Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cassiopeia, 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

About references

WikiPedia asks for references. In the article there are at least 3 external hyperlinks that appoints to the existnce of this person. Why are these hyperlinks denied by saying there are none ?? 81.205.214.61 (talk) 15:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Decline of Draft:Bukarester FC

I declined Draft:Bukarester FC at Articles for Creation, and have been asked by User:Alexiulian25 on my talk page why I declined it. As I explained in my decline, I didn't see adequate evidence of notability, including that it wasn't clear that the team met the fully professional standards of WP:NFOOTY. (I realize that those rules are primarily meant for players, but I was using them for a team also.) The submitter says that the team is notable, but there isn't a whole lot of information on it because it only existed a few years before it folded during World War One. I realize that means that there is a shortage of reliably sourced independent coverage. I also noted that the article would require heavy copy-editing for grammar. What is the opinion of other reviewers and experienced editors? Was I justified in asking the author to include more information, such as at least a clear statement that the team was in Liga, and was I justified in expecting the submitter to request the heavy copy-editing before submission? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:46, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

move proposal

Am I allowed to make a move proposal as an I.P. without an account? 92.19.28.191 (talk) 10:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Although it is always best to make your account and get registered, as far as my Wikipedia understanding of policies is concerned anyone can propose that but you must have a good reason for that. Any autoconfirmed experienced editor may then move it on your behalf. Hope that helps. JugniSQ (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

So you may request page move. JugniSQ (talk) 11:40, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Am new editor, have seen note that my article has close paraphrasing, but no info/detail is included. How to resolve?

I have just posted my first article on Wikipedia. The article was an original piece of work, with many references added. None of the article was cut and pasted or copied from elsewhere. However, there is now a banner that says the article contains "close paraphrasing". I have no idea which section of the article is being referred to, but I definitely have not "closely paraphrased" anything ... how do I clear this issue up and remove the banner? Thanks. WikiForester (talk) 20:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Continuous Cover Forestry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello, WikiForester, and welcome to the Teahouse. The tag was added by Adam9007. You can leave a message for that editor on User talk:Adam9007, or perhaps he or she will see this thread and respond here as to what sections of the article included close paraphrasing of what sources or works. The article history shows what user made which changes, and can often be used to reach out to the editor who made a change, asking for reasons. It is good practice in such a case to leave a comment on the article talk page with more detail than a tag can provide, to aid editors who wish to fix issues raised in a tag. I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 20:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

WikiForester, the copyvio detection tool finds significant overlap with http://www.ccfg.org.uk and with https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260031518_Continuous_cover_forestry_in_Britain_challenges_and_opportunities. You might want to check for similar phrases and sentence structures with those sites. DES ^(talk) 20:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

As per DESiegel, you can use the copyvio detection tool to see where the similarities are with which web pages. Adam9007 (talk) 21:17, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Adam9007, when you tag an article and an editor then asks why, it would be helpful to indicate what sort of problems you actually found. This is especially true with a comparatively new editor, as per WP:BITE. For the matter of that, it would really be better practice in a case like this for you to have proactively left a note on Talk:Continuous Cover Forestry describing the issues you found in more detail than a tag supports. I do this frequently. Moreover, while the copyvio detection tool is excellent at detecting actual copying, it is not as good at finding close paraphrasing, and my use of it was merely a guess at what you might have found. Please tell us at least what works you found paraphrasing of that induced you to place the tag. Thank you. DES ^(talk) 21:42, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Am not sure if the person am writing about is notable or not.

Need your help regarding article on an important personality.Rakeshpathai (talk) 17:28, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

no one still respondingRakeshpathai (talk) 17:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rakeshpathai. You only have two edits logged under this account, the two above. Were you working on something that got deleted? Or were you using another account? Who is the person and what is the evidence that they are an "important personality"? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:59, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

It would help if you would include the name of the person? or a link? Jaldous1 (talk) 17:55, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Also please realize that like you, everyone here is a volunteer, with real life demands on their time. Attitude like demanding an answer in 7 minutes will get you nowhere in this volunteer collaborative project. John from Idegon (talk) 18:06, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

am new here, so wasn't sure how this works. I just tried to draft the article, am not sure whether it saved or not.

Its titled Doctor Bhagwan Das PathaiRakeshpathai (talk) 18:10, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Rakeshpathai. That would be Draft:Doctor Bhagwan Das Pathai. Please remember to write in full sentences in a Wikipedia article. "He was married on 28 September 1982." not "Married: 28 September 1982" for example. This draft mis a start, but it needs to explain why this person is significant. Not every doctor will have a Wikipedia article. As part of that, and particularity important, you need to cite reliable sources, especially sources that are independent of the subject. This means not blogs or personal websites, not the site of his employers or partners, not press releases, but newspapers, reputable magazines, or other sources with editorial control and a good reputation for accuracy. This should include multiple sources that each discuss the subject in some detail, say several paragraphs at a minimum. See Wikipedia's Golden Rule, Your First Article, Notability of biographies, and Referencing for Beginners. When you think the draft is ready for formal review, place {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page. I hope this helps. DES ^(talk) 18:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Note to all: I sent Rakeshpathi a talk message explaining that the Teahouse, and Wikipedia, is edited entirely by volunteers on volunteered time. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 18:56, 25 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

Archive

How can I set up an archive for my talk page - FOX 52 (talk) 15:31, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

There's a very thorough tutorial at Help:Archiving a talk page. —2macia22 (talk) 16:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

about adding an article

Hello guys, I am trying to create an article about an Ethiopian personality, who I admire so much. But I don't have any permission from that person. I don't think it is harmful to his career, infact, it can promote him world wide. So is there any way that I can post an article on his biography on wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawit Tesfa (talk • contribs) 14:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Dawit Tesfa, and welcome to the Teahouse. The best way to start a new article is to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Your first article and to make use of the article wizard. You don't need someone's permission to write an article about them, but also note that neither should you be using a Wikipedia article to promote an individual. Articles need to be written in a neutral, encyclopedic tone, and should include a balanced treatment of the subject - including, where relevant, criticism. You also need to consider whether the person meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, which require substantial coverage of a subject in reliable third-party sources before a Wikipedia article can be written. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

It actually seems that you have already started the article, at User:Dawit Tesfa/sandbox. You need to address the concerns expressed there, which led to the draft article being declined. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:28, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Cordless Larry gave you some good advice. To add, a test I often recommend to help determine a subject's notability is the amnesia test:

1. Forget everything you know about the subject you want to write about—act as if you know nothing.
2. Go online (or your library or wherever) and do research on the subject, focusing more closely on third-party news sources and less on sources affiliated with the subject; be sure to check the reliability of the sources
3. From your research, and your research only, write an article
4. If you find that there are few or no sources to use, the subject may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

If you need any help, feel free to ask at this Teahouse again! Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 15:31, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

References cleanup - where is the Reflinks tool now?

What happened to the Reflinks tool for references cleanup? Is there something else available now to do these tasks? --Djembayz (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Djembayz. It has turned into reFill, available under Tools at the left hand side of pages. It has some limitations (Internet Explorer doesn't cooperate and put's # in instead) and some editors will revert it because of the way it formats some things. StarryGrandma (talk) 15:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Will give it a try and see if it gets reverted. --Djembayz (talk) 15:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

@Djembayz and StarryGrandma: Reflinks is available at http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webreflinks.py I believe that reFill is a similar tool from a different person. I had to set an item in my preferences to get reflinks to appear on the left side tool list, it is there now. Reflinks also has some limitations -- it tends to stuff things into title that should be separate, but it is usually an improvement over a bare url cite. DES ^(talk) 13:07, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Ready to go live?

Hi, I have put together a well-sourced article about a notable person: the first East Asian elected to a national legislature in the Americas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Robert_Victor_Evan_Wong

I'm not sure I've used the <ref> tags correctly, since they are not automatically turning into footnotes, except in one case, and there's a message saying I haven't closed one of the pairs, but I can't find where the problem is.

I have more than 10 edits on other pages. I'm not sure what the next step is. Can you help/advise? I don't know if I should Move this now to article status, wait for another editor to do so, or tear this up and repost throughout the "first article" template, which I tried but also found hard to use.

Sorry to be so clueless about the technical details, but I feel the substance of my article is notable, independently-sourced, neutral, etc. I'm just having trouble with the mechanics necessary to get this into the review process.

comment added by Sprucegrouse (talk • contribs) 13:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sprucegrouse. I've copyedited the draft. This is how a citation is made:

<ref>details of source</ref>

→ That is, there's an opening ref tag (<ref>) and a closing ref tag (</ref>; note the forward slash).

Do not use <nowiki> around the ref tags. That's for telling the code not to treat wiki markup as code, as in your use above to show the ref tag, rather than having it manifest its function. Another issue was that in order for these tags to properly display, you needed a references section, with code there to tell the software "this is where to display the references". I've added that using the template {{reflist}}. You were also attempting to place various things you see in other articles by a "homemade" method. For example a table of contents is automatically generated (when an article has four or more sections) – that is, you don't make one, the software does. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:10, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Fuhghettaboutit!

What next? May I move it to another area for review?

Sprucegrouse (talk) 15:32, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Sprucegrouse. You now need to introduce proper wiki-links, as I did in this edit. Find a term which has a Wikipedia article, and which it might help the reader to know more about and make a link by adding double square brackets around the target term, like this: [[Target]]. Don't over-do this. If an article includes a phrase like "The door of the house was painted green." it is not helpful to link "door", as that would be of use to most readers. You can also find and add additional reliable sources if any are available, but the sources already present are probably sufficient. The formatting can be improved a bit, for example, titles of works should be in italics such as The Daily Argosy (not just The Daily Argosy). When you think it is ready for formal review, place {{subst:submit}} (without the nowiki and code tags) at the top of the page. There is no need to move the draft, if it is approved the reviewer will do that for you. DES ^(talk) 18:42, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks, Fuhghettaboutit. I appreciate all your help. I took the tutorial for beginners, which was also very helpful, so I should be a little better at the basics now. My article is now in line for review, about 500 articles back in the queue.Sprucegrouse (talk) 22:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Advice on article rejected for notability?

Hello, I've been working hard on getting the article Draft:Wei_Dai published:

• Worked on the article for a while before submitting for review.
• After the initial rejection, I made dozens of improvements.
• I asked the reviewer for suggestions, but never got a response.
• Did my best to read through WP:REFBEGIN and WP:PEOPLE and find reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
• I asked for more info on the "Articles for creation help desk". No reply.
• I contacted other editors who are working on related articles, but did not receive any constructive advice.
• After many more edits, moving my user space version to Draft: namespace and merging content from existing draft, I submitted the article again. It was rejected.

Part of the problem here is that it is difficult to establish notability for a cypherpunk who deliberately avoided media attention, interviews, etc.

Considering the influence his projects have had, plus the many sources which do mention him (although briefly), I am confused what more is needed?

Reliable sources that are independent of the subject:

• New York Times.
• Wall Street Journal.
• The Sunday Times.
• The Register.
• Business Insider.
• The Washington Post.
• Engadget.
• IEEE Spectrum.
• University of Maryland, Department of Mathematics.
• Journal of Peer Production
• Unenumerated - Blog of world-famous cryptographer Nick Szabo
• International Association for Cryptologic Research.

I'm close to giving up... am I wasting my time with this? -- JonathanCross (talk) 12:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, JonathanCross. I'm afraid you may be. I haven't looked at your references, but just on the basis of what you've written here, somebody who has "deliberately avoided media attention" may well not be notable. You say "the many sources which do mention him (albeit briefly)" (emphasis mine). Brief mentions are not generally enough to establish notability. I am become increasingly clear that "notability" is a very unfortunate word for the Wikipedia concept, because people repeatedly assume (reasonably) that it means famous, influential, significant, popular or some thing like that. It doesn't mean any of these. The way I think of it is that it means "there is enough independent, reliably published, material about the subject to make it possible to write an article on the subject". If Wei Dai is often mentioned in articles on something else, he may well appear in a Wikipedia article about that something else; but do those mentions, even taken together, allow one to put anything significant into the article. As I say, I haven't looked at your references - this is just in response to what you've said above. I hope this helps. --ColinFine (talk) 12:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the response ColinFine.

"there is enough independent, reliably published, material about the subject to make it possible to write an article on the subject"

(Emphasis on the word "enough" added by me)

There is a lot of sourced information there, so it doesn't seem to be a quantity issue from what I can tell, but more that subject does not have mainstream articles about him as a person. Do their accomplishments not count towards notability?

do those mentions, even taken together, allow one to put anything significant into the article

Would you mind taking a look at the draft? (I of course feel there is an abundance of "significant" information in the article. :-)

If it is true that Wikipedia will not allow this article to be published (shame), then I'd like to somehow alert others not to waste their time the way I did. Can I add a note on Talk:Wei_Dai pointing to the draft? -- JonathanCross (talk) 13:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

(e/c) Hey Jonathan. No, I think an article is possible here – and you're close. Some possible additional sources for you to mine from (I haven't looked in depth at these, just giving you some options): [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] and [8]. For the book sources you might use the Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books to easily get the citation to place (though I always tweak its output, usually adding location information; changing the name format to last, first; changing the exact publication date to just the year; and most importantly, the page parameter always needs fixing: either add an end page for the range, or remove the en-dash – then hit make citation and copy the code). This is more of a general note, but to the extent relevant remove any extra citations to less reliable sources where they are just added to give a veneer of more sources. That detracts from articles, makes them more difficult to review and is actually a red flag for reviewers that often correlates to non-notability by overcompensation for lack of reliable, in-depth sourcing existing. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:22, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Fuhghettaboutit, I'll check out those references (seems they are considered more reputable) and remove some of the less notable ones as you suggest. Cheers, -- JonathanCross (talk) 13:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I agree that Wei Dai is certainly notable enough for an article. Jaldous1 (talk) 17:59, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia support javascript...

...or html5? I think there is a way to use javascript, but I'm not sure. does <script></script> tag work? Also, does it support HTML5? I have never seen any animated pages except for those which used GIFs. Frank (User Page) (talk) 08:02, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Frank, I think you would get a quicker and more accurate answer if you asked at the Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) instead. That is where all the tech-savvy editors hang out. :) w.carter-Talk 10:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

@Imfrankliu:: <script></script> does not work. A wikitext page cannot load JavaScript but there are special JavaScript pages ending in .js and not associated with specific wikitext pages. Some js pages like MediaWiki:Common.js are made by administrators and run for all users with JavaScript-enabled browsers. Some js pages run for users who have them enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. Some only run for a user who made them for their own account, or others who choose to load them from the account of another user. See Wikipedia:Customisation and Wikipedia:User scripts. Wikitext only allows a limited subset of HTML. See Help:HTML in wikitext and Wikipedia:HTML5. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

How to improve a page so it is not a candidate for speedy deletion

Hello,

I am new here, and am trying to create an article for a World sporting event. However, it was flagged for speedy deletion. I don't know why, the info was all factual, it wasn't "sales-y" and certainly not spammy or inaccurate. It was an event that reached 700,000 people on Facebook and continues to be very popular, so it's not like it's a "made up entity". Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Figure_Championship

Any advice on how to fix it up (and how to get rid of this tag) so it is not a candidate for speedy deletion would be great! :) I read the info but don't quite understand. Lakeplacidskater (talk) 03:34, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

@Lakeplacidskater: If I were you, I would move the draft to the main page.
Your page meets the R2 criteria for speedy deletion: "Redirects, apart from shortcuts, from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces."
I am a new editor, too, so I hope my advice can be helpful. If not, please don't be mad! *sniff *sniff

Template:Newbie-biting

Frank (User Page) (talk) 04:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Lakeplacidskater. On a personal note, I visited Lake Placid in 2003 and have fond memories of the Adirondacks. That being said, your article is completely lacking in references to reliable, independent sources, devoting significant coverage to the topic. Your only source is to the website of the event itself. That is not enough to keep the article. By the way, we don't care about how many people "like" anything on Facebook. Not a bit. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:24, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Another factor to consider is that there is already a fairly comprehensive article at World Figure Skating Championships. Does your new article add anything new that is not in the existing article? If so, we should consider whether the best approach is to merge the additional information into the existing article. --Gronk Oz (talk) 05:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I see that World Figure Championship is now in mainspace, as a redirect to a draft. That can't be right. If I were at home with a real computer instead of on holiday with a flaky laptop, I would try to fix it. Maproom (talk) 07:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I've deleted the mainspace redirect and cleaned up the draft and added one independent source. There's local coverage to be mined from the Lake Placid News (though not much else I found). But there's quite a few of them. There's the one I found as well as this, this, this. this, this, this, this, this and this. Lakeplacidskater: using sources like these for expansion information (not for their copyrighted sentences) and citing to them is a good way to go to make an acceptable article. You might emulate the citation form I placed when I cited to one article from this source for others. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

New article is rejected, but comparable article is allowed

I have been slowly putting together an article that I believe to be notably sourced, including published articles written by others in the publishing industry. However when I requested approval it was rejected. But a comparable article about another company, with citations that are clearly PR was allowed. I've never been able to get a clear answer on why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tipalti vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payoneer

Zoodc (talk) 23:52, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Well if I had my way the other article would be deleted too. Would that make you feel better? if you want to gain perhaps 7% more credibility, put something, anything, on your user page and your user name will become a blue link rather than a red one, suggesting that perhaps you came to wikipedia to do something other than just launch your article. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. As you can see, another editor agrees that maybe the other article should be deleted. See the deletion policy for how that can be requested. However, in reading over your contribution history, I see that you have a conflict of interest because you are employed by Tipalti. It is possible that the other reviewer noticed that, but gave a different reason for the decline. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:18, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Wow, I guess we now know that 5 hours is "never". That's how long the editor waited between the time he posted a question on my talk page, and now has answered here. The current article is quite promotional, which is the rationale I gave when I declined it. I haven't looked at the other article, simply because it is irrelevant. This article is promotional. I actually hadn't realized their was a COI until I just read his post on my talk page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:02, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Zoodc. The first thing you should do is read, study and comply with the Paid-contribution disclosure, which imposes legally mandatory requirements on you as a paid editor. Do not ignore this. Once you have complied with those binding requirements, consider this: English Wikipedia has nearly five million articles, and millions of those should be either improved or deleted. You seem to be saying, "There is a mediocre, promotional article about one of our competitors. Therefore, we deserve to have a mediocre, promotional article about our company". My answer to that proposition is "no way under the sun". That's bad logic. Prove that your company is notable by bringing forth rock solid coverage in reliable, independent sources, and then step aside. Uninvolved editors will evaluate your best efforts. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Are deleted pages archived...

...or are they just gone? (the contents)Frank (User Page) (talk) 20:07, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Only admins can see them. - Supdiop (T🔹C) 20:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

There are also various places that you can see them; Archive.org archives everything so as long as they were up long enough. There's speedydeletion.wikia.com which is dedicated to keeping copies of things that were deleted. And other sites such as wikipedia mirrors may have old snapshots or just keep around deleted articles.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 23:00, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Also, if you have a legitimate reason for wanting access to a deleted article, Frank, such as if it was deleted for having insufficient sources but you've found new reliable ones and don't want to have to start completely from scratch creating a new article on the same topic, and the reason for deleting the page did not include copyright violations, someone listed at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles will often be willing to put a copy of such a deleted article on a userspace subpage so that its useful content can be retained. That page also links to information on reversing the deletion of an article or other page. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:36, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey, the upload a picture is blocked by "ContentKeeper" on my chromebook, any way around that?

I wanted to upload a picture of myself but it was blocked by ContentKeeper. Any way around that?

Starbomb is awesome (talk) 18:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

@Starbomb is awesome: Welcome to the Teahouse!

Wikipedia doesnt have anything to do with the nannyware installed on your computer. The reference desk might be able to point you to some sites that have hacks that let you violate its controls. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:19, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Starbomb is awesome, and welcome to the Teahouse. ContentKeeper seems to be a third-party program, probably installed by the educational institution that provided your Chromebook. See here for more information, since Wikipedia does not yet have a ContentKeeper article. On another note, is there some educational use that a photo of you would contribute to Wikipedia? Wikipedia is primarily an encyclopedia; it is not like social media sites where you create a profile page. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 20:24, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Editors like me who disclose their real names often also post photos of themselves on their user pages (or Teahouse host profiles). I am 63 and self employed, and have relatively little to lose. Younger editors, and those who value their anonymity, should think very carefully before posting photos of themselves here. The internet can get ugly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

That's true, Cullen328, but "editors like you" also have years of contributions towards Wikipedia and have established that you are here to edit the encyclopedia. A photo on the user page of a newer editor with comparatively few contributions to their name is less likely to be appropriate, just as it's inappropriate for users to spend more time editing their user pages than editing articles. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 00:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

You are correct, GrammarFascist. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:01, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) GrammarFascist I disagree with the thinking behind your contention above. There are (or should be) no second class editors here. if it is acceptable that I have my picture on my user page (and I do, and did have years ago, before I was nearly as experienced as i am now -- in fact I posted it when i had been editing for less than 6 months), then it is acceptable for a brand new editor to have his or her picture there, if such an editor duly chooses to have it after being warned of the implications. If a user does nothing but work on a user page there may be a case of WP:NOTHERE, but a new but productive editor should not be pressured to refrain from things more experienced editors do. DES ^(talk) 01:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I didn't think I was proposing a strict delineation of first-class and second-class editors, DES, my apologies that I didn't make myself more clear. When I said content such as a photo on a user page "is less likely to be appropriate", all I meant was that it was less likely — not that it was categorically inappropriate. And it is customary to advise visitors to this page against treating their Wikipedia user page like a social media profile; that's all I meant to do. Again, sorry that my intended meaning did not come across. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

My opinion is that all of the experienced editors commenting here have made valid points, that there are no easy answers, and that improving the encyclopedia must be the main motivation for any productive editor. Thanks to all. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

@GrammarFascist, Cullen328, DESiegel, and Starbomb is awesome: While caution should always be exercised on the Internet, the Template:Infobox Wikipedia user, currently used by over 4400 editors, contains options for photo and many other personal data. The template has been in use for nine years, so I assume that the parameters have been vetted and deemed appropriate and within the guidelines of the WP. I have seen this template on many new editor pages since it is easy to use and resembles what people are used to in social media. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:04, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Who is owner and controller of Wikipedia?

Yes, I know, it's the Wikimedia Foundation, but who controls it? There must be some boss or so. --Ueberwolf (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Like all American non-profit and charitable organizations, it has a board of trustees. Please see Wikimedia Foundation#Governance - Arjayay (talk) 18:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. --Ueberwolf (talk) 18:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ueberwolf. The executive director of WMF is Lila Tretikov, but the WMF has no day-to-day editorial control over Wikipedia content. That is in the hands of volunteer Wikipedia editors like you and I. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I see, thank you, but there are e.g. administrators and bureaucrats who have to control the WP e.g. that there are no lies in WP, but only the truth aso.. --Ueberwolf (talk) 16:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Ueberwolf, but our administrators and bureaucrats are just volunteer editors who are trusted with additional powers. They are not paid. The responsibility for maintaining accuracy though verifiability is the job of all editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Of course, but buraeucrats e.g. cannot be degraded anymore and if they are for whatever reason blocked they can unblock themselves. So they have a major power, don't they? --Ueberwolf (talk) 17:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Minimum threshold for autopatrolled

I was of the impression the minimum threshold guideline for receiving the permission was 50, but it says on the Autopatrolled page this is 25, a change not suggested by any discussion on the talk page. Which is it? Thanks, Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 16:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Rubbish computer: Check out this discussion on the talk page, which points to this discussion at the Village Pump. The latter is where support was expressed to reduce the number of articles from 50 to 25. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:39, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

@SuperHamster: Okay, thanks. --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 17:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Creating Wikiproject

How can i create a new Wikiproject? Is there any pre-installed template and format which will help creating Wikiproject. Can a single user create them or its a joint effort by a group of users? The Avengers (talk) 14:49, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, The Avengers, and welcome to the Teahouse. Prior to making a new WikiProject it's helpful to search the WikiProject Directory in case the WP you're considering might already exist. Or that the topic might fit under an existing encyclopedia subject area. Secondly, a good resource is at Wikipedia:WikiProject#Creating and maintaining a project. While I myself have not created a new WP perhaps another more experienced editor can chime in with additional advice. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 17:49, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

It's probably useful to establish that at least a few people are interested in helping. Many WikiProjects are just a collection of pages with no active work or even members. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC).

I would start by following the advice at Creating a Wikiproject, especially checking for existing proposals and identifying the scope. RockMagnetist(talk) 22:58, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedians, 5 minutes of your attention, please.

I would like to offer to my fellow Wikipedians to have a look at the sketch of the following idea: AN ANNUAL COMPETITION IN PHOTOGRAPHY AMONG WIKIPEDIANS ONLY, and to consider a possibility to turn this sketch into a working project by ideas, suggestions and constructive criticism, or to offer a better plan to solve the “problem”.

The thing is, that many articles (as I have noticed) on various subjects of science can be illustrated in much more interesting, expressive way, in better quality and, what is even more important, in stronger connection to the essence of the subject; that’s why I propose to hold a competition in photography for (as a first step) the science articles.

It is necessary to stress here, that the appearance of the new photos in the articles is getting less attention of the Editors, than the appearance of the new articles, that is why good texts are bit by bit being filled with obscure and sometimes confounding photos, which often does not correspond to the current level of photography and doesn't reflect the latest scientific concepts and achievements.

The proposed competition could attract a focused attention to the articles of all participants, what will help to improve the quality of edited photos, and the winners will become a Wiki’s known and recognized experts, as each winning photo should be marked by the symbol of the win —Wiki-medal; thus, the winners will be able to give valuable advice to those, who need it, and to help the beginners to join future competitions, being better prepared.

Each day really gigantic number of people are approaching each Wiki page, and especially articles about science, such as palaeontology, astronomy, geology, etc...

For many of the readers these articles are the only immediately available source of information they have, and illustrations are incredibly important, as they act here as the “windows” to the World of Science, and this wonderful world should be presented correctly and interestingly.

I believe, that many Wikipedians can offer high quality photos of their own work for each of selected by Editors topics (articles). Those who are not interested in photography, could participate as the creators of designs for Wiki-medals, or to vote for the best 3 photos on each topic.

As the purpose of the competition, in the first place, is to improve a quality of the illustration of the articles, it will be appropriate to have competition without 1-2-3 places, but with selection of 3 best photos for each article, and prize the winners, for example, in category Chemistry, by 3 Wiki-medals of the same, ‘chemistry’ design, but in category Astronomy — by 3 Wiki-medals of the different design, created specially for the article Astronomy, and so on.

Every next year Editors could offer, let's say 4 (probable, it will be the optimal number) new different subjects for competition and 4 designs of Wiki-medal. Designs should reflect the assents of the subjects by its symbols. All designs, being different, should be contained in the chosen shape, which remains constant. On my page I presented an example of 4 designs of Wiki-medals for the best illustration of the following articles: Chemistry, Geology, Mineralogy, Gemmology.

It doesn't mean at all, that I wish to suggest to narrow down the Photography Competition to some single category, as for example, the illustration of science articles, or wider—to narrow down competitions to Photography only.

There’s an endless variety of the possible types of brilliant competitions and only the will and creative ideas of Wikipedians are needed for their development. I’m offering to take Photography Competition under consideration just as a first step, and if it will be found by Wikipedians, as the positive step, then the advice, recommendations and suggestions of the experienced and willing to help Wikipedians will be absolutely essential and invaluable, as there are a lot of questions here, for example: how to organize the competition technically? Whether it is possible to create a special contest page? In what form shall Editors vote for the best photos? And many more.

But the first question - what Wikipedians think about this proposal?

Thank you.

Regards, Chris Oxford. Chris Oxford (talk) 15:35, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

How would this differ from Picture of the Year, and how do you propose to address the issue of people thinking the winning photos have some kind of special status and shouldn't be removed from articles, which has been an ongoing problem for as long as I can remember regarding WP:Featured pictures? There isn't much correlation between aesthetic attractiveness and encyclopedic value. This isn't to say I'm automatically opposed to such a process, just that there would need to be very good arguments in favour of adding yet another layer of bureaucracy. ‑ iridescent 15:58, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chris Oxford and welcome to the Teahouse. Since you are relatively new to the community you may not know that most of the pictures used in the Wikipedia are stored at another Wikimedia project called the Commons. This is where the pictures, videos and audio recording are kept, currently 28,780,973 of them. On this sister project there are many competitions that are similar to the one you are outlining in your post, such as "Wiki Loves Monuments" and "Wiki Loves Earth". In fact, there is one that is almost exactly what you propose. It is held on a monthly basis, you can read all about it here. This month's challenge is "100 years later". Previous themes have been things like "Personal Protective Equipment", "Fountains and wells", "Fossils", "Steps, Stairs and Staircases", "Household items in use", etc. With so many active photographers the subject needs to be more narrow than just "Chemistry" or "Geology", since the number of entries for such large categories would be impossible to handle. I'm sorry, but I don't see the reason for having two similar competitions. Best, w.carter-Talk 18:03, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I also see that you have uploaded some pictures here at the Wikipedia. It would be better if you uploaded them directly at the Commons. Start on this page. If you look at the pages where your pictures are, you can see that they are all tagged with a notice that they should be moved to Commons. w.carter-Talk 18:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

reference.

On internet many entries related to saint bhole baba are available.Can they be use for the reference required by the wikipedia? BHOLE BABA GURU JI (talk) 11:35, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, BHOLE BABA GURU JI, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia requires that articles be supported by reliable sources. This means sources that have a degree of editorial supervision and a reputation for accuracy and fact checking, in general. Many internet sources do not fit this description, although others do. Also, to establish the notability of a subject, independent sources are needed, not including press releases or statements by the subject or associates of the subject. It all depends on the particular source and the statements that source is being cited to support. Questions about specific uses of specific sources can be asked at the reliable sources notice board or here, but the RSN is watched by editors particularly experienced in such matters. DES ^(talk) 11:47, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

What is the point of compressing...

...if Wikipedia saves all versions of images? For example, I've seen images being compressed losslessly, but the original copy is still kept. Say an 1MB image being losslessly compressed to a 900KB image, but both copies are kept, thus the actual disk space used would be 1MB+900KB. Just Curious. Frank (User Page) (talk) 07:13, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh wait another question, can I create templates in the /wiki directory? Say /wiki/Template:Foo, so people can use my template by using {{foo}}. Frank (User Page) (talk) 07:16, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure but it may help the page load faster. I think, it wouldn't make much difference. - Supdiop (T🔹C) 07:27, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you can create templates. - Supdiop (T🔹C) 07:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Imfrankliu - I suggest you don't think about "in the wiki directory", or about URLs at all. A page in Wikipedia has its name (which might include a workspace, such as Template: or Draft:) and you link to it by putting it in double square brackets. So [[Template:Tl]] appears as Template:Tl, a link to the template called 'Tl'; and [[London]] appears as London, a link to the article (or mainspace page) called 'London'. --ColinFine (talk) 09:28, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

The point of compression, particularly for a site with millions of users, is to save bandwith. Disk space is barely relevant. Maproom (talk) 09:34, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

@ColinFine: What I'm thinking is creating the page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Something, and add a userbox or something. So I can use that userbox quickly by adding {{Something}}. Can I do that? Frank (User Page) (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

So not [[Something]], but {{Something}}. Frank (User Page) (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh I can! Didn't read the previous reply carefully. Frank (User Page) (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Follow up to "Blacklist/blocked-link error in error?" question yesterday

Hi PrimeHunter and JohnBlackburne Thanks for helping me investigate. I have had to post a new question here because I was stopped from "editing" / adding a reply to your responses again with the Blacklist/blocked-link error. The last page I tried to edit was Cravath, Swaine & Moore just to delete "Swaine2012" in order to fix the cite error which I think you will see there presently. It is not always the same page but I don't recall the other pages in this moment. I don't believe I have tried to add templates (not sure I know how). I will meanwhile check for possible malicious code on my machine. Thanks! remando (talk) 20:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I just had a look and had no problems fixing it by changing the names of both definitions so they were distinct. There is probably a more elegant way to do it, as the refs are almost identical differing only by a page number, but it fixed the error. I did not encounter any problems such as you described. I am just an autoregistered editor like you so you should have been able to make the same or a similar edit.

To be more particular over what you might check it could be a rogue browser extension or plugin. They are used to do things like ad-blocking but can do almost anything including things you don’t want. They operate within the browser which might explain why you are seeing a problem just editing. You might also try using another browser to see if it makes a difference.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 21:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

The template {{Rp}} can be used, to give a page number after the reference. It would look like this.¹ It's far from ideal but it is one solution. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:57, 24 October 2015 (UTC).

Thank you JohnBlackburne and Rich for helping with my troubleshooting! I am on different machine this afternoon to see if it makes a difference. I was just blocked again from editing in this space a few minutes ago using the same browser as before (Chrome) but now I am trying with a new browser, so fingers crossed you will be able to see this message from me. remando (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2015 (UTC) It worked! Thanks again! remando (talk) 18:52, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Random page patrollling

How do I patrol pages so that a notification would appear in the users feed?WaterViper (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Every time you click "mark this page as patrolled" it automatically sends the page creator a notification saying "WaterViper patrolled Example page". You should be sure to read the guidelines for new page patrollers before you start, though, and if you see something you're unsure about, get a second or third opinion before you tag it or notify the creator. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 20:49, 23 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

I think random page patrol is different to new pages patrol, White Arabian mare. I don't quite understand your question though, WaterViper? By "feed", I presume you mean watchlist, but which users are you concerned are notified? Cordless Larry (talk) 21:07, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I assumed WaterViper meant new page, not random page patrol.😳 Another way to find articles to improve, though, is to find the lists of stub-class articles and sort through them, viewing the ones that look interesting and editing them as needed; sometimes you can make a lot of good improvements that way. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 00:36, 24 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

Userboxes

I need some help organizing my userboxes. I want to put them under different headings and have them neat, but don't know how to do that. YoSoyUnHamster (talk) 18:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

They look pretty well organized already to me. You do have some headings there, but I guess you don't think they're enough? One thing some users do alternately is just create a whole subpage for their userboxes, and put section headers titled beliefs, likes, dislikes, etc over them, thereby sorting them by topic. Other people (me) just throw them all together on their userpage under one heading. I guess the best thing to do is just group them however you want, since they're yours. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 19:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

Hello, YoSoyUnHamster. This is a friendly reminder to you that this is a project to build an encyclopedia, not to create individual user pages adorned with lots of user boxes. User pages are to facilitate collaboration with other editors to improve the encyclopedia. Right now, you have over three times as many edits to your own user pages as you do to encyclopedia articles. Please reconsider that approach. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

How to place link in template

I am editing an infobox template.

It has data# = { { { country| } } }

How can I link that so that if someone writes

| country = India

while using the template, it automatically links to India? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Pankaj Jain I see you have been working on Template:Infobox project. Note that while this infobox is not as widely used as some infoboxes are, it is not a good idea to make changes on the live copy as you test things out. Ther3e are currently 73 live articles that use this infobox, plus perhaps 20 sandboxes, drafts and other pages. Any change you make will affect all of those pages. Before making any changes you should propose them on Template talk:Infobox project and perhaps put some messages on the talk pages of articles that use the infobox to see if there is consensus that your changes are desirable. For one thing, It is not always the case that the name of the country is also the title of an article, and if there is already a link to the country in the text of the article, a user might not want another in the infobox.

Testing of changes to a template like this should usually be done in a template sandbox, such as Template:Infobox project/Sandbox. This should start as a copy of the template, and then changes can be made here for testing. It is also common to create a testcase page, such as Template:Infobox project/Testcases. Here several different calls with different parameters can be made, using both the live and the sandbox version, to see the differences between the two. Introducing too many parameters to an infobox is often a mistake -- I think that many infoboxes have gone overboard in this regard.

You will also need to handle the case when a parameter you are linking to is empty or not supplied.

I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 20:00, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

This doesn't answer my query, regarding how to link, in any aspect. I haven't edited any of the existing parameters and hence have taken full care for articles using the template. I have only edited the new parameters introduced, since the existing ones did not serve the purpose. The country was mere example, I have been working on a few infoboxes including some existing ones, and need to know the syntax for link as is there in infobox former country. So if you can share the syntax, that would be of real help. Thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 20:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Capankajsmilyo Do remember that any change to a template forces the rebuilding of every page that uses it, even if the rendered result is unchanged because the altered parameters were not used. It is really best to set up a template sandbox, test all your changes there, and then (if and only if there is consensus for the change) make a single edit to the actual template. Multiple rebuilding of multiple pages is not a good idea, although it is not as bad in this case as it would be if thousands or tens of thousands of pages were using the template.

I didn't give a specific answer because I wasn't sure, not having tested such a case. It looks to me as if data# = [[{ { { country| } } }]] ought to work, but I'm not sure how an empty value is handled here. If you want to handle cases whre the displayed name of a country is not the same as the article title to link to, you might need to introduce a country_link= parameter and have the template output [[{{{country_link}}}|{{{country}}}]] IF country_link is non-empty. (that would be done with an #IF parser function).

Still I urge you to do your testing in a sandbox version of the template. DES ^(talk) 21:35, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, displayed name of country is same as link title. However, [[{{{country|}}}]] doesn't work in empty fields. It returns [[]]. Is there any other alternative? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 21:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Capankajsmilyo, the display name and the link target might not always be the same. For example, one might want to display "UK" but link to United Kingdom. Remember you are not building an infobox just for indian projects.

As this is making a call to {{infobox}} I wasn't sure if it had already built-in mechanisms to handle generating no output for an empty parameter. If not then a parser function call will be needed, something like:

data# = {{#if:{{{country|}}}|[[{{{country}}}]]|{{{country}}} }}

You would need to test that, of course. See Help:Magic words#Conditional. I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 22:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

data# = {{#if:{{{country|}}}|[[{{{country}}}]]}}

will do the job slightly better. If the country parameter isn't defined, you don't even want to display it unlinked. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC).

How to upload an image with permission from archives

I am working part time at Mount Holyoke Archives and editing an article entitled List of Glascock Prize Winners and Participants. I am trying to upload a 1955 photo from the college archives with a publisher who may also be the photographer, and who has passed away, and have permission from the head of the archives but don't seem to fit any of the categories listed for releasing the rights. How might I go about uploading it, if possible?Romolade'Bardi (talk) 17:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse! If the copyright owner died, then the rights would pass on with their estate and would need to be release by someone who actually holds the rights, which is most probably not the head of the archives. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

And furthermore, Romolade'Bardi, "permission" is probably not enough. The copyright owner must explicitly release it under a licence compatible with Wikipedia, such as CC-BY-SA. Please see Donating copyright materials for what they need to do. --ColinFine (talk) 22:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Of course, if the image was published in 1955, or indeed in any year up to 1963, there is a good chance that the copyright was not renewed 17 years later, which would put it in the public domain under US law, unless the author was a non-US person, or the publication was outside the US. However, determining non-renewal with reasonable assurance for an image is a non-trivial task. (for text with a consistent title and author it is easier). It also pretty much demands a known year of publication. Would such an image qualify for fair-use as an image of a "historic event"? DES ^(talk) 23:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I am not a new editor, but . . .

a vandal at Browder v. Gayle made a series of bad (as in "bad dog") edits and I know that there is a way to remove them all in one edit, but I don't know how, so if someone who does could take a look at it we will all sleep better tonight. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Carptrash. Thanks to Nthep, who reverted the vandalism before I could get to it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:56, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Carptrash: One of the ways is to go to the history tab and choose the edit before the vandalism starts and compare to the last vandalism edit, then from that comparison page, click Undo. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. Carptrash (talk) 20:46, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

what is a sandbox?

I cant help but notice what is the sandbox tab?ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, ArabAmazigh12. Your sandbox is a place for you to experiment with wikicode, to keep notes, to draft sections to add to articles, or for any other purpose that helps build the encyclopedia. Although your sandbox will usually be left alone by other editors, you do not have 100% control. It can't be used to host copyright violations or personal attacks on people, for example. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:53, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

The guidelines regarding use of your sandbox and other user pages can be found at the shortcut WP:USERPAGE. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi ArabAmazigh12. You can usually find / create your sandbox in Special:MyPage/sandbox. Please do visit the guidelines. Frank (User Page) (talk) 19:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

DVD cover image usage

I have noticed that a large number of film articles make use of non-free images such as posters and DVD covers without proper licensing or issues. I attempted to do the same for an article, however the item was quickly deleted despite my use rationale and attempts to justify the picture's use. I understand that for copyright reasons these images are precariously used, but I would like to know just how so many articles are able to use such images without permission and whether I am simply putting in the wrong details when it comes to writing about the license and use?

Wacky-Sansaizue (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Non-free images cannot be uploaded to Commons where you uploaded that file. They must be uploaded here on the English Wikipedia and they must comply with all the criteria listed at WP:NFCC. The easiest way is to use the {{Non-free use rationale}} template. --ukexpat (talk) 14:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

ukexpat Brilliant. Thanks very much for the info. I knew I'd seen that template before. Wacky-Sansaizue (talk) 19:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

No problem.--ukexpat (talk) 00:46, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

deleted

I need to revise my deleted article how can I do that?Hengameh Nikmaram (talk) 12:54, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Hengameh Nikmaram:, and welcome to the tea house. I look for an article you might've edited which has been deleted and did not find one. Can you tell me more about this article?--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Hengameh Nikmaram: I now see what happened. You didn't actually create an article or have it deleted, you edited a wiki project page to add a first draft of an article. That wiki project is a place to discuss edits to templates not to start an article. However, I fully recognize this place can be very confusing, so it may have seemed like a good place to start an article.

There are a couple different places to work on a new article. One of them is a user space draft. I created one for you here:

User:Hengameh Nikmaram/Soosan Ghaemmagham

Please feel free to work on it there.

I see that you haven't been properly welcomed so I left a welcome template on your talk page. One of the links is "how to create your first article" which sounds very relevant. Welcome to Wikipedia and I hope the next steps go better.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

new WP account

Greetings, I have coble of queries related to our new account WP.QACA; appreciate your assistance: 1- How can I retain our page. 2- How can I edit/ add more article 3- How can I make my page popular Kind Regards Dr. Hussam ElBakry (Wp.qaca (talk) 07:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wp.qaca. Perhaps you do not understand that this is a neutral encyclopedia, and that our articles need to summarize what reliable, independent sources have written about the topic. We need references to those sources. The article in question is Quantum AlBadi Chartered Accountant, which is unreferenced and highly promotional. Please read Your first article to understand the changes you need to make to this article, and how to write more acceptable articles in the future. Wikipedia does not care about the popularity of individual articles. It is true, though, that a well-written, comprehensive article will show up high on relevant internet search engine inquiries. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:42, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

And your user name was blocked because it was being used for promotional purposes. It would also have been blocked for using a company/business name and for being a shared account ("our new account"), both of which are not permitted.--ukexpat (talk) 13:27, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

how to change the name of a page?

ok so I made a page for Hismaic Arabic but I forgot to say it was a dialect instead I just left it as Hismaic so I made another page how do I delete the other one that just says Hismaic???ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 07:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

ArabAmazigh12 you can place any of {{Db-g7}}, {{Db-author}}, {{Db-blanked}}, {{Db-self}} on the top of the page you want deleted (Hismaic) so long as none else has made extensive edits to it. You might also consider wp:redirecting the first page to the second, (Hismaic dialect).

• Note that the title of this section doesn't match the question you have asked. You could have WP:moved the original page to the new title, but I am not sure you have enough edits to do that yet? You need to be WP:Autoconfirmed. - 220 of ^Borg 08:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

293 edits and 4 months is plenty, so certainly should be autoconfirmed. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

So how do I become auto conformed?ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 13:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

You just need to have been registered for four days and to have made 10 edits, ArabAmazigh12, so you should in fact already be autoconfirmed. You can check at Special:Preferences. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Replacement for Template:Address

I'm working on CE of the page KMFY, and it appears that the author appeared to add Template:Address, which doesn't exist, for the address and contact info of the radio station. Should I just delete it, or is there a proper contact info template I should use? Astrosalad (talk) 06:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Astrosalad. Here is my best understanding of consensus, though opinions may vary: In general, encyclopedia articles should not include contact information in articles about companies and organizations. A street address should only be included if the address is a historic building or widely discussed. Wikipedia is not a business directory or a phone book. The group's website or official social media site can be mentioned once in an "External links" section, and in the optional infobox, if one is included. That's where readers should go for more detailed contact information. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

On The Arab disporia page

on the Arab Diaspora page it says there are 13 million outside the middle east Arabs but they don't mention the other people of Arab descent like the 15 million Syrians and 5 million Yemenis in Indonesia and the 22 million Lebanese excluding 4 million and the 7 million Arabs in France Of Algerian Moroccan Descent ....Basically why Arent we mentioning it also why are the numbers saying there are 1 million Lebanese in brazil if there are 12 million people of Lebanese descent I had a ref to it but someone seemed to removed itArabAmazigh12 (talk) 04:07, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, ArabAmazigh12. The Teahouse is for getting answers to questions about procedures for editing Wikipedia. What you are describing is a routine content dispute. First, find a high quality reliable source about the demographics of the Arab diaspora. The definition of "Arab" seems variable, and my hunch is that many Algerians and Moroccans would not be considered Arabs by reliable sources, or in their own self identification. But we need to reflect what the sources say. So, boldly edit to improve the article, citing reliable sources. If you are reverted, discuss the matter on the article's talk page, working toward building a consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:54, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Who can edit?

I am going to be writing up an article within the next month or two, after getting my sources together. I was wondering who can edit what I write? I am concerned about those who won't edit for positive reasons. Do I report them if this happens? Are there a set of people on Wikipedia who are on patrol? Do edits need to be approved? I'm really just thinking ahead, so any links for me to read about this will prove beneficial. Thank you. Hrh1986 (talk) 01:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Hrh1986: as it says in the edit box of every edit " Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone—subject to certain terms and conditions." and no, you cannot prevent others from making changes. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Read the dispute resolution policy for guidance on how to deal with content disputes and with conduct disputes. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hrh1986, welcome. There is very little vandalism on the English version of Wikipedia. Unless your page is fringe or controversial it will not attract nutters. What is your topic? You can keep an eye on the article you create and you can easily revert any vandalism. If the article you launch is well read others will fix vandalism too. You can warn and report repeat vandals. You set the warnings yourself on the offending users Talk page. You can do it in plain language or you can use easy to set templates. You can also discuss problems on the article Talk page. Pages start out being wide open. Anybody can edit, even anonymous users, unless the page has been set up with restrictions (like semi-protected, fully protected, or pending-changes-review protected). Pending changes only protects the article from edits by very new or unregistered users. Even if a page is fully protected, edit requests may be made by anyone on the article's Talk page, and then an Administrator can approve or deny the edit. Once the article is launched its is wide open for community editing. Be careful of edit warring and the 3RR rule, and BRD. These concepts are explained on the links from the welcome-message on your Talk page that some kind editor has invariably sent you by now. I hope this helps. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Hrh1986. People have answered your general concerns, but not your specific questions. Anybody can edit what you write, and consensus among editors - not only you - will decide whether edits people make should be kept or not. There are people who are on patrol, but nobody has appointed them: they are people who have chosen to exercise that function. If you haven't already read Your first article, I commend it to you, and I suggest you use the articles for creation process, which will include a step whereby you submit your draft for review. --ColinFine (talk) 13:10, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Why Wiki remove updated french version and keep old english version

Hi there, I have notice that the french version of Parti unité nationale was removed from Wikipedia. Why ??????? The english version which contains false informations remains there. Why ???????

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parti_Unit%C3%A9_Nationale

I have enclose the french version file (Parti unité nationale - Wikipedia.htm) which was removed without any reason.[Ticket#2015102210024691] Parti unité nationale If you put back the french version we would update the english version. If Wikipedia do not intend to put back the french version which contains real information for whatever reason, please remove the english version which is false.

Thank you in advance for your answer !

Gilles Noel Registraire Parti unité nationale

Here is the answer receive fro wikipedia Re: [Ticket#2015102210024691] Parti unité nationale Dear Parti UN,

Thank you for your e-mail. This appears to be a content matter and therefore beyond the scope of the volunteer response team. We do not have an editor-in-chief or an editorial board, so if you have suggestions for improving or correcting an article, please leave a message on the talk/discussion page of the relevant article.

If you need further help, please visit the Tea House and follow the instructions to leave a request for help there (click the "ask a question" link in the box at the top of the page):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:THQ

Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Robert Laculus

74.210.151.115 (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello 74.210, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is the English language Wikipedia, and thus will have an English-language version of the content. If you believe that the content is in error, you are certainly free to make edits with reliably-sourced citations that will correct the article, provided they are in English, of course. Also, as your signature suggests you are connected to the article subject, please be aware that there are guidelines involving editors working on subjects with which they are connected. If you have additional questions, please feel free to post them here and other editors will be able to respond to them. --McDoobAU93 18:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Also, please note that French Wikipedia is a completely different website, http://fr.wikipedia.org and it does NOT appear that they yet have an article on this topic. The French Language version of this article would likely be welcome there. If you are more comfortable working in French, feel free to contribute there as well. --Jayron32 18:16, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

The deletion debate on the French Wikipedia was here. The article used to be at fr:Parti unité nationale. Reason for deletion appears to be lack of notability. Even in 2003 the party received only 0.08% of the votes cast and didn't succeed in electing anyone. Here on the English Wikipedia we still have Parti Unité Nationale. The criteria for having an article are up to each Wikipedia, and might not be the same here. If you think new information should be added to the English article, you can give your recommendation at Talk:Parti Unité Nationale. EdJohnston (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I have nominated Parti Unité Nationale for deletion, on the grounds that it is not notable. If anyone has opinions on the matter, and particularly if anyone has reliable sources that might help in establishing notability, or has searched and been unable to find any such sources, the discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parti Unité Nationale, and your views would be welcome. DES ^(talk) 21:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I thought OTRS communications were confidential or does that only apply to OTRS volunteers and not to those e-mailing OTRS?--ukexpat (talk) 13:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

ukexpat I would think that OTRS volunteers are not supposed to reveal personal information (taken broadly) from an email. I have seen such volunteers post at article talk pages saying things like "An email complained that Statement XXX is untrue. Do we have good sources for it?" I don't see why the person writing to OTRS shouldn't post the email and response, which seems to be what was done above, and in any case we would have no way to prevent it. It is true that the OP connected his name and his IP address, but that was his choice, and in these days of dynamic IP addresses, It probably doesn't actually impact his privacy in a significant way. Aside from that I see no confidential info in the exchange. (Note, I am not an OTRS volunteer, and may have things mistaken.) DES ^(talk) 16:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I am an OTRS volunteer and before I post a request for an edit that came in by e-mail I always ask for the consent of the correspondent. In any event, not an issue, nothing else to see here.--ukexpat (talk) 16:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Changing images on a wiki page.

Hi,

I am editing the 'Lisgoold GAA' page. I am having a wee bit trouble with the shorts and socks... They wear Blue shorts with Gold trim and Blue and Gold Hoops socks...

See...

Shorts -

_mfkzemplinmichalovce1516away _mfkzemplinmichalovce1516away This is pretty much what they look like

Socks -

_hoops_gold _hoops_gold I know this is white and gold but you get the idea...

How do you do this? I just have plain blue shorts and socks on the page..

Thanks

Regards

Moss 15:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mossdaniels (talk • contribs)

Hello, Mossdaniels, and welcome to the Teahouse. After reviewing the documentation at Template:Infobox GAA club, I believe the answers you're looking for can be found at Template:Football kit/pattern list. I know very little about the gaelic games, and I had never encountered the Football kit template before today — that's a neat trick, generating the uniform image rather than having to use a separate stored uniform image for every team — so I hope I have understood your question and its answer correctly. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 17:17, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Grammarfascist for that.

However I still am having trouble putting what is needed in. I change the code as approaite but still hasnt appeared!!!

Can you or anyone please assist me on this?

Thanks Moss 08:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mossdaniels (talk • contribs)

This is the code I have put in.

| pattern_la =_goldshoulders | pattern_b =_goldhorizontal | pattern_ra =_goldshoulders | pattern_so =_goldhoops | pattern_sh =_adidasgold | leftarm =0000FF | body =0000FF | rightarm =0000FF | shorts =0000FF | socks =0000FF

But still have plain blue shorts and socks...

Can anyone advice how to fix it? (Page is Lisgoold GAA)

Moss 09:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mossdaniels (talk • contribs)

Page deleted, please help me!

Hi editors,

I created my first short article called Rhino Africa Safaris yesterday. It now says that the page has been deleted without me having the chance to dispute it or edit it. Please can someone help me?

I am just also trying to understand how it is different to the below page which could come across as "promotional" too.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abercrombie_%26_Kent

How do you suggest I go about writing the content to encompass all that the company stand for.... example: travel, conservation and community upliftment?

How can I improve on this to avoid deletion?

I appreciate your advice and guidance so that this mistake will not be made in the future.

Thanks Rudy ShireRudyshire (talk) 07:25, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Rudyshire, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry that you had the unpleasant experience of having your first article submission deleted. I recommend you read Wikipedia:Your first article, and particularly that you consider Wikipedia's Golden Rule by asking yourself whether Rhino Africa Safaris has been written about in some depth by multiple reliable sources with no connection to the company. If it hasn't, then it simply isn't eligible for a Wikipedia article to be written about it yet. I can't view the now-deleted article to see what kind of wording was used, but you may also want to review the guidelines on what Wikipedia calls "puffery" or overly-promotional language. Finally, I highly recommend using the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process if you decide that Rhino Africa Safaris is notable and want to try to recreate an article about it. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 11:41, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi GrammarFascist,

Thank you for your prompt response. I am in the process of reviewing the content that was written and will submit it to the Wikipedia:Articles for creation section for review. This has been quite a challenge but with all the good advice received and the speedy responses from fellow wikipedians, it has made the process a bit easier. Thank you for your help, it is much appreciated.

Rudy ShireRudyshire (talk) 12:36, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Rudyshire:. Another thing to keep in mind is that there are nearly 5 million articles now and probably several million of them have never seriously been reviewed by experienced editors to see how well they comport to basic Wikipedia content policies like WP:GNG / WP:N / WP:OR / WP:NOTADVERT / WP:NPOV / WP:RS. And so taking a random article and stating "mine is just like that" is rarely convincing, because that comparator probably sucks. Each article is measured on how it and the content and sources therein measure up to the policy standards, not to other articles. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:57, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

And if you notice, the sample article you point to has in fact been flagged as being inappropriately advertorial. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:03, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

It's not entirely surprising that it read like an advertisement, as it was copied word-for-word from the company's various websites in 2009. Now blanked and listed at WP:CP. Thanks for drawing attention to that, Rudyshire! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Justlettersandnumbers,

I have noticed several of them on wikipedia and understand that it takes time to go through the various articles, especially if they have been created a number of years ago. When my first article is well published and I understand the rules in greater detail, then I hope to contribute to these articles to make it better. I appreciate the feedback and grateful that the support structure here is so amazing.

Rudy ShireRudyshire (talk) 06:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Spam link?? I entered a link to a textbook?

How do you respond to someone who wrote that you were entering spam links when you only entered something you considered educational (a link to a textbook, a blog post from a different site, a technical whitepaper). They were rather aggressive and rude in their message to me and even reverted some changes I made deleted dead links I found.Momilyruns (talk) 18:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Momilyruns. In your most recent edit, you added a link to the website selling a book. This adds no value to our readers and is considered a promotional, or "spam" edit. Blog posts are very rarely considered reliable sources, except for the tiny percentage that have professional editorial control, or are by a widely recognized expert. The reliability of "white papers" needs to be determined in context. Simply inserting them as external links is bad practice. Any hint of promotionalism in your editing will meet push back from other editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:43, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your info. I'm still a bit confused as I would find a link to a textbook providing more information on the subject valuable. But that being said, I can see your point on it being promotional. Momilyruns (talk) 16:57, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Momilyruns. If it is appropriate to reference a book, you should reference it by giving bibliographic information (for example by using the template {{cite book}} and filling in the parameters such as title, publisher, ISBN). You should only include a link if the text of the book has been published online, not to a sales site. --ColinFine (talk) 21:24, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, ColinFine, I will do that from now on.Momilyruns (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

South African actors

Hi.

I just wanted to know why there is only about 0.4 pages of South African actors and actresses on Wikipedia while the majority is the white peoples pages?And another thing is there's a big problem with the pagee with no images.When is that gonna get fixed?•••• — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.79.2.180 (talk) 14:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:197.79.2.180. Wikipedia articles are written by volunteers, so it may just be that the volunteers who have written articles so far tend to be more interested in white actors and actresses. It's too bad that it isn't more balanced (I'm taking your word for this -- I just clicked through some pages in the category Category:South African actors and the few with images are all black...). If you would like better coverage of black South African actors, I would recommend reading WP:Your first article and thinking about helping write new articles. As for pages with no images, Wikipedia is a free culture project and needs images that are public domain or freely licensed so they can be reused everywhere. This means that we can't generally use images taken by photo agencies or images from movies. Normally we have to wait until a volunteer takes a photo of the actor at an event or in public to be able to have a photo in the article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:25, 23 October 2015 (UTC)