Wikipedia:Teahouse
![This is the teahouse](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/WP_teahouse_logo.png)
Gråbergs Gråa Sång, a Teahouse host
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.
Article
I have created an article and I want someone to review my draft before I make final submission. Shehnaz17 (talk) 22:18, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
To get some ideas about editing
Today I wanted to write some articles but unfortunately it was already informed and posted. Would you like to give me some ideas how to make my articles perfect to make them promoted for wikipedia? Amiy Chakraborty (talk) 18:10, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Amiy Chakraborty. Please be aware that we need lots of help improving existing articles. If you want to write new articles, please read and study Your first article. You can ask specific questions about editing here at any time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I will add a few comments. Creating articles with references is the hardest task that there is for Wikipedia editors. Also, with five million articles, it is very likely that a topic of interest to an editor may already be covered. There are many ways that editors can help Wikipedia, especially by improving articles. While we have five million articles, many of them need various sorts of improvement. As mentioned, if you have specific questions about how to improve articles or otherwise how to edit, you may ask here. I will repeat a question that was asked at your draft article. Was this part of a class project? If so, maybe the instructor should be asked to read WP:Student assignments. Unfortunately, some class projects duplicate what Wikipedia already has and waste the time both of the students and of experienced editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Greetings Amiy Chakraborty – Another place to find more Wikipedia articles to be improved is at the Community portal, Help out section. The grid there shows nine different types of updates on a variety of articles, and that page is frequently updated. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I will add a few comments. Creating articles with references is the hardest task that there is for Wikipedia editors. Also, with five million articles, it is very likely that a topic of interest to an editor may already be covered. There are many ways that editors can help Wikipedia, especially by improving articles. While we have five million articles, many of them need various sorts of improvement. As mentioned, if you have specific questions about how to improve articles or otherwise how to edit, you may ask here. I will repeat a question that was asked at your draft article. Was this part of a class project? If so, maybe the instructor should be asked to read WP:Student assignments. Unfortunately, some class projects duplicate what Wikipedia already has and waste the time both of the students and of experienced editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
How to insert a logo for Wren's Super Wax Shoe Polish?
Hi,
I need to know how to insert a logo for Wren's Super Wax Shoe Polish?Latency23 (talk) 17:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- To save other editor's time - it appears the user has worked this out - Arjayay (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
What is the biggest Wikiproject?
Im looking at WP:MilitaryHistory and it is extremely comprehensive, just by looking the main page. Is there a project "bigger" than WP:MH in breadth? — Etimena 17:22, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Greetings Etimena and welcome to the Teahouse, With over 1 million articles, I believe that WikiProject Biography is the largest. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Categories
The category section at the bottom of the page. My coding seems to match all others, except it does not have ONE category and then lists births, living people, etc etc etc. It does this:
Category: 1962 births Category: Living births Category: American Business Theorists.
What have I done wrong? JenWUSTL (talk) 16:57, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Here is the page in question Draft:Jackson Nickerson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) unless my assumption is incorrect. J other editors will be along soon to answer your question. MarnetteD|Talk 17:03, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- @JenWUSTL: welcome to the Teahouse. You haven't done anything wrong but by convention categories aren't added until articles are published into the main article space. So in this edit CAPTAIN RAJU suspended the categories while it is still a draft article. When it accepted and moved to article space the category listings will be restored as part of that process. Nthep (talk) 17:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- The valid categories would be restored at that stage, but two of the suggested categories don't exist, and it isn't clear that they are required. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:17, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks so much! I appreciate your assistance. JenWUSTL (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Guidance with article submission (rejected draft "Yitzhak Buxbaum"
My draft article "Yitzhak Buxbaum" has been turned down for a third time. As you can imagine this is frustrating, since I have reworked the article after every rejection, trying to address the critiques and recommendations provided.
This time the reviewer suggested that more promotional language has been added. But all the added citations were attempts to establish notability - which was the main point of reviewers' earlier comments. That is, Buxbaum's work has been recognized as good and important by a variety of sources. I can happily delete the quotations, but please explain how to establish someone's notability without including favourable comments on their work.
Earlier reviews of the article commented that there was a lack of reviews of Buxbaum's books. At this point, the draft cites four reviews of different books by Buxbaum from different, independent sources (Tikkun, Sentinel, Hadassah Magazine, The Algemeiner), as well as references to his books in other sources.
The citations also demonstrate the respect according to Buxbaum by people considered notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles, and beyond his own Jewish community. Not counting publishers' websites and the like, seventeen independent sources are cited, including six printed books from significant authors and publishers. It is true that none of these books have an in-depth discussion of Buxbaum, but all of them acknowledge his importance.
I am troubled by the implication that any personal connection with Buxbaum would invalidate the article. I am a tenured university professor publishing work on Hasidism; in that capacity, I frequently use and cite Buxbaum's books. I have avoided citing my own citations of Buxbaum exactly in order to maintain objectivity, but they are, in fact, further evidence of his significance.
Is the message is simply that without something like a front page New York Times article or an existing biography in an encyclopedia, nobody is going to get into Wikipedia?
If not, more guidance would be greatly appreciated. Justin Jaron Lewis (talk) 16:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- First, the article in question is Draft:Yitzhak Buxbaum. If you ask about a page, it is a courtesy to us to provide a link, although we can find it (and you did provide his name). The most recent review is the one on which I would suggest that you focus, which has to do with the promotional tone. I haven't checked all of the peacock quotes against the originals to see if they are in the originals, but the amount of peacock language, even if properly quoted, is cloying. At this point my advice would be to go through the entire draft sentence for sentence and make it neutral in its wording, with a limited amount of properly quoted praise. I would also advise you to read our conflict of interest policy to see why there are concerns about a connection between you and Buxbaum. The main concern that I see about COI is that you evidently had the rights to an image. I will let other editors comment further. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:15, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Justin Jaron Lewis: you wrote "please explain how to establish someone's notability without including favourable comments on their work." It seems an odd question. Perhaps you are confusing notability with merit. For an example showing how to establish someone's notability without heaping praise on him, see Miguel Treviño Morales. Maproom (talk) 20:23, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
shashi kumar(Arjun)
The name of the page created properly Arjun skymax (talk) 11:30, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- It is unclear what your question is, Arjun skymax, but you appear to have written Shashi Kumar (Arjun) about yourself (or is it Steve Jobs?). Please don't do that - see Wikipedia:Autobiography. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Please help
Hello, this time i don,t want to disturb you, some days ago i asked a question about uploading images and my that question was not answered better, again asking this. Please tell me the tips. I want to post my own work image but in this HTML how can i post, now help me. 🌴🌹.--Yes ji (talk) 09:34, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Yes ji. Your question was partly answered at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 484#How to upload, and partly responded to explaining tha you need to give more information about what you are trying to do. Incidentally, I don't know what you think HTML is, but it is irrelevant to this question. --ColinFine (talk) 09:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Need assist for reviewing Draft:Karen_Civil
Hi all,
I need someone here to helping for reviewing my draft article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Karen_Civil
Last reviewed by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Onel5969 on 16 May 2016. Then at 19 May I received report from Ms. Karen that she got mail from some one called "Stevvy Steve" offering and mention he is a "gate-keeper" of Wikipedia. He ask some money to do review and publishing my draft of Karen Civil.
Please advice.
Dega 05:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Dega, and welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to have an article reviewed and accepted is to resubmit it for review - which I see you have done. Please do not pay anyone who contacts you offering that sort of service. It is likely a scam, and you will likely be wasting your money, because if the draft is approved without meeting Wikipedia's criteria, then it will be deleted. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:12, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- PS: You also need to fix your signature, Dega, to make it comply with WP:SIGLINK. You probably just need to untick the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box in your user preferences. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:14, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you Cordless_Larry for your advice about my fail signature setting and specially for my draft article. Do I have to wait for decision from the last declining user? Or any other user may review and make some decision? Dega (talk) 05:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- No problem. The review could be done by any number of reviewers, Dega. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:22, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Dega, you have previously been advised to remove promotional language from your draft in order to comply with the neutral point of view. You have not yet done so. Your draft is packed full of overtly promotional and unreferenced praise of Civil expressed in Wikipedia's voice. Your very next step should be to go through the draft word by word, sentence by sentence, removing every trace of promotionalism, and leaving only dry, factual prose behind. On the other matter, never pay so called "Wikipedia experts" who reach out to you. They are dishonest con artists. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:44, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- No problem. The review could be done by any number of reviewers, Dega. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:22, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you Cordless_Larry for your advice about my fail signature setting and specially for my draft article. Do I have to wait for decision from the last declining user? Or any other user may review and make some decision? Dega (talk) 05:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Cullen328, thank you for your great advice about my writing. I will do carefully edit again, word by word, refer to neutral point of view. I hope my last future editing would be a good result. I will be back after finishing it. Dega (talk) 05:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Dega, can I suggest that you forward the e-mail to info-orangemoody@wikipedia.org? I raised the issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Possible AfC review scam? and was told that that address has been set up to deal with further instances of the scam described in the article I linked to. Furthermore, since you appear to know the subject of the draft you are writing, please read and follow the advice given at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:16, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- A final comment: I saw that you added yourself to the list of Teahouse hosts. Perhaps you didn't realise what being a host involves, but to clarify, to be an effective host, you need to have sufficient experience of editing Wikipedia to be able to provide answers to questions here. You will no doubt make a good host someday, but I would focus on editing for now. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:31, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Cullen328, thank you for your great advice about my writing. I will do carefully edit again, word by word, refer to neutral point of view. I hope my last future editing would be a good result. I will be back after finishing it. Dega (talk) 05:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Blanking content
I am trying to work on an editing issue with another editor who blanked a lot of content that I referenced very well and was an update to older research. I would rather do this between the editor and myself before I revert, but isn't blanking content sometimes considered a form of vandalism? Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) (talk) 17:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- User:Bfpage, you're not a new user by any means; why are you asking this at the Teahouse, since you know perfectly well how WP:BRD works? Assuming it's the sequence of edits at Probiotic and its related pages which are the issue, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine is the place to go for what will be a discussion requiring fairly specialist input on the relative validity of different research groups, if you can't get a consensus on the article talkpages. (I'm noting a singular absence of attempts by you to discuss this on the talkpages, FWIW.) ‑ Iridescent 19:57, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- If you really are User:Bfpage, an experienced editor and a Teahouse host, not a Teahouse guest, then I wonder whether your Visiting Scholar account has been compromised, because you know how to report vandalism and how to use WikiProjects to get expert participation. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:57, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
What do I do about red links?
I assume that these are links to articles which no longer exist. Therefore, should I remove the brackets?Vmavanti (talk) 16:53, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- They are links to articles that do not exist. They may be links to articles that no longer exist or they may be links to articles that have never existed. Each link should be evaluated on a case by case basis. If it is reasonable for an article to exist at the name then it should remain. If the article should not exist then it can be removed. More information can be found at WP:Redlink. -- GB fan 16:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- I agree with the answer already given, Vmavanti, although there might be occasions when it is reasonable for an article to exist but when a red link to it should nonetheless be removed, to prevent what is called overlinking. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- It is quite rare (nowadays) though for red links to be appropriate for removal for overlinking. If something is commonplace enough that linking too it would be overlinking, then it's now getting rare for that commonplace link to still be red. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I agree with the answer already given, Vmavanti, although there might be occasions when it is reasonable for an article to exist but when a red link to it should nonetheless be removed, to prevent what is called overlinking. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Privacy in Biographies
I've read some of the sections on Biographies and took note of the mention of privacy, always a big topic. Sometimes I come across an entry, for example, rock star John Smith married his high-school sweetheart Lucy Banks, and here's where they went to school, here's where they live now, and here are the names of their children. Lacking journalism experience, I lack the standards typically applied, if any, in these situations. My own inclination is to delete material like this -- but don't worry, I haven't and I don't. Yet. What information do we really need to have? A big subject, I know, but if anyone would like to comment, feel free.Vmavanti (talk) 16:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- This is also a case by case basis. Is the information discussed in reliable sources? Is is widely reported? If it is then it might be kept. If not it should be removed. I have removed many names of children. If you find addresses, phone numbers or other non-public personally identifiable information you can ask for it to be completely removed by following the instruction ast Wikipedia:Oversight. -- GB fan 17:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Vmavanti. The best guidance for such cases can be found in our Policy on biographies of living people, which is an essential core content policy. That says:
- "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, ex, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject. However, names of family members who are not also notable public figures must be removed from an article if they are not properly sourced."
- It is common to find the names of the children in the biographies of various people, without a reference being provided. These names may have been added in good faith by someone with personal knowledge. But this is wrong. All such mentions of children's names should be removed unless they are discussed in reliable, independent sources, both for reasons of verifiability and of privacy, especially of minor children. When in doubt, remove the children's names. It is incumbent on any editor advocating inclusion of children's names to provide reliable sources and to explain why it is proper to include these names. Curiosity is not an adequate argument when it comes to the names of non-notable minor children. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:46, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Information about family, including minor children, is common in articles that were originally written as autobiographies or by other family members, because the author doesn't understand the privacy issues and doesn't understand that Wikipedia isn't just a social medium. If the person survives notability and any non-neutral language is toned down, the unnecessary family information may remain. The conclusion is that experienced editors, in cleaning up a promotional biography that is being made encyclopedic, need to be careful to take out the children unless there is a reason. (Of course, often the questionable article gets deleted, which resolves the question of the children by deleting them.) Robert McClenon (talk) 16:21, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Vmavanti. The best guidance for such cases can be found in our Policy on biographies of living people, which is an essential core content policy. That says:
Uploading photo
Good morning, I am attempting to upload a photo, I receive this message "you are not auto confirmed, you need to have made 10 edits and have had your account for 4 days." All of these things have occurred. Advice please. JenWUSTL (talk) 15:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, JenWUSTL, and welcome to the Teahouse. You created your account at 15:23 (UTC) on 16 May 2016, so it won't be four days old until tomorrow afternoon. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Many thanks!JenWUSTL (talk) 15:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- But in most cases, JenWUSTL, it is better to upload photos to Wikimedia Commons, which does not have such a restriction. Please use the Upload Wizard. The only case when it is better to upload a photo to Wikipedia is if it is not freely licensed, in which case its use must meet all the criteria in the non-free content criteria. In order to upload to Commons, you will need to be able to show that the photo is freely licensed: if you took the picture yourself, you can license it as you upload it, but if not, the copyright owner must explicitly release it, otherwise it may not be uploaded at all: plese see donating copyright materials. --ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Issue on Wiki page
Hi, I updated the wiki page for Barkha Sharma. I have included relevant information and reliable sources to the content of the page. A message appears on the page suggesting I remove/delete excessive/inappropriate external links from the article. Could you help me out with this? How can I have the quality of the article improved? Thanks, (Dxcu12 (talk) 12:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC))
- We do not include External links in the body-text of an article - the seven in that article all need to be removed.
If they are specifically relevant to the content, like the Times of India article in EL 6 then it needs to be turned into a proper reference - see Help:Referencing for beginners for how to do that.
If it is a general link to a general website, like The Wharton Business School (reference 7) it needs to be removed, and if, as with the Wharton Business School, we already have an article, this should be Wikilinked - Arjayay (talk) 12:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Arjayay. I have incorporated the changes. Dxcu12 (talk) 13:08, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Add Person in Wiki
Dear Sir,
Please inform how to add our CMD in wiki who is sucessful young entrepreneur of India Awarded Top 100 INDIA SME Awards 2 times recently.
Regards Nakoda Team27.58.46.162 (talk) 06:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Nakoda Team. Please be aware that team editing of Wikipedia is not allowed. All editing must be done by individuals not groups. As for the article you propose, please read and study Your first article. Simply being included on a list of 100 business people is not sufficient to support a Wikipedia biography. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Short list of easy questions from a beginner
Easy questions from a beginner:
1) If I have a question, where do I go first?
2) Are there model Wikipedia pages that might serve as examples of "How It Should Be Done" that I could follow?
3) What order is used to sort lists - for example, members and former members of a musical group. Alphabetical by first name, last name? What about items on disambiguation pages? Chronological?
4) Why include opinions from critics on pages for songs, albums, musicians, movies, and so on, where there is naturally going to be a lot of subjectivity?
5) How do I prevent someone from editing a page while I'm working on it?
6) I've been fixing redirects. Is that a waste of time?
7) Note: Wikipedia has many rules, and yet few people seem to follow them. Many entries, possibly most entries, lack proper format and sourcing.
8) I find many pages with dead links because a URL no longer exists. A contributor ought to know ahead of time whether a link is fairly temporary and therefore not the best place to link to. Or is that impossible to know on the internet?
9) Note: For a beginner, Wikipedia rules can be overwhelming. Vmavanti (talk) 01:48, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, Vmavanti. I hope my answers can help you out a little.
- Here is good. You can also ask at the help desk for technical help.
- Yes, they are called "Good Articles" and "Featured Articles". There's also Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:Writing better articles.
- There isn't usually a set method. Sometimes it helps to look at articles that you know will be highly watched and edited, such as The Beatles for rock bands and Blade Runner for films.
- Critical reception is one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia's coverage of pop culture. The contention comes from unsourced statements that analyze the reception, such as "it received critical acclaim" or "it was a box office bomb". These are problematic because they're original research. Citing a critic's opinion helps readers understand the real-world significance of a novel, film, song, etc.
- Sorry, you can't.
- No. Thank you.
- Yes, it's frustrating. Try not to let it get it to you. Clean it up as best you can and use clear edit summaries.
- There isn't really anything people can do about that. One solution is to proactively archive everything at archive.org, but that's tedious and still not bulletproof.
- Yes, sorry. It will take a while before they even begin to make sense. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Vmavant. I7ll try to answer some of your questions.
- 1) It depends on what your question is. If it's a general question about editing, then the Teahouse is a good place to start. Typically, someone will either answer the question or point you to a page, etc. where you can find the information you need. If, however, your question is about a specific article, policy or guideline, then you might also find assistance on the relevant talk page or noticeboard. For example, you were bold and added some content to an article, but it is subsequently removed by another editor. If you want to know why they removed what you added, then you can post on the article's talk page and ping them or you can post on their user talk page and ask them. Maybe you want to use cite a certain website as a source, but are not sure whether it is considered reliable. You could ask for assistance at Wikipedia:Reliable sources noticeboard. If you're not sure about the copyright status of an image you might want to upload, you could as for help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. There are various Wikipedia:Noticeboards where you can try and get more specific answers about certain things.
- 2) Wikipedia:Featured articles are considered the best that Wikipedia has to offer, so often they can be good examples of what to do and what not to do. However, just because it is done a certain way in a featured article does not automatically mean in should be done in the same way in other articles. Wikipedia has it's own manual of style and many WikiProjects also have their own version of a manual of style. So, if you want to create an article about TV program, then a good place to check might be at WP:TV and see what it suggests.
- 3) Depends upon the article and whether a consensus has been established on the article's talk page to list things in a certain order. A list of company presidents may follow a chronological order whereas a list of alumni may be in alphabetical order. In some cases it may be a combination of both. The best thing to do if it's an existing article is probably just to ask on the article's talk page. If it's a new article, you can ask on the talk page of the relevant WikiProject.
- 5) There's no real way to do such a thing since we do not own the articles we create/edit and we don't really control who edits what when. You might, however, be able to minimize edit conflicts by placing a template such as Template:In use, etc. at the top of the article if you're going to be working on it for a while.
- 6) Yes and no. Please refer to WP:NOTBROKEN for more information. Note that in my answer to #1 above, I linked to "Ping" which is a redirect. "Fixing" that link would be a waste or your time and might be seen by others as unnecessary.
- 8) A deadlink is not necessarily a valueless link. Please refer to WP:DEADREF for more information. There are probably lots of reasons why links go dead; even major newspapers archive online stories after a while or change urls. I think it's probably pretty hard to predict which links are eventually going to go dead.
- Hope what I posted was helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy responses.-- Vmavanti (talk) 03:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Vmavanti:. By "fixing redirects" you appear to mean changing links to redirects into going directly to the target of the redirect and also displaying the title of the target. Per WP:NOTBROKEN such changes are often unnecessary and sometimes directly wrong. For example, Cannon's Jug Stompers is a band which currently redirects to the leader Gus Cannon. In [1] you replaced Cannon's Jug Stompers by Gus Cannon but the article was probably referring to the band and not just the leader. There is also a chance the band gets its own article later so it's good to link to the band name when referring to the band. "Fixing a redirect" means to edit the redirect page itself. What you are doing is called to bypass redirects so please use that term in edit summaries and not "fixed". PrimeHunter (talk) 09:54, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- OK. Thanks. I'm glad you made that distinction about redirects and told me about. Very important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vmavanti (talk • contribs) 16:39, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- With regard to your question "3) What order is used to sort lists - for example, members and former members of a musical group", please see Template:Infobox musical artist
- "Current members of the group, listed in order of joining with no other notation than names. For multiple members joining concurrently (such as the formation of the band), list them according to alphabetical order."
"Past members of the group, listed in order of joining with no other notation than names. If a group is inactive, all members should be listed here, and none in the "current_members" field"
- "Current members of the group, listed in order of joining with no other notation than names. For multiple members joining concurrently (such as the formation of the band), list them according to alphabetical order."
- Each type of infobox has its own documentation, which includes what should be included/excluded under each parameter and how it should be arranged. Unfortunately, these parameters are not totally consistent across all infoboxes. - Arjayay (talk) 10:34, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- With regard to your question "3) What order is used to sort lists - for example, members and former members of a musical group", please see Template:Infobox musical artist
Locked out
Dear Wiki I have tried to login to wiki and get the following "You have been globly locked out" what have I done to be locked out please? 110.20.197.141 (talk) 01:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- On the talk page of your registered account, there should be some sort of message from the blocking steward or blocking WMF employee. If not, use OTRS to ask what steward blocked you. By the way, of course, by even asking that question here, you are technically engaging in block evasion. Ask the blocking steward or blocking WMF employee, or ask OTRS who globally blocked you. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:00, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Editing "Sherlock Holmes"
I was editing the article on "Sherlock Holmes" - trying to add a quotation. After having finished the editing, I was met with a message saying that the article is semi-protected. How do I proceed? woodpecker 20:34, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Wikifan1248, and welcome to the Teahouse. You should make an edit request on the talk page of Sherlock Holmes (Talk:Sherlock Holmes) by using the template: {{Edit semi-protected}}. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:37, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- You also need to fix your signature, Wikifan1248, to make it comply with WP:SIGLINK. You probably just need to untick the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box in your user preferences. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Your account can edit semi-protected pages. The message is just informational. If you get an edit window then you can edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- You also need to fix your signature, Wikifan1248, to make it comply with WP:SIGLINK. You probably just need to untick the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box in your user preferences. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks to all. Now it worked!
- woodpecker (talk) 07:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- And you now have a working signature. Thanks, woodpecker. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:16, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, Cordless Larry woodpecker (talk) 06:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Are any of the following websites acceptable to use as sources?
Yahoo.com, Gawker (gawker.com), contactmusic.com, The Huffington Post. I have found articles in all 4 websites with information to reinforce the statements that were made in a BLP article. But are any of those 4 websites considered eligible for use as sources on Wikipedia? Lupine453 (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about Gawker or Contactmusic, but Yahoo should be reliable and so should the Huffington Post, unless the ref you want is on one of their op-ed pieces (op-eds in reliable sources may not be themselves reliable). For the other two sites, look to see if the content is written by admins or users; user-written stuff like forums aren't acceptable for a source. White Arabian Filly Neigh 20:54, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- A common saying on Wikipedia is that there are no reliable websites, only individual statements that are situationally reliable or unreliable. Context is everything. The best answers will come from WP:RSN, a forum dedicated to answering these questions. You will need to say which Wikipedia article you are editing, what statement you want to add, and provide a link to the website's content that you want to cite. Out of those, contactmusic.com strikes me as the least reliable and mostly likely to be user-generated content, as they open solicit for writers. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Upload pdf reference as pdf/image rather than URL?
Hi I'm still a bit confused about this... I received some feedback that, if it's a reliable source, I can reference a pdf without it having a URL. However, I'd like Wikipedia readers to be able to read the pdf, so would like to be able to upload it for reading. It's no longer available as a URL. I don't understand where or how to upload it? Does it need to get saved as a jpg first or something, then can it be uploaded as an image? Thank you Lisa Playethic (talk) 18:51, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Playethic. As far as I know, it is not possible to upload PDF files to Wikipedia. I can't think of a way to convert a whole PDF into a single image, and doing so would likely be a copyright violation in any case. You could upload the PDF elsewhere on the web, but that might be a copyright violation and we can't link to copyright violations from Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- You say "It's no longer available as a URL" - if you have an old URL it may be possible to re-access it via an internet archive such as the Wayback Machine - Arjayay (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Lisa: Has the document been published? If it has, all you need to do is give details of when and how it was published, so that readers can verify it if they have access to a library that holds it. If it hasn't been published, it's not acceptable as a source anyway. Maproom (talk) 19:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes it was published in 2006. We will try the recommendation for trying the Wayback Machine. Otherwise, will try uploading it as a jpg? Not sure if the jpg will enlarge so people can read it. Playethic (talk) 20:17, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- From the technical side of things, it's possible to upload and display PDF's. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- So it is, Finnusertop. I've just found Wikipedia:Creation and usage of media files#Text files. I've learned something there. I don't think I've ever seen one, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, I now remember that I have seen them, at Wikipedia:Training/For educators/Resources. I agree with other below that an uploaded PDF is unlikely to be useful as a reference, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- So it is, Finnusertop. I've just found Wikipedia:Creation and usage of media files#Text files. I've learned something there. I don't think I've ever seen one, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Certainly it's possible to upload a PDF as a file just like (for example) a JPEG, if copyright can be satisfied. But I can't think of any way that such a thing would be usable as a reference, because the provenance of the uploaded copy can't be established: even if it was originally published, its contents could have been altered at some point. --ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- And if it has previously been published elsewhere, it is likely to be a copyright violation to upload it to Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Uploaded files are not reliable as sources, if that is the intention here. Digital files can be manipulated (not that I am suggesting this one has been). Far better to find an archive of the original site and use the {{Cite news}} or {{Cite web}} templates, or {{Cite news}}, {{Cite book}} for hard copy sources.--ukexpat (talk) 18:32, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I reviewed Draft: Miron Construction Co., Inc. and declined it for an overly promotional tone. Its original author has now been blocked as a promotional-only account. I now received a question from User: Chiekhaefer:
Hello! First of all, I am connected to a few non-profits that Miron Construction supports (in particular Big Brothers Big Sisters, the Boys and Girls Club - which they just finished building a new one in our community, and some Fun Runs that they sponsor). I know there is an original article out there that was declined. I'd like to understand why (new to this side of Wikipedia - to date, I've only read their posts, not submitted) and then I'd like to work on the Miron Construction Co., Inc. article and clean it up for re-submission. Can you make some recommendations on what sections need editing and maybe some ideas of what I can improve on the original post? I'm new to this, so any insight would be appreciated! Thanks.
I am glad to see a neutral editor who wants to rescue a draft that was written by a promotional editor.
I will comment that the current references are something of a case of WP:CITEKILL or WP:BOMBARD. I would suggest getting rid of the Leadership entries for people who don’t have their own articles. I would suggest focusing more on the history of the company and its history of projects. The current focus on Sustainable Practices and on Community Involvement looks as if the focus is primarily on how good they are, not how notable they are. Trim down the references and the praise. Expand the history. Do other experienced editors have comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:27, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Ckiekhaefer (you seem to have spelled that wrong above), Robert McClenon. Expanding on Robert's comments above, it seems that many of the references used in the article are to the same three or four sources. The advice given at Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once should be followed here. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
I reviewed Draft:Marie-Florence Gros and declined it on notability grounds. Its author then posted an inquiry to my talk page:
Hello Robert, You declined my article's submission about Draft: Marie-Florence Gros because of unadequate documentation about the subject's notability. I understand the reasons but this article is only the translation into English version of an article in French already published on Wikipedia and providing the same references (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie-Florence_Gros#La_paroli.C3.A8re). If the subject has been already approved, how can I make my translation published? Thank you for your help! Wwsheng
First, approval procedures and criteria on the Wikipedias in different languages are different. (Smaller Wikipedias, for instance, may have less stringent rules on notability, in order to get more articles.) Just because the article was approved in French does not mean that it will be approved in English. However, the main problem that I see is simply that, in English, biographies of living persons must be referenced by in-line citations, also known as footnotes rather than only by end-of-the-article references. The references need to be moved into the body of the article. That is the obvious comment that I have. Do other experienced editors have other comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:12, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Robert McClenon: There are some bits of promotional language here and there, such as
With a very sharp and artistic vision
andHer passion for photography led her to work on, and to open La Galerie Paris 1839 [9], in Hong-Kong
, so that is something worth noting. It seems like there should be coverage of her music career and exhibitions, likely in French, so I expect the person probably does meet the notability threshold. I JethroBT drop me a line 05:29, 20 May 2016 (UTC)- I agree that there are tone issues that need correcting. I also agree that she is almost certainly notable. However, as I mentioned, the draft doesn't establish her notability because it doesn't have in-line citations. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- It does have the code for inline citations, just not a references section, so I have added one. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:12, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I agree that there are tone issues that need correcting. I also agree that she is almost certainly notable. However, as I mentioned, the draft doesn't establish her notability because it doesn't have in-line citations. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
well cited material is removed by " interested" parties. what can we do about it?
I am getting disturbed because a very well cited content; that too with credible sources, is removed by " interested parties". I wonder should i still continue my editing work or leave it?MalikAttaRasool (talk) 08:05, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- @MalikAttaRasool: which article are you talking about? From your contribution history it looks like the issue is that rather than referring to material with is reliable and verifiable, you are adding significant chunks of the text of those sources and therefore you are creating a copyright violation - and it is that copyright violation that is being reverted. That is not a judgment on your additions just how you are doing it. Write the content in your own words and then use the sources as references. Nthep (talk) 11:48, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- I will only comment that many new editors do not understand that Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. We may be one of the few major web sites that takes copyright seriously. However, copyright is a matter of law, and we take it (and other laws) seriously. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, the fact that you can steal a whole movie and post it to YouTube with no repercussions is not helping us when people who have been using YouTube for years come here. It seems like YouTube, Facebook and other major sites would have to take copyright seriously or get in trouble, but they don't. White Arabian Filly Neigh 20:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- My guess is that most copyright holders whose copyright is being ripped off on YouTube or Facebook consider it to be free publicity. Wikipedia considers it to be a violation of policy and law. Wikipedia also disapproves of being used as a method of free publicity. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:54, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- YouTube routinely takes down copyrighted content when the copyright holder objects. Facebook is analogous to the old practice of photocopying magazine articles and passing copies around to your circle of friends. This is considered acceptable fair use by the courts. Wikipedia, on the other hand, openly encourages reuse and modification of its free content by anyone on Earth, for any use at all, including commercial use. This approach requires us to emphasize that the vast majority of our content is freely licensed, except for cited free use quotations and irreplaceable low resolution images used in strictly limited circumstances. We are a free encyclopedia, not a social networking site. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- My guess is that most copyright holders whose copyright is being ripped off on YouTube or Facebook consider it to be free publicity. Wikipedia considers it to be a violation of policy and law. Wikipedia also disapproves of being used as a method of free publicity. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:54, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, the fact that you can steal a whole movie and post it to YouTube with no repercussions is not helping us when people who have been using YouTube for years come here. It seems like YouTube, Facebook and other major sites would have to take copyright seriously or get in trouble, but they don't. White Arabian Filly Neigh 20:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- I will only comment that many new editors do not understand that Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. We may be one of the few major web sites that takes copyright seriously. However, copyright is a matter of law, and we take it (and other laws) seriously. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Which of my sources are not reliable?
Hello :) My article was declined, and I would like some help determining how to correct it to wikipedia standards: Draft:James Norley (model/actor) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:James_Norley_(model/actor)
My 3 sources were Models.com, IMDb, and Twitter.
Models.com lists all the previous work of models with links to the work to verify it.
IMDb doesn't allow user-generated content when it comes to the work the actor has done. Users can't even submit their own, someone from the film team does that, and IMDb has to approve them, so that would count as reliable right?
Twitter, I can see how that's not reliable because people can say anything they want in their bios.
Any help is welcome. Thank you very much! Nephasno (talk) 06:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Nephasno. Please start by reading and thoroughly understanding Your first article. We require significant coverage of the topic in independent, reliable sources to establish notability. The model directory is, well, just a directory. Directory listings do not establish notability. IMDb may have limited use on Wikipedia, but the content you mention is also, in effect, a directory listing, which does not establish notability. An official Twitter feed may be acceptable for a few non-controversial biographical details, but it is most certainly not an independent, reliable source, so has no value in establishing notability. We need solid prose coverage in several independent sources with reputations for accuracy and professional editorial control. Lacking that, Wikipedia would instantly deteriorate into a swamp of spam and gossip. No, people cannot say anything they want in their Wikipedia biographies. They have no ownership rights whatsoever. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
how to create sidebar info graph
how do you insert/format a sidebar graph with a photo and key highlights for that page's topic? MichelleMTL (talk) 03:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi MichelleMTL, welcome to the Teahouse! The box on the side of an article that highlights key information about the topic is called an "infobox" on Wikipedia. Check out Help:Infobox to learn more. The key is first finding the right infobox to use. If, for example, you are writing about a person, you would use the template
{{infobox person}}
. One of the easiest ways to add an infobox is with VisualEditor. Click the "Edit" tab of an article or draft (not the "Edit source" tab), and in the edit window, click the "Insert" button. In the dropdown menu, select "Template". It will pop up with a search bar – use the search bar to find an infobox to use. If, say, the article is about a person, type "infobox person" into the search bar, then "Add template". It will automatically provide you with various fields that you can fill for the infobox. If you need help finding an infobox to use or if you have any other questions, please let us know. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 04:12, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Save Problem
Sometimes I save an edit an it doesn't work. Please help me. Enough with long questions M!necraft36O 02:10, 18 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by M!necraft36O (talk • contribs)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, M!necraft36O. Sometimes, attempting to click the "save" button doesn't work, especially with some mobile devices. Just try again. Another possibility is an edit conflict. An intervening edit made by someone else while your edit window was open will prevent your edit from being saved. You may need to go back, copy your attempted edit, and paste it into a fresh edit window. This is a common mishap on heavily edited pages. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:56, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
i want to know to get the micro sign
how do you get the micro sign μ M!necraft36O 02:00, 18 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by M!necraft36O (talk • contribs)
- Hello M!necraft36O. If you are using a computer that runs OS X, simply use "option+M". Otherwise, right below the edit window (in the "Edit source" tab), there is a list of various special characters you can input. Use the dropdown menu in that list and select "Greek". μ should be in either the first or second row. Mz7 (talk) 04:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
--thx M!necraft36O 01:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by M!necraft36O (talk • contribs)
Why has my addition been removed?
I have provided exactly battery life of Sony Xperia Z5 Premium Dual Sim E6883
What it had been changing again Pgangwani35 (talk) 22:12, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Pgangwani35. It appears your additions to the article Sony Xperia Z5 Premium have been reverted because they did not include a citation to a reliable source. It is important that all information in Wikipedia articles include a source so it can be verified by anyone. Moreover, there is likely no reliable way to report battery life other than in units of charge (typically mAh) - the actual time a battery lasts will be heavily dependent on a variety of factors including device usage. Intelligentsium 00:22, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Ref cite problem
Can someone please tell me where I've gone wrong with this ref cite?
</ref>{{webcite|url=https://www.geni.com/people/Anne-Shelton/6000000006444065505 |title=Anne Shelton |website=geni.com |accessdate=17 May 2016}}<ref/>
The ref tags seem OK to me, I've got in the Wikivoodoocode squiggles & all the pipes, but the 1st ref tag is hanging out, & it's not translating itself to a citation number when I test it out in my sandbox to make sure it was correct before editing the pg. Driving me mad staring at it trying to figure out where I've gone wrong. TYVM if you can help. ScarletRibbons (talk) 20:23, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Wait, that red text at the end wasn't there before!
<ref>{{webcite|url=https://www.geni.com/people/Anne-Shelton/6000000006444065505 |title=Anne Shelton |website=geni.com |accessdate=17 May 2016}}<ref/>
Nope, still telling me it's malformed even tho I've changed it. Help! ScarletRibbons (talk) 20:25, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- @ScarletRibbons: Greetings. The tag at the beginning of a reference should be <ref>, and that at the end should be </ref>. In your first try above, you had </ref> at the beginning and <ref/> (misplaced slash) at the end. In your second try, you fixed the opening tag but not the closing one. Deor (talk) 20:45, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- O, good grief! Dunno how I missed that, & the help pg the red text it cited wasn't helpful at all. I just tried it out in my sandbox, & all's well. TYVM for pointing out the misplaced slash. O & how come the red text didn't show up in my sandbox when I tested the citation there, but showed up at the Teahouse? ScarletRibbons (talk) 21:15, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
How can I recreate an article deleted via old AfD?
How can I recreate or (preferred) restore the deleted version of an article if an old AfD was closed with a deletion?
As per "G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion" it would be deleted if I just recreated it right away.
In my case the article was deleted for notability-reasons. The notability (or the proof of said) has changed since the deletion was being decided.
Note that it's probably close to impossible for newcomers to find the right thing to do when they find an article they'd like to create having been deleted before. The red box on the deleted article page should probably provide some more info here. (This has an inhibitory effect on the amount of new articles and new editors)
--Fixuture (talk) 19:45, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- You missed an important part of G4, only "sufficiently identical copies" are eligible for deletion under G4. If you recreate it and include sources and claims to notability that were not in the deleted version then it is not eligible to be deleted under G4. -- GB fan 19:50, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks so far! Just one more question: is it possible to view or request undeletion for the old article even if it was deleted by an AfD if it would be helpful as a basis for the revised article? --Fixuture (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- What is the article, I will look at restoring it as a draft. -- GB fan 20:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- It's Cloudkicker. I don't know how the previous article looked (the other draft is a new one; also it has almost no content) so I don't know if it would be worthy of restoring and using it in a new version. If you could do that that would be very helpful! --Fixuture (talk) 21:05, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I missed your reply until now. I have undeleted the article and moved it to Draft:Cloudkicker (2) so it is separate from the other draft. -- GB fan 18:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- It's Cloudkicker. I don't know how the previous article looked (the other draft is a new one; also it has almost no content) so I don't know if it would be worthy of restoring and using it in a new version. If you could do that that would be very helpful! --Fixuture (talk) 21:05, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- What is the article, I will look at restoring it as a draft. -- GB fan 20:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks so far! Just one more question: is it possible to view or request undeletion for the old article even if it was deleted by an AfD if it would be helpful as a basis for the revised article? --Fixuture (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Removing a second copy of an article
Please help me find and remove a second copy of an article I submitted on G.Parthasarathy. I can't seem to find the second copy - not sure how to locate it. When I asked this question earlier, I was told to refer to the Teahouse for my answer but I couldn't find the answer to my question there. Please give me clear instructions on how to do access the correct answer that pertains to my question or explain it to me here. Shyamw1149.152.191.2 (talk) 18:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Shyamw1. You have a draft of an article about G. Parthasarathy at User:Shyamw1/sandbox. There is an article about him which was written by someone else at Gopalapuram Parthasarathy. Is that what you meant? —teb728 t c 20:23, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. Since there is already an article in article space, the draft should be declined, a redirect should be created to G. Parthasarathy, and any information that is in the draft but not the article should be added to the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:52, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- See previous questions and answers at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 481#User:Shyamw1/sandbox and Draft:G. Parthasarathy and then at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 482#Deleting a second copy of an article. To find your previous contributions in the archive, put your user name into the archive search box, as here. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:31, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I have provided the correct information then why it's gets changed
I have provided correct information about x men apocalypse 2016 movie Release date in India is 20 May 2016 Then why it is being removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgangwani35 (talk • contribs) 06:05, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Pgangwani35. The standard for film articles is to include the original release date and the release date in the country of origin. If we added the release date in every country, there would be hundreds of such dates clogging the article. Think of it this way: In general, articles about Hollywood films include the U.S. release date, while articles about Bollywood films include the Indian release date.
- Another problem is that you did not provide a reference to a reliable source. But please be aware that not every single fact belongs in an article. There must be consensus to include the fact among the editors interested in the article. You should discuss such matters on the article's talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:08, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Important early memory management software - written by Peter Lipman @ DEC
Anybody who knows computer history knows that DEC was a pioneering company between the 60s and 80s. They were so strong that they had they had their own fleet of helicopters that they used in order to fly some key engineers (including Peter Lipman) from office to office (like from MA to NH) - this is not unlike Google and Apple today using private busing in the SF Bay area.
I wrote an article about Peter Lipman documenting his contribution to computing - he created novel low level memory management that lives on today in much of our modern computer tech.
I found this question on USENET - People were asking who Peter Lipman was since he was one of the original architects of VAX VMS https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.os.vms/c9_quls-Nc8 http://compgroups.net/comp.os.vms/history-peter-lipman/525284
I wrote this draft article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peter_Lipman
I was unable to satisfy the editors sourcing rubric. Some time has passed and it is now being nominated for removal as I've been unable to improve the sourcing.
Peter's Former boss at DEC, and Security Heavyweight who are both well documented on Wikipedia provided technical background for the article I wrote helping me understand some of his major contributions: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1THVkntARc9_4Sa_Q76jm1jneSzlVHgF0k0stXbgVX9U/edit
This history is not publicly documented, but Peter's contribution was early in the computer history world. If the tech journalism that exists today had existed back when Peter was making his contributions, there would be a more public data set on what he did in the same way you see this with folks who are active today, like Jon Callas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Callas who looked up to Peter Lipman as a brilliant forefather. You will see this if you read the writing of Dave Cutler and Jon Callas - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1THVkntARc9_4Sa_Q76jm1jneSzlVHgF0k0stXbgVX9U/edit RE: Peter Lipman
Another VAX VMS architect who died before his time was Dick Hustvedt documented here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Hustvedt previously, but I have less technical information on his contributions.
Any help moving this forward is much appreciated. it's my first wiki effort Etlipman (talk) 17:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)etlipman
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Etlipman. Unfortunately, material on Wikipedia needs to be verifiable, meaning that its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. If there is not sufficient published material available about a person, then we can't have an article about them. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- The draft was in danger of being deleted because no-one had edited it for six months. I have made a trivial edit to it, which I hoped will deal with that problem.
- I would be surprised if his notability cannot be established. I have even heard of him myself. I'll see what I can do to help. Maproom (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I hope you saved a copy of the article, just in case! If not, hurry up & paste it into your sandbox so that you have it for future reference. ScarletRibbons (talk) 20:31, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- If it does get deleted for some reason, let me know and I'll undelete it (or email you the contents to work offline). Peter Lipman is undoubtedly notable; the issue will be digging out the mentions of him from assorted specialist journals, many of which won't be online. Paging Eric Corbett, who's been very good at digging out sources about early computing in the past. ‑ Iridescent 20:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I'll make you a deal. You get rid of Jimbo Wales and I'll help find sources. Eric Corbett 22:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I find that he is mentioned in Wikipedia's articles about his colleaugues Dave Cutler and Dick Hustvedt. That doesn't directly help us, but it's encouraging. Maproom (talk) 20:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
What qualifies as a reliable independent source?
I've just submitted my first article for review, Draft:Taimane Gardner. it was declined within a few seconds on the grounds there weren't enough reliable independent sources. All the sources I quoted were independent, they ranged from IMDb to Guitar World magazine. If they're not independent and reliable, what the hell is? Any help? The reviewer was Robert McClenon and it says to ask here before asking him on his talk page. Misterdequincey (talk) 15:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- The article in question is Draft:Taimane Gardner. For future information to a new editor, when asking a question about an article, please put the name of the article in links to make it easier for editors to view it. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:53, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Some of your sources are not considered independent and reliable. In particular, IMDB is largely user-contributed and so not independent and reliable, and Allmusic is intended to list everything. I do see now that some of the reviews do appear to be independent and reliable sources. Please trim out the references that are not independent and reliable. Do other experienced editors have comments about the reliability (or lack thereof) of sources? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:56, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Righto. Got it. Can we talk about the reliability and independence of Guitar World magazine now? CheersMisterdequincey (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I can remove the IMDb reference and the allmusic one. Any others? What about discogs.com and mele.com?Misterdequincey (talk) 16:01, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I've added the references to "virtuoso" from Guitar World and the South China Morning Post; there are others, but it is getting a bit bulky. After several albums and performing with Earth, Wind and Fire, Jimmy Buffet, Chris Isaak I feel it passes the notability test, at least as far as I read it, i.e: "multiple sources that discuss the topic directly and in detail" and independence, as: "sources that are independent from the subject of the article". These do and they are; they are interviews and reviews of albums and performances, some very lengthy (especially the one from Ukulele magazine). I actually tried to cut down the amount of references as there were too many, and the only place I've included the direct website is in External links. Any further suggestions welcomed. Thx. Misterdequincey (talk) 16:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
What is the most convenient shortcut for creating a new article? This is the only problem I've experienced since becoming a Wikipedia editor.Nkwe (talk) 15:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Either
- type "Draft:name of article" into the search box at the top of the page and hit Enter. You'll go to a page that includes the line "You may create the page Draft:name of article with a red link. Click on that link and start typing. Or
- Go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow the instructions there. For new editors, this method is highly encouraged.
- Rojomoke (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Need to replace an incorrect image.
Hi On the Clan MacLaren page the Clan Crest badge displayed in the "Infobox clan" is incorrect and needs to be replaced with a correct image which matches the description. I can provide a accurate image, but have not been able to figure out how to replace with a correct image, please help. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_MacLaren
{{Infobox clan
|clan name=Clan MacLaren |image badge=Clan member crest badge - Clan MacLaren.svg
MacRory Mor (talk) 13:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- You say can provide a accurate image. If this is your own work and you are willing to release your copyright in it, you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons. If the name you give it there is say "Clan MacLaren crest badge.svg", then in the Clan MacLaren article, you replace the current "Clan member crest badge - Clan MacLaren.svg" by your "Clan MacLaren crest badge.svg". Maproom (talk) 16:28, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Much imp ques
Hello!
If a person use different accounts on different wikis, does it allowed. I mostly use yes ji account on wikis with LATN alphabets also at some others. But at wikis like Punjabi, Sindhi,Urdu etc. I use different account. So, ANY PROBLEM???--Yes ji (talk) 11:29, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- It is my understanding that different accounts may be used on different wikis. I don't think that is a problem. You didn't ask whether your questions on the English Wikipedia are problematic because we often can't understand them. Your questions on the English Wikipedia are often not in good English, and that causes confusion and uncertainty. We try to answer them. I don't know what your reason is for asking so many questions here, because it doesn't appear that your English is good enough for you to be able to make useful contributions here in any of the various ways that editors contribute, such as creating articles, editing articles, reviewing articles, advising other editors. I don't mean to be unwelcoming, but it isn't clear why you are doing what appears to me to be wasting both your time and the time of the other editors here by asking so many questions, when you could instead contribute to another Wikipedia, some of which have a great need for language-fluent editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Robert McClenon, tell me, do you speak in Urdu, Punjabi etc. Maybe NO. I mostly contribute another wiki. I,m not interested much in english wikipedia. I know my english is not much better. I contribute wikis like Urdu,Punjabi,Sindhi,scots etc.
Im Asking more questions because i noticed differences in different wikis.--Yes ji (talk) 13:05, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- No. I don't know those languages, and I don't try to use those Wikipedias. If you do know those languages and use those Wikipedias, that is very good. My real question is why you ask questions here, when you know enough English to think that you can ask questions here, and not enough English to actually ask questions here. We can't answer some of your questions because the English is so bad. You apparently don't realize just how bad your English is, and it is a waste of our time and your time. You asked us, about a month ago, about becoming an administrator. You will never become an administrator in the English Wikipedia with deeply broken English, and it wasn't even a reasonable question. It appears from this comment that you are comparing the English Wikipedia and the Wikipedias in the Indian languages, and then asking questions in English about the differences. The instructions in the Wikipedias in the Indian languages are the ones that you should pay attention to. The instructions here do not matter except if you want to edit here, and you don't know enough English even to ask questions here without confusing us. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- I do not edit the Urdu Wikipedia, the Punjabi Wikipedia, or the Sindhi Wikipedia, for the same reason that you should not edit the English Wikipedia or the Scots Wikipedia. I do not know those languages, and you do not know English enough to edit, only enough to confuse us. I also do not try to edit the Scots Wikipedia. If I tried to do that, I would cause as much confusion there as you do here. You almost certainly know even less Scots than you do English. (At least its editors might think that your posts were patent nonsense, rather than trying to answer them.) If you have questions about the differences between different Wikipedias, ask them at a Wikipedia where you know the language. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- Do you really want to be blocked for not being able to post reasonable questions here? You don't know enough English even to ask questions here. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- These comments will soon be archived out of the Teahouse. I am copying a diff to your user page as a record that you have been asked both politely and less than politely not to waste our time asking questions when you can't really formulate them well. I don't want to see you blocked, but I don't want us to have to waste our time (and yours) on your questions that we often don't understand. Which of the Indian languages that you mention is your first language? Do you need someone to explain to you in your first language that your English is a problem? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Robert McClenon, My first languages are both Urdu and Punjabi (Native Indo-Pak langs) and i contribute mostly to Urdu. Thanks for telling me. So, i,m wasting your time..... Ok WELL
--Yes ji (talk) 15:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Ok to contact living person for confirmation of their details?
I'm having a go at writing my first WIki article. It is about a musician, a virtuoso ukelele player from Hawaii. I have no relationship with her. The idea came when I saw a video of her playing, and tried to look her up on wiki and discovered there was not an article, so thought I'd create one. I have several sources, articles about her in reputable magazines. But before I post, I want to check on some biographical details (age, birthplace etc.) She has a web page, with contact details, and I wondered if it is okay to contact her and get these details directly. Also, can I link to and quote from her own webpage? Or is this too much like advertising. Also, when mentioning her released albums, is it okay to link to an online site where they can be bought? Or again, is this too much like advertising? I'm concerned, as it seems a previous article about her was deleted due to sounding too much like advertising; probably written by herself or PR team, so I want to make sure this is neutral enough. Thanks for helping a newbie, folks. Misterdequincey (talk) 09:58, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Misterdequincey. It seems to me it would be a waste of effort to contact her, for you couldn't use the information she gives you: All information in an article must be sourced to reliable published sources. You probably can put a link to her website in the "External links" section of an article but don't quote from it or link to a sales site. —teb728 t c 10:17, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, @teb728. I did manage to find a source for the birthdate so that's fine, and yes, I'll put the musician's website into External links. If I hadn't found a source, would it not be okay to check with the person or someone close to them as to the correct birth year? I know for example that the wiki entry for a family member of mine gives the incorrect birthplace, but I haven't attempted to edit it, as the source would be me. Not a good idea? Misterdequincey (talk) 12:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- No, not a good idea. Unpublished sources are completely irrelevant to Wikipedia. If the wrong information is published in an apparently reliable source, that's what we go with, I'm afraid. If reliable sources disagree, the article should mention this, but not attempt to choose or argue between them. If the information is not sourced, then it may (and arguably should) be removed. --ColinFine (talk) 14:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Makes sense. Thanks for clarifying that ColinFine. Misterdequincey (talk) 15:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for your contribution. As mentioned above, in a draft article, it is important to know what are and what are not independent reliable sources. What the musician says is not independent and reliable. However, further discussion of your draft can take place in your more recent post above. Thank you for contributing. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:10, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
But Why????????????
Why creating new account, not allowed, even in good faith (if someone)??--Yes ji (talk) 09:43, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Your question is unclear, so you may want to rewrite it in clearer English. If you are trying to ask when it may be appropriate use an alternative account, see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry#Legitimate uses. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:56, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- The original poster asks a lot of questions here that are in nearly incomprehensible English. What is their native language? If they have reason to ask a lot of questions about the English Wikipedia, they might do well to find a "linguistic mentor" who can ask their questions for them in good English. Also, please consider whether you might be better able to contribute to the Wikipedia project in another language, some of which have a shortage of editors and of articles and are in urgent need of expansion (while the English Wikipedia already has five million articles). Robert McClenon (talk) 13:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- The OP apparently does edit in a number of other languages, see #Much imp ques above. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:45, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- These languages are similar, and quite common in the Punjab. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 14:09, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- As mentioned above, I would suggest that this editor would contribute better to Wikimedia (the overall project) in the Wikipedias of languages with which they are more familiar. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:04, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I would like to find curation opportunities
I was recently talking to a friend and she showed me that there are many "backlogs" on wikipedia which require someone to take care of them, and that there are many simple tasks which are needed for everyday working of the encyclopedia. Can any experienced user guide me towards these?
EDIT: I have found this page via google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Backlog CuratorGuy CuratorGuy (talk) 06:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, CuratorGuy, and thank you for your offer to help out. I recommend that you take an in-depth look at Wikipedia:Community portal, which functions as a central hub for the wide variety of tasks that need to be completed. Select any area that appeals to you, and get to work. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Cullen328 Thank you. What is the educational requirement to edit? I am very new and I still have not found the link to upload my credentials CuratorGuyCuratorGuy (talk) 06:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, CuratorGuy, as long as they comply with our policies and guidelines. See the Five pillars of Wikipedia for a basic outline. Although experts are welcomed, our job is to summarize published sources, so any reasonably intelligent person can be a productive editor. Since consensus is the method we use to build articles, a collaborative, open-minded attitude is more important than waving around a PhD. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Cullen328 thanks again. My apologies for being thick, but you seem to have uploaded your credentials as I can see them displayed on your main page. How can I do that? CuratorGuy (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- No problem, CuratorGuy. If you click on the red link that is your current signature, a message will come up letting you know that your userpage does not yet exist. It will give you an option to create it, and an edit window will open below. Type a brief description of your goals as a Wikipedia editor, and save it. As time goes by, you can expand it as you see fit. See WP:USERPAGE for more information. Typing "WP:" followed by a logical keyword will almost take you to an informative page for editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Cullen328 thank you ever so much. This is just the thing I was looking for. CuratorGuy (talk) 07:13, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- CuratorGuy, I've discovered that "credentials" are not exactly welcomed with open arms around here by some users - they'd like to punch you in the nose as soon as they find out you have an advanced degree! This seems to occur when you're suggesting changes to or actively editing an article in your field of expertise. I don't get it, as you'd think the opposite would be true, & people with a good knowledge of a subject would be welcomed to edit because they know what they're on about. But some users can be "territorial" about articles they've created or to which they've contributed, & seem to think that academic credentials pose some sort of "threat" to them, that you're making them up, that you think you're a big fat know-it-all who's going to wreak havoc & run amok on their "baby", or all 3 at once. Cullen said all that a bit more diplomatically than I did (& more succinctly). May I offer you the suggestion of joining the Guild of Copy Editors as a general starting place? There are, of course, lots of other WikiProjects that are subject-specific if that's what you have in mind. In that case, try looking at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory to find one. Best of luck. ScarletRibbons (talk) 21:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Cullen328 thank you ever so much. This is just the thing I was looking for. CuratorGuy (talk) 07:13, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- No problem, CuratorGuy. If you click on the red link that is your current signature, a message will come up letting you know that your userpage does not yet exist. It will give you an option to create it, and an edit window will open below. Type a brief description of your goals as a Wikipedia editor, and save it. As time goes by, you can expand it as you see fit. See WP:USERPAGE for more information. Typing "WP:" followed by a logical keyword will almost take you to an informative page for editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Cullen328 thanks again. My apologies for being thick, but you seem to have uploaded your credentials as I can see them displayed on your main page. How can I do that? CuratorGuy (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, CuratorGuy, as long as they comply with our policies and guidelines. See the Five pillars of Wikipedia for a basic outline. Although experts are welcomed, our job is to summarize published sources, so any reasonably intelligent person can be a productive editor. Since consensus is the method we use to build articles, a collaborative, open-minded attitude is more important than waving around a PhD. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Cullen328 Thank you. What is the educational requirement to edit? I am very new and I still have not found the link to upload my credentials CuratorGuyCuratorGuy (talk) 06:24, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Finding Wikipedia articles which are need for editing!
Dear editors,
I am an old Wikipedia user and a newcomer editor. I am interested to know if wiki pages are sorted in the quality of articles written. This would help to identify the pages which are in more need of being improved. It is harder to go from page to page to find out what is their exact status. Thank you to everyone in advance.
Warm Regards, Varshit Dusad Dusadv (talk) 04:50, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- If you are interested in particular topics, joining a WikiProject might be a good idea. For instance, you could join Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany by adding your name to this list. It is probably best to first add the main project page to your watchlist and follow how things are done in that project for a while. WikiProjects often have a page summarizing current assessments, making it easy to select, for instance, articles that are rated as being of start class but high importance. For instance WikiProject Germany has a table here. Clicking on the appropriate table cell displays a list of talk pages (since it is the talk pages that contain the project's quality assessments). You can also go to this page and drill down from there. --Boson (talk) 08:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- There is also a category of articles that have been tagged by an editor as needing copy-edit. That category is:
- These will not be in any particular topic area, but have all been tagged as needing copy-edit, typically because they have problems with grammar. I don't know whether that is how you would like to improve articles, but it is a way that some editors improve articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Time zones and "Retrieved" dates
When citing web sources, we say "Retrieved (date)" If an editor is not in the UTC time zone, should they use the UTC date or the date in their own time zone? Thanks! Chickadee46 (talk) 04:04, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Chickadee46. Personally, I use the date in my own local time zone, and I do not think a one day discrepancy is of significance. I suggest that you choose the method that feels best for you, and stick to it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:43, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse Chickadee46. Using the date in your own location is perfectly fine, and is what I do, as it's easier for me. The accessdate parameter in citation templates is built to accept access dates that are 1 day ahead of the current UTC date for this reason. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:28, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
my article is being deleted!!!
I'm new to this and have part written an article about the band I perform in, the article will be deleted in a week as I have not referenced it to any articles. how do I do this? the band has been in various newspaper articles and magazines and I am struggling with how to do it "properly" as I have been requested many thanks Bill S Bill scroggs (talk) 20:55, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Bill scroggs, and welcome to the Teahouse. Cite them just like you have cited ryansgigguide, though preferably make note of the author, publisher, title and date of the source as well. See Help:Referencing for beginners. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
- But, Bill scroggs, you really need to read about conflict of interest, to see why you are strongly discouraged from working on an article about your band; and your first article to understand the basic requirements for an article. Wikipedia has essentially no interest about what a subject (whether a person, a band, a company or anything else) says about themselves: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about them in reliable places (such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers). If such sources exist (newspapers and magazines are good, but it needs to have people unconnected with you writing in depth about the band, not just listings or passing mentions, and not anything based on press-releases or interviews) then the band meets the criteria called "notability", and we may have an article on it. IN that case, I suggest that you Move the article to draft space, so you (or somebody) can work on it and get its referencing up to scratch. --ColinFine (talk) 00:24, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Colin Fine, thank you very much for the advice, I will attempt to place the article in draft space, that was where I intended it to go but it seems it's published....whoops, sorry about that, I really appreciate your help and contribution to making the article look presentable for this site. many thanks Bill ScroggsBill scroggs (talk) 08:39, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Edit page name
This page on Wikimedia Commons has a spelling mistake in the name of the page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chuche_of_Ognissanti_(Venice) It should be Church rather than Chuche. What is the best way to correct this? I tried changing the display of the name with DISPLAYTITLE:Church of Ognissanti (Venice) but that didn't work. Thanks. VeniceEmpire (talk) 10:19, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- The process is to move the page, and I've done that. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know what to do in future and correcting it in this case. VeniceEmpire (talk) 13:19, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Sandbox
What is a sandbox page? — 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:45, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse. You'll find the answer at Wikipedia:About the Sandbox. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:49, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you! — 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:57, 20 May 2016 (UTC)