in at the Teahouse. What do you mean by "deleted"? Generally, anything that shows up in your contributions counts. This means that edits that someone else has added to, modified, or reverted still count, since that's just another edit on top of yours. Your edit remains in that page's history, and so it shows up in your contributions as well. Edits made to deleted pages do not count—if you edit (or create) a page that is later deleted, those edits are removed from your contributions, and they don't count, as far as I'm aware.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 00:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I do mean edits to pages that are deleted... I created a user subpage and made a few edits to it, then requested speedy deletion of that page without realizing that those edits would no longer show in my contributions. Which was a mistake on my part. Thanks for your answer. --RHSN (talk) 01:10, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you're looking for something to do that will help you get some experience editing, you could try joining up with WikiProject Wikify or the Guild of Copy Editors. The first of those focuses on wikifying articles, e.g. improving formatting and adding wikilinks, while the second focuses on correcting errors in grammar, spelling, and style. In any case, you may find the Wikipedia Manual of Style helpful. It describes various stylistic rules and recommendations for editing, like which kind of spelling to use in an article ("colour" versus "color", etc). Thanks again for visiting the Teahouse!  dalahäst (let's talk!) 02:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My friendly suggestion to you, RHSN, is to not be in a rush to reach autoconfirmed status. It is really very good to gain some experience here by making minor but constructive improvements to the encyclopedia before moving on to bigger and more challenging things. That's my thought, at least. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of Shubh Film

Hello Everyone,

Today I tried to create a page for Shubh Film, which is the leading film production company in our state Chhattisgarh. As I have a keen interest in regional cinema I felt that it is important to have this information on Wikipedia as all film production houses are listed. Shubh Film has produces 3 all time hit movies of Chhattisgarhi Cinema. Though Chhattisgarh is not a very big state of India as compared with others, but that should not be a reason calling it "Non Significant". Shubh Film is a very popular production house of our state.

Please someone look into this and help me out...

Thanks in advance... . Simplify.buzz (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. Creating your first article can be tricky. Doing a bit of research first will greatly improve your chances for success. Notice that when the article on Shubh film was deleted, no one called the production company or the region "Non Significant." Instead, the reason given for deleting the article was that you had not indicated why the company was significant. Have a read of Wikipedia:Notability and you will see exactly what you need to do to show that a company is notable. If the company has produced hit movies that have been reviewed by the press in India and/or elsewhere, you should not have a problem finding reliable sources that will help you demonstrate notability. Also, I highly recommend reading Wikipedia:Your first article, which clearly spells out what you should and should not do in creating your first article. Finally, if you ask one of these administrators, he/she will place a copy of your deleted article in your userspace so you can work on improving it until it is "ready for prime time." Good luck, and don't hesitate to ask more questions if you have them! Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 20:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your reply, I have just followed your advice and asked an administrator to move the article to my user space. Now I will cite all reference from newspapers and other media. Onca again thank you.. Simplify.buzz (talk) 21:05, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We are at your service, my friend. Please let us know if you have any other questions. Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The high school project

Moved from Teahouse talk page hajatvrc @ 17:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Three questions: 1. If a beginner (me) wanted to work on the high school project is there a better way than looking at a good article (say Plano Senior High School) and imitating that?

2. In the category "notable alumni" for schools is notable defined to be "wiki-notable" = "has an wiki article about them"?

3. The template for HS does not include a slot for the website for the school's Foundation. a) should it and b) is there a way to put something in an infobox that there is not a slot for? Thank youPyramid43 (talk) 17:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pyramid and welcome to the Teahouse.
  1. If you're going to work on a high school article then looking at a Wikipedia:Good Article like Plano Senior is a great way to do it.
  2. Notable alumni should be wiki-notable in their own right, that means either they do have a wiki article about them or if not they would meet the notability criteria. If they already have an article, link to it. If they don't it's worth including a line or two and reference to establish why they are notable (this is a brief abstract of Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines#Alumni).
  3. The template to use is {{Infobox school}}. This template will support more than one website being listed by using both the parameter |url= and |website=, you can use text to differentiate between the school website and the foundation website. For example
{{Infobox school
|url= School {{url|example1.com}}
|website= Foundation {{url|example2.com}}
}}
Hope this is of some use to you. NtheP (talk) 18:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

article rejected PLease help

My article keeps been rejected. Can someone PLEASE tell me what I am doing wrong. Your help will be greatly appreciated. Heres the link to the article:

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Eli Levy Rubinstain. (Jennypatrizia (talk) 16:09, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. It looks like the reviewers are having trouble viewing your references and can't verify the statements made in the article or the notability of the subject. You might want to check out the referencing for beginners page for a guide on how to get started on correctly adding references to an article. References can be confusing at first, but once you get it the first time, it usually comes pretty easily after that. Topher385 (talk) 16:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jenny. Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry you've had such a rough time of it so far. The basic problem with the article you show us is that it does not demonstrate that Mr. Rubinstain meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. In other words, the article does not show that Mr. Rubinstain has received coverage in newspapers, magazines, books, TV, and/or other reliable sources. If you want this article to be approved, you will have to find reliable sources that talk about Mr. Rubinstain and demonstrate that he is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. One more note, it might help you to read Wikipedia's policies on encyclopedic style. That might help you word the article in a manner which will help it get approved. In the meantime, don't let these initial issues get you down. We all have to learn about editing when we start, and sometimes the process is a bit complicated. Thanks for helping to build Wikipedia! Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 16:34, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May I create a Cisco Portal?

On Wikipedia I noticed there were things called portals. But I also noticed we lacked a Cisco portal. I have asked if I may create Cisco pages. The answer apparently was yes. So I am asking if I may (with the help of anybody who is interested) to create a Wiki project Cisco and a Cisco Portal. ZSpeed (talk) 14:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, ZSpeed! If you wish to create WikiProject Cisco, it may be a good idea to see what others think before. The best way to do that is to go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals, which gives you the instructions for creating a WikiProject proposal. If enough people wish to join, which is usually between 6 and 12 users, then you can create a WikiProject using a skeleton by following the instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject. Brambleberry ☾of RC☽ 14:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for clearing that up.ZSpeed (talk) 14:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, that's what we do! Brambleberry ☾of RC☽ 14:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

drug rehab wiki

is drug rehab wiki a part of wikipedia? I ask this b/c it seems like there are duplicates re: specific subjects like love addiciton, gambling addiction for example. The articles that appear under drug rehab wiki are different than those appearing under wikipedia.

Also I have been unsuccessful in locating a link fm. wikipedia "drug rehab wiki". The only way i have been able to pull it up is by typing "drug rehab wiki" into the google engine. If they are 1 in the same then why do we have multiple articles appearing for the same topic & with similar info.?

Please help me. I'm confused. AddictionPsychologistFrank (talk) 14:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, AddictionPsychologistFrank, and welcome to the Teahouse. :) Drug rehab wiki is not affiliated with Wikipedia. Wiki is a generic term used by a lot of people. There's a recent post on how to tell when a site is connected to Wikipedia at the Wikimedia Foundation website. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict):Hey, AddictionPsychologistFrank and welcome to the Teahouse! The two wiki's have no relation other than the fact that Drug Rehab Wiki uses the software that was mostly developed for Wikipedia. Drug Rehab Wiki does not have the same rules as we do, such as their not using inline citations. This difference makes information found on Drug Rehab Wiki largely incompatible with Wikipedia, which would explain the differences in information. At Wikipedia we have a firm "No original research" policy that says there can be no claims without support from reputable sources in the form of citations. You can probably use information on Wikipedia to transfer over to Drug Rehab Wiki, but to do it the other way around you would have to find sources that support what you are trying to add. I do hope that this has answered your question. hajatvrc @ 14:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think Hajatvrc does a good job answering above. I only want to add one more note. You are always free to write articles on this subject (or improve existing ones) if you're interested in that area. Just be sure to cite your information with reliable sources, that are neutral. So, as an example for the field of drug issues, a government report on drug usage or a peer-reviewed paper on drug addictions is definitely preferable to .com website links. Best of luck and welcome to Wikipedia! Lord Roem (talk) 03:16, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How to write an article about an under-documented but significant topic.

Hello all. I recently joined, and after awhile of looking for uncovered topics, I realized there is little information on here about the early Kaypro computer games. This is significant to me because Kaypro was my first computer and I imagine I am not alone(there are plenty of people old like me). I own a Kaypro with its original games bundle and so I know what these games are like, who made them, etc from first hand knowledge. But when searching the internet, I found there was almost no indication these games ever existed. As I see wikipedia as the most sacred of information sources, I would love to contribute to it by assuring this information about Kaypro games isn't lost. But how do I cite sources if there seem to be none? I have personal proof of these things, because I own the original software, but is that enough to give the article legitimacy? Should I maybe write a webmaster of a reputable website asking them to put up this info so I can cite it? Any help appreciated. AntTche 13:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntonTchekhov (talk • contribs)

Hello, AntonTchekhov! I do not know where you can find these sources, but we do have a place called the Entertainment Reference Desk where you will find Wikipedians who are up on these things. The fact that you own the software is not enough to create articles about it. It is a good starting point, but in the end you have to find published sources. hajatvrc @ 14:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You also might consider creating a section in Kaypro's existing article here if you can't find enough reliable information about the games to warrant their own page. But, as hajatvrc mentioned above, the Reference Desk is likely your best choice for finding the sources you're looking for. Topher385 (talk) 14:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice Topher385 and Hajatvrc! I will try the Reference Desk. I was also wondering if taking my own pics of the game and uploading the screenshots would help? The title screens have publication dates, name of creators with full addresses. Does that add legitimacy? Thanks again! AntTche 03:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntonTchekhov (talk • contribs)

Hello again. You certainly can create screenshots of your games, but how you use them will depend on the current licenses of the games. If a game is not currently under a free license (which many old games are by now, so I would check), the image is subject to "fair use" policy which means it can only be used when it is absolutely educational, and not be used more often than it absolutely has to. On the other hand, if the software is under a free license, you have more leniency. For example, I created two of the screenshots at BZFlag (the first and third), and I was able to release these images under the the GNU Lesser General Public License (a copyleft free software license) because that is the license under which the game itself is released. Therefore those images can be used in galleries, etc. if anyone wishes. Also, Wikipedia's "Image use policy" requests (but does not require) that game screenshots are in the .png format. hajatvrc @ 03:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Though on a side note, the policy doesn't really mention screenshots that you take with a camera and not screenshot software on your computer, so your images probably will not have to be in .png. hajatvrc @ 03:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And now that I read the policy more closely, they will probably want it in .jpeg. hajatvrc @ 03:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that your topic is notable, AntonTchekhov, but it will take a lot of work to find and properly cite reliable sources. I owned a Radio Shack TRS-80 computer in the late 1970s, and it is very difficult to find online sources about this era of technology. There were plenty of decent sources available at the time, but most of those publications are in dusty paper archives and were never scanned and made available online. But paper sources are acceptable if you can find them and cite them properly. Here's an advertisement in InfoWorld in January, 1983, but ads are not independent or reliable sources. Perhaps you can find some sources by networking at websites such as old-computers.com or obsoletecomputermuseum.org. Keep looking, and good luck. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anton. Basic Google Books and New Archive search appear to find useful sources, such as <this> and <this>. You can also target once you know a particular game offered, e.g., <Kaypro "slot machine">. I tried a search at newspaperarchive.com (subscription only) and there are many hits but it is difficult finding any targeting the games. (I read a hysterical articles about the amazing and powerful 10 megabyte! hardrive included, only $1,795.) There are 265 hits at Old Fulton NY Postcards (free) searching Kaypro. Hope this helps. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If nothing else, it could be merged into the List of Pac-Man clones article, which has a (incomplete) section for such home computer clones. --MuZemike 21:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate all the help. The information about copyrights helped a lot in categorizing my screenshot during upload. Hopefully I did everything right. I think they are non-free fair use as I took the photos myself from my own computer and software which are my personal property. The screenshots also help confirm what company created the clone and when it was released as that info is displayed on the title screen of the game. I also really appreciate the links to google books, which I did not realize could be so helpful. I was actually able to find a 1985 computer mag here that mentions both CatChum and Ladder(another Kaypro game which someone else already put an article up about) so I was able to add refs to both my CatChum and the Ladder article(which did not have a ref either.) I would also like to create an article about the company that made these Kaypro games Yahoo Software(nothing to do with today's Yahoo of course) as it seems on first search there is no article about them and yet it seems they made quite a few games in their time.

Also, I will definitely add CatChum to the List of Pac-Man clones, thank you MuZemike! I have not been an editor here long but I am already enjoying it quite a bit. Thanks again! AntTche 07:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntonTchekhov (talk • contribs)

What tag do I use for outdated predictions of the future?

There's an article which quotes a source in 2009 talking about predictions for 2010. I'd like to add a tag to remind editors that this should be replaced with a more recent source that can confirm or deny whether the prediction came true, but I'm not sure what the tag to use. Any ideas? Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 12:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about {{out of date|date=August 2012}} ? Sionk (talk) 12:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sionk, that says the right thing, but it's made for the top of an article. Is there maybe a tag that fits the end of a sentence? Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 12:58, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see what you mean. Maybe {{update after}}, which is for inline with the text. WP:TC has most of the clean up tags listed, for future reference. Sionk (talk) 13:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that did the trick.[1] And thanks for the tip about WP:TC. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 13:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I created/translated the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mieczysław_Detyniecki from the spanish version. I did it based on an automatic translation. It is not perfect yet, but before putting even more work on it I would like to figure out the following. A wikiBOT found that there is another copy in the web (which is in theory impossible)! It turns out that somebody did a straight forward google translation of the spanish wikipedia page. It is rough that the note numbers are still in the text (but not the content), moreover the english does not make totally sense. How do I prove that there is no copyright issues here? Polish Art Student 12:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polish art student (talk • contribs)

Hello, Polish art student and welcome to Wikipedia. :) Thank you for doing that; this is an important way that we help disseminate the work done by volunteers around the world. This happens sometimes. You did the best thing to start - explaining what happened. Usually, it just takes a few minutes of investigation to determine which came first. I'm going to take a look and see what I can figure out. I'll be back and update this message once I have. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You did exactly the right thing by explaining what happened, and you are completely correct that the other website copied from the Spanish Wikipedia, but - I'm so sorry - it turns out that the Spanish Wikipedia article was created as a copy-paste of content hosted by the National Museum Foundation. :( We will have to rewrite the article anyway. Just to make sure that we will be left with at least some basic information on him, I've started that at Talk:Mieczysław Detyniecki/Temp.
One thing I did notice is that you used the Spanish Wikipedia as a reference. While we love translations from other projects, we can't actually rely on them to be accurate and we can't cite them as sources. :) Because projects like Wikipedia can be edited by anybody, we don't regard them as "reliable." It can be a good idea to find independent sources when you do translations or, at least, to rely on the sources the original article uses.
I hope you won't find this too discouraging. This kind of thing is very rare. It's not your fault at all, of course, that the editor on the Spanish project copied the content from somewhere else. :( --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to insert a little note here—translating from other Wikipedias is not only allowed, but encouraged; we have templates specifically for the purpose of requesting this, {{Expand language}}. Generally, the sources from the translated article can be used to source the translation as well.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 05:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I find this more than discouraging. I translate an article, to "improve" wikipedia. And as a result an article is erased! By the way, who tells you that the text in the webpage you are pointing to is not a copy from wikipedia? From what I remember (it is not anymore online), it was more complete! Complete not only the text, but also with lots of links to other pages: all this is lost!
Based on the current experience, I did the following test. I took a random wikipedia page (arithmetic mean). I took the first paragraph google it. It turns out that it "already" exists in tons (2440 to be exact) pages. Does it mean that wikipedia should erase it, because of copyright issues?
I am very sorry that you're finding it discouraging. The article isn't erased because of what you did; as Hut8.5 explained to you a few days ago, the problem is what somebody else did. There's no doubt that they copied from the other source. Beside the fact that it is a reliable source, it had dating and formatting that was removed in the second edit on Spanish Wikipedia. Very probably, what you found with the random page you tested are "mirrors" of Wikipedia like the site you originally correctly identified as having copied from us. This is okay, although they are supposed to give us credit, because our content is liberally licensed. But we just can't keep material that has been copied from other sites unless we can prove that they are compatibly licensed or public domain. These are core policies meant to keep us legal, and we have to comply. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Polish art student! A good thing has happened here, since we have removed a copyright violation (copyvio) the encyclopaedia has improved! The sooner these are removed the sooner we can start a legal properly licensed page on the subject. So thank you for your work here, and of course thank you to Moonriddengirl, one of our top cpoyvio fixers. We move on and up. Rich Farmbrough, 15:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

How do I add/edit articles?

So, I am new to wikipedia and I was wondering, how do I edit an article? I saw something that was incorrect so I wanted to change it, but could not figure out how. Can you please explain? Secondly, I was wondering how to add more articles to a specific topic? What do i do if there's more that I want to add to a topic? (article) Thank you. I really appreciate the help! 58.168.229.1 (talk) 09:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, and thanks for dropping in at the Teahouse. To edit an article, simply click the edit link at the very top of the page. This will take you to the editing page, where you can see the text and any wiki markup code in that page. From there, you can make whatever edits you see fit. Fill in an edit summary to briefly describe the changes you made, and mark the minor edit box if your edit was for something small, like correcting spelling errors or adding formatting. It's a good idea to click the preview button before you save the page, so that you can see how your edits will look, and if anything shows up wrong, you can fix it before saving. Once everything looks right, click the save button to save your changes.
By the way, be bold when editing, and don't worry about making mistakes. The software that Wikipedia runs on has features that allow you, or anyone else, to restore a previous version of a page. If you do mess something up on accident, it's easy to put things back and start over.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 10:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And also, if an article is semi-protected (with a silver padlock in the top-right corner, like here), that means only registered users that are confirmed (after a few days editing and 10 edits) are allowed to edit. If there is a golden padlock (like here) means only administrators can edit the page. You can read Wikipedia's protection policy for more details. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 11:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have to start a WP

But how will I start a WP?

i.e What all things should I do to get it clearly started?Unpresidented welcome to almaat chat 04:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'll be happy to help - however what are you looking for help with? Could you be a bit more specific? Are you trying to create a new page? Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 05:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've created a new page, but I need to know if I have register it somewhere, or get permission from somebody, or something like that.Unpresidented welcome to almaat chat 05:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Creating a WikiProject isn't my area of expertise, but this page has quite a few tips. Any other hosts wish to chime in here? Theopolisme TALK 05:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few important points on that page that can be summarized easily. Before starting a new WikiProject:
  • make sure there isn't another project, or proposal for one, that does the same thing as what you're planning
  • once you've done that, look for existing WikiProjects that are related to the topic of the one you want to start; if these exist, consider joining them and working on your idea as a sub-project
  • if that doesn't help, make sure your project idea doesn't cover too many or too few topics (e.g. it's not too general or specific)
  • before actually starting your project, look around for other people who would be interested in helping
That seems to be the TL;DR version of the page, anyway.  dalahäst (let's talk!) 10:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see you registered your proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Puntland back in May but apart from yourself there appear only to be two other interested editors. While there is nothing stops you having the project you might want to ask yourself if there is any point. Projects are there to co-ordinate effort, if there are only a small number of you, do you need a project page to do that or can you liaise via user or article talk pages? How much effort will go into maintaining the project page rather than working on articles? That said the converse argument is that the level of support for the proposal is almost irrelevant as the existence of the project page may attract more editors who wouldn't necessarily be aware of the existence of the proposals page. A bit of a Chicken or the egg situation. Personally I would be bold and if you have already set the project page up, go forward with it. NtheP (talk) 10:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TOC question

Hello hosts and thank you for being here - very comforting! And thanks to Sarah for her invite. My question is - I recently added the section “Cast” to the movie Borderland article. While my interests are more in keeping with history and other subjects, I happened to discover I could contribute to this page. In order to learn I thought I’d go for it. Well,,, I am now trying to fix the TOC, which automatically changed on it’s own. I have explained it all on the talk page, which I’ll attempt to link for you here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Borderland_(film)

I have studied the editing pages for a while now and am unable to figure this one out. Does anyone have the time to help me with this please? If the link I provided doesn't work - should I have left the http off? And can I link to the specific section of that talk page? Multi-layered question for you! Thank you for any assistance you can provide!Albeit27 (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! My link works. So the latter questions at the end of post can be disregarded. :) Albeit27 (talk) 01:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Albeit27! That problem is easily fixable, and if you go to the page now you will see that I fixed it! There are three "levels" of section headings. The largest looks like this when you code it: =Big header text=. The next level looks liek this: ==Mid-level header text==. The smallest looks like this: ===Small header text===. Usually, in articles we only use the mid-level and small headers. When you added the "Cast" header, you only put one = on each side of the text, which created a large header. This caused the mid-level headers below it to be counted as "subheaders" of the Cast header. Therefore, the TOC indented them and labelled them 2.1 and 2.2. All that needed to be done was to add an extra = on each side of the header! Thanks for your contributions and this question.
Regarding linking, you certainly can link to a specific section. If the title of the page is "Borderland (film)" and the section you want to link to is "Cast", you would code that link like this:
[[Borderland (film)#Cast]]
You will notice that the page title and the section title are separated by a "#". When you save the code, it will show up on the page like this: Borderland (film)#Cast, and will link right to the section. If you have any other questions, ask away! hajatvrc @ 01:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much hajatvrc. You provided easy and concise instructions! It all makes sense now. And I appreciate you fixing the TOC too. I hope you have a nice weekend! Albeit27 (talk) 06:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note for completeness, the header levels go down a few more than three. Rich Farmbrough, 03:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Thank you Rich Farmbrough! I appreciate your thoroughness and helping me to understand my way around! Please read the last paragraph I've posted below.
Howdy, Albeit27. One more point to add about the internal links is that you the text viewed by readers can be changed. For example, the link to Borderland (film)#Cast can be edited as "[[Borderland (film)#Cast|the cast]]" so that it just shows the cast when you refer to it in another article. Use a pipe "|" inside the wikilink to separate the link and the words you want displayed. Hope that helps with your editing projects, DocTree (talk) 03:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello DocTree! Thanks so very much. In the next couple of days I plan on contributing to Julius Caesar's page under the section "Legend and Legacy" - so excited. And I hope to completely uplift the "Ancient Roman Slavery" article, which has multiple issues (3 tags, one saying it needs to be completely rewritten). It'll be a little while before that's complete - reading books at home. Meanwhile I'll con't to gnome around correcting grammar, sentence structure, etc. (ummm, not that my writing is perfect).
Thanks to you, Sarah, hajatvrc, Rich Farmbrough, and my mentor (the list is growing!) and all others who have been so kind to newbies - the atmosphere at Wikipedia is nourishing at it's best! And I heard 93% of editors are male??? lol, well you (mostly) men have been great! I volunteered at craigslist's help board for a while - because I knew their system, but I set out to learn their system (to some extent) because the innocent people coming on-line for help were treated so horribly, even cruelly, that I wanted to show understanding and some compassion. I have decided this is a better and more positive place to spend my net time. Again, thanks to all. Your kindness to a stranger won't be forgotten. I'll include other passerby's here when saying please remind the Teahouse community how appreciative we newbies are. Well, when did I become so chatty? lol Take care all. Albeit27 (talk) 07:51, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient inline citations

Hi there --

Could someone please offer up their expertise on citations? I have several citation for the Pendleton Whisky page, but I still have a flag up. This is what the flag says:

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (May 2012)

Could someone help me determine what I should do next?

Thanks!Cvargas1129 (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cvargas, hi, welcome to the Teahouse. Tags like the one you mention aren't automatically added or removed. So if you think a tag is no longer applicable, you are free to remove it. I've removed the tag now as the additions you made are very positive and remove the issue the tag highlighted. NtheP (talk) 20:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, thanks for the help NtheP (talk! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvargas1129 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteering

Hi I have been told that volunteer photo editors are used by Wikipedia? I have over ten years working with photoshop/ gimp etc and also teach image editing and restoration. If possible I would like to offer these skills to Wikipedia.

Stephen 86.22.7.197 (talk) 07:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stephen! That would be great! Wikipedia always needs people with good photoshop skills. You'll need to create an account, as accounts will be needed to upload images, but to find things that need doing the Wikipedia:Graphic Lab is always after skilled volunteers. - Bilby (talk) 07:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Stephen, thanks for any help you can give! I'd like to point you out to com:commons:Graphics Lab as well. Your assistance would be useful for both projects. Ryan Vesey Review me! 18:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the correct link: commons:commons:Graphics Lab. You might help at Commons:Category:Images for cleanup too. -- Common Good (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that, I should have used a preview. Ryan Vesey Review me! 18:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, so taking your advice I created an account. However I'm finding navigating my way round very difficult. For instance, where do I go to find images needing some digital TLC? Then after downloading then retouching how is the retouched image placed back on its correct wiki page, it it automatic? I did manage to somewhat confirm the authenticity of a photograph of Edison, Ford and Firestone that a request had been submitted for. However to be honest I'm not sure if I clicked on the right links to submit said appraisal. --Ceepin1826 (talk) 10:01, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ceepin. It can be very difficult at first and your offer is very generous. One place to find requests for fixing/retouching photographs is at following link (I suggest bookmarking it with your browser): Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop.

Maybe I can boil a few things down. The first thing to know is that there are actually two websites often involved with image use here: This site (the English Wikipedia), and our sister site, the Wikimedia Commons, a free media repository. It can be very confusing in that many of the images seen and used here are actually hosted at the Commons (though some are local), and when you click on one of those images here, you are not actually seeing where the image is hosted. So my first tip is this:

  • Anytime you come across an image here, after you click on it if you see this symbol , the image is actually at the Commons. When that is the case, there will be some text just below the image that says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below." The phrase "description page" will be a blue-colored link to the actual image page at the Commons. Now what to do?
  1. Click on that link!
  2. Bookmark that page or keep it open because that is where you will be re-uploading the image after you work your image manipulation magic offline.
  3. Download the image, work your magic, then go back to the page where the image is hosted. Look for a link near the bottom of the page that says: "Upload a new version of this file" (you can use your browser's find function to find this text – on most computers, accessed by clicking Ctrl+F).
  4. Click that link.
  5. On the resulting page, click on the button marked Browse which should then access your computer and allow you to choose the image you've fixed and saved.
  6. Briefly describe what you've done in the "File changes" field, e.g., "removed watermark, per request".
  7. Click on the button marked Upload file
  8. Voila.
There's much more I could say but I don't want to overwhelm you. Maybe just start with removing the watermarks from the photographs on the page I linked at the beginning, following the steps I've laid out, which I hope are clear and correct. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Fuhghettaboutit Ok, I managed to follow your instruction to find and download an image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albertus_Soegijapranata) needing attention. I carried out the requested work, saved it and then ? I could not find, even using Ctrl+F, anything that said "Upload a new version of this file" I did try, on the left side of the page, in the toolbox, "upload file" but soon realised I'd boobed! So I've got an image all dressed up, but with nowhere to go! Help.--Ceepin1826 (talk) 08:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ceepin1826
  1. If the image is based here, as for example File:Sogijapranata Nasional 24 July 1963.jpg is, then the "Upload a new version of this file" link is a few inches from the bottom of the page.
  2. If the image is based at the Commons project, as for example File:Soegijapranata Nasional 8 Nov 1960 p1.jpg is (see the box under the image, that says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below.") then you need to click through to that location (the description page there). But first, make sure that you're logged in at that project, by clicking Special:MergeAccount (This will create a Unified login, thereby automatically logging you in at all the Wikimedia Foundation projects). Once you're logged in, the "Upload a new version of this file" link will appear. (ctrl+F for it).
Hope that helps. -- Quiddity (talk) 03:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=506655493"