Wikipedia:Teahouse

GoingBatty, 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

My References are not coming out right!

Hi! I have written a draft (Link: [[1]]) which was submitted for review but declined along with reasons. I have so far fixed some of the issues but i am having confusions regarding a few things.

Firstly, my references are not coming out right. I have followed the correct procedure of citing external links in text. But when i preview my changes and click on the reference, it does not redirect to the website which i have cited, even though the URL posted is correct. Kindly advise.

Secondly, how to insert categories list at the end of the article? If i don't insert categories, will that effect my submission?

Thirdly, i want to insert an image within the text. Do i have to use the file upload wizard or i can embed the image through source editing?

Thanks in advance.Ahmedasghar2016 (talk) 06:15, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Why am I not able to edit an a wikipedia article?

I am a wiki-editor. As soon, as I log in, I would find the Edit button between 'Read' and 'View History' buttons, so that I can edit the article. But, In the recent days, I don't find the 'Edit' button, Instead I find 'Edit source' button. Through this button, I am not able to edit it. What to do? I want to edit some articles. BawinV (talk) 05:10, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Some articles are page protected for various reasons. Without knowing what article you tried to edit, I cannot tell you the reason why. This prevents users from editing the page if they are not autoconfirmed or confirmed (which you should be), extended confirmed (users with more than 500 edits over 30 days), or even administrators. It doesn't really have anything to do with you. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:30, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

How can use references for an article in a different language?

I would like to translate articles from English to Spanish but I don't know if is allowed use the same reference to the same article but with different language? Fujiiy (talk) 04:37, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

We can't really answer that question for the Spanish Wikipedia. It is OK to use Spanish (or other non-English) sources on the English Wikipedia, as long as they meet our reliable sourcing standards (though if there is a local language edition of a given source, it's nice to cite that alongside the foreign language source). Some other language Wikipedias have different standards for what constitutes a reliable source, though I've gotten the impression that ours are a bit more strict than some others. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:35, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Can I use Korean reference on English wikipedia?

Can I use Korean reference on English wikipedia? I didn't find a English reference, so I used Korean references only. Is it OK? Gong Ju-young (talk) 04:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

As long as that source meets the rest of our reliable sourcing standards, language is not an issue. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:42, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Article advice

How can I do much better my article? This article is an assignament from one class. Likn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fujiiy/sandbox

I'm beginer using wikipedia and im not sure how to use it very well.

Thank you Feryeah13 (talk) 04:20, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

will my article be deleted which has wrong english grammer and wrong spelling?

will my article be deleted which has wrong english grammer and wrong spelling?Berlinuno (talk) 04:17, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Grammar and spelling are not reasons to delete an article. When an article is deleted, it is most likely deleted because it does not cite enough reliable sources. See WP:42 for more information on how to avoid that problem. Another reason might be plagiarism and copyright violations, but if you're writing with "wrong" English, then you're doing a good job of avoiding plagiarism. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:46, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

What to do when I find a factual error?

I found part of an article that I'm fairly certain is wrong. I looked at the Edit history for someone I can contact, but for various reasons it didn't look promising, among them my inability to decipher which contributor wrote the part in question. What do I do about this?
--Vmavanti (talk) 01:47, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

If you're certain something is wrong, change it. If someone reverts you, be prepared to discuss the change on the talk page, citing reliable sources to support the change. WP:WIKIBLAME links to a tool that can help you find out who added the material in the first place. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:47, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

COI in creating page for AWA Lighting Designers

Hello all, I'm working on my first article, but I am a "paid contributor" (the subject is my employer) and well aware of the accompanying COI issues. Rather than just toss in my hat, I want to make sure I do everything properly; I understand that submitting a draft to AfC with the proper COI tag, {{connected contributor (paid)}}, is a final step. However, how much or how little content is appropriate? And what kinds of information should I include or avoid (e.g., listing projects, biographical material like education/employment, etc.)? I know these are murky waters I'm navigating, so thank you for your patience and help.

A link to the current draft is here: User:Camnelson15/AWA_Lighting_Designers. I've kept it short to start, and don't worry about more general issues, I plan to have third-party sources for everything, and format it all nicely. The main thing I want to understand is COI ethics/procedures. I'm taking this one step at a time.

Thanks again!

Camnelson15 (talk) 17:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Just letting you know, I replaced {{connected contributor (paid)}} with {{tl|connected contributor (paid)}} so that this page is no longer tagged as having a connected contributor. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 20:03, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Camnelson15, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for being up-front about your status. I have taken the liberty of replacing your external link above by a Wikilink, for clarity.

The (potential) problem is that you have started the wrong way round. You have started with information you know about the company, put it in, and found sources for it. That is better than a lot of people manage, who don't even provide sources. But it is not the way to write a good Wikipedia article. What you need to do is to start by finding independent reliable sources that discuss the company in depth. Then you should forget every single thing you know about the company, and write an article based strictly on what these sources say (though in your own words, so as not to infringe their copyright). If that gives you a substantial article, then you might fill it out with factual information from the company's own resources, and add a selection of products or projects that they have done. But an article that consists almost entirely of projects or products is not encyclopaedic, and indicates that either the company is not notable or that the writer has not found the sources which will establish its notability.

I'm not sure about the two references for which you haven't given URL's, but of the five you have, not one is a substantial piece about the company - they all just mention it; and few of them are independent: if they are published by a company they work with, they are not independent. It is possible that references 2 or 6 are substantial pieces about the company; but given that you have used them to support specific projects, I doubt it. You need to find articles in major newspapers or magazines, or books from reputable publishers, which have substantial pieces about the company (not just about its founder, or about particular projects), written by independent people, not associates of the company (and also not based on press releases or interviews). If you can find some, then write the article based on those; if you can't, then give up, because in that case the company doesn't meet our criteria for notability. --ColinFine (talk) 18:04, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine, I'll give that approach (coming at it blind) a shot! Your candor is appreciated. --Camnelson15 (talk) 19:09, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Article creation timeframe

Hello, how long does it typically take for a page to be reviewed and approved once it's been submitted?

Thank you in advance.

JenWUSTL (talk) 15:54, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't have direct experience, but I've read it comes around in 1-2 weeks. I found the information here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article, where it says "...One way of making this happen is to request a review: this may take a week or two, depending on the backlog; but when a reviewer accepts it, they will move the draft into the live space..."

Hope that helps!

Camnelson15 (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, AfC is relatively backlogged at the moment, so it may take longer. Also please keep in mind that timeframes can vary widely. The whole process is run by volunteers. We generally review submissions in random order, and volunteers may skip over, or just comment on, submissions they don't feel comfortable assessing. In the meantime, please do continue working on your draft. There is nothing quite as pleasant as coming across a policy-compliant draft in AfC that just needs a quick check before approving. Happy Squirrel (talk) 17:38, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! JenWUSTL (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Greetings JenWUSTL – Even after being reviewed & approved, articles can continue being improved. FYI here is a page that explains more about Article development. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

How authentic?

How authentic would it be to use facts and figures from wiki source to my research?(49.244.90.83 (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I think that your real question is not about what is "authentic" but what is verifiable. What Wiki source? Do you mean another Wikipedia article? If so, you can use the facts and figures, but you should in general include the references from the existing article. Do you mean some other wiki? If you mean Wikipedia, the key is helping the reader do the verification. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Robert, I think the OP is referring to Wikisource. Nthep (talk) 15:31, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Regarding creation of an article of Chandigarh Handball Association.

I want to create an article i.e. Chandigarh Handball Association but I was not able to create it because it has been deleted by someone allready. Chandigarh Handball Association is an affiliated state association of the Handball Federation of India which is and federation of Olympic sport of Handball. Please help me to create this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiupdater1997 (talk • contribs) 09:51, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

@Wikiupdater1997:, I suggest that you create a draft article at Draft:Chandigarh Handball Association and work from there. There have been several attempts at creating an article about this association, all of which were deleted for failing to establish the notability of it. As a result, the title has been salted and only administrators can create the page. If you start as a draft page then if the draft is accepted, it will be moved to the article space as part of the acceptance process. Please read WP:My first article before starting so that you understand what is needed. The previous attempts have not included any information other than lists of the officers of the association. Nthep (talk) 14:45, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

biography of a living person

how to write/create a wiki page for biography of a living person? AhaGuru BS (talk) 08:55, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You should do so with great care and using high-quality sources, AhaGuru BS. Please read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons to understand why this is important. I suggest going via Wikipedia:Articles for creation when you want to create such an article. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:04, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Removing the tag on my page

Hello everyone,

I am a new Wikipedian and the page I created World Bamboo Organization is tagged and suggested to make it neutral. I would appreciate any help on that to get rid of the tag.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crfl wiz (talk • contribs) 07:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

For starters, to be brief, you need to remove all uses of the first person plural pronoun from the article. The article should be in the voice of Wikipedia, not the voice of the bamboo organization. Also, there is too much information about the leadership and structure of the organization, and not enough about what others have said about the organization. I will let other editors comment further. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

The thing to remember, Crfl wiz, is that in that article, Wikipedia has no interest in what the WBO, or its employees, supporters, or associates, have said or want to say. It is only interested in what people who have no connection to the organisation have published about it in reliable places. --ColinFine (talk) 17:44, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

How do I create a new article page?

I was wondering how to create a new article page on The Boy Spies of Philadelphia.Stevenszz (talk) 05:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Stevenszz, and welcome to the Teahouse. All the information you need is at Wikipedia:Your first article. When you have read that and are ready to start writing the article, you can do so via Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Stevenszz. I assume that you are talking about one in a series of late 19th century young adult novels written by James Otis Kaler. One approach might be to write an article about the entire series, with a section about each of the books. Please read our notabity guideline for books. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:19, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Did this organization really exist and is it documented by historical reliable sources, or is your account at Draft:Boy Spies of Philadelphia fictional? In the former case, provide reliable sources, such as historical books that have mentioned the boy spies at least in passing. If the account that you submitted a few days ago is fictional and is written by you, Wikipedia is not interested in web hosting your fiction. If it is about fiction that has already been published, if the fiction is notable in the sense of having been reviewed and discussed by independent sources, you may submit an article as an article on fiction. I can't tell from your draft whether it is meant to be historical fact, previously published fiction, or self-published fiction. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:24, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

How do I correctly give credit for an image?

I put an article about Joseph N McCormack onto Wikipedia last month with no problem, including a photograph. The next week, I put up an article about his son, Arthur T McCormack, including a photograph. But, because I didn't fill out the forms correctly, the photo was deleted. I have permission to use it from the Department of Special Collections and Archives at the University of Louisville (Kentucky) but, somehow I went through the wrong steps to upload it. Would someone please walk me through the steps so I can get the photograph up again? Drvalsummers (talk) 22:30, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Drvalsummers. Copyright in the United States has expired on everything published before 1923, which is almost a "magic date" in copyright law. Since the portrait of Joseph N. McCormack was published in 1920, it is now copyright free and can be used for any purpose. His son Arthur T. McCormack lived until 1943 and a photo of him taken after 1923 is in a different legal status. Did the people at the University of Louisville explicitly release the image under an acceptable Creative Commons license, in writing? In other words, do they own the copyright and are they freely allowing anyone produce Arthur T. McCormack posters, T-shirts and coffee mugs without permission or payment? I am not saying that this is a viable business venture but that is what a Creative Commons license allows.

The other option allows limited use of a non-free low resolution image of a person who has died, only in that person's biography. Please read our policy on use of non-free images, especially #10, and follow the procedures there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Blanking content

(cut and paste from archive) 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 talk pages, 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)

Not such a friendly response...hmmmm, maybe even a bit icy. Though I am not a new editor by any means and did not say that I was, I still have an editing question. I am sorry that I did not get back sooner. My question is not about the Probiotics article at all. As a matter of fact, I have absolutely no problems with the Probiotic article and hope to continue to work with other editors to make it better. I have waited until my editing history was long enough so that my question would not be tied to a particular article and that assumptions like the ones made above could not be made. Yes, I know about being bold, but the edits I am referring were not so bold. As for my account being compromised, that is not the case as far as I know. Discussing small edits made over a relatively long period of time is not something that usually merits discussion on talk pages. You won't find too much from me on the Probiotics talk page since I don't have a problem with the editing. I generally avoid reverting, it gets so contentious. But the edits made to an article that I was working on were not bold but over time much of my MEDRS supported content was removed - one small edit at a time. Essentially in the course of a two week period, at least half of it was gone. My point is that if the content were removed all at once, it would be blanking content, is that correct? I think I get the gist of what you might be getting at - blanking content in small, incremental steps is not a form of vandalism, yes? Best Regards.

Barbara (WVS) (talk) 21:49, 24 May 2016 (UTC) and Bfpage

I, for one, really don't like to answer questions of this level of generality. The answer to questions of this high level of generality is typically: Sometimes. Maybe. However, to answer your question as you asked it, you already know that large-scale blanking, unless accompanied by a detailed edit summary, is usually a form of vandalism. You appear to be referring to repeated small-scale blanking of content. If you are saying that small edits over a period of time are not normally discussed on talk pages, I wouldn't generalize, and your question makes me uneasy because of its generality, but I wouldn't say that repeated small edits with an overall effect are not worth discussing. You are forcing me to do a lot of guesswork, which is why I really don't like your question, but, if an editor is repeatedly removing small amounts of content, knowing or hoping that the edits will not be discussed, it probably isn't vandalism as such, because it may be POV-pushing instead. Now, rather than deliberately being annoying and vague and general, will you please direct us to an article? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. It has really helped me. I am sorry to be forcing you to do a lot of guesswork and my question is genuinely being asked in good faith. I needed a general answer about editing and what you wrote makes a lot of sense. I don't intend to be deliberately annoying but my question was really about editing and blanking of content and you have given me an unbiased viewpoint about blanking content vs. POV-pushing. I won't direct you to an article, I am sorry. Instead if I continue to have questions about the kind of blanking of content that may be happening, I will discuss with such things with any editor with whom I have a problem. I am here to make an encyclopedia and learn as much as I can from other experienced editors like yourself. I am not sure why I am annoying. I don't want to be. Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) (talk) 23:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC) (other username, Bfpage)

sources

Hi where and when i m adding sources on my page biography?and what happens if i dont have sources?Sakgra (talk) 18:47, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Sakgra. When you say "my page biography", are you referring to an article? If so, which one? Cordless Larry (talk) 18:50, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

its a new one about Bessy Argyraki but they removed it because i didnt had sourcesSakgra (talk) 18:52, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

That will likely happen if you add unsourced material, Sakgra, due to Wikipedia's requirement for verifiability. See Help:Referencing for beginners for instructions on how to cite sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:55, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

When is it appropriate to add deep details of a game to its Wikipedia article?

Hey, folks! I'm relatively new here, and while I've done a decent amount of editing and rearranging of articles, I haven't really added much new content. Having been entranced by Overwatch of late, I'm interested in filling out that article with extra details.

The thing is, I'm not sure if that's appropriate on the general-interest Wikipedia. Obviously there are IP-specific Wikis that fans put together, and Overwatch already has one. But I feel like having a brief breakdown of each playable character in the game could be useful, especially since those characters are referenced in several of the article's sections.

I know I could ask this on the Overwatch talk page, but despite my specific interest in that article, it would seem to apply across IPs. Is there specific guidance on what should and should not be included, in terms of depth, within an article for an IP?

Thanks, folks! Aussietommartin (talk) 17:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Aussietommartin. I'm not sure I understand what this has to do with IP addresses - have I misunderstood? That aside, a good place to ask for advice on this would be at WikiProject Video games. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:44, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Whoops! By IP I meant intellectual property. Should have specified; I'm sorry! But thanks for pointing me int he right direction. I'll check things out there! Aussietommartin (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Aussietommartin. I think that it is fair to say that "deep details" about a video game are inappropriate for Wikipedia. It is a well-established principle that Wikipedia is not a game guide. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:30, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

It kind of depends, really. When overly detailed information is unsourced, we call it "trivia" or "cruft". When overly detailed information is well-sourced, we call it a "featured article". However, cynicism aside, in-universe details generally belong on Wikia. Wikipedia is more focused on real-world details, such as reception and development. If a character receives such attention, such as Johnny Cage, they can get their own article. But if it's just plot details, that doesn't really belong here. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:23, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Draft:TheManInTheSuit

I reviewed Draft:TheManInTheSuit and declined it, saying that user pages are not reviewed at AFC, but are just moved into user space. I was asked:

hi. What do i have to to do create my user name page? I don;t see to understand it. Do i have to include contact details or something. I just want a beginning page with some personal info that i add to with time. Please advise and thanks for your help

Just do it. (In fact, contact details, such as phone number and email address, are discouraged, because communication between Wikipedians should be via Wikipedia.) See The user page guideline. Do other editors have other comments about user pages? Would you like the current draft moved to your user page? That is normally something you do yourself. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

What question are you asking us here, Robert? Did you intend to put this at User talk:Themaninthesuit, or in reply to the question on your own user talk page? --David Biddulph (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I am asking if anyone else has advice to the User:Themaininthesuit. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

If you want to create a user page, Themaninthesuit, then please go ahead and do so at User:Themaninthesuit. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:22, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

My comment was brief because I'm fine with the decision. The article does need some more work... BroVic (talk) 14:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Draft:National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Nigeria)

I reviewed Draft:National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Nigeria) and declined it as not showing notability. I received a very brief comment from User:BroVic. Would other experienced editors please comment either on whether I should have accepted it or what he should do to get it ready for acceptance? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:57, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Request for review

Hi. Since January, I've had a request pending for an independent review of suggested edits to the article Fabrice Grinda where I have a COI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fabrice_Grinda#Updates_--_request_review Almost five months is a pretty long wait (I just updated and streamlined the request) and I wonder if someone might take a look and decide whether the suggested edits are worth making. Thanks.BC1278 (talk) 16:26, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

The best place to advertise nominations like this would be to add it to the associated Wikiproject's talk page (which can be found on the article's talk page), in this case WikiProject Biography.   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:03, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Ali Hussein Hassoun

I reviewed Draft: Ali Hussein Hassoun and declined it as having no references. I then got the following request for help from User:Nadinelama:

I followed your comments and made the required modifications and resubmitted my draft for your kind review. An error message is displaying: 1-Submission declined on Error: Invalid time 2-, Error : first parameter cannot be parsed as a date or time.. 3- Redirect: target page name What does this mean? How to fix these? I am new to wiki and html so please bare with me... —

I have reviewed the history. I see that the editor made multiple edits to add references. I see that some of the edits were made by an IP address. They were probably the editor who forgot to log in. Please remember to log in. It protects your privacy of location, and provides you with various privileges. The logged-out edits didn’t break the submission. An experienced editor, maybe on New Page Patrol, made a minor edit. That didn’t break the submission. The author tried to insert additional references, but accidentally "broke" the record of the previous decline. Can another editor please fix the record of the previous decline. I will comment that the current text is non-neutral and contains peacock language. He is referred to in the lede sentence as distinguished. He probably is, but in Wikipedia we attribute that to critics. The following language is likewise non-neutral:

'Ali Hassoun's works seem to act as a pole that attracts various cultures which merge to create a new, richer culture. Hassoun wants to highlight the idea of “unity through humanity”: universal and spiritual features that are common to all human beings, and that always come first, before any political or religious division. The artist is like a cultural translator; different traditions coexist in the perfectly balanced space of his colourful paintings.'

It has a footnote, but is not in quotes and so is in the voice of Wikipedia.

Will other editors please comment? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:08, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Making references accessible to readers

Hello! I have a question about references. I have some printed newspaper articles that contain information that I would like to reference on a Wikipedia page that I have been working on. I have found that some pdf's of those files are hosted online by the person that the article is about (Howard Newman, a living artist.) I would like to reference the pdf's rather than making citations strictly for the print copies so that the references are accessible to others. So my question is in two parts: 1. Is it possible/optimal to make inline citations that reference something that can be easily accessed online by others using Wikipedia? 2. Is it appropriate to reference the pdf's Howard Newman is hosting on his personal web page?

Aculpepp (talk) 13:33, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey, @Aculpepp: Thanks for stopping by to ask this. The first thing you need to know is that there is no requirement that an online version of a reference exists. It merely has to be published and disseminated. If it is reasonable that a person could find the referenced text in a public or academic library somewhere, that is sufficient. In fact, since Wikipedia has a strict policy against linking to copyright violations, sometimes you shouldn't link to a source, if it exists online but only as a violation of copyright. Instead, just include all the standard bibliographic information; templates like {{cite journal}} and {{cite book}} are optional ways to organize this. Now, that doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T link to an online source if the source exists onlin and is published reliably and legally. It is optimal to do so when possible, but source which do not exist online are in no way inferior. You can read more about this at Wikipedia:Citing sources, notably the section titled "Handling links in citations", as well as Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. I hope that helps. --Jayron32 14:06, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

An online PDF, like any other online information, is not reliable unless it is hosted by a reliable source, because it could have been altered. Having said that, it is the bibliographic reference that matters, not the link; but I think it would not be appropriate to link to a copy of a document hosted at the subject's website. --ColinFine (talk) 21:37, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

How do I handle this case?

Hi there. I'd like to have some advice on how to handle this.

An article I'm working on, a BLP of William Lane Craig, involves a protracted disagreement about how the BLP subject should be characterized in the lede. Extensive discussion hasn't produced consensus. Dispute resolution has been ignored.

It's gotten to the point where the person reverts changes, and also ignores attempts at consensus on the talk page.

In this way, it looks like this user has singularly taken control of the article, while refusing, or being unwilling to have a discussion about building consensus.

What's the appropriate way to handle this?

BabyJonas (talk) 03:45, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, BabyJonas. This looks like a routine content dispute to me, with active discussion going on at the talk page. What seems lacking to me is discussion of specific changes to article content, instead of debating the article in general. If, after trying very hard, your concerns cannot be resolved on the talk page, then we have a variety of forms of Dispute resolution available. If a lower level does not work, you can move up a level. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Cullen328. The last comment on the talk page was left (by me) two weeks ago. My interlocutor seems uninterested in continuing the conversation, but is still actively reverting changes on the article. Does this warrant moving to dispute resolution? BabyJonas (talk) 09:00, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

You refer to your "interlocutor". That is a strange reference if you mean an editor who disagrees with you and reverts your edits. (I was recently asked to act as an interlocutor for unregistered editors by stating their case and I declined to do so.) However, I see that your question is where to go from here. The amount of recent talk page discussion has just barely been adequate to start a discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard. I would suggest resuming the discussion on the talk page. If that doesn't work, then I would go to the dispute resolution noticeboard. An alternative, if a concise question can be formulated, would be a Request for Comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I find interlocutor perfectly normal in the sense of "somebody I am talking to". --ColinFine (talk) 21:27, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Maybe that depends on regional varieties of English. In any case, discuss on the article talk page, and if discussion is inconclusive, you may pursue other means of dispute resolution. Unfortunately, editors who revert but will not discuss are more common in Wikipedia than they should be, and they sometimes have to be blocked. I hope that this is not one of those cases. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Why is my article submission being declined?

Hi everyone! Quick question -- I'm not entirely sure what the referencing issues are specifically with the draft I'm trying to submit. Link here:

Draft:Henry Alan Green

I'm not irritated or anything, just very new here and looking to be told exactly what I need to fix in order to make this article Wiki-worthy. Thanks!

Gc717 (talk) 01:20, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Pinging reviewer Robert McClenon and changed external link to wikilink. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 01:51, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Gc717. At least 15 of your sources are formatted as bare URLs, as opposed to fleshed out and properly cited references. Please follow the good advice at Referencing for beginners, and clean up those references. While you are at it, if any of them do not qualify as reliable, independent sources, remove them. It is far better to have a smaller number of high quality sources than a large number of sources, many of which are mediocre. Human nature being what it is, if a reviewer clicks on a poor source, their opinion of your draft plummets. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:19, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

When I said, "Fix reference errors", I meant in particular that some of the references were "broken" in that they were displaying as ugly red errors in the document. That is what I meant. I see that you have them fixed. I don't even try to check the good references in an article if it has broken references. I don't think that an article should go into article space if it has "broken" references. That is what I meant. Also, I agree with Cullen328 that it is better to have a moderate number of good sources than a large number of sources, some of which are mediocre. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:54, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Using Wikipedia as a glossary.

I would like to use Wikipedia as a glossary reference for a translation project (open source). I've been looking for official, international reference (?) of terms used in statistics, research/scientific method and it would seem that the most comprehensive source is Wikipedia classification. Would you kindly advise if this is permitted to use some API or other automated method for this purpose? What would be the best way to access the resources? I would appreciate your help. Perfekcyjna Perfekcyjna (talk) 19:51, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Perfekcyjna. Your question raises issues that are beyond my technical expertise, but I want to point you in the right direction. There are lots of resources available to you at WikiProject Glossaries. Our policy on use of bots should get you started regarding automated tools. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:19, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, if you just want the names of articles on the same subject in multiple languages, wikidata: has a wealth of such data, and is easily scraped. If you need instead a dictionary proper, see Wiktionary. Intelligentsium 02:02, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

You may also be interested in API--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:07, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Red Links on Disambiguation Pages

Should red links be placed on disambiguation pages if a page with that name does not exist? I would think so, but I have never seen it done before.Fhutch21 (talk) 18:13, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fhutch21
The simple guide is Wikipedia:Disambiguation dos and don'ts although that is not the official guideline which is at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages.
Every entry must have one blue link - but redlinks can be included - provided the redlink already exists (WP:DDD explains how to check this).
A typical use might be a song on an album, where we have no article on the song, as it is not notable, but we do have an article on the album, Someone looking for the song then has a bluelink to the album. Arjayay (talk) 18:35, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

How Do I Save Myself?!

I am really getting worried that none of my articles are getting submitted. I am really going insane and I need some advice about them except than the First Article. Please, please, please somebody help me, instantly!Amy2563 (talk) 17:17, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Amy2563. I only see one existing article that you have created, called The Song from Heaven. That is an entirely unreferenced article that duplicates Silent Night, which is properly referenced. It is not appropriate to create new articles about topics that already have existing articles about them. The best advice that I can give you at this time is that you should not submit unreferenced articles, as they will almost certainly be deleted. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:22, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I have a conflict of interest- am I allowed to draft an article?

Hello,

I would like to draft an article for the French company Voluntis, but have a conflict of interest. Reading over Wikipedia's guidelines, given my situation, I believe I can draft an article for submission. Please let me know if this is correct. In the meantime, I will act in good faith by not trying to publish, but I will begin a draft based off of the links I have on the company and then work with editors to submit.

Thank you! CommsPro123 (talk) 14:10, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, CommsPro123. Yes, you can draft an article about the company and submit it for review through the Articles for creation process, which was created in part for people in your situation. Adhere strictly to the neutral point of view and avoid any trace of promotionalism, which is the most common pitfall for editors with a conflict of interest. For references, use independent, reliable sources that devote significant coverage to the company. Avoid blogs, social media, press releases and the like. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:10, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

If you are being paid by the company, you need to make the paid editing disclosure, preferably on your user page. Thank you for asking here. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:09, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

My page has been tagged for speedy deletion and i want help to keep it save

I've recently made a wikipedia article about a Musician M.ZHE and it has been tagged for speedy deletion and i don't think so that it should be deleted i have read the criteria for wikipedia pages and i accept that its not a place like myspace and facebook but its a place of information and of biography right? i've saw each musician has a wikipedia page and it has nothing special just a simple biography of them and M.ZHE page has the same information on it and it is not trying to promote the random individual or something the article should be there and may not be deleted you can google about M.ZHE and check his website too. itsMZHE.com i have spent an hour writing and creating the article and you are about to delete it just like that. I request you please check be humble and check the details again and i guarantee that it is not trying to promote anybody it is just a simple wikipedia article about a musician almost meets all the guidelines of wikipedia articles. Please help me keep the article available and help me to edit if i wrote something wrong! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.ZHE (ItsMZHE (talk) 13:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't meet WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:BLP, WP:COI... Ian.thomson (talk) 13:52, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ItsMZHE. The article M.ZHE is completely lacking in references, which means it fails Wikipedia's requirement for verifiability. You also need sources to demonstrate that the subject has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Changing a redirect

Hi. I want to change the redirect for Jnes to JNES without being too destructive. Is there any way to do it? Devinthepeng (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Devinthepeng, welcome to the Teahouse. I have made the change and created a new redirect at Jnes (emulator) as part of the cleanup. Other pages referring to the emulator can link to that instead of to Jnes. I have fixed all mainspace links at Special:WhatLinksHere/Jnes and removed the redirect notice at the old target.[2] PrimeHunter (talk) 19:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Referencing - why is my article being declined?

I have submitted my article three times, with references however it keeps being denied stating the article is not referenced well enough - please can someone helo me? 77.89.158.98 (talk) 13:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. It would have been helpful if you had included a link to the draft: I take it that it is Draft:Scintacor Limited. The problem with your references is that not one of them is about the company. If you write an article about a scientific process, then academic sources might be appropriate as references. But if you are writing an article about a company, the article should be based 100% on what independent people have published about the company. Until you supply several sources which discuss the company at some length (and are independent of it, and published by reliable publishers), no article on the company will be acceptable, however it is written. Please read Your first article and WP:42. --ColinFine (talk) 14:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

How do i write article about Training organization

13:01, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Hi, I want to write an article about a Training Organization called Qspiders,its already very famous in India where it helped thousands of people to get job i saw that Naukri.com and other place where people use them to get job has article in wikipedia. then why not "Qspiders"?

Please Note: my intention is not to make advertisement as it already to famous I feel its proud to have an article in wikipedia

Please help me 13:01, 23 May 2016 (UTC)13:01, 23 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhanuprakash HK (talk • contribs)

Hello, Bhanuprakash HK. The main problems with your draft Draft:Qspiders are twofold: first, it doesn't have any references, and secondly, it is full of promotional language (eg "one of the largest", "best-in-class", "learning solutions" (note that "XXX solutions" is almost always a meaningless promotional phrase).

Wikipedia is not interested in what you think about the company, or what I think about the company, or what the company (or its friends, associates or employees) say about the company. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with the company have published (in reliable places) about it. If an independent reliable published source describes the company as "best-in-class", then the article may say so (with a citation to the source that says it). Otherwise such evaluative language has no place - ever - in a Wikipedia article.

So the first thing you need to do in creating a Wikipedia article (after checking that it doesn't already exist, but long before trying to write anything) is to find several published sources which are reliable (not blogs, wikis or forums, but published by reputable publishers), independent of the company (not from its own website, or based on press releases or interviews), and substantial (not just directory entries or passing mentions, but the result of somebody deciding to write at length about the company). If you cannot find any such sources, give up: the company is not notable (in Wikipedia's jargon) and no article about it will be accepted however it is written. If you can find such sources, then you can write an article about it. Forget everything you know about it, and write an article based entirely on these sources (though in your own words: you mustn't infringe your sources' copyright). You can then supplement the article with uncontroversial factual information from the company's own publications; but you mustn't include any unpublished information, and the writing must be neutral.

All this is expanded in your first article, which I urge you to read. Also, if you have any connection with the company (I don't know whether you have or not), you need to be aware of our policy on conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 14:05, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Copyrights of the images

Hello,

What if I use an image downloaded for the official websites of the government officials? (Governors of the states of India to be precise)

what if I don't know who holds the copyrights?Haldipoor (talk) 08:27, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Haldipoor, because Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, we insist that almost all images here have crystal-clear copyright status. They must either be unambiguously in the public domain, or licensed for any one to reuse without any limitation except for accreditation. If you do not know the copyright status, you must not use the image. The only exception is our "fair-use" rule, which allows us to use low-resolution images of certain subjects, mostly because no other alternative is available. Fair-use images of living people are not allowed because theoretically an alternative photo can always be taken. You should read our guideline WP:Copyright and the pages linked from there. Please come back if you have any more questions. Rojomoke (talk) 09:33, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Since it's an image issued by the government it should be public domain, but that's generally for the U.S. government, I'm not so sure about India. Use images at the Wikimedia Commons which are all public domain. You could try to request this image at the Wikimedia Commons, but it might be safe to ask if it is in public domain at the Village pump (who are sure to give you a good answer). Hope this helps!   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Working with students to add content to Italian Wikipedia

Hello!

I'm working with a class of 11th grade students on a project to add content to the Italian Wikipedia entry for Troy, New York. I've got a good handle on the process of getting these students trained as Wikipedians, but am aware that there are "unknown unknowns" in this process and want to start this off on the right foot. Any advice would be most appreciated.

Thanks!

Laertides (talk) 02:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Laertides, and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is specific to the English Wikipedia, so what we can tell you about the Italian Wikipedia is limited, but there is no doubt generic advice that applies to both. Have you looked at Wikipedia:Education program? Cordless Larry (talk) 05:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Cordless Larry! I really appreciate your guidance, and will now explore some more. Laertides (talk) 12:59, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Laertides: Most of the education program's structure is built for higher education, but the materials are still useful. I'd recommend visiting the Wiki Education Foundation website. That's the organization that runs the Education Program in the US and Canada. They have a number of resources that may be helpful, although they're only working with post-secondary institutions. You might also want to check out Italy's page on the outreach wiki, which lists some education initiatives and participants in Italy who might be good contacts for learning about e.g. ways the norms of that project may differ from here (each Wikipedia has a few core rules in common, but develops them somewhat differently). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:17, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Rhododendrites. I've noticed that about the focus on higher ed, and am taking steps to tailor the available information to meet the needs of secondary school aged students. This is most helpful. Thanks! Laertides (talk) 13:33, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Where can I help out the most?

Are there some tasks more pressing than others? I'm a beginniner, but I was looking at the various jobs that need to be done on Wikipedia. What needs to be done the most? Can you rank the tasks?
--Vmavanti (talk) 22:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Vmavanti. A comprehensive directory of tasks that need doing can be found at the Community portal. For you as an individual, the most important tasks are those that correspond to your interests and skills. For this vast project as a whole, some the most important tasks include eliminating copyright violations, removing content that does not comply with our strict policy on biographies of living people, and detecting and eliminating hoaxes, some of which can be obscure. But every edit which improves the encyclopedia is an important one. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

First of all, Wikipedia is one gigantic backlog all the time. Some things are time sensitive, but most are just important but somehow never get done. May I suggest referencing and copy-editing as good places to start. From my experience, copy-editing mostly consists of reading content from editors with good knowledge but whose first language may not be English and polishing it up so it is easy to read and understand. This is as easy for beginners as it is for experienced editors. It does require patience and attention to detail. Referencing is also good, if you have skill at searching. You end up reading unreferenced content and trying to find a source to confirm it. Given that you have the information, you can often get good search terms and find a source. This is a crucial task because of how important verifiability is. There is lots more to do, but this is what I learnt with. It also has the advantage that you don't need much Wikipedia-specific knowledge to start. Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

You could join an active WikiProject, I'm sure they'll have some articles for improvement and other users to interact with. You can find some at the WikiProject Directory.   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:13, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Article Declined/No Specific Reason Given/Please Help  :)

Yesterday, I submitted an article for review: Draft Dr. Kevin Buckman. This morning (my time), I received the following rejection message from 333blue : "Be sure to meet Wikipedia guidelines"

This was all I received and nothing more. There is no nice way to say this but I find this type of extremely short, generic and non-specific message unacceptable for the following reasons:

A) I am a newbie (I submitted my article in good faith with my understanding of the rules) B) I feel any user should be given the courtesy of a proper rejection (Why did it fail?)

I want to be very clear, I have ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM with the rejection. It is my desire to be here a long time and contribute as much as possible. My only issue is with the way it was handled. If I had been sent reasons for refusal, I could be researching and learning that help material (or getting help from other users) rather than writing this message.

IT IS NOT MY INTENT to make an enemy of 333blue. I have chosen to address this issue here (rather than the talk page feature) because I feel this is a community issue rather than a personal one. Sending such a generic response does little to enhance the overall Wiki encyclopedia nor does it encourage one to continue contributing.

I do not have any intention of leaving but I do respectfully request that someone steer me in the right direction with regards as to what is wrong with my article. Again, I submitted my article in good faith thinking it was fine. However, in the future, I will try to get opinions and guidance about an article before submitting it.

Thank you in advance for your time and any courtesy (and help) you extend to me. Bajamark013

Ps. I am also really confused about notability. I understand the need for credible reference sources but why do cartoon and/or comic book characters (no offense intended) get approved but articles about living figures get rejected or they seem (at least to me) to have to meet a higher standard?

Please, this question is not a criticism. This is only for my own clarity and to avoid problems in the future :) Bajamark013 (talk) 17:38, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

First, the original poster protests too much. It isn't necessary to apologize for asking a good-faith question about a decline.

Second, the original poster asks if articles about living figures have to meet a higher standard. The answer is indeed yes. Read the biographies of living persons policy.

Third, when asking about an article including a decline article, it is a courtesy to use to provide a link. In this case, the draft is Draft:Dr. Kevin Buckman.

Fourth, in this case I mostly agree that the decline wasn't helpful. I will comment that, in asking why a reviewer declined an article, it also helps to ping the reviewer, as User:333-blue. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:19, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Fifth, it appears to me that the article is overly promotional with respect to the company. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Robert McClenon's remarks above. In brief, notability here on Wikipedia means that the topic, Buckman in this case, has been the subject of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. I see no such coverage. Many of your references are press releases about the company, which do not establish notability because they are neither independent nor reliable. I see a passing mention in an Australian newspaper. Lacking evidence of such coverage, Buckman appears not to be notable, unless you can find and provide much better sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:29, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I have asked 333-blue to provided more detailed and helpful reasons for declines in future. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:45, 23 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.

1. Here is good. You can also ask at the help desk for technical help.
2. Yes, they are called "Good Articles" and "Featured Articles". There's also Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:Writing better articles.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Sorry, you can't.
6. No. Thank you.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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 [3] 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.
-- Vmavanti (talk) 18:14, 21 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"

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)

• Vmavanti - An amendment to the answer given to your question No. 5. There is a "template" (informational notice) that you can type at the top of the page on which you are working. Type two curly brackets { then type the words in use and then two closing curly brackets } . The result is this

{{in use}}

I expect that a bot will pull that notice down pretty fast automatically, hopefully you get here quickly enough to see it. Happy editing, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 16:33, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I already found it and used it, though it didn't stop a high-level editor from making changes.
-- Vmavanti (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Carrite, why not replace that template by using Template:Tl to display just the code, {{in use}}, so that when this section is archived, the page isn't forever more tagged as under expansion? Cordless Larry (talk) 05:30, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Make it so! Carrite (talk) 14:47, 24 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)

Somewhere the documentation discourages the use of IMDb. Twitter is just a social site that anyone can contribute to, so of course it's fairly unreliable. I guess one reason why so many entries on Wikipedia have the "need citations" template is beause reliable sources are hard to find, while unreliable sources are plentiful, especially on the internet.
-- Vmavanti (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

That documentation on IMBDb would be WP:CITINGIMDB. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:46, 26 May 2016 (UTC)