Wikipedia:Teahouse

A lad insane, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Philosopher Seeking Sponser

Hello everyone, and happy New Year!

I am a philosopher and have spent my life invested into the most difficult subjects of our human condition. This year was spent practically explaining the theory behind our social problems historical development, and how we could flip everything by creating quality free education, distributed on the Internet.

I do not separate my "personal" and "professional" life. I am alone in this life and spend it travelling the world, studying society both theoretically and practically while standing outside of it. I then create films that attempt to receptively reinterpret wisdom into the actions of our society's individuals. I then distribute these films for free utilising most media distribution formats including many sources on the Internet.

I would assert that I am more closely connected with my work than anyone else in the world because my heart is all in it. I live the life of an anchorite. And when the relational qualities of the dots of our constellations become clear to me, I am thrown into inspiration and then very quickly create very moving productions that will stand the test of time.

My work is all about me. But I have conditioned my psychology over my life to be all about our human condition. Thus from the reflections of me, if the work is examined in its entirety, we come to learn that my work is all about each and every one of us. I have spent my life attempting to remove bias from my thought process. And I closely examine each and every detail within my existence and contemplate different methods to understand and interpret this "reality" in front of me.

I am seeking an editor that has experience in philosophy to work with me to be able to create the type of articles that Wikipedia desires. I have a great amount of work but have really only started creating professional audiovisual productions recently, so my old work would not need articles on them, but may be linked as references. I will not have a problem finding additional references for the articles because that is all included in my work anyway: I am a philosophy teacher.

Me and all of my productions that I would add to this site are EXTREMELY noteworthy and will one day be in physical encyclopaedias. I have given my life entirely to all of my fellow human brothers and sisters and one day they will realise what I have done.

I do want to mention that my work is extremely controversial according to our modern society. But when we shine light over the ghosts we always find that they were only sheets draped over a chair. Dionysus is my method and Love is my game.

Thanks!

Wendell Charles NeSmith www.imdb.com/name/nm5192719/

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz-0aaji0nU

Wcnesmith (talk) 00:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wcnesmith, there is actually a Wikipedia Philosophy Project that exists, so why not join it and find out if there are any tasks you can help with. Bear in mind Wikipedia isn't really the place to promote your own work. That would represent a conflict of interest, which is strongly discouraged. However, if your work is widely known and has been discussed in reliable secondary sources, maybe you can find someone at the WikiProject who can give you specific advice. Good luck! Sionk (talk) 00:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Problem editing the first time

I can see how to write new paragraphs but I can't understand how you edit what is written on a Wiki page. When I click edit (logged in) I don't get the text to edit, just a list of other things. I seem to be missing something very basic in the process Heritage specialist (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Heritage specialist, welcome to the Teahouse. Click the "Edit" tab at top of the page to edit the whole page. If you click the "edit" link to the right of a section heading then you only edit that section. See more at Help:Editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I just tried again before you answered and this time the text has come up ok. Now I am struggling with how to add refs, but I will get there in the end! It does not seem very intuitive but I will learn!

Heritage specialist (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

References can be tricky. You can see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and ask here if you have problems. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

   I have added a ref but keep getting error messages. Can you check for me to see what I am doing wrong? It's on the Old Boma page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Boma page 98.204.26.105 (talk) 00:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

why is it so hard to suggest new topic ? more user friendly ?

why not ?

suggest - PAIMI federal law: protection and advocacy for mental ill individuals act 50.79.41.93 (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! I did a bit of research and found quite a few reliable sources regarding Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (the PAIMI Act), so if you'd like to work on that article, I'd say go for it! Regarding your broader question, "why is it so hard to suggest new topic?", topics need to be notable and there need to be reliable sources to support it. There are a lot of topics still missing, and a lot which are already created but need more information. I hope you'll enjoy editing wikipedia, and, if you wish, create a user account. Hope this was helpful. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Note, you will not be able to create that article yourself unless you create an account. Otherwise, you'll have to go through Articles for Creation which is a long and grueling process with a huge backlog. One more reason to create an account :) gwickwire^talk_edits 22:13, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I have added a ref but keep getting error messages. Can you check for me to see what I am doing wrong? It's on the Old Boma page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Boma 98.204.26.105 (talk) 00:41, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

About Lies Marcus Antonius Felix (talk) 21:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

How does wikipedia guess if someone doesn't tell lies? Marcus Antonius Felix (talk) 21:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Marcus. It hard to make out from your question what you're getting at. Can you be more specific in your concern, maybe give us an example of what you mean? My best guess is that you're questioning how we know whether content added to articles isn't just made up and incorrect. A check on false addition of content to articles is our verifiability requirements. When content is added it should cited to reliable sources which corroborate the information added. In practice not everything that is verifiable (able to be checked against sources) is verified by a source actually cited for the content, but the requirement works out to a great degree.

There are lots of unsourced articles and they are often flagged as being unsourced. The less an article is sourced, the less we trust its veracity. On the other end, in order to gain recognition as a good article or a great article, citations are required, among other matters, and the process of getting articles up to snuff results in scrutiny from peers. An article that is full of lies would not pass cursory review. Also, people who know something about a topic (and those interested in a certain topic will often visit topics they know) will immediately see things are incorrect from their own knowledge of the topic and once they bring problems to light, scrutiny over deliberate lies would result in more examination of a user's entire set of edits.

There's other factors. Yes, there could be evil geniuses out there whose mission is to fool everyone with bad content, but most people aren't like that. A person who sits down and engages in a scholarly practice of writing well developed content, spending hour upon hour finding and citing sources supposedly backing their edits, will most often be exactly what they appear to be, and not an evil genius whose mission is to waste their time in such a a subtle, time consuming, easily discovered way for little nefarious benefit. It's no a perfect system but it does work out so that, at least as to well developed, highly sourced articles, Wikipedia has a pretty good track record of getting it right.

See also: Wikipedia:Assessing reliability and Reliability of Wikipedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

rejected revisions

I just got a notice that my changes regarding male tennis players were considered unhelpful and removed. I have absolutely no idea what this is talking about. I have, to my knowledge, never been a wikipedia editor. Can I assume this is an error? 24.178.6.142 (talk) 20:47, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! IP addresses often are shared, so if you've never edited Wikipedia, it likely applies to someone else who has your same IP address who did something unhelpful. If you'd like to contribute to the project, I'd strongly recommend creating an account, so you avoid irrelevant notices such as the one you just received. Thanks for dropping by! Go Phightins! 20:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

editing with footnotes

Hello! This is my first and I look forward to getting more involved in projects. I played in my sandbox and have submitted AND been rejected AND corrected. However, I am so close to completion. If someone could look at the article and tell me what I am doing wrong. It would be extremely appreciated. I know that it is a simple fix, but I am doing something wrong in the referencing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Badding_Rug

L,S,A. 18:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by L-S-AZZAR (talk • contribs)

I think the article looks good enough to go now. How about submitting it and seeing if its accepted?

Cheers!! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, L-S! Your article is looking good. The only problem I see is the {{{15}}} in the last sentence and the redlinks in the article. The only children's hospital I could find in Oakland is Children's Hospital Oakland. The department store actually has an article on Wikipedia under a slightly different name. If you want to link to it and still call it a department store, you would type this:[[Breuners Home Furnishings|Breuners Department Store]]. One last thing...one of your reviewers mentioned to you about the use of titles. We don't use them. You should clean that up. We don't follow the tradition of the time. If the Museum's name is the Mrs. Dwight D. Eisenhower Museum, that would be ok (but I find no reference on the internet to such a museum in NYC). But you do need to find and use all the rest of those ladies whole names. Commenting that you are writing in the style of the time is unencyclopedic. You article is very close to ready. Good luck! Gtwfan52 (talk) 19:50, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

How to create a template on Wikipedia

I want to make a template on Wikipedia, i shall be grateful very much to anyone who will guide me. Sanpatrick81 (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Sanpatrick, You can request that templates be created at Wikipedia:Requested templates. ANother place to make a request would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates. For general help pages on how to write a template, please see Help:A quick guide to templates, Help:Template and Help:Magic words. What is it you are trying to create as in many cases there is already an existing template that will do the trick. NtheP (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Overlay does not seem to work properly anymore

This template is used quite a bit on Wikipedia, and editing the article Temple of the Tooth which did not display properly, I realized that the template itself has an issue.

Have a look at Template:Overlay and the examples, they do not display legends properly.

The author of the template Overlay article does not seem to be active anymore.

I have added two entries on the talk page Template_talk:Overlay.

Vincent Lextrait (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, interesting one, I've raised it at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). NtheP (talk) 15:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Ok, the people who hang out at VPT have fixed it. Thanks for pointing it out, Vincent. NtheP (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Is The Sun Star and a book reliable sources?

Im writing this article and it has been declined twice already. I used reliable sources like a book on moulding and casting (author: Nick Brooks), and a local newspaper in the Philippines (The Sun Star) but it still got rejected. Please help...

lifecastingph 13:50, 30 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeiarobin (talk • contribs)

Hello Aeiarobin. welcome to the tea house. Neither of the two references given relate to the company. One of them is about breastfeeding. There is a long list of external links which fail our policy on external links. I do not see any indication that this company is notable for Wikipedia. --Charles (talk) 14:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello and Welcome to the Wikipedia Teahouse. Wikipedia has some very strict guidelines related to Notability of content, especially companies. While we allow companies to have their articles on Wikipedia, they must be backed up by atleast one reliable, independant secondary source. Which means atleast one source that you add must be someone who can be trusted, like a local newspaper, or a journal; and that they MUST be speaking directly about the company [Not mention it as a sidenote in another article]. For example, this link would be a good secondary source for Coca Cola, but not for "The Atlanta Beard & Moustache Competition". Also note that a secondary source means it cannot be something created by the company itself - So the facebook page does not count; but an article in a newspaper does count.

Hope this helps, and happy editing at Wikipedia!

Cheers and Happy holidays!!! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

What references are reliable?

Hi, I'm starting to write this article and I found most of my information on their official website. Is an official website a reliable source or just an external link? Would this website be a better source? Also, about how many reliable sources do I need? I'm sorry for all the questions. Thanks. JHUbal27 (talk) 07:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• Hello JHUbal27, good to see you again. You should really read the guidelines to reliable sources, but let me try to sum up the basic idea for you in a few words. We're basically looking for information where at least one person has done some level of fact checking. Broadly speaking (and there are exceptions) we consider newspapers, magazines and books to be reliable because there are disinterested writers and editors involved. Blogs, home pages and press releases don't have disinterested editors and so we don't consider them to be reliable. Thus, to answer your question, the first website isn't reliable because it is put up by the company, and the second website isn't reliable because they've just reprinted a press release.

There are many nuances here—I'd consider the company website to be reliable for uncontroversial facts like the company's mailing address—and the documentation covers most of those kinds of cases that you'll run into.

As to how many reliable sources are needed: it depends, but if you can't scare up at least three independent reliable sources then you're going to have a hard time arguing that your subject is notable. You may be able to make that argument, but it's not going to be an easy one.

Hope that helps! GaramondLethe 08:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. JHUbal27 (talk) 16:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

starting an article

Hello Teahouse, I have editing experience but am an article originator rookie, and am wondering if the Article Wizard is a safe haven to build an article over time. I will be writing one with appropriate references and don't want anyone making rash decisions about the article's worth for Wikipedia until it is ready to go live. My impression of the Sandbox from the descriptions is that there is always someone looking over your shoulder poised to hit delete, so I think the Article Wizard is best, yet am seeking advice. Is crafting the article in Word a better route, so as to submit in complete form? Please advise.

Thanks Wordcraft (talk) 07:38, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wordcraft and welcome to the Teahouse! The Article Wizard is a great place to start a new article, and as long as you don't submit it for review, it won't be thoroughly checked. However, some users, such as myself, frequently check the recent contributions across Wikipedia (for vandalism, among other things), so someone may happen to find your submission. But rest assured it won't be deleted, unless it is a major issue, such as vandalism or a copyright violation. I can assure you that your draft will be safe there, but keep in mind that it can still be edited by other users (which are almost always helpful ). If you need any help with your draft, feel free to ask here. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 08:01, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• (ec) Hello Wordcraft, and thanks for dropping in. I don't have any experience with the Article Wizard, but I can tell you that your sandbox will probably be left alone. That doesn't mean you can upload anything at all there, of course, but I have several future articles incubating in my own sandbox that are nowhere close to being complete and I haven't heard any complaints. Taking a look at the wizard I think it would be more appropriate for relatively simple articles and will prevent you from making several basic mistakes. If you want to make something a little more complicated, then using the sandbox will give you some more time to get it into shape as well as let you have other people take a look before it goes "live". Either way should work well, but given your concerns I'd recommend the sandbox. GaramondLethe 08:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Querying the Wikipedia database

Hi - is it possible to write queries against the database to find, say, all the article titles for migratory birds? I have SQL experience but don't know where to start. Thanks, Tod71.212.97.129 (talk) 04:26, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia!

We don't generally allow people to run queries against the live production Wikimedia databases, for obvious reasons. However, there are a couple options:

• Wikipedia has an Application Programming Interface (documentation). You can find it at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php. With the right queries, you can get all of the information you would need.
• Toolserver (which replicates Wikipedia's databases) runs a query service. To request a query be run, follow the instructions on this page.
• I can run a query for you. Just drop me a line at User talk:Matthewrbowker with the details of the request, and I can run it against a copy of the database I have access too.

Hope that answers your question. Feel free to reply with any more questions. ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Make a comment!} 04:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, because, as Matthew says there is a reluctance to run sql or other queries against the database, there is an extensive categorization scheme in place across wikipedia. As it is manually maintained there are bound to be numerous examples missed but Category:Migratory birds (Western hemisphere) and Category:Migratory birds (Eastern hemisphere) might be good places to start your search. NtheP (talk) 13:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Writing a template

Hi. Can someone tell me where to go? I want technical help in writing a new template.
kcylsnavS{^screech_harrass} 20:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Svanslyck. You can request that templates be written and ask for assistance with one you're working on at Wikipedia:Requested templates. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates might also be a good place to get the ear of a template guru. For general help pages on how to write a template, please see Help:A quick guide to templates, Help:Template, m:Help:Advanced templates and Help:Magic words. It might not hurt if you detailed the problem you are having here though. Someone might be able to help. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:46, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Hi there!

I created a new article, (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rank Uiller), but it was rejected due the reliable sources issue. I have two questions about that. 1.- Is the external link that appear on the page, valid? 2.- Is the References section mandatory on each article?

Thanks. Happy new year! Regards, Zoe. Zoepe (talk) 17:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Zoe, hi, welcome to the Teahouse and happy new year to you to. The external link is valid as an external link but it's not a reliable source as it's not independent of the subject. So at the moment your article has no sources at all and as a biography of a living person it will not be accepted without at least one source, so to answer your second question - yes a references section is mandatory especially for biographies. What you are after is sources about him but not by him and these need to be from reputable sources like newspapers, art magazines, reviews of his exhibitions and the like. I have to say that a quick Google search isn't showing too much but I've only looked at English language sources not Spanish ones. NtheP (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Please, tell me !

Please,tell me how to add a photo to the article. If you can give me the tutorial video,please! I really really thanks to you :) DaFaJi (talk) 06:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

question moved to top of page. NtheP (talk) 13:12, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I tend to be a rather boring curmudgeon, so I am unaware of any videos, but that's not to say there aren't any, perhaps another host could help us out if there are...though adding a picture isn't that difficult. First you need to make sure the image in question has been uploaded either directly to Wikipedia, or to the [commons.wikimedia.org Wikimedia Commons]. Once you find the image there, you'll want to copy (or memorize) everything after "File:". In the article you want to add the image to, click on the icon in the editing interface that looks like a little picture of, I don't know, a sunset or something of the like. Once you do so, there will be a popup to put the name of the image, and the caption you'd like to include. If you add a caption, remember not to use ending punctuation. I hope this helps, perhaps a non-curmudgeon host is aware of a video, I am not. Happy editing! Go Phightins! 14:10, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey thanks:) i wanna try this. it really really helped. And thanks again. DaFaJi (talk) 08:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Great! Happy editing! Go Phightins! 14:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Just in case you are still interested, there is a Video here. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:22, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Photo Editing

I uploaded a photo on wiki but it's name has changed . Why an how did it happen? The same file has been redirected.Alhosniomani20 (talk) 11:06, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The reason for the rename is given in the edit summary in the picture's history- David Biddulph (talk) 11:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

April Fool's

Is it true that on April Fool's day, one can randomly nominate any random page on Wikipedia for deletion, in the name of fun? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 08:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Bonkers. I am not sure about that, but anyone can nominate a User for deletion. I am going to nominate you. April Fools!  :) Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:01, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

HAHA, but it's not April! :) Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 09:04, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

For further context and pranks pulled in years past, please see WP:APRIL and Category:Wikipedia April Fools' Day

Traditionally, we try to avoid impacting the readers, so most jokes happen "behind the scenes" at places like WP:ANI and WP:AFD. Users have retired, disappeared, changed their names, and the like. The strangest, randomest stuff has been nominated for AfD (who needs the Earth, anyway?), and well-known editors SPIed (e.g. Jimbo Wales). But the rule is, keep it out of the reader's way.

Hope I cleared things up! Feel free to reply with any other questions. ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Make a comment!} 10:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Gee, thanks! Can't wait for next April. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 10:03, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Any tips on assessing an article?

I have read my talk page, and I received large amounts of messages saying that I should assess this article. any tips? :) Ianlopez12 (talk) 07:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Please see the criteria here. Some of the wikiprojects may have slightly different versions of this, so clicking on the link at the talk page will let you know this. Basically stub, start, C, and B are just based on your assessment. A GA rating has a formal set of criteria that needs to be met, and an FA rating can only be obtained from going through the FAC process. An A rating is the highest rating other than FA, Featured Article. Apteva (talk) 08:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Ian. I am kinda confused here. The only request for assessment I saw on your talk page was for Jehovah's Witnesses practices. If that is the article you are talking about, I would suggest you ask for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity. If that isn't it, please let us know! Gtwfan52 (talk) 08:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for the help. Yes, correction, the only one. Ian Raphael Lopez  :) (talk) 08:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, one more question. Is there any time deadline in assesing an article? Thank you Ian Raphael Lopez  :) (talk) 08:31, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

How do I remove a structure banner?

Greetings... I've revised an article that has a banner reading: This section may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines. Please help by editing the article to make improvements to the overall structure. (November 2012) How do I either remove or petition to remove the banner now? Thanks very much and Happy New Year! Misssarta (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Misssarta. If you have fixed the problem you can boldly remove the banner. If other editors disagree and put it back you should then discuss what is needed on the article talkpage.--Charles (talk) 21:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Misssarta, welcome! If you provide a link to us, I can take a look at exactly why the tag is on the article. However, unless you fix the issue described by the tag, it can't be removed. It's probably nothing that is hard to fix, just removing the tag may get some other editors to be less-than-happy with you. I'll take a look if you can give me a link. gwickwire^talk_edits 22:41, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps worth guessing at Chuck Philips (in which case the tag was added more recently than any edits by the OP)? - David Biddulph (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Zack Norman

Hello there! I wrote an article on actor Zack Norman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Zack_Norman), which has been rejected twice because my reference sources (primarily the Internet Movie Database) didn't meet Wikipedia requirements for verification. So I had a quick question: does Wikipedia consider the New York Times website to be a reliable reference source? Because, for example, if you go to http://movies.nytimes.com/person/52994/Zack-Norman/filmography many of Zack Norman's film roles are listed. So could I just cite that url as verification for his accomplishments as an American film character actor? Or would I need to cite a separate url for each role, i.e.: http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/41997/Romancing-the-Stone/cast for his performance in Romanicing the Stone? If you could let me know if this would be acceptable, that would be a huge help, because then I could just replace the reference footnotes where necessary, redo the layout according to Wiki guidelines, and ... is there something I'm forgetting? There's certainly no conflict of interest, as I am not associated with Mr. Norman in any way. I'm just a writer with an interest in submitting articles to Wikipedia, and chose Zack Norman as my first article subject simply because he's not yet represented there and seems like he should be. I look forward to your response, and Happy New Year! All the best, Matthew WeissMatzohboy (talk) 21:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Matzohboy. Welcome. Yes the New York Times is a reliable source. I recommend using the detailed references for the various roles, adding them as inline citations.--Charles (talk) 21:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Matthew, welcome to the Teahouse. The NYT is a reliable source so you can us it. If it covers all his films you can just cite it once but if there are roles it doesn't list which you have other sources for you would need to use the NYT cite against each role it lists. if you do this to keep the typing down you can use the named reference trick so it would go something like this

*Role 1<ref name="NYT">http://movies.nytimes.com/person/52994/Zack-Norman/filmography</ref>
*Role 2<ref name="Somewhere else"> made up URL </ref>
*Role 3<ref name="NYT"/>
*Role 4<ref name="NYT"/>
*etc

== References ==

{{reflist}}

gives

Hope this helps. NtheP (talk) 22:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll get right on it! Thank you both so much.Matzohboy (talk) 00:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Is a Wikipedia article a reliable source?

Is it okay for an article to use another Wikipedia article as a source? Would it be considered reliable? Or does it depend on the article? Koopatrev (talk) 11:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Koopatrev and welcome. Well, long story short, the answer is no. I would recommend you reading WP:Identifying reliable sources. Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:06, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

While Bonkers is right, one thing you can do is, if you're looking to cite something from another article, you can look at the source provided in the other article and cite that in the article you're working on. Go Phightins! 20:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Koopatrev! Although you cannot use wikipedia as a source for a fact, there is absolutely nothing wrong (and many things right!) with dropping a Wikilink to another article into the article you are working on for information. For example, if you were working on an article about CNN, you could certainly put "Ted Turner" in as a Wikilink for information. Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

posting

Hello community... thsi would be my first time to want to (a) correct and (b) post a new page. Specifically somebody has posted erroneous information on an airline company that is now out of business (flyAruba), but mixing up with this our company website, and in and effort to create a posting on our company (Aruba Airlines) i now see messages indicating this is unverified or other such comments and subject to deletion. How do i simply correct the erroneous poster information and post an intro of our company, that can be build on...

thank you for any inputs

Trevor Sadler 201.229.125.182 (talk) 01:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! One thing you need to be very careful about is editing pages in which you have a conflict of interest, such as this airline company. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so feel free to correct any errors you see, but also be sure to add a reliable source to back up what you're saying. Otherwise, it may be contested and removed. I hope this helps, and Happy New Year to you. Go Phightins! 01:55, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I hope I've done the right thing trying to help here. It's not my area of expertise, but it sounded like an unocnnected editor could assist. I have brushed-up both pages to remove dead links, removed some English errors and make the distinction between the failed airline and the still-extant one clearer. If someone with the privileges to do so can move Fly Aruba Airlines to Fly Aruba and Aruba airlines to Aruba Airlines that will also make things clearer still, I think. John Snow II (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Cosmetic changes, CSD P2 and Visual Editor

Question No 1: What are cosmetic changes? I am seeking help here because I recently got the AWB flag. The AWB policy states that we should be careful in making cosmetic changes. I don't want to lose the AWB flag so I would like to know what are cosmetic changes. "Cosmetic changes (such as many of AWB general fixes) should only be applied when there is a substantial change to make at the same time.". What is general fixes here? Please give me a detailed explanation about this.

Question No 2: What is CSD P2? "Any portal based on a topic for which there is only a stub header article or fewer than three non-stub articles detailing subject matter that would be appropriate to present under the title of that portal." I found the sentence very confusing. Please give me a detailed explanation about this.

Question No 3: What is VisualEditor and how does it work? I found this gadget in the Editing section of Preferences.

Question No 4: What are reliable sources and how to identify them? I read Project:RS but found it confusing. I also read in Project:V and Project:NOR that reliable sources must be cited for potentially controversial claims. I would appreciate a detailed explanation.

Please answer my questions. Thanks! Forgot to put name 18:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Forgot, welcome to the Teahouse! AWB has several fixes that it makes automatically, without you needing to write rules for them; these automatic fixes are what's known as "general fixes", and they're described in more detail here. Many of these general fixes fall into the broader category of cosmetic changes, which are changes that do little or nothing to change the output of a page. I think the idea is that these changes are unimportant, and the edit history of an article shouldn't be cluttered up with a bunch of revisions where each one adds or removes a line of whitespace, for example. If you have a serious edit, like fixing misspellings, those cosmetic changes can be done at the same time, but they shouldn't be made on their own.

The Visual Editor is a piece of software that is designed to enable a WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) editor for Wikipedia. The idea is that wikicode is confusing for many first time users of Wikipedia, and you can't tell what it will look like on the final page while you're typing it (you can use the "Show preview" button, but that breaks the rhythm of writing). The Visual Editor is designed to allow a more "natural", MS-Word-type interface to editing Wikipedia, which will be easier on the newbies. It's still in alpha stages of development, so it's nowhere near complete; it's listed in the Gadgets menu to enable people to start testing it.

I don't really know how to give you a detailed explanation about reliable sources if you don't understand WP:RS. Our sources generally have to be published by some organization with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This isn't always true for completely uncontroversial things; for example, we could use a person's official website as a source for their birthdate. But for anything with any degree of controversy, we need a true reliable source. The general idea is that, since we know nothing about who's pseudonymously editing Wikipedia, we have to rely on objective sources to support our information. But, especially on the Internet, posting a blog or creating a website that says anything you want to say is easy, so we have to be sure that our sources come from organizations we can trust to get things right. Now, which organizations to trust, and on which subjects, is never set in stone, so there is no surefire rule for identifying reliable sources. As RS says, it's always dependent on context; you just need to make the best judgement that you can. There's always the reliable sources noticeboard, where you can ask for another opinion, if you can't decide on your own. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the replies. However, I did not get answer to #2; can anyone answer this question please? Thank you in advance Forgot to put name 06:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Forgot, to understand CSD-P2, you need to understand what Portals are - these are pages intended to serve as "Main Pages" for specific topics or areas and there are guidelines about what they should contain. CSD-P2 basically says if the content of the portal is minimal and so far below the guidelines then speedy deletion of that portal can be considered. NtheP (talk) 11:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Where do Article Wizard articles go?

Hi,

I'm trying to understand how Wikipedia works, and I have a few questions. I'd really appreciate if someone can help me with them.

1. If I create a page using the Article Wizard, what happens to it? Is there any way to bypass review and send it directly to the article namespace? If not, where does it go for review? It seems that it goes to Articles for Creation, but I thought that was where people post drafts to be reviewed - does the Article Wizard direct there, too? If so, I see there's a backlog there. About how long can I expect it to take before my article is reviewed?

2. Once an article is moved from AfC to the main namespace, will it show up on the Special:NewPages page? Or is considered an old page?

3. When I look at Category:Candidates for Speedy Deletion, I see a lot of pages that were created very recently and nominated for deletion after just a few minutes. Often, they are deleted just as fast. Why, then, do I follow a link from Special:Newpages and find an article that has been deleted, or even tagged for deletion? Do those articles not even make it to Special:Newpages? Should I be looking somewhere else? Are they really patrolled that fast?

Thanks so much - eagerly awaiting your answers.

Polymath49 (talk) 17:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Polymath. I will try my best to answer your questions in order:

1. If you create an article with the Article Wizard, it will go to Articles for Creation (AfC). You can bypass review by moving it directly to the mainspace, or by creating it directly by typing the page name in the search box, typing ↵ Enter, and clicking the create link. The backlog at AfC is getting smaller, and a backlog elimination drive should bring it down to near zero in a few days. I think that if you submitted to AfC, you should have to wait no more than about a week or so.
2. I'm not 100% sure, but the page was new when it was created in AfC, so it will not show up there. The whole point of Special:NewPages is for users to watch newly-created articles and check them for problems (which AfC is supposed to do).
3. Articles that don't follow the basic policies (copyright violations, attack pages, vandalism, etc.) will (and should) be speedy-deleted quickly. In many cases, those pages are patrolled within minutes from Special:NewPages, or even Special:RecentChanges.

The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 18:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Just what I wanted to know. Polymath49 (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

"Common Knowledge" Citing

If a piece of information is considered to be "common knowledge" (ex. "Snowmen are made of snow."), does it need to be cited? Thank you. Henrib736 (talk) 16:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Please see the 2 essays called WP:BLUE and WP:NOTBLUE for a discussion of this. Bus stop (talk) 17:01, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

And please only post a question in one place. There are also answers at Wikipedia:Help desk#"Common Knowledge" Citations. I will link all the places you asked it to there. Please post any follow ups there by clicking the "edit" link to the right of the section heading. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:18, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm doubting myself on why I accepted an article

I accepted this article and my name is tagged to it on the talk page. However, the article has multiple issues. How can I fix the issues so that the article won't be so bad? I accepted it because I felt it had potential. Thanks. JHUbal27 (talk) 16:44, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, JHUbal27, and welcome back! The best answer I can give you is to find good articles on scholarships, see how they're put together, and rewrite this article to match their style. The categories at the bottom of the article should give you a place to start. GaramondLethe 20:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. JHUbal27 (talk) 20:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Adding to a WikiProject

I recently created an article about a play, The Universal Language. I wanted to add it to the WikiProject Theatre, but I couldn't figure out how. Could someone instruct me on how to do so? Aplaster (talk) 15:52, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Aplaster, welcome to the Teahouse. On the article talkpage (Talk:The Universal Language) add this markup {{WikiProject Theatre|class= |importance = }} this will add the article to the categories Category:Unknown-importance Theatre articles and Category:Unassessed Theatre articles and bring it to the attention of editors at WikiProject Theatre. NtheP (talk) 16:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Why does my page not show in searches

I have created a page about Fantom - digital trading cards: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantom_-_digital_trading_cards

When I search on the word Fantom it does not show up. But the page is there ok, and it is indexed by Google no problem.

Any thoughts? PabloHealy (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Pablo, welcome to the Teahouse. There is already an article called Fantom (as well as FANTOM) so searching for "Fantom" or "fantom" will bring up the Fantom article. However if you starrt typing the second word in the search box then as soon as you get to "Fantom d" then you article is found. With three articles with the same name it's probably time for a disambiguation page to be created. NtheP (talk) 16:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Hi, I created an article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ataklan , and it has been rejected 4 times. After the last edit, I was sure I had included sufficient references by inserting newspaper article links, however it was still rejected. There are not online references for all of the information within the article, however there is 'non-digital' evidence that I cannot get a hold of to upload. I do not wish to compromise the accuracy and completeness of the article by excluding information that I do not have online sources for, can you give me any suggestions. Thanks Petalm (talk) 15:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Petalm, hi and thanks for stopping by. There is no requirement that references you want to use have to be available online. If they only exist in print then that's fine as long as you give full enough details that should someone ever want to locate the reference they have enough detail to do so. For example if it's a book then not only the title and author but the edition and page would be needed.

Looking at the article it does need a lot more referencing. Taking one sentence out of the lead paragraph "Ataklan hails from the village of Chinapoo in the heart of Morvant , Laventille- the urban community that was once the epicentre of Trinidad's Golden Age culture- and now is collapsing into zones of urban decay and gangland criminality." Potentially there are three references needed here 1) that Ataklan is from Morvant, 2) that Morvant was once part of the Golden Age of culture and 3) that it's now collapsing into decay. Frankly I'd just delete everything after "Morvant, Laventville" and just provide a reference for his upbringing there unless you are saying that where he is from is relevant to his musical style and development in which case the references about Morvant become even more important. NtheP (talk) 15:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Signing

I want to make my signature colorful which is done in my preference but when i make it colorful so it shows code not the result please give an example of colorful signature which we make in our preference, Thank You Greatuser (talk) 14:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Greatuser, welcome to the Teahouse! What's happening here is that you have the "Treat the above as Wiki markup" box, right below the field for your signature, unchecked. When this box is unchecked, it means that Wikipedia will read what you've typed into the box literally, instead of looking at it as if it were code. Try putting the code in again and checking the box; that should do it. If it doesn't, copy and paste the code here (you might need to surround it with <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags so that we can see what your code is), and we'll help you get it working. Hope this helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Please give an example just your signature is like this (Writ Keeper ⚇♔) How have you written it on your preference? Greatuser (talk) 14:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure, my sig is written as: [[User:Writ Keeper|Writ Keeper]] [[User talk: Writ Keeper|&#9863 ;]][[Special:Contributions/Writ_Keeper|&#9812 ;]], with the box checked. (The spaces between the numbers and the semicolons need to be removed in order to have the special characters appear.) The problem with yours is that the "font" tag has been deprecated since HTML 4, and is no longer supported in HTML5, which Wikipedia recently switched to. As an alternative, you should use span tags with a css style attribute. You would type in [[User:Greatuser|<span style="color:red;">Greatuser</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Greatuser|<span style="color:yellow;">talk</span>]]</sup>, and it will come out looking like: Greatuser ^talk. Again, make sure you have the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box checked. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:52, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Like Writ Keeper said, you can use several different colors in your signature. Try this article to get you started on picking colors. My signature is written as:

'''[[User:JHUbal27|<font color="mediumblue">JHUbal</font><font color="teal">27</font>]]''' ('''[[User talk:JHUbal27|<font color="darkviolet">talk</font>]]''') Go to "Preferences" on the top of the page and type in what you want for your signature. After that, sign your posts on talk pages like this one with ~~~~ and you should be good to go!

Your signatre is your's to customize, so have fun with it! If you have any questions contact me on my talk page. Here's my beautiful cool color signature. JHUbal27 (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

How long does it take to review and publish? (Approximately)

Hello, I have created a page on Wikipedia about 2 weeks ago, but when I type the title of the article into the search bar at the top of the screen, it says that no article exists with this title. Does this mean that my article has been deleted? Or is it not released yet? How long (approximately) does it usually take for a page to be reviewed and be made (for lack of a better word) 'searchable'?

The page is called Nice Pebbles

Thank you for any help or advice you can give regarding this!! Makahi (talk) 11:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

• There never has been a page called Nice Pebbles. All Wikipedia pages are published instantly and usually reviewed within minutes. There was however a breakdown in vigilance and user talk:Makahi managed to survive for several days. But it has now been rightly deleted as blatant advertising. Please do not attempt to republish under any title. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:05, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Take 2 - Journalist Attempting to Corroborate Event

Greetings, former AP reporter attempting to make new entry into Wikipedia about a political group responsible for upset victory of Minn. Gov. Arne Carlson 1990 but being denied for lack of citation. This group appears to have been DELIBERATELY OMITTED from record. I notice RE-TYPED, non-authentic transcripts of newspaper articles accepted by Wikipedia on same subject. Why?

Main problem: lack of Internet access to 1990 USA Today article published circa October 17, 1990 on page one with photo of Gov. Carlson in victory salute. Pls. advise.

06:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razorfish721 (talk • contribs)

Hi, razorfish! nothing says there has to be an internet source. Go to the library find the issue of the newspaper you need, and use the "cite news" template to reference it. Just keep in mind that wikipedia requires you tell both sides of the story WP:NPOV. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:28, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, razorfish, and welcome. I posted a comment to your talk page, with an offer to help. SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

I have rollback rights, and the rollback button always displays on my Watchlist. And sometimes it's directly above/below the actual link I intend to click.... And one time too many I accidentally press it. Is there any way to minimize the chances of this happening? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 04:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

One option is to have a separate account (linked via userpages) which does not have rollback.

Another, equally incomplete, approach is to disable as many gadgets as you can. (This can help to stop the window jumping up and down...)

The extreme approach is to ask for removal of your rollback rights, and just use Twinkle instead. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:20, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I just might consider that if it happens too often. Yeah, the window always "jumps" Thanks! Cheers, Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 04:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

A fourth, slightly less extreme, option is to put in some user CSS code to hide it on the watchlist. To do this, just copy and paste: body[class~=page-Special_Watchlist] .mw-rollback-link {display: none;} into your common.css page, located at Special:MyPage/common.css. That'll get rid of the button on the watchlist, without removing the tool or the rollback button elsewhere. Hope this helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 06:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Very good, I think I will do that instead. Thanks for helping! Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 06:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Creation user page

Hello, looking for help to link my talk page, contributions, and e-mail using this icon menu page Wikipedia:User page design center/Menus and subpages/Menu15 many thanks FOX 52 (talk) 04:07, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Fox. It's done. Note how I did this--nothing earthshaking, I clicked edit at the design page you linked, copied the code and pasted it into your userpage. Then, in every place where the word "Example" appeared, I replaced with your username. The one thing that could trip you up here is that for the URLs (as opposed to wikilinks) I added an underscore where the space is in your name. Without this the links would break, i.e., I used "FOX_52". Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit (talk) a million thanks friend I appreciate that very much, and yes quite easy, thanks again cheers FOX 52 (talk) 05:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Glad to help.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Reference warning needs help

Just created a new article called Lenart Sphere and the first reference bombed. I'm a real novice here but do have a PhD in math and am a good OOP coder, so can probably help from time to time with tech stuff once I get the feel for the format. Need help in fixing the first reference, and welcome any other help and suggestions. Still trying to find a copyright free image-- see my comment on the article's talk page. There are hundreds of references to this on Google but I kept it minimal for now, not knowing what was kosher for Wiki's copyright rules. THANKS tea friends! Pdecalculus (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Ref has been fixed, you can see the changes here[1]. You forgot the }} at the end. Here is a guideline for citations WP:CITE. Ajaxfiore (talk) 02:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

AJAXFIORE, YOU'RE THE BEST, THANKS! Pdecalculus (talk) 21:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

BLP Master's Degree

Hi there, quick question: If someone has a master's degree on biology and a PhD in theology, is it correct to say - "John Doe is a theologian and biologist"? Ajaxfiore (talk) 01:15, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ajaxfiore, welcome to the Teahouse! Sure, if you're writing about someone, who..well..is a theologian and biologist. Some people might not actually *do* what their degrees "are" so to say (i.e. "I have a degree in art history but I work for a tech organization doing outreach,"), so, I'd just focus on what the subject does...if John Doe doesn't actively practice biology anymore, but is known pretty much as a theologian, then I'd just call him a theologian and mention someplace in the article that he did get a degree in biology. I hope that makes sense :) SarahStierch (talk) 02:07, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

ok, thanks. Ajaxfiore (talk) 02:18, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

"Redirected" message, and what do I do with my user sandbox after I've moved message to main Wikipedia space?

I'm a new Wikipedia user. I recently wrote an article first in my user sandbox, and then I moved it to the main Wikipedia space (entitled "Mary Sands"). First I had a problem with an error message, but someone fixed that for me. Now, in my sandbox, at the top, it shows "(Redirected from User:K828/sandbox)." Since I'm finished using the sandbox to work on that project, can I delete what's in it? If so, how?

Would appreciate any help or advice from others more experienced.

Thanks,

K828 (talk) 19:01, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

K828, welcome to the Teahouse and congratulations on your first article. Redirects like this are always created when you move pages. You can easily edit your sandbox page and delete the text you find there thus removing the redirect. Alternatively you can add {{db-u1}} to the page and an administrator will delete the page for you (you can always recreate it at another time should you need it). 19:28, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You may have noticed I edited my question above, but your answer is exactly what I was looking for. So, all I need to do is go to the sandbox, hit edit, delete everything, then save?

K828 (talk) 19:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

yep :-) NtheP (talk) 19:40, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Now I'm really confused. I deleted what was in my sandbox and someone restored it, with a message saying I needed to put a reason in an "edit summary." So I put a reason and deleted it again. And somebody else restored it immediately. How do I fix this? In addition, I didn't see a way to delete the title it shows, "Mary Sands." I would think my sandbox would go back to the way it was before I put anything on it. Of course, I don't want to do anything that affects my real article on the regular Wikipedia space.

K828 (talk) 20:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi K282. It looks like you were deleting the real article by mistake instead of the sandbox redirect. To get to the actual redirect page you need to click the blue link that says "redirected from" just below the article title. I have deleted the redirect for you. You are allowed to delete what is in your own userspace.--Charles (talk) 20:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, Charles. K828 (talk) 20:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Under Construction

I am in the middle of editing an article, but need to leave. I just forgot the "Under Construction" box. What is the code? Thanks 04:00, 26 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrairieKid (talk • contribs)

Hi, in the future use the code {{Under construction}}. Mono 04:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Help fixing coordinates in Muir Woods National Monument

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse#Edit request on 26 December 2012 and section header added.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The current given coordinates for Muir Woods National Monument are for a spot well inside the park boundaries, not near the main entrance. Many people use these coordinates in their gps and end up on Ridge Ave Mill Valley which is the closest point to the given coordinates (from outside the park) but a long way from the main entrance to the park. Every day people drive to Ridge Ave and ask the locals how to get to Muir Woods Park. Please give the correct coordinates of the entrance to the park which are on the Muir Woods National Park Service website (but are not what Wikipedia lists). Therefore, please change the given coordinates from 37degrees 53' 56" N, 122degrees 35' 2" W to 37degrees 53.519' N, 122 degrees 34.254' W. I used "degrees" because I didn't have a degree symbol which, of course, should be used. I also used the same format as in the NPS website--degrees and decimal minutes for the coordinates, not the degrees, minutes, seconds given in Wikipedia.

Plrichardson (talk) 01:52, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Plrichardson! I exercised a bit of WP:BOLD and went ahead and changed it. If the old coordinates would have been to a structure in the monument, I would have started a discussion at Talk:Muir Woods National Monument about changing it, but since it appeares that the coordinates were just some random tree in the middle of the area, I just changed it on my own. Hope that fixes your problem! Gtwfan52 (talk) 04:45, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Newly created articles?

Hi, I'm new. Just asking, is there any way to view a list of newly created articles? Something like the contributions list? 2q2q (talk) 00:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, 2q2q, does Special:NewPagesFeed meet your needs? --Jayron32 00:31, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thx, just what I was looking for.2q2q (talk) 00:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Need help

I need help about pashto wikipedia so who can help me??? some one with name of Khangul has blocked people from writing new articles or translating articles from other languages to my country Pashto , so as i am Academic member of Academy of sciences of Afghanistan and have specielity in urology field , i want to write some article or translate some to pashto but i cant create an account or i cant login in ps. Wikipedia. please help me in this case.
I am waiting for your help... (Mirwice Haqmal (talk) 18:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC))

Mirwice, my sympathies. It sounds like you are in a difficult position. This isn't an area I know too much about but it might be that you need to contact the stewards. You can find details of who they are and how to contact them at meta:Stewards. I hope you get things sorted out. NtheP (talk) 21:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I Will try to tel you all story so i hope you may help me: I am using en.wikipedia since long time for finding informations about many topics, so i asked wiki team via these emails to create ps.wikipedia and Afghan people are ready to write Articles or translate Articles from Other languages to their own language Pashto. these two emails replied my email and told me that we have ps.wiki and sent me the link of that page but when i tried to open that page and make an acount their like maked an acount here in en.wikipedia, that page Show me a message that Some one with name of Khangul blocked this (Account creation from this IP address (61.5.196.4) has been blocked by Khangul )so i cant create An acount here, after that i tried to send him an email but i couldnt find his email anwhen i tried to write in his talk page i couldnt do that too because i was not login. It made me realy sad. As i am a doctor and i Know pashto language very well( it is my mother language) i can write many medical Articles and translate many and i can edit many too. I got realy sad when i saw an Article of fever in pashto wrote incorect and i cant edit it.
(Mirwice Haqmal (talk) 7:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
I need help please who can help me here in wiki???
Mirwice Haqmal (talk) 14:31, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mirwice! I'm sorry to hear about your situation, and I'm afraid there's not much I can do. However, if you go to MetaWiki, the coordinating wiki for our projects, and look for someone with the name Khangul there. Or, go to metawiki (linked above), and look for a "Steward". They may be able to go to ps.wikipedia and unblock your IP or create an account for you there. I'm sorry that you have these problems! If anything didn't make sense, feel free to ask me here for clarification! gwickwire^talk_edits 17:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

My Category was Recently Deleted

Something went wrong when I created a Category for NC-17 rated films: the category I created was in response to the same category that a University of Northern Iowa put on Simple English Wikipedia in 2011, and because of a strong need to highlight the NC-17s in special categories. For some unknown reason, others (I refuse to mention names) decided to delete my category. Is there anything I can do? Usually I perform my edits on Simple English Wikipedia although every now and then I edit the regular English Wikipedia, albeit with strong caution. September 1988 21:05, 25 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by September 1988 (talk • contribs)

September 1988, looking at the deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 December 17#Category:NC-17 rated films) it looks like reasoning is that there are numerous film rating systems around the world and priority shouldn't be given to any one over any other therefore it's best not to have any. Looking in the archives of Wikipedia:WikiProject Film it looks like it has been debated previously but if you feel it's a topic worth revisiting that would be the place to have that discussion. NtheP (talk) 21:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

How to tag that a better source is desired but the content is probably true

(Note: I have more Wikipedia experience than my user page reveals).

I have run into a problem with the various forms of "reference needed" tags: It seems there are lots of ways to tag something as "this might be wrong, please cite a reference", but I have a hard time finding ways to say "This is almost certainly right, there might even be a low quality source, but a better source or citation would be most welcome".

To take the classic example from WP:CITESHORT:

The sun is pretty big (ref citation to unreliable source here)(a better source would be nice). The sun is also quite hot (a good source would be nice).

I am lacking good tags to use in place of "(a better source would be nice)" and "(a good source would be nice)", without attracting big defamatory banners and visits from roaming deletionists searching for completely unfounded claims. Jbohmdk (talk) 17:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Jbohmdk, and welcome. Try {{better source}}. Does that work? --Jayron32 18:07, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks that what I was looking for, but I couldn't find it on the various meta pages discussing the {{citation needed}}, I will go ahead updating my recent edits now. Oh and Merry Christmas. Jbohmdk (talk) 18:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup is a good place to go if you need an esoteric tag. And Merry Christmas backactha. --Jayron32 00:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Sources

Hi everybody. I've a question on sources. Can you use a map (e.g. google maps) as a source?Kuba.greenland (talk) 17:45, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Kuba, and welcome to The Teahouse. It depends on for what purpose. The suitibility of any source is dependent on what exactly it is being used to support. Could you elaborate a bit more? --Jayron32 17:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I mean if you mention that a certain place is near another etc., then can you use a map as a source.Kuba.greenland (talk) 16:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

That would probably be fine to cite a map on, as long as it's unquestionably near. For example, JFK airport in NYC is near water. But if it's something that could be controversial as to whether or not it's truly "near" the other object (JFK airport is near LaGuardia Airport, some say sure, some might say not), then you'd need a different source. See WP:CALC for the policy on routine calculations. I'd go so far to say if something's unquestionably near another thing, it falls under CALC and wouldn't need a source at all. If you tell me what article and what you're trying to add, I can take a closer look fo you. Thanks! gwickwire^talk_edits 17:08, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Reliable Sources: Face book

I am currently doing a page draft on Black Anvil and they currently have a 4th member now since like November and I only could find their new member's name on their facebook page and they are signed to relapse records and it says on a website page by relapse about them confirming it to be their facebook page. I need to prove it that Sos is the member's name. Is this source okay? BlastBeat4 (talk) 01:32, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Are you referring to:

"Updated BLACK ANVIL news and album information will be made available at the Relapse Records website and the BLACK ANVIL Facebook page."

If so, I would go with the Relapse Records website. This is just my opinion, but essentially, anybody can say just about anything on Facebook - even on an "official" page. ~Just my 2¢ ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 03:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Blast Beat. Facebook is never a reliable source for exactly the reason 74 said---anyone can put anything they want on facebook. The label's website is ok to source the members of the band, but you will need some independent sources to show notability, enough to meet the requirements of WP:BAND. Gtwfan52 (talk) 04:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I can't find any sources. I got this one though. Which confirms their tweets. It's the only place I can find the new member's name.

-BlastBeat4 (talk) 02:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Alright I found one. Read the quote "Sunday October 21, 2012 we play our first ever live show as a 4 piece. It is with great honor we welcome our new comrade, Sos to the fold for this special ritual."

BlastBeat4 (talk) 02:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

link to a category?

Is it considered proper to link to a category within the text? For example:

...and there are many metaphors referring to elephants.

~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! That is an excellent question. I have no idea. I can find out for you, but I imagine both the users who I would ask are not going to provide a fast response as it is Christmas Eve, after all. Let me get back to you on your talk page, if you don't mind. Thanks. Go Phightins! 21:11, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

One of our most experienced content contributors, Dr. Blofeld, told me "Yes, but it usually isn't advisable, most links should point to an article. It should only be done really on a "see also" Category". I'm still waiting to see what the other person who asked says, but hopefully that answers your question. Go Phightins! 21:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

I did put a link in the "See also" - but that is already overloaded. (The article is currently "Under construction", and is in the "do it now" phase, and will soon enter the "fix it later" phase when stuff gets removed.) ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:51, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

OK...I'll let you know if I get a contradictory reply elsewhere. Go Phightins! 21:56, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

~Thanks ~E : 74.60.29.141 (talk) 02:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Another prolific content editor, Drmies, said that he didn't think they usually should be cited in articles, but if they must be, to keep it in the "See Also" section. Drmies and Dr. Blofeld were the two best editors I could come up with to ask. Well, the best editor to ask is retired, so these are #2 and 3. Anyway, Merry Christmas! Go Phightins! 04:21, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks ~ and give my regards to Drmies and Dr. Blofeld and to the Phightins (whoever they are) - :) ~E : 74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:36, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I recently accepted an article, need to edit it?

On Wikipedia, there are improvement boxes, such as {{refimprove|date=December 2012}}. I recently accepted this article and I think I should add one of these boxes or two. Where can I find a list of these? When I accepted the article, I added it as a stub-class and added categories. Can I add anything else? Thank you. JHUbal27 (talk) 20:41, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! If you have Twinkle enabled, there's a link to "Tag" under the TW tab. If you click on that you'll get a list of many of them. I believe there's a list here, but you'll have to check it out as I'm not 100% sure. Merry Christmas! Go Phightins! 20:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

I actually found what I wanted here, but your answer helped me a lot too. Merry Christmas to you too! JHUbal27 (talk) 21:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

By the way, can anyone review this article? Thanks. JHUbal27 (talk) 21:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and checked that one out for you. I added a {{notability}} and {{advert}} tag to it, but I feel it has a bit too much potential for me to feel good nominating it for deletion. Thanks for the questions! gwickwire^talk_edits 17:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, thanks, but now I feel responsible for this. Should I have declined the article? JHUbal27 (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Review mid-edit

Sorry if this is a repeat. Can I get a review on a page that I'm still creating? Thanks.

Jlfeuerbach (talk) 06:56, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Could you post a link to the article here?EagerToddler39 (talk) 00:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Question regarding reliable sources

Hi, I am working on my first article which was recently reviewed and declined. SarahStierch wrote me a nice messge and suggested I visit the TeaHouse for additional assistance. The reason the article was declined was "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources" I have added additional independent sources such as Slate Magazine, The Washington Post, the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament, and others, but I wonder if I need more sources, or the ones I have listed are not considered reliable. Please provide any feedback. Thanks for your help in getting my first article published! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Matt_Gaffney JGellner (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse JGellner. Some of the sources there, (Such as blogs) aren't really reliable and I believe thats the reason it was declined. §haun 9∞76 ^༆ 15:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

old family letter upload (no copyright)

hi, I uploaded an old family letter (there is no copyright) I'm not sure what category to place this in and have picked to the best of the options so Wikipedia can be satisfied it is a free work . how can I be sure that the picture wont be removed ? is there another option I can select? Trixx22 (talk) 23:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Trixx22, welcome to Wikipedia. Just curious, what article will you be using the image in? When was it written? Both of these things will help us make the best decision for it. Thanks! SarahStierch (talk) 00:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Trixx22, I'm the person who tagged the image asking for more information. Letters do have a copyright and it is held by the author of the letter not the recipient. So in this case the copyright is held by the Honorary Secretary of Ponsonby Rugby Football Old Boys' Association and it's their permission that is needed, as the letter is only 30 years old there is no question of the copyright having expired. NtheP (talk) 18:50, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, the letter was written in 1981 and is in reference to "George Carter - Rugby NZ Allblack"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Carter_%28rugby_union%29

the letter was written to my Great Grandmother who lived to 106. As I live in New Zealand I am not aware of what copyright is being referred to? and If there is a copyright then what is required as proof? Trixx22 (talk) 10:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Trixx22, New Zealand copyright law is fairly similar to UK law. The content of the letter belongs to the person who wrote the letter not the person to whom it was sent. Therefore without permission from the person who wrote the letter you do not have the right to publish it's content. If you really want to publish the letter you need permission from the club preferably in the form of an email confirming their agreement to it's publication.

Looking at what you are using the letter for it looks like you are using the letter as a reference for asserting that Carter was the first capped player for NZ from the Ponsonby club. I'm not sure the letter meets the needs of a reliable source as there is no indication that the person who wrote the letter isn't just reciting club folklore rather than ascertained fact. NtheP (talk) 14:45, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Nthep, The NZ Copyright Act (law) came into force in 1994 . there is no prior law concerning Copyright in 1981 when this letter was written. Further under NZ law "A publisher's copyright in the typography of a published edition lasts for 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first published" therefore this letter being written over 31 years ago is no longer under Copyright. Please do not challenge this letter being uploaded in future as it is a free work Trixx22 (talk) 02:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Of what use is the letter to Wikipedia, regardless of its copyright status? --Jayron32 03:09, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Jayron, I have researched the recorded history of the Earliest AllBlacks in New Zealand and have had discussions with a number of historians about these early records and for the most part the early records are incomplete and alot of information is missing. My Grt Grt Grandfather (George Carter) played for the Ponsonby Rugby Club, he also played for Auckland Club and travelled around NZ to other Clubs and played overseas (Australia) matches, playing for other clubs was practised by all players. This letter is the familys record that George Carter was a member for Ponsonby as some historians are trying to revise history without any proof (as they themselves state that records are incomplete), and without any proof are wanting to remove a number of players from the honours board at Ponsonby Rugby Club. the letter can be taken for what it is an acknowledgement. There are records available that show George Carter playing for Ponsonby Club. Alot of NZ's early history is no longer available, It is a Great shame that this letter is not admissable to wikipedia site as part of a Great Players story, a letter written to George Carters own daughter Trixx22 (talk) 22:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

There are two things here. Firstly, the letter is just the secretary of the OBA's view (and probably genuinely held belief) that Carter played for Ponsonby. That's not proof that he did play for the club, just evidence that someone believes he played for the club and is not a reliable source that can or should be relied upon. Secondly about its uploading here, all I have asked is that you prove that the letter isn't copyrighted or if it is copyrighted to obtain permission of the copyright holder to use it. The 1994 NZ Copyright Act is essentially an update of the 1962 Copyright Act which defines a literary work as "any work, other than a dramatic or musical work, that is written, spoken, or sung". If it falls under this definition then it is copyrighted to the author of the letter until 50 years after their death. The publisher's copyright of 25 years you refer to, relates for example, to a book publisher of Shakespeare's plays, their copyright over their edition, not the content. I'm sorry you find this frustrating but Wikipedia has fairly strict copyright policies to prevent copyright abuse and the onus of proving that something is eligible to be uploaded onto Wikipedia rests with you as the person uploading it. I have raised the question about section 2 at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions so hopefully we will get a reply reasonably quickly. NtheP (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)