Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 69.230.179.59 (talk) at 16:22, 10 May 2015 (→‎Creating a new question on an article talk page: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is the teahouse
Shortcuts

GoingBatty, 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.

Creating a new question on an article talk page

Dear helpers, I was looking at the talk page for the article "Mold": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mold I would like to create a new section in this talk page which would contain my particular question, but I can't see how to do it. Can you tell me? Thank you.69.230.179.59 (talk) 16:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing song genres

I recently added a genre to an infobox but had it promptly removed by another member who claimed that a reference was needed, even though it's fairly obvious that it's correct (don't bash me for this; I'm just saying...). Looking at other song pages, none of the genres seem to be referenced - at least not in the infobox - and It leads me to think that the references may by stated in the description of the edits. So I tried this once, but then had my edit reverted once again. Honestly I find this really frustrating and feedback would really be helpful.

-PotatoNinja123 (talk) 15:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is this source reliable or not?

I posted it here about the neurodiversity site wrongplanet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wrong_Planet#Possible_Criticism_Section.3F Ylevental (talk) 14:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If I saw the same link, I would have used it. Just remember to cite it properly and make sure that the reference comes from a reliable and authoritative source.

-PotatoNinja123 (talk) 15:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gocmar07 (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)helpGocmar07 (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Gocmar07 (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)I make a definition about Nanografi Company. I want to ask some question. I want to add some file and template.And ı had a membership 3 days ago.Is there rule for this situation?Gocmar07 (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gocmar07. The page you posted at Nanografi was a blatant copyright violation of that company's website, copying and pasting content owned by it. We cannot accept such content here. It also read as content written to advertise the company, which is how material written by a company, for itself, usually reads. So even if it was not a copyright violation, it was not the type of writing we would desire to see in a proper article. The process it was deleted under is called speedy deletion, which allows immediate deletion by an administrator of this encyclopedia if a page meets one of the criteria for that process. Here, the page was deleted as unambiguous advertising and as one that did not indicate by its text the importance or significance of the topic (though it also could have been deleted for the copyright infringement).

You will see that these were the bases by clicking on the red-link for the company I placed earlier in this reply. Before ever reaching enhancements to an article like template and files, the fundamental issue of proper content would need to be addressed. We would need a neutrally-written page, containing no copyrighted content, no original research, and one that met our notability guidelines, by citing reliable, secondary sources, independent of the company, that wrote about it in detail. This would also allow verifiability of the content.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Statustop

Does anyone know what has happened to the {{Statustop}} template Ive tried using it on my userpage and sandbox but none is working any thoughts? TeaLover1996 (talk) 21:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TeaLover1996: I don't think there's anything wrong with the template; the problem here seems to be that you're just missing a "Status" subpage. According to the template's documentation page, it seems like you need to make a subpage (if using default parameters the page should be User:TeaLover1996/Status for you) and place one of the five parameters given in the documentation on the subpage in order for the template to work. You don't appear to have that subpage, which might be the reason why it didn't work for you. CabbagePotato (talk) 22:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The template contained a "display:none" parameter, which meant the template's output wasn't displayed. I have no idea why it ever worked, but I've removed that parameter, and now it works again. Huon (talk) 23:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@CabbagePotato: It worked before without me creating a subpage, so why do I need to now? TeaLover1996 (talk) 08:07, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTMEMORIAL

I have recently been greatly expanding the Birmingham pub bombings article, and have included the names of the victims in one subsection. Another user has removed the names with the justification of the talk page (which is 8 years old and itself including opposition to removal of the victims list). Some articles such as Bloody Sunday (1972) and the 2014 Isla Vista killings include victim lists, whereas others do not. This article could and, I feel, should, too in spite of the edit reverts I have seen. It seems like this WP is a grey area. My understanding is that WP:NOTMEMORIAL has nothing whatsoever to do with victim lists, but, rather, it is to stop people starting pages about specific non-notable people as a memorial to them. That would not and should not happen in this case. Can a final consensus on this please be reached as I basically do not wish myself and the other editor (whose integrity I 100% respect) to engage in edit warring. Many thanks.--Kieronoldham (talk) 20:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Kieronoldham:. Please see Wikipedia:Victim lists . I think the clear point to remember is that we are writing an encyclopedia. I fail to see the encyclopedic value of lists of names that no one knows and and that had no significant impact on the wider world and who merely happened to be tragically in the wrong place at the wrong time. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, thanks. This is a good start, although the link you sent may be passionately contended as in more than seven years, 10 editors have contributed to that article since its inception and, sadly, impartiality may be breached in the seemingly approved structure ("I feel that", "I have yet to see" etc.). As the link you sent unequivocally states in the header, this is contentious and in my humble opinion, as I stated in my 1st message, why is there complicity in the usage of victim lists in some articles but not others. Many similar articles have similar lists, but, the main point of my reply is that WP:NOT refers to articles per se; not lists/names within an article. I'd say, as per "notability", these people should be included as this act was the worst act of terrorism in mainland Britain between WWII and the 7 July 2005 London bombings (and the 7/7 article is another example of many which has its own fatalities list). It is a good start, though. Thanks again. I'd welcome two or three other editors' opinions though before I finally steer my judgment. Thanks.--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:27, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes there are lots of articles in the 4+million that have inappropriate content. That doesn't mean they are examples that should be followed and that inappropriate non encyclopedic content should be spread to other articles. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:29, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If these other articles have vociferous claims/efforts to remove them as this one now does I'd acquiesce. Aside from the points in my earlier two messages, I reiterate that I believe a fair, balanced and neutral discussion as to the pros and cons of this gapingly grey area on Wikipedia should be engaged. Thanks.--Kieronoldham (talk) 02:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, Kieronoldham and thank you for a sincere and thought provoking question. I wrote an article when I was a fairly new and inexperienced editor called Ford Hunger March. Looking back on it now, I see lots of shortcomings in my article, including elements of original research. I mentioned the five people who were killed in that terrible incident, not as a list but as part of the narrative. Three killed on the first round of gunfire, one killed in a second skirmish, and a fifth who died much later of his wounds. The fifth was an African-American who couldn't be buried in the same cemetery as the others due to segregation. For me, this is an important distinction. We can mention a few victims in the narrative. We can list notable victims, with blue links. But it seems unwise to me to have long lists of the names of non-notable victims. I readily acknowledge that reasonable people will disagree. But that is how I see it after thinking about it for a few hours. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings Kieronoldham, if the victim lists or memorials are available at another website, it would seem like a link to that webpage would be OK to add into the External links section of the article. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 12:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse Host

I applied to become a host at the Teahouse, what do I do now? TeaLover1996 (talk) 18:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Read this aGain and you will know that you are a host now!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 18:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So I am a Teahouse host now? TeaLover1996 (talk) 19:04, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi TeaLover1996 - it's not an application but a public declaration by you that you want to help out as a host. As for what to do now, just check by here whenever you can and answer any questions you can. Obviously you may not be able to answer a lot of the questions at first as your relatively new here, but by reading the answers other give is also a great way to learn new things and as time goes by you'll be able to help more people. One hint (pokes @Acagastya: on this one) is to mention the person in the answer, or use the {{Ping}} or {{Reply to}} templates so people get a notification of an answer (does not work for anonymous IP editors). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:12, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@KylieTastic: Sometimes I ping sometimes I leave {{teahouse talkback}} on the respective talk page.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 19:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
:@Acagastya: Ah sorry I missed that! Also good advise to do that for the IP edits (I always forget that tempate) Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This reminded me to actually sign up to be Teahouse Host, good work people. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is it just me or do the same two hosts pop up in that box in the top right that I swear was supposed to cycle...? Random question but does anyone know? EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 21:04, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, It's HostBot's job, it just like picking the same people.... EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 21:08, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
HostBot displays host images based on how active each host is here at the Tearoom. Since I have made over 2500 comments here, you will see my ugly old face quite often. Sorry about that. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:12, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Its funny because that is why I was commenting. I was wondering why it liked picking you so much , thanks for explaining... EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 00:59, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Cullen328:
You are a helpful person, always ready to help new persons like me.
And yes you are NOT ugly but sober and graceful
Best regards
Aftab Banoori (Talk) 08:29, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nonconstructive?

Is it permissible to remove puffery if this may cause there to be less information on the article, as in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=San_Pedro_College_of_Business_Administration&oldid=661536484 ? Rubbish computer 15:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely yes. If it's unsourced puffery it should definitely be removed. Even if it makes the article shorter, it vastly improves the quality- I've removed up to 80% of text from articles before as unsourced puffery. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This is a relief to know as I have already done this many times. Rubbish computer 21:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

can't find my question

I asked a question here on Wikipedia:Tearoom approximately three weeks ago, but now I can't find the question or possible answers. Any tips on how to find it? Would it help to have the exact wording of the question summary, I didn't think to write it down at the time? The question involved a section I added to the article "Mold" about artists who had used mold in art pieces. When I looked at the article I saw my section was gone. I couldn't seem to get any info about the deletion on the "edit" page, but wasn't sure I was looking correctly. Is there a way to know if a person deliberately deleted the section? Is there a way to know who did it? Is there a way to contact the person as I'd like to know why it was deleted? Thank you.69.230.179.59 (talk) 14:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The questions has been answered here- questions that no-one has commented on for a few days get automatically archived. For future reference, on the right-hand side, there's a search bar that searches this page's archives. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adding new languages to existing article

Hi wikipedia....I am new and novice in' well everything at wikipedia. I want to translate pages to another language like English to Nepali or Hindi but I don't have any idea how to do that. I only edit pages which has already translated and does not have any information but I want add new languages to pages and it would be nice if someone can help me out with this...so, I can add some bytes to wikipedia database. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lightendark (talk • contribs) 13:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lightendark, start at WP:Translate us and feel free to come back here if you need further assistance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:34, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Submission for review

an article by another author titled Preetam Pyaare was requested for deletion by me coz it had incorrect information. i started writing another article for the same person with proper references which are very much permitted by Wikipedia rules. it was deleted too only because this personality is not famous enough??!! and this person has been voted world wide and has fans world wide...there are so many silly articles floating on wikipedia about much less known personalities..i want to put it for re-review. please tell me how can i do it? and as per wikipedia rules my article had at least three notable references. i was told that my language sounded like i m advertising for him which also i corrected. still it was deleted. why this unfair thing? Toshwets (talk) 12:51, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Toshwets: Draft:Pritam Singh (Actor, RJ) is very much not deleted. If this is the draft you are speaking about it has simply been pushed back to you for further work. Please enjoy doing that work. Fiddle Faddle 14:04, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

How do I get my current signature to appear when I type 4 tildes?

My signature TeaLover1996 (talk) 00:00, May 2015 (UTC) as I have to repeatedly copy and paste my signature as I cant get it to work properly TeaLover1996 (talk) 12:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This will fit:
<span style="font-family:Tahoma">'''[[User:TeaLover1996|<span style="color:#006400">Tea</span><span style="color:#ff0000">Lover</span><span style="color:#0000ff">1996</span>]] [[User talk:TeaLover1996|<span style="color:#800080">(talk)</span>]]'''</span>
It produces: TeaLover1996 (talk). PrimeHunter (talk) 15:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: Is this an alternative?
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 16:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Acagastya: Substituting a signature above 255 characters is not allowed by WP:SIGLENGTH. See also WP:SIG#NoTemplates. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:21, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay PrimeHunter, I will notify the user not to follow it. But, why if the template is substituted and there will be nothing left except the code, which will also be generated by the ~ symbols? And how will one know is template was used? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acagastya (talk • contribs)
The edit box is harder to use if it's full of huge signatures. I think 255 characters is bad enough. If we wanted to allow more then we could just request an increase of mw:Manual:$wgMaxSigChars. It's technically possible to substitute a longer signature but it's against WP:SIGLENGTH. Somebody may notice its length and complain. If a substituted signature is below 255 characters then I don't think others can see it was substituted. WP:SIG#NoTemplates says it is "permissible but discouraged". PrimeHunter (talk) 23:32, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question about removing comments

Hello, am I allowed to remove comments that appear to contain possibly offensive material and do not seem to contribute helpfully to a discussion, such as this one (which was posted to this page)? CabbagePotato (talk) 07:56, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One more question, Should be that (IP) editor warned? If so what is the appropriate one in TW?
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 08:40, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you KylieTastic for answering my question (as well as Acagastya's) and removing the inappropriate comment. Really appreciate it! CabbagePotato (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@CabbagePotato: If you find content on your talk page which may offend ou then yes you are allowed to remove it, also keep in mind you can remove anything usually non-harmful content is usually placed in an archive, hope this helps TeaLover1996 (talk) 20:53, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TO JEREMIAH RE: EDIT OF NATIONAL AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ASSOCIATION

Jeremiah Y.:

Regarding the National Automotive Parts Association ("NAPA") entry, you left a message saying that my edit seemed to be a test so you changed it? Nothing about my edit appeared to be changed, but, in any case, as Mr. Baxter's granddaughter, I felt obligated to correct the information on the site, especially since Wikipedia had NAPA being created as a retailer in 1925 by a company that didn't even exist until 1928. That inconsistency was there in black and white, yet no one noticed that the facts, as stated, were impossible. It also was not a retailer until Genuine Parts did whatever it did to make it so after 1970 or 1980.

Since the first edit, I have refined the text and eliminated extraneous information so that it reads better. Can you explain why you thought my corrections were a test and what you did to change them? Thank you for your anticipated clarification. MarthaQualitymatters1555 (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2015 (UTC) 76.180.67.212 (talk) 05:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Qualitymatters1555. A better place to post this comment would be Talk:National Automotive Parts Association. Jeremiah Y. might not see your post here. RockMagnetist(talk) 06:28, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is this i blog?

Is this is a blog? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.51.205.186 (talk) 03:16, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't, see WP:NOTBLOG. Wikipedia is not a blog or social network- it's an encyclopedia, written about notable things in a factual, neutral way. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple merges in Parental leave

Hi! With the advice of my instructor in a Wiki Education program, I have merged several related (short!) pages together into the existing Parental leave article. I'm brand new to editing Wikipedia this quarter and would love community feedback on how to make the article better! Melody.waring (talk) 03:08, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just did a quick look through at your changes and everything looks good to me. By the way, I can't think of a better article to edit for a Feminist Economics class! Happy editing! Winner 42 Talk to me! 14:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!! Appreciate your vote of confidence. :) Melody.waring (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Review

Can I get some editors to look over my changers to the Boeing Everett Factory? This is my first Major edit and I want someone to look over and tell me how I did.--AM (I would LOVE to talk!) 21:17, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me, you might want to add a reference to the statement, "The Boeing 777 is a wide-body airliner designed to fill the size gap between the 747 and 767. In order to have the space to build the 777, Boeing spent nearly 1.5Billion dollars on expanding the Factory, doubling it's size. Production began on the 777 in 1993" though. Nice Job Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! And I got the part about the growth of the building form the Boeing 777, I don't have a reference...--AM (Talk to me!) 21:27, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So take their reference . They use <ref>{{Harvnb|Norris|Wagner|1999|p=133}}</ref> as their source, so I would say you can use it too. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 22:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Winner 42. Totally agree with EoRdE6 that you should use the source from there if it verifies the content. Just dropped by to note you would have to use the underlying source from the sources section, not the shortened citation code above, and add in the page number from the shortened citation. So, the citation would rather be

<ref>{{Cite book |last1= Norris |first1= Guy |last2= Wagner |first2= Mark |year= 1999 |title= Modern Boeing Jetliners |location= Minneapolis, Minnesota |publisher=Zenith Imprint |isbn= 0-7603-0717-2|page= 133}}<ref>

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:11, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Winner 42. You can use the source discussed above, as long as you actually read the original source and verify that it actually says what the other article says. It is not acceptable to copy a source from one article to another without reading enough of it to verify in your own mind that it verifies the content in question. You do not need to read an entire book but you should certainly read the relevant pages in context. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Cullen328: I think you are mistaken, User:Airplane Maniac is asking the question here, I am merely responding.Winner 42 Talk to me! 03:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct, Winner 42, and I apologize to you. I made a mistake copying and pasting the user name. Airplane Maniac is the editor I intended to address. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:48, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect information on an already published Wikipedia article.

How do I add/edit a Wikipedia article?2602:306:B8F2:D860:144A:587:BF6B:9BB9 (talk) 15:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By clicking Edit source.
Here, at WP:EDIT you will get all the guidelines!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:33, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Acagastya: It's just Edit for non-logged in users (actually anyone not in the VE beta) EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 19:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Click Edit if not logged it.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 19:21, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I suggest you take a your through the Wikipedia:Tutorial, which will explain these and other matters, and give you a foundation in the basics of editing. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Signature question

I would like to change my signature so that Rubbish leads to my user page and computer leads to my talk page and both are in italics. How do I do this? Thanks, Rubbish computer (talk) 15:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIGN will guide you. But the way you want it:
[[User:Rubbish computer|''Rubbish'']][[User talk:Rubbish computer|''Computer'']].
Paste it in Signature filed of Special:Preferences. And don't forget to tick: Treat the above as WikiMark up.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above produces RubbishComputer. Maybe you want [[User:Rubbish computer|''Rubbish'']] [[User talk:Rubbish computer|''computer'']] to produce Rubbish computer. By the way Acagastya, you only need one <nowiki>...</nowiki> around the whole string to display code. The source is hard to read when it's littered with nowikis. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Thank you but I have changed this already. Rubbish computer 22:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christ Acagastya got enough <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags yet??? EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 22:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually @PrimeHunter: At the beginning, I used only a couple of sets. But it rendered as [[User:Rubbish computer|Rubbish]][[User talk:Rubbish computer|Computer]]. But then I realised a small mistake. Both the words were in italics and the '' was not visible. Thus I had used many! I was sick looking at it. But the one who wants it, mostly will copy from here to save time and won't see the codes!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 22:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

self published books

Hello, May we cite self published, scholarly books (published by Create Space, for example) with an ISBN number under Further Reading? Vocatur (talk) 09:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, no. Further reading sections shouldn't contain links that wouldn't meet Wikipedia's reliable sources guidelines. The only exception would be if the author of the book in question was already well-known in the relevant field and had previously been published on the subject by a reputable publishing house. Otherwise, self-published books don't belong in Further reading sections. Yunshui 雲水 09:56, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This concerns an author known in the relevant field who has been published by a reputable publishing house. Should I put his books under References or Further Reading? Vocatur (talk) 10:53, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vocatur: I think there are two separate issues here: citing his books, presumably as a reference for him, which, usually, is not appropriate whoever published them, and placing books under a "Further reading" section.
The first is sometimes seen as complex. Let me try to explain. If s/he manufactured vacuum cleaners, the cleaners would be her/his work. A vacuum cleaner could not be a reference for her/him, simply because it is the product he makes. So it is with his books. However, a review of her/his work by others tends to be a review of her/him and her/his methods, so is a reference
The second is a judgement call about whether such a section is appropriate at all, and, if so, what its content ought to be. I would err on the side of caution in this area, choosing to list only the most significant of his works, and then by ISBN to avoid linking to the site of a single vendor. Fiddle Faddle 11:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your thoughtful answer. I have not explained well: this does not concern an article about the above-mentioned historian, but rather listing his books here and there under "Further Reading" on OTHER notable people he has written about! Vocatur (talk) 11:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I assume we're talking about Albert B. Southywick here? If so, his books might be appropriate - he's reliable enough to be used as a source in books from OUP and Princeton UP, so clearly historical scholars recognise his validity; he's also been published by a reputable publishing house in the past. I'd imagine, though, that his books would be better as sources for expanding the articles in question, rather than just tagged on as "Further reading". Yunshui 雲水 11:32, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this useful reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vocatur (talk • contribs) 13:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Query regarding MOS

I could have asked it at the Portal, but if I need it for future. So
In cricket (game), is the letter C, in the headings and sub-headings like International centuries to be in upper case? And are these type of rules in the other sports too?
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 08:29, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It should be lower-case I believe. The general Wikipedia rule (on MOS:HEADING) is that words in titles/headings should only be capitalised if they are names or proper nouns, which centuries isn't. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question Regarding Rejected Article

I initially wrote to the editor of my Wikipedia article who referred me to this page, here is my question copied below:

Hello, I wanted to send a message to question why my article has continued to be rejected. I wanted to add an article about a local comedian Des Dowling because he is a known comedian in Australia, particularly in Melbourne and already has quite a few Wikipedia mentions which can be linked to an official page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coxy%27s_Big_Break https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1116_SEN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinne_(Australian_TV_series)

He is also regularly mentioned in local Melbourne media as a comedian/local celebrity, which is why I wanted to add him to the Wikipedia database. I have added independent media mentions of him to show that he is a prominent local celebrity. My wikipedia username is samanthalenkic. Thank you for your time. Regards, Samantha Samanthalenkic (talk) 00:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Samanthalenkic and welcome. I have had a look at your Draft and the reasons given are that the subject doesn't meet the criteria for notable individuals. As a Melburnian, let me see if I can assist you in getting the Draft up to standard. Flat Out talk to me 03:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How to "Request for deletion

Hello There currently is a stub article [General Service Area] which is wikilinked to by every town, village and community in Nova Scotia, Canada. One editor in particular has taken it upon his/her self to change over 1600 articles to use this obscure stub as the definition for each and every community in this Province rather than the usual wikilinks (town, village, community etc.) used by the rest of Wikipedia. Seeing as how NS is apparently the only region in the world that uses this definition and the definition could be eliminated at any time by the stroke of a pen by the NS Government, I would wonder if the project would be better served if we simply deleted this article under WP:N as a Google search using the phrase gives few (if any) reliable sources? This particular editor has become active again in the last couple of days and simply refuses to engage anyone who attempts to talk with him/her. See [1] Thank You,  Aloha27 talk  23:07, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Aloha27: Having looked at this issue I think it is worthy of administrative attention, so have opened a discussion at WP:ANI where any editor who wishes may comment. I have done this because the issue you report seems to me to be more weighty than the Teahouse should be handling, though is, I think, borderline for the other venue. Fiddle Faddle 10:47, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on the biography of Sir Frederick Page (1917-2005). I have a nice image of his signature from "Yates, I. R. (2006). "Sir Frederick William Page CBE FREng. 20 February 1917 -- 29 May 2005: Elected FRS 1978". Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society 52: 231–210" But I am unsure of the copyright status of the signature and if it falls into the category of fair use KreyszigB (talk) 20:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey KreyszigB. Signatures are copyrighted, so long as they are sufficiently artistic for copyright protection (I suppose one might describe the two ends as block letters versus a unique cursive with a face included in it). See {{PD-signature}} and Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag. It's unfortunate that the consideration here seems to require a judgement call with no brightline rule. I'm going to have to punt and say that after viewing his signature in the pdf, it seems to me pretty much right in the grey area and I just don't know. If it is copyrighted, I don't think fair use is sustainable. A low-res photograph of him, yes, that meets the contextual significance standard of the fair use policy – it "would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic". I don't think this is true for a signature, absent extenuating circumstances (like the person was famous for the way they signed, and that's covered in the article). You might want to ask for a second opinion at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:21, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks, I can follow your reasoning, after all I'ts not the most important thing about him, but it is of minor interest. I've reposted the question on the Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. KreyszigB (talk) 06:01, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fuhghettaboutit, something is missing from your response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ha. If that's an invitation to play twenty questions, I'll start with "what"?:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:49, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see, someone removed part of my post (checking page history) aha, it was removed by the OP when he responded, here. I can see exactly how that happened, he was intending to follow the post by navigating there and used cut instead of copy to get the title.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:54, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Updating Company Info

Hello,

Am I allowed to update company information if it is false on the current page? For example, the company legal name is wrong as well as a photo that is being used.

Thanks!216.143.116.8 (talk) 18:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes as long as the information is verified preferably by 3rd party sources using references. I'm obliged to tell you to read WP:COI and I'm sure a few other users will chime in below with more information about it soon EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 18:52, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How do I change (correct) the title of an existing article?

How do I change (correct) the title of an existing article. Just need to add a word to the title to change it from a general-public term to a term specific to the content.Shonzey (talk) 18:41, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Shonzey: Welcome! To move/rename a page you use the WP:MOVE function with the tab at the top of the page. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 18:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand. I don't want to MOVE anything; just fix the title by changing one word. (I realize that changing the title has ripple effects from other articles, but must start by fixing this one title.)

Maybe method requires opening a new article with the correct title, then using MOVE to migrate all the content. Is that it? If so, I still need more guidance.Shonzey (talk) 17:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Shonzey: Moving an article is how you change the title on Wikipedia without getting rid of the article's history. If you give me the title of the article and what change you want I can do it for you. Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Shonzey and Winner 42: I'm going to take a guess at Just in time (business). EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 19:06, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-automated edits

I know I am probably asking something extremely obvious but how do semi-automated edits work? I don't understand. Rubbish computer (talk) 17:26, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Rubbish computer (talk) 18:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Help me"

Hello. I know one way a user may get help is by putting "{{help me}}" on their talk page; I know there is a page the editors who end up helping them monitors to see that they left the template in the first place (the Help Me page?). Where is this page? —DangerousJXD (talk) 04:34, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think Category:Wikipedians looking for help is the page you want. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Though @Mj has given you the accurate answer: shortcut is CAT:HM. If you edit through mobile bookmark it!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 09:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the Artical for a Game

How far into depth am I allowed to go into the rules of a game? I want to make the article Titanic: The Board Game better, but I don't know how far into depth I am allowed to go... Airplane Maniac (talk) 01:42, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you can go fairly deep into the rules. Chess is an example of a fantastic board game article and it spends roughly a third of the article talking about the rules. You can always feel free to be bold though when adding new content. Happy editing! Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have a slightly different view, Airplane Maniac. Chess is a non-commercial game with origins in antiquity, played freely worldwide, and widely acknowledged as a game worthy of in-depth academic analysis. Its rules are relatively simple though its subtleties are deep and profound. Titanic: The Board Game, on the other hand, is a commercial game of far more narrow interest. The company that markets and sells the game has the means and the resources to instruct their customers in how to play the game. Per WP:NOTMANUAL, it is not appropriate for Wikipedia to instruct commercial customers how to play this game. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:56, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, are you saying that I shouldn't add more to it in the area of gameplay,Cullen328?--Airplane Maniac (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New editor submitting new article for a company in need of help

I put a good amount of time into following the first-time-making-articles guide on Wikipedia, for a growing company I know of which currently does not have a wikipedia article. After a few hours putting together the first draft, I submitted the page live to /wiki/Vuevent and the page survived for about 8 hours, before being nominated for Speedy Deletion along CSD A7 and CSD G11. It was midnight at the time of the nomination, and, to my expectation, the article was deleted in the next 2 hours while I was sleeping.

Of course, after doing some more homework on wikipedia, I realized that the sourcing is incredibly important, if not the most important concept of the wiki (cross checking etc.). To the advice of the admin who deleted the bad wiki, I rebuilt the page from scratch using my sandbox.

I am requesting people check out my sandbox, and give me specific advice about which CSD clauses may still be affected, and more importantly, any specific parts of the submission which should be removed etc. To my understanding, if I was marked for speedy deletion, my submission was "unquestionably" bad, and an obvious candidate for deletion.

I know not to take this personally, so I went out and did my research homework and came back with over 20 sources (my original submitted article noted only 2 sources!).

I appreciate your time and input - all of it! Please check out what I intend to submit as an article for wiki/Vuevent for Vuevent inc., currently stored on my sandbox at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jderocher/Sandbox

Best wishes and thanks, Jderocher (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jderocher: Wikipedia often feels a harsh place. I've only given your sandbox a skim, not a detailed read or review. On the surface it looks like a decent start. I suggest you click the big blue Submit button. What this does is offers the draft to reviewers to review and push back to you iteratively with comments. It can be a tough process, but not as tough as outright deletion. Fiddle Faddle 22:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent Thank you - I have gone ahead and submitted the draft for review.

Jderocher (talk) 22:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jderocher: Now you have submitted it do not just await a review. Continue to improve the draft when you see the need. Submission does not set it in stone. I've been in and performed some basic tidying for you, and migrated it to the Draft: namespace (you will still find it by clicking your sandbox for now, don't worry). I;d review it myself, but I'm tired.
Be prepared to have it pushed back to you more than once. If you don't understand the reviewer's comments when it happens, ask them on their talk pages. Fiddle Faddle 22:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jderocher: I've had the chance to review the draft now at Draft:Vuevent, and no Declined it this time for the reasons stated on it. This is not a reason for despair, just for improvement. Go to work with a will and be encouraged that you have some meat to work with from the comment on the draft. Fiddle Faddle 08:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

registration

How can i register my company herePrathamking8 (talk) 10:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might misunderstand, Wikipedia isn't a place to register your company for free advertising or a social network-style profile (like LinkedIn), see WP:NOTADVERTISING and WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK. Wikipedia has neutral point of view encyclopedia articles about notable companies- to be notable enough to pass WP:GNG and/or WP:CORP, a company needs to have significant, independent coverage from reliable sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not adding here for promotion...as i think it will be good to see my company over there..such a trusted platform..nothing elsePrathamking8 (talk) 11:21, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you cannot write articles about your companies, ergo you can give an idea in Requested articles, so other wikipedians may write it instead of you, if they decide that company is significant. With best regards, Ochilov (talk) 11:39, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true, you are allowed to write about your company, it's just strongly discouraged. If you think your company passes WP:GNG and WP:CORP, then I would recommend using the articles for creation process to create your article. This allows you to get feedback on and improve your draft before it becomes a proper article. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Joseph. You gave some good info right there. You deserve a cuppa tea. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:10, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is place of online knowledge, the main role is to provide information and for users, to update information, You are not aloud to edit your own profile or your businesses for that matter, as this could include bias information, information which really shouldn't be here or publicity for your business. I must make it clear that as a user for Wikipedia, mainly for research, it is not a place for putting advertisements and the services and prices your company does, with your current account you can add your website, which provides this information (Z2a (talk) 18:33, 9 May 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=661715954"