Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tired time (talk | contribs) at 09:47, 16 July 2018 (→‎Is it a COI?: I deleted my question because I should ask it at help desk, not here). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


This is the teahouse
Welcome to the Teahouse...                        
A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.
Shortcuts

GoingBatty, a Teahouse 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.

New Article - erased as I was working on it.

Started a new article in Visual Editor. When I took a look at it from the source view option and then went back to Visual Editor, all info was gone. What's the deal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RosyCanfield (talk • contribs) 22:30, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse RosyCanfield. I can see how this can be a frustrating experience. You do have the option of contacting the administrator who may have deleted the information. I see that your sandbox now contains content so at this point your problem may have already been resolved. I've taken a look at your sandbox and unfortunately it has some major problems and should not end up being an article on Wikipedia for a number of reasons. First, you have a conflict of interest assuming that it is not coincidental that the article is about something that seems to be named after you. Basically, Wikipedia is written objectively and honestly, it is considered very difficult for anyone related to the topic to be objective. You just can't write about yourself or your company. Second, Wikipedia is not a marketing tool to get the word out about your business or products. Will you find articles on Wikipedia that are clearly promotional? Yes. But there are legions of editors who will eventually cull these articles from Wikipedia. Sorry for the bad news. I hope you will stick around to be a contributor to Wikipedia and become involved in topics and articles that interest you. Best Regards, Barbara ✐  ✉ 13:55, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are these ?

Hi Pharaoh of the Wizards, what is the meaning of [1] (copied from the pune district article). Can it be simplified ?

BTW can anyone popover and check my change request at WikipediaAttad M (talk) 08:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Attad M, I'm not Pharaoh of the Wizards, but I took the liberty of answering your edit request. Unfortunately, I had to deny it since, as far as I can see, it's unnecessary to make the change you've suggested; I've provide the reason on Talk:Wikipedia. Best, -- ChamithN (talk) 08:26, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But it's better grammer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attad M (talk • contribs) 08:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Attad M: I think the grammar is fine as it is. Could you point out which part you think is wrong? -- ChamithN (talk) 08:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I mean nothing is exactly wrong but the "it's" is redundant and is not concise — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attad M (talk • contribs) 09:14, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Sen, Sailendra Nath (1999). Ancient Indian history and civilization (Second ed.). New Delhi: New Age International. pp. 24–25. ISBN 9788122411980.
@Attad M: I disagree: according to the cited source, Wikipedia gets money from its own fund drives, which could be elaborated as it's independent of third-party fundraisers. -- ChamithN (talk) 10:32, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"It is owned and supported by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization which operates on money it receives from its annual fund drives." V/S "It is owned and supported by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization which operates on money it receives from annual fund drives." How can this be misconstrued as meaning third party fundraisers ? Can some other helpers/moderators also take a look at this and leave their opinion. Btw can somebody answer my first question ?(what does the ref{{ stuff do and what does it mean ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attad M (talk • contribs) 10:42, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Attad M: You can open a talk page discussion at Talk: Wikipedia (not an edit request) regarding this if you need more input. Also, the "ref stuff" are citations which can be used by readers to verify the accuracy of content on Wikipedia. On Wikipedia, we have to go by what reliable sources say, not personal analysis. I declined your edit request since this citation said monies it receives from its annual fund drives, as that means, according to the cited source, there's nothing wrong with the original phrasing. Cheers! -- ChamithN (talk) 11:04, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Attad M: ChamithN is right. The two versions of the text you present are equally correct from a purely grammatical point of view, and while it is good to strive towards a style that's not overly wordy, there is no reason to remove the pronoun "its" for reasons of conciseness. Besides, it does add clarity in that it specifies that these are Wikipedia's own fund drives. Regarding your first question, in what way would you like to simplify the reference? The information needs to be there to help the reader find the source, if necessary, and I don't see any redundant info there. But perhaps I misunderstand your question? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:50, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadea,ChamithN I was going through the material given by ChamithN, and the page goes really deep into the depths about "citation". It has answered most of my queries but also created some new ones, such as: 1 Which "citation" style should I use if I need to add sources ? 2 What are templates ? 3 How do you enable the automated Visual Editor thingy12:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC) ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attad M (talk • contribs)

@Attad M:
  • 1) Use the same citation style that the rest of the article uses.
  • 2) Basically, anything within curly brackets, {{ }}, is a template. On the page where it is inserted, the template will be replaced by other text, defined on the template's own page. (That is, you can't insert any text in curly brackets and have it work as a template - it must be an existing template). More info here.
  • 3) I've never used Visual Editor, but there is a guide at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide. --bonadea contributions talk 08:01, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about works without official translation

Not all the works has been translated into English as they don't have an official English name. In that case, what name should I write? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariogoods (talk • contribs) 08:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mariogoods just use the original title. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:24, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Original title? Does it mean if the original title is "我家" (Without original name), name it "Wo Jia" rather than "My home"? (It is a example. I hope you can understand my meaning.) Thank you! Mariogoods (talk) 12:55, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kundan Srivastava

Hi,

Greetings from India!

I am Surbhi contributed an article about Kundan Srivastava, an activist and author from India. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Surbhi20/sandbox

May the same name article was deleted many times, but, this time please look into the article. It has been written by me with best of reliable sources. I would request to administrator to create the same content.

Thanks, Surbhi

Surbhi20 (talk) 17:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your sandbox version now has 29 references. But most (?all) of these do nothing to establish that the subject is notable, because they include no in-depth discussion of him. Please be aware that when a reviewer considers whether the subject is notable, it's the quality of the sources that will count, not the quantity. If there are references in that list to sources that discuss (rather than mention) the subject, you should make it easier for a reviewer to find them, by removing all the worthless ones. Maproom (talk) 08:24, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maproom

I got your points Sir. Will provide you the same (depth discussion sources about him).

Surbhi20 (talk) 05:26, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

statistics tool on wikiproject activity

Is there a tool available that counts the number of new articles created per month or expanded per month for a specific Wikiproject like WikiProject Archaeology? I know there are a lot of edit counters and information counters on user activity, but I am interested in learning more about the Wikiprojects that I am participating in? I have searched around a bit and cannot find any tools. thx MauraWen (talk) 18:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


start here. 96.242.88.25 (talk)

@MauraWen: welcome to the Teahouse!
Articles can be tracked by WikiProject through the categories added to the article talk page where a WikiProject banner template exists, such as {{WikiProject Women}}. Petscan can be used to cross-index articles by category, though I'm not very familiar with it and I'm not sure if you can find recent changes this way.
An easier way might be to check some of the lists generated at Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory. You might specifically be interested in something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Showcase. These lists don't always have consistent naming across WikiProjects, so a good way to find them is to go to a recent article like Meryem Benm'Barek-Aloïsi, click on What links here in the sidebar, and look for any links to Wikipedia-namespace pages. And look, it shows Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's history/New articles and Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers/Metrics.
If you want to look for editors who have recently contributed to a WikiProject, then there are pages like Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory/Description/WikiProject Women's History where you will find yourself listed.
I hope that helps! Thank you for supporting Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red and creating women's biography articles! – Reidgreg (talk) 13:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Reidgreg: Thanks! those are very helpful links. MauraWen (talk) 14:00, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started

Hello Teahouse!!

Very new user here but as odd as this sounds, long time reader of Teahouse threads! I know this has been asked time and time again but I couldn't find what I wanted in the archives. I was wondering if one of you lovely admins could link me places to find lists or articles that need typo help, clean up or have promotional language? Those are the edits I feel most confident doing right now and I'm having trouble finding articles that need that help.

Thanks so much Regar29 (talk) 18:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Regar29 and welcome to the teahouse! I'm happy to hear you have an interest in helping work through the backlog of articles that need some typo help or other cleanup. Let's see if I can help you get to the right place! You specifically mentioned wanting to help articles that have promotional language. In general, those articles are likely to be tagged with the template, {{advert}}. You can view a full list of all of our cleanup-related templates here. In general, those templates will have a link to their respective categories on the left side of the table, and the one provided for those tagged with advert is here (a general category listing articles needing style editing). I may also recommend you take a look at one of our WikiProjects, the Guild of Copy Editors, which maintains various guides and lists about how to copy edit and places to start. Let me know if you have any other questions, I hope this has helped! --HunterM267 talk 18:26, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Regar29: I also started with typos and cleanup and recently became coordinator of the Guild of Copy Editors (GOCE), so feel free to ask me about that. We have a wealth of how-to files at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/How to and organize editing drives. If you're more interested in typos, there are resources at Wikipedia:Typo Team, including lists of common misspellings which link to search queries so you can find any article with a particular typo. (Just be sure that they're really typos and not part of a proper name, quote, etc.) You can also go to Wikipedia:Backlog for a directory of maintenance categories and the populations of their backlogs. There is an awful lot of maintenance to do and many areas to choose from. I used to choose a different one each month, gradually building my competence and confidence as an editor.
You can come to me for help as well. Happy editing! – Reidgreg (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for your images

I am an art historian and am always amazed at the wealth of images that I can find online. The idea of putting all these mages online is brilliant. But what is NOT helpful is when the image is identified only by an artist and title -- no date, no dimensions, no medium, and most importantly NO INDICATION OF WHERE THE ACTUAL OBJECT CAN BE FOUND. If a work is in a museum, please indicate as much so that researchers can contact the owner directly to get additional information. If the image came from an auction house or dealer, tell us that. If it's in a private collection (unlikely because it probably wouldn't be publicly accessible if it were) just say Private Collection, city/country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.240.187 (talk) 19:56, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello anonymous IP user. Welcome to our Teahouse. Having been in the museum profession myself for many years, I can well understand your frustrations. Unfortunately, what happens on Wikimedia Commons is completely outside of our control here on English Wikipedia. But I do agree with you. In fact, considering how fussy we are about verifiability of textual content, it seems anyone can post any image they've taken on Wikimedia Commons and call it whatever they like, or guess at the identification of some plant or animal and nobody seems to take much interest in whether it's correct or not; nor is there any easy way to flag up concerns over incorrect naming. If you do find images which have insufficient information, you could always open it in Commons and contact the uploader to see if they can give further details. I would have expected organised projects in the GLAM sector to be already be providing this information, so it's possibly individual images uploaded as a one-off that are most likely to be lacking provenance. I'm not sure whether Wikimedia has the equivalent of a Village Pump where these issues can be raised, but it's certainly the case that uploaders at Commons are very much left to their own devices when it comes to adding additional information. But I doubt it would ever be possible to force people to add more unless we had specific templates as we do for references here on Wikipedia. I have left you a welcome message on your talk page, and invite you to create a named user account and start using your knowledge and access to information to improve what content you can here. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes: Just to clarify, instances where you mention "Wikimedia" in your message should actually be Wikimedia Commons, or Commons in short. Wikimedia refers to the projects run by the Wikimedia Foundation and their communities, and is not commonly understood as short form for Commons. Thanks, Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 06:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My update article on Tipperary Crystal keeps getting removed and returning to previously edited incorrect information on the company

Hi Community,

I have noticed the Tipperary Crystal wikipedia page is inaccurate with the present information that is on the page. I wish to change this as a few people have commented that the owners have changed and the company have moved address. I got an auto reply after changing the information that there was a conflict of interest but i cant see any conflict as everything i have put in the text is factual and correct. Can someone help me with ensuring these changes remain and dont get removed again to return back to a page full of false information?

Any help is much appreciated.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wroxtonwiki (talk • contribs) 13:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wroxtonwiki, the information you added was unsourced and promotional. It was right to revert it. Wikipedia doesn't care what you know but what others have written about it. NZFC(talk) 04:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You, and before you, another editor "Aloadofblarney", have been adding promotional descriptions of the company. And have seen that reverted, as warranted. If you want to add factual information, references required. Also, if you or Aload have any connection to the company, that must be declared on your User page and on the Talk page of the article in question. It's about COI and PAID. David notMD (talk) 10:45, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Uploading

Plz tell me guyz how to upload a photo on a article. I want to upload a photo on Nooriabad. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haseebahmad1087 (talk • contribs) 05:00, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Special:Upload. You need to be active for 4 days after to make your username. 96.242.88.25 (talk) 11:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Photo Uploading

How can i upload a photo on a article. I want to upload a photo on Nooriabad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haseebahmad1087 (talk • contribs) 05:09, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Haseebahmad1087: Please do not post your question multiple times. Here is a standard reply:
To use an image on Wikipedia, follow these steps:
  1. Ascertain carefully the copyright status of the image. If in doubt, ask. As a rule of thumb, images that you did not take yourself are almost always under copyright, and images that you took can be released under a free license.
  2. If the image is in the public domain, or under a free license compatible with Wikimedia Commons' license requirements, or if you hold the copyrights and are willing to release the image under such a license, upload it on Wikimedia Commons using the Upload Wizard.
  3. If the image is neither public domain nor available under a free license, check whether it satisfies all non-free content criteria. In particular, photographs of living people almost never qualify. If it does not, it cannot be used on Wikipedia; do not upload it. If it does, upload it on Wikipedia (not on Wikimedia Commons).
  4. Once the image has been uploaded to the Wikimedia Foundation's servers (either to Commons or Wikipedia), follow the steps in the picture tutorial to place the image in an article.
TigraanClick here to contact me 08:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

infant vs baby

Why does baby redirect to infant? For what particular reason is the article called Infant rather than Baby? Angela Maureen (talk) 05:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Infant" is considered a more precise term, and it is also more formal. There have been discussions about the article's title, and a suggestion to move it to "Baby" which ended in a consensus to keep the title "Infant" - you can see the archived discussion here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 06:56, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's an instance of the "classic" Anglo-Saxon versus Norman dichotomy, where the Norman-French origin word is percieved as more formal. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello (Ola)

My name is IanBrendan1, i'm Brazilian-American. My first question here in teahouse.--IanBrendan1 05:46, 13 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by IanBrendan1 (talk • contribs)

@IanBrendan1: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't seem to have asked a question, if there is one you have, please ask. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ashton House, Beetham

Text of proposed article

A regionally typical L-plan yeoman farmhouse was built in 1678 adjacent to the existing site of Ashton House for Thomas and Sarah Johnson, during a period a substantial rebuilding at this social level.

The Johnsons were a long-established yeoman family in Beetham: parish records suggest that they had probably lived in the township from the medieval period. A conveyance of 1614 evidences their tenancy of Beetham corn mill.

Some of the original 17th century fabric of their farmstead which included a farmhouse with attached farm buildings and a separate barn is extant both within the range of buildings which now runs from the Wheatsheaf Inn to the outhouses at Ashton House, and within three further houses situated opposite the Wheatsheaf Inn, adjacent to the churchyard which originated as a 17th century detached barn. This barn was converted into housing at the turn of the 19th century.

The date-stone from the Johnson's farmhouse was subsequently repositioned onto the side entrance of Ashton House when this new, highly fashionable, gentry-plan house was built adjacent to the farmstead in c.1749 by their great-grandson, James Johnson, commensurate to his status as a wealthy merchant. A further date-stone of 1744 commemorates James Johnson's inheritance of the estate upon the death of his mother, which is corroborated by surviving family records. [James Johnson (1717-1769), son of John Johnson (1686-1735).] Merchant trading accounts and estate records within the family papers evidence the Johnsons' diversification from their farming interest into the cloth trade from the early 18th century. By the late 1740s they were wealthy London clothiers, exporting cloth to Lisbon and importing wine to England. Johnson was forced to sell in Ashton House in 1757 probably as a result of the Great Lisbon earthquake of 1755 which destroyed much of the city and all of the ships in the harbour.

Ashton House returned to descendants of the Johnson family when James Johnson's cousin, John Yeats (1729-1813), married the purchaser's daughter, [daughter of John Benson]. John Yeats, a successful overseas Liverpool merchant re-landscaped the gardens and built a substantial Picturesque gazebo in the pleasure grounds, a walled garden and a model farmyard to a Reptonian-style plan. He extended the landed estate leaving sufficient land and other assets for the family to acquire gentry status.

His son Rev. Edward Yeats (1781-1830), Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, extended Ashton House into a country house commensurate to its landed estate, remodelling the existing wings and extending the main front into the present Classically-derived, symmetrical façade which comprises a five bay, three storey centre within single bay, two storey wings. A lead hopper dated 1827 decorated with the Yeats family crest [a goat's head] remains extant on the facade commemorating the completion of this phase, for which some accounts survive within the estate papers. Edward died a bachelor leaving the house and estate to his sister's family. Typical of the period, her son, John, adopted the name Yeats in in addition to his patronymic, changing his family name to Yeats-Thexton to continue the dynastical line.

Whilst not adhering to strict principles of primogeniture, Ashton House remained within this family until it was acquired by Mr and Mrs Gordon Fairclough as a family home in 2003, who restored the house over the next decade.

[Gordon Fairclough KLJ, FSA Scot., LLB, MA, Pg.Cert. (Oxford).] Gordon Fairclough is an architectural historian and antiques dealer. He was knighted in the Military and Hospitaller Order of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem (Knight of Grace), and is Commander of the Cumbrian Commandery of the Order. He was educated at Lincoln College, Oxford where he is currently reading for a doctorate. He was elected a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland in 2015.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by HistoryofArchitecture (talk • contribs) 08:34, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofArchitecture: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place for new users to ask about using Wikipedia, and not a place to draft articles. You do have a personal sandbox you may use(if using a computer, click "Sandbox" at the top right of the screen). 331dot (talk) 08:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryofArchitecture: Notwithstanding the above comments, I'd urge you not to be too downhearted that your good faith edits to Ashton House, Cumbria have recently been reverted by Theroadislong. Although I can see you've done your research, the problem is that here on Wikipedia we don't actually accept Original Research. Our encyclopaedia is rather more of a distillation of already published material that others have written. So had you got the local archives office or the Lakeland News (or whatever) to properly publish your researches, then that content could be used as a starting point for expanding the article here on Wikipedia. (avoid personal blogs etc as these aren't regarded as reliable sources - we like online content which has some authority and editorial control behind it, thus minimising issues of personal bias or error) Is there a way that you could do that? If so, it's a good route to go down, though it may take time. We do need sources to be widely available, and the editor just refered to was right to point out that an accession number in an archive office isn't sufficient useable as a reference. You will need to read Help:Referencing for beginners, and also look at how other articles have handled sources. So, handwritten notes, indentures, notebooks and manuscripts in a museum or archive are problematic because, as professional historians, we regard these raw documents as the most valuable sources of information, and the basis of all our research. Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't work that way, preferring only to summarise what has previously been published. We call these secondary sources. Are there any printed or published documents within that archive in Cumbria which could, individually, be cited as secondary sources? If so, you'd be welcome to expand the article using only those. (But you could add an external link to this if you wished. In future, I'd advise you to use the article's talk page to raise these matters for comment. (It also, rather cheekily, has the benefit of being able to associate that original research you've done with the article, whilst not actually inserting it within it. This could well be of use to other editors in the future.
Finally, do be aware that we take a very dim view of one person using two accounts to edit here. I believe you were asked a while back to clarify whether you also edited once as User:Architectural.History. If it was, I'd suggest you just briefly respond and simply clarify that it was an error of naming and that you never intend to use that account again. (You could add a note to that users talk page declaring the link, too). And if it wasn't you, please just say so. That way we keep everything above board. You might also wish to add something about yourself and your background to your userpage. Knowing the skillset that an editor brings to Wikipedia can help others assess the merits of individual edits, especially if they've accidentally transgressed our rules and guidelines. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:50, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough references.

Hi! So Pakistan is a country where very little information about a person can be found over the internet. So the references that I can find are from facebook or youtube mostly. What should I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali Aabid (talk • contribs) 10:19, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ali Aabid, and welcome to our Teahouse. Thank you for this question, and the one that followed immediately afterwards.
I assume you are referring to Draft:Aabid Ali? I also assume that you are trying to create a Wikipedia page about yourself, based on your own Facebook page and appearances in YouTube videos? If so, I advise you not to. You have a clear Conflict of Interest which you must declare, according to the policy I have just hyperlinked to. If a subject like an actor has not been written about in depth by independent sources (newspapers, magazines, websites etc), it is unlikely they will be deemed to meet our criteria for notabilty, and the page will be rejected or deleted. Facebook and YouTube can only be used to verify minor details, not as the basis of a complete page. See WP:NACTOR to assess whether you think you are, at this stage in your career, and therefore likely to meet those criteria. As harsh as it may sound, we cannot accept pages about every minor sportsman, actor, CEO, or whoever, who happens to want a page on Wikipedia. There are simply far too many if us in the world, and so we advise using LinkedIn or other free websites for that. I do not mean to sound rude, but maybe it is simply WP:TOOSOON, and worth waiting until you have won acting awards, or been written about by the media in a way which we regard as sufficiently notable to accept a page on you? You may also wish to read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, because there is also a down-side to trying to write about and promote oneself. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes Thank you for responding. I am not writing an article about myself. It is an article about an actor who has been in the show business for 18 or more years while I am only 18. He is on the linked in so I'll definitely share that link on the draft. He is very famous here. Thank you for your help. Cheers mate! [[[User:Ali Aabid|Ali Aabid]] (talk) 11:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)][reply]

Ali Aabid Greetings and welcome to Teahouse. Content of the article needs to support by independent, reliable secondary sources for verification to establish notability of the subject. If no such source could not be found, and only facebook, youtube and daily motion as in your draft article at the current stage, then it would not meet the notability requirements which it need and the article would not be published. Secondly, your username indicates your are the subject of the article which means you have a conflict of interest here. Wikipedia strongly discourage editor with COI to write article of the affected page. Lastly, pls discourse your COI in your user page and the article talk page by following the instruction of the COI message I have sent you.Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CASSIOPEIA Thank you for responding. as I have estalished above that I am not writing an article about myself. He is on the linked in so I'll definitely share that link on the draft. Thank you and regards. [[[User:Ali Aabid|Ali Aabid]] (talk) 11:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)][reply]


In addition to what CASSIOPEIA pointed out, you will also need to make it clear to the readers what the references are. A bare URL doesn't tell us anything apart from the domain of the source. Help:Referencing for beginners has a lot of information about how to add references (including how to format them, and how to use the same reference multiple times). Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadea Thank you! [[[User:Ali Aabid|Ali Aabid]] (talk) 11:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)][reply]

What next?

Hi! I have written an article about an actor here in Pakistan. That is still captioned as a draft. How can I get it published and accepted? When will it be published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali Aabid (talk • contribs) 10:22, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Aabid (targeted article - Draft:Aabid Ali - hi, Please see the above message. The subject has not meet the notability requirement needed at the moment. Once you have found multiple independent, reliable secondary sources (such as from major newspaper where by the article talk about the subject in dept and length), then you would could submit for review by inserting {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:04, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Aletta 2018

I have a question, I have a major interest in meteorology, and from June 6 to June 11 Aletta was dominating meteorology news, so I go look for an article for this Aletta and very surprised to see no article for it as the only result sends you to the 2018 Pacific hurricane season article. So, I make a deadline for myself, August 1 to create the article, my question is "Would Aletta be considered notable for article creation

Plus, I have a temporary deadline for January 1, 2019 to make articles for storms from 2017 that don't have an article. For crying out loud, Arlene has an article despite staying out to sea in April. Emily at least hit somewhere yet doesn't have an article I believe if I'm not mistaken. Would a system like Bret be notable enough? Every system I can list 3 major, reliable base sources.Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 12:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyclone of Foxes your topic is a bit too specialist for the Teahouse. It would be much better to discuss the issues with your fellow hurricane enthusiasts at WT:WikiProject Tropical cyclones. By the way, why do you have deadlines? Wikipedia has none. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:25, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help me with the article.

Hi! First of all I want to state that i am not writing an article about myself. I have chosen a username that resembles the name of the person about whome I am writing the article. I have cited many references of credible newspapers that are not available online. Can somebody please tell me if the material I have provided is sufficient and whether or not I should submit it for publication. Ali Aabid (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2018 (UTC)][reply]

  • @Good Cop Sam: I see you have changed your username, which is a good thing. Well, you have had an answer, since your draft was speedily deleted on the grounds that it was unambiguously promotional. Before recreating it though, could you post the references you intended to use to Wikipedia talk:Notice board for Pakistan-related topics and get some feedback here? I have the feeling that there are not a lot of "credible" (Wikipedia's term is "reliable") newspapers around without an online presence, but I might be wrong. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know honestly, I think I might've wanted to make articles and saw how many potential subjects don't have any article. I just wanted to keep my schedule sorta busy so I can provide enough articles within a time frame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclone of Foxes (talk • contribs) 17:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

making new page in my sandbox

I want to make a new wikipedia page in my sandbox (I have made one so far) - when I look in my current sandbox, it says :

From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name.

Can I delete this safely and start a new page on a new topic?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorenmork (talk • contribs) 13:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Lorenmork. The answer is yes. The former article in your sandbox has been moved to article space, so you are free to blank your sandbox and use it for other purposes. Deor (talk) 14:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you!

Loren — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorenmork (talk • contribs) 04:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking help on references that I can't access

Hello, I am seeking help to make the references look good on Baghdadi Jews which I have been working on.

However, when I click the edit zone... I can't see them! So I can't put them in neat link capsules.

Please advise! User: David Nahoum — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Nahoum (talk • contribs) 23:05, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about the links to Synagogue websites in your list of Pre-WWII Baghdadi Communities in Asia? They wont be "visible" in the reflist because they're transcluded. Actually, they probably should not be there are at all; Wikipedia is not a directory, and we shouldnt be providing external links to organisations (even if they are religious/for a good cause or not for profit). They are not independent sources, so they arent much good as a reference either. Curdle (talk) 17:38, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Eddie Deloach

hello, I am new to wikipedia and worked on creating this page, I was wondering why exactly it was rejected what additional sources i may need to include for it to be accepted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brettkohler69 (talk • contribs)

@Brettkohler69:Hi! It looks like we need to expand the article somewhat. We have notability criteria for politicians and judges, and the usual consensus for politicians like Deloach would be: Mayors of cities of at least regional prominence have usually survived AFD, although the article should say more than just "Jane Doe is the mayor of Cityville". So any additional information you can provide about Deloach's political (other offices held, other campaigns run, scandals, etc.) or business career) to establish notability would be helpful. Thank you, caknuck ° needs to be running more often 15:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have also made some small edits to the draft, mostly grammatical. caknuck ° needs to be running more often 15:13, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

80s mania wrestling

I'm having trouble figuring out how to ask for an article to be made. The process seems super complicated. All I want is an article about a game that has a decent following its called 80s mania wrestling returns it is the 3rd game in the series the first being 80s mania wrestling & the 2nd : 80s mania wrestling 90s xtreme. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackson rod stewart (talk • contribs) 15:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jackson rod stewart. Wikipedia is entirely edited by volunteers, who decide what they want to work on. You can ask foran article to be made (the place to do that is Requested articles, but there is no guarantee that any volunteer will decide to fulfil the request. You're probably better asking at WT:WikiProject Games --ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Please participate in AfD (Redacted) Accesscrawl (talk) 16:04, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Why you people Change the things i Edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laygbemah Gibson (talk • contribs) 17:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Laygbemah Gibson, welcome to our Teahouse. I'm afraid you haven't given us enough information to answer your question. You asked why we change the things you edit - well, we all collaborate here and we all have the right to add and improve articles. However, if any editor breaks our rules those edits may be swiftly undone. It looks as if you have made a number of edits which have been interpreted as 'non-constructive', and some images you may have uploaded have been deleted as blatant copyright violations. So possibly for that reason your edits have been undone. But if you'd like to ask a specific question and link to the article in question, we would be happy to try and help you further. Good luck with your editing, and welcome to Wikipedia! Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Laygbemah Gibson: You uploaded many images to Wikimedia Commons today [1] but they were all deleted as copyright violations. The deleted file pages can only be seen by Commons administrators but the deletion logs indicate the images were taken from various websources and you made undocumented claims that the images were your own work. Wikipedia and Commons take copyright seriously. Are you the photographer? If not then stop uploading copyrighted images without permission and do not lie about images being your own work. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How can I use my Wikipedia? and what is the function of Wikipedia?

South Sudan news today — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhel Dhel (talk • contribs) 21:01, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have a draft.

I have draft but not how to submit for review and submit tell me how to submit a draft for review? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newke 2.0 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Newke 2.0. Welcome. Is what you're referring to this short sentence: Draft:Ahswrat? It is unacceptable on many levels, and not worthy of submission for review. I don't know enough about this subject area to tell if this is a genuine attempt at an entry, a spoof, or simply an attempt at rudeness - perhaps others can. I have also deleted the entry you added for it at List of Hindu deities. Please read Wikipedia:Your first article where you will find an article wizard to help you create something worthwhile. (That means it has to be notable, covered in details by other sources, and supported by references, and should follow the style of other Wikipedia articles.) Creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks here, and I would advise you to first get familiar with minor editing and improvement of subjects you are interested in. I will keep an eye on your future edits and drop by to let you know if I see any problems I can guide you over. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:28, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

talk page

How do you talk to someone on their user page?RaisinBrannen (talk) 23:56, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RaisinBrannen and welcome to the Teahouse. You talk to other users (about editing articles, not general chit chat) very much as you've already done here. You go to a user page, click 'Add Topic' and leave them a succinct note or question. It's often a good idea to click the star at the top of the page to add that person's talk page to your watch list. That user will receive a notification that you've edited their page, and you should receive one when they reply to you. It's polite - as you've done here - to always sign talk page posts so that it's easy to see who said what and when. If you look at Wikipedia:Talk dos and don'ts you'll get a few simple ideas, plus links to our Talk Page Guidelines which go into a lot more detail. Oh, and well done on making a really informative userpage. It's an excellent example of what a new user should do to introduce themselves, and I wish many other new editors would do what you've done. I do wish you well on your journey into Wikipedia. For some it can be a short, sharp foray into dull territory; for others it can be the start of a lifelong involvement in sharing knowledge and helping to create the world's greatest free encylopaedia. If you've not heard of it yet, do try The Wikipedia Adventure - there are 15 badges you can gain by working through the interactive game. Do come back and ask for more help if you need it (or if my answer isn't as clear as you needed it to be!). Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:43, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Minor thing, on a user talkpage you click "New section". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:52, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Submitting article for review

Hi there, I completed a draft article more than a month ago, but so far no-one has reviewed it. Just wondering whether this is normal or whether I have missed a step that would have involved submitting it for review?

Could someone please have a look and just advise me whether it's in the correct format and whether I should just continue waiting, or whether I need to take an extra step?

Here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:James_Waltham_Curtis

Thank-you, Lindsark (talk) 02:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I helped you to submit it and reviewed it. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 02:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Factual conflicts

One source says this and other says that. Wikinews editors say to believe neither but I want to know views of Wikipedia editors. I think both the facts should be included for a more encyclopaedic approach. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 03:17, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you provide more specifics it will be difficult to answer your question. Ruslik_Zero 06:08, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jockey Laura Barry

hope someone would make this article about this notable person that just die today. 49.145.244.119 (talk) 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi anonymous IP user. Sad as the news of the untimely death of this apprentice jockey is, Wikipedia is not a memorial. I suspect her achievements to date as a young sportswoman would not meet our notability criteria. But were they to do so, there is nothing to stop any editor creating a page about her, based on in-depth reliable sources which demonstrate her achievements and notability. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:52, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

is she notable to be made up article? she died yesterday, she has a huge achievement on jockey as a young sorry. 49.148.236.74 (talk) 22:25, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would say "yes" seeing as I'm finding many news articles about her. I would simply title the article 'Laura Barry', seeing as no other articles exist with her name. TheTechnician27 (talk) 22:29, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, like I've seen many news about her death, which makes notable and the article should be created, hope someone would create. 49.148.236.74 (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have combined the two identical sections. IP user, please don't create new sections asking the same thing, and also don't use fake user names (I have removed the fake name from your signature). You are welcome to create an account with your preferred user name, but don't add nonexisting user names to your IPs' signatures. --bonadea contributions talk 22:45, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

didn't know it was not allowed as I've seen other users with different name on their signature, as i wanted to make new section so people will see, this person I mentioned was everywhere on the news BTW so this possibly needs to be created. 49.148.236.74 (talk) 22:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page Removel

Hi , i would like to ask for page removal no encyclopedic value, since its being used for self purposed propaganda: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meytal_Cohen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana341 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dana341, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not really sure - at a quick glance - that I agree with your assessment of the article on Meytal Cohen - the first reference I read was a full page biography in a published book about drummers, and I don't immediately see any Conflict of Interest in editing. However, we do have a system called Articles for Deletion (also known as Articles for Discussion). Any editor who can put forward a rationale for page deletion can propose an article for fellow editors to consider and offer their opinions upon it. Retention or deletion relies more upon consensus based upon our policies, rather than simply the number of commenters. Hope this clarifies things. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPV - rule or intent?

I have recently come to edit Wikipedia after doing edits years ago on various topics. This time, I started by creating an account. I have an interest in egalitarianism, specifically issues around equality between the sexes.

One of the articles I realised that needed enhancing was on the only political party in the English-speaking world to specifically care about men and boys, the UK's Justice for Men & Boys. This, to my knowledge, is a small party (it's only been going a few years) which is active in promoting its aims and objectives including running conferences and doing campaigning. It did NOT put forward candidates for the last (rushed) general election but has done before that and talks of doing so again. As a pressure group and as a political party (it seems to span both definitions) it is an important part in a campaign on what it sees as discrimination against males. The party is openly pro-gender equality and anti-feminist.

There was a proposal for merging the article on this party with an article on it's founder. One person Agreed with some comments, another simply agreed and I disagreed. Days after I started to improve the article, a user with the name "The Vintage Feminist" deleted the article.

My question is, is it in keeping with the intent of holding a neutral point of view that an article on an openly anti-feminist organisation is demoted and (partly) subsumed into another article by someone who is openly opposed to the subject of the article? It seems to me that articles on feminist organisations, while being open to anyone, should not be subject to major alteration or deletion by anyone clearly anti-feminist; and that articles on anti-feminist organisations, while being open to anyone, should not be subject to major alteration or deletion by anyone clearly feminist.

KarenBrittworth (talk) 10:52, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Karen, Do note a username User:The Vintage Feminist is just a user name and the decision from merge request is merge. What is matter is the edit performance by any editors is accordance to Wikipedia guidelines and policies such as an article needs to meet notability guidelines where content is supported by significant coverage from independent, reliable secondary sources where it would be verified. In addition, the content need to write in a neutral point of view. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:01, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again KarenBrittworth, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you appear to have misunderstood Wikipedia:Neutral point of view if you think that "anti-feminists" shouldn't edit articles about feminism and that feminists shouldn't edit articles about anti-feminist political parties (incidentally, I'm not sure how a party can be anti-feminist and pro-gender equality, since the latter is the aim of most feminists). The problem with this understanding should become clear if you think about other types of political party or political - for example, presumably you wouldn't advocate that the Donald Trump article should only be edited by his supporters, or that the British Labour Party should be written only by Corbynites? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:23, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Further information on this:
  • I formally requested that Justice for Men and Boys be merged into Mike Buchanan (politician) on 16 December 2018 diff.
  • Merger tag was added to both articles on 8 January 2018 diff 1 and diff 2
  • The result of the discussion was a unanimous consensus to merge confirmed (as part of a batch) 2 June 2018 diff.
  • If I was in breach of WP:NPOV in any way my request would have been rejected. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Honors: Postage stamp issued

I have started editing only recently and made mistakes!! I did amend some, but I think I am still below perfect. Experienced editors try to guide me by referring me to read the innumerable topics, reading them causes a circular feeling and I loose track of what my initial problem is/ was! My edits are minor and are additions of a few lines concerning philately. I have some specific questions: 1. Should I start every edit, however minor, on Talk page? If so, will senior editors bring it to standard format and publish themselves? or do I have to do it? Then how? 2. How to know if an image of a postal stamp on online catalog or on the website of the concerned Postal Dept is freely available without any violation of copyright? Kaushwiki (talk) 12:46, 14 July 2018 (UTC)kaushwiki[reply]

Kaushwiki Hi Welcome to Teahouse. It is normal for new editors to do mistakes, and I am one of them. Most newbies would find editing in Wikipedia is a complicated task in their first few months. All of us leart our from mistakes but as long as we make effort to follow the advice from experience editors, reading the guidelines and policies provided and make effort to contribute positively, you would be on the right track. To answer your question, you dont need to start every edit on Talk pages, as long as any edit you do is supported by independent, reliable secondary source and the content is written in neutral point of view, you are most likely to be on the write path. Any question on editing, you could always come to Teahouse to seek help, or you can insert {{help me}} on your talk page and including what kind of help needed, someone will pop up on your talk page and provide assistance. As for the image copyright question, I will leave it to other Teahouse hosts, such as user:Nick Moyes, to answer this. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:15, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Kaushwiki: For starters, I would recommend that you look carefully at how your additions to Miklós Zrínyi were corrected here. Try to understand the format used and try to use that format for future additions you make.—Anita5192 (talk) 16:12, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, Kaushwiki, I was hoping somebody else would answer the question about image copyright for stamps. But as CASSIOPEIA named me, I'd better have a go! Normally we just look for the copyright ststement or an acceptable Creative Commons licensing statement on the website to see if it was made freely available or not, but I don't know what the issues are around government release of stamp images. It probably works on a country by country basis, plus the age of the stamp itself. I might suggest you ask this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philately, and be sure you include hyperlinks to the pages of relevance to your query. Sorry I can't offer more assistance in this instance. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:27, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nick Moyes sorry Nick :), didnt mean to put you in such positon. I mentioned you as you are one of the regular hosts well-verse with image copyright knowledge. Thanks for the reply. Cheers! CASSIOPEIA(talk) 17:37, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. You have greater confidence in my knowledge than I do! Nick Moyes (talk) 17:57, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mei Ling (Kung fu panda)

Is she a fox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitewii1234 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Whitewii1234. Welcome. Our Teahouse is here to help new editors with issues around editing Wikipedia. It's not a reference desk to ask general questions, especially if you could find the answer out yourself by a simple Google search. That said, I generally find Wikipedia a valuable source of information on many topics, so you might like to look at this link which suggests Mei Ling is a Chinese mountain cat, despite their being no sources cited to support this assertion. Please remember to always sign your posts with four keyboard tilde characters, like this (~~~~). Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Hold that thought! Re-reading the link I gave to List_of_Kung_Fu_Panda_characters#List_of_supporting_characters, I see there are two different Mei Lings in the KFP franchise. It looks like the villanous one is indeed a female fox. So there you go. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:13, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OSKAR

OSKAR is a upcoming bengai film but wikipedia yet not create any page of this film so I think one page must be create for OSKAR[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyaharimondal (talk • contribs) 13:18, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Satyaharimonda, welcome to the Teahouse. From the reference you've kindly supplied, I don't think this film project merits a Wikipedia page at this time. You might like to read WP:TOOSOON and WP:NFILM to understand the criteria for having pages about films, and when it is the right time to have a Wikipedia page about something or someone. It would need much more in-depth coverage to show that independent sources have taken note of this film for a page to remain here at the present time. Of course, this shouldn't stop you starting to draft an article about it in your own sandbox, ready for a time when/if it does indeed meet those criteria. Then, when the time is right, you could then submit it for review. (Oh, and do please remember to sign every talk page post with four keyboard tildes, like this (~~~~). This shows everyone who has posted what - and when. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:10, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bengali/movies/news/oskar-provides-a-platform-to-budding-filmmakers/articleshow/64683252.cms

References

Hello, I am struggling to get my page submission accepted due to a lack of sources. I now have sources that I would like to add but I am not sure how to edit the page. When I click the "edit" button, it brings up the page but in almost a code form, and I do not know how to correctly enter the sources. How do I get the page back to the editing view it was when I first made it? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpuffett (talk • contribs) 16:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hpuffett, Welcome to Teahouse, I believe you refereed to Draft:Meditate (Rapper) here. The "code form" you saw is what we refer to "source editing", if you want to switch to "visual editing" mode, just click on the "pencil" icon on top right on the menu bard, bring down the drop-down list and click "visual editing". Pop back here if you have any other questions. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 16:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. I am really sorry, but I cannot find the pencil icon. The only one I can see is on the left of the word "Advanced", and when I click it, it just highlightes all of the references.... Please let me know if you can help! Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpuffett (talk • contribs) 16:57, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hpuffett Hi, I have WP:VisualEditor installed in my Wikipedia, for such what I had advised you would not applied as I guess you are using default page set up. I dont remember how it looks like anymore and cant advise.
Hi Teahouse hosts, kindly assist user Hpuffett. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 17:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hpuffett Hi there and welcome to the teahouse! What CASSIOPEIA recommended would definitely be a great way to get familiar with Wiki editing and a much easier interface to add your references! It's possible that you haven't got your visual editor enabled. To do that, you'll want to head over to your user preferences (top right), on the editor tab. Here's a direct link! From there, there's two things you'll want to check: that Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta is not checked, and that Editing Mode is set to either "Show me Both" or "Always Give Me the Visual Editor if possible". Let me know if this doesn't work or if you have any additional questions! --HunterM267 talk 18:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Some parts of the edit form did not reach the server; double-check that your edits are intact and try again."

Whenever I switch from visual to source editing mode, I get this error message at the top of the page. Additionally, there is no chart showing the difference between the current version and my edit. This had never happened to me, but recently it's happened every time. I get this on two separate computers, and I can't seem to find any information about it. I'd like to find a way to stop this error message from showing up and to get the side-by-side comparison to show up again. TheTechnician27 (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTechnician27: Interesting question. We don't normally encourage posting the same question in two places, but because of its technical nature, which might be linked to a memory issue, I've just reposted it for you at Village Pump (technical). (See here) So please also watch that page for a possible reply there.) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Already other users are reporting the same problem at the copy of this post at Village Pump. Looks like it's going to be a system-wide bug that gets reported. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:46, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a new page and article.

I’m a new editor here, and I want to know the procedure to create a page for a band who I noticed Wikipedia doesn’t have on. How may I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stantioner (talk • contribs) 00:09, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Stantioner: Welcome to Wikipedia! Please refer to Wikipedia:Your first article. Regards, Zingarese talk · contribs 00:23, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Stantioner: Meeting our notability criteria is essential, otherwise pages are liable to be removed. Please see WP:BAND to help you determine whether your band meets our criteria at this point in time. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:29, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What can I do dere?

Does anyone know what to do here? I'm new. SandSsandwich (talk) 02:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)SandSsandwich[reply]

SandSsandwich Welcome to Teahouse. Teahouse is a help desk where new editors would ask question on editing topics and understand the Wikipedia culture. So if you are stuck or have a general question to ask, then fire away. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:44, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SandSsandwich: New user or old, one can ask general questions about wikipedia here. The specialised questions go to the respective wikiproject, article talkpage, or similar places. If you cant find venue, asking the question here is a good idea too. Even if not answered directly, somebody would point you to the appropriate venue. For topics other than wikipedia, we have reference desks. I see you have already posted there. Regards, —usernamekiran(talk) 12:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding information

I have some information about the USS General John Pope regarding some parts left over after her scaraping. But I don’t have any wrighten proof, besides the fact the parts have the ships name (and hull #) on them.

Could I add them to the ships article without any real proof A 10 fireplane (talk) 03:17, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, A 10 fireplane. All information that you add to Wikipedia must be verifiable. By far the best way to do so is to provide a reference to a reliable source that verifies the content. If there is no "written proof", then the information does not belong in this encyclopedia. You could upload photos of the parts to Wikimedia Commons but you cannot draw any conclusions on your own. We do not allow original research. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your personal knowledge is not a sufficient reason to make a change on the article, but it may serve to interest a historian enough to write on it, which would be a source. I'm not sure what value that information would have, which is in part why we don't allow the use of personal knowledge here. But if your discovery is written about in a reliable source, then we know at least the author found it important enough to write about. Suggest you contact a naval museum. John from Idegon (talk) 03:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ok thank you Cullen328 (talk · contribs) John from Idegon (talk · contribs) I’ll see if someone has wrighten about it.
Thanks again A 10 fireplane (talk) 04:29, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

De-stubbing entries

Some entries are really short and deserves to be elongated Also, Some categories should deserve their own entry (such as semi-major characters in a book or other fictional paraphernalia) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DÆmÖN MUNDANE++ (talk • contribs) 05:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DÆmÖN MUNDANE++ and welcome to the Teahouse.
Not always. Using your example, a character in a book would need to be written about extensively, as a character, in either popular press or scholarly articles, for there to be enough material to write a separate article about them. If such coverage does not exist, it is much better to have a redirect that points to either the book itself or to a list of characters from the book. The target article could contain a sentence or more about the character, in their proper context. If you find a stub like this, where the stub has too little referenced information to stand alone, the option to expand it with additional references is always there, but turning into a redirect is another option to consider. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 05:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

entry on man is the measure by reuben abel

I have the book and extensive knowledge about it, should I create a rudimentary entry for it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DÆmÖN MUNDANE++ (talk • contribs) 05:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, there DÆmÖN MUNDANE++. You're filling up the Teahouse with your ideas and questions! No, just kidding, we're happy to answer any and all questions here, as long as they're related to editing Wikipedia!
I did a quick search on Man is the Measure by Reuben Abel and found plenty of hits offering to sell the book, but only a couple that might count as independent reviews that we might use as sources to a) establish the book's notability and b) provide content to summarize for an article. Please remember that there are a few things we cannot use as sources for an article about a book: sales pages from bookseller sites, student papers, or most blog posts or similar user-generated content (Goodreads, for instance). We also cannot directly use your own extensive knowledge of the book. To the extent that your knowledge of the book extends to knowing where to find good published resources about the book, then that's exactly why contributions from experts are highly valued.
If you are inexperienced at writing WP articles, I suggest that you start by creating a draft that does little more than list a few of the most important references you plan to use. Get advice on whether those references are sufficient to establish notabilty for the book; I recommend using the articles for creation help desk for this, since that creates a permanent record that you can point to later. Then, summarizing information from those references, you can begin to build out the text of the article, in your own words, but avoiding the temptation to add your own ideas or analysis. We expect you to walk a narrow path. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 06:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jure/De Facto

Under the Anglosphere/English speaking countries, Ireland is listed as a 'De Jure' country, and not 'De Facto'.

This is not alone incorrect, but obviously the wrong way round.

The official language of Ireland is Irish (making it NOT a De Jure English-speaking country). However, it is indeed a De Facto member of the Anglosphere, since English is spoken by almost 100% of the population, 100% of the time.

Wasn't sure how to attempt a manual correction. Involves flags, boxes, etc.

Perhaps someone else can do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Galvin (talk • contribs) 07:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mike Galvin. I'm not sure which article you're referring to: Anglosphere does not contain the phrases "de facto" or "de jure" at all. (The treatment of Ireland in that article does seem odd: it is not mentioned in the lead section, except as an afterthought, and is not listed in the table). But the recommended place for discussing the details of any article is in that article's talk page, not at the Help Desk or Teahouse. --09:42, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Galvin: A country can have more than one official language. Article 8 of the Constitution of Ireland says: "The English language is recognised as a second official language." List of territorial entities where English is an official language#Sovereign states is correct to list Ireland under "Countries where English is a de jure official language". The listing correctly says "Irish is first official language". PrimeHunter (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article created as user page

Hi, what's the correct way to deal with this? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Curb Safe Charmer and fancy meeting you here in the Teahouse!
There are two branches of response. The first branch is that a user page is not a proper place to develop article content and doing so violates user pages policy. The guidance to the user is that the page should be moved to a sandbox or draft and a proper user page created to replace the redirect that moving leaves behind. There's a warning template you could use: {{uw-userpage}}.
The other branch is to consider whether the user should be encouraged to submit the draft for AfC or be advised that it cannot be accepted. Of course, if it meets any speedy deletion criterion, such as being a copyright violation or too overly promotional, it should be tagged accordingly.
When, as appears to be the case here, the user has not submitted the draft, I would be inclined to stop at this stage, or at least wait a bit to see if there is some response to the advice. If you think the article is suitable for mainspace, that notability is established, then it would be appropriate to move the article to mainspace and request deletion of the inappropriate user page redirect left behind. A note to the contributor explaining what you've done should minimize any confusion. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 09:29, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User name is same as the topic of the draft article. David notMD (talk) 13:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
David notMD A true observation, but as this often happens because a new editor believes they should use the name of the article they wish to create as their username, it is not automatically a sign of conflict-of-interest editing. It's a topic I would take up with the user later. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 02:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest: Draft: Tim Curnow

Please help me to create an acceptable Conflict of Interest declaration. Thank you

Terry Snow

Declaration of Conflict of Interest

Terry Snow and Tim Curnow were students at Auckland University in the 1960s. They had independent careers in different countries, one a journalist in New Zealand, the other a literary agent in Australia. After 40 years, they renewed acquaintance. Because of the notability of Tim Curnow’s career suitable for Wikipedia and because noone else had described this for Wikipedia, Terry Snow edited a potential Wikipedia page titled Tim Curnow, Literary agent. For this page, reliable, independent and reputable sources were used for information. No compensation was paid for this editing. Many thanks Terry Snow SnowbirdTS (talk) 08:32, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of adding some formatting to SnowbirdTS's post to make it easier to read. --ColinFine (talk) 13:18, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:SnowbirdTS - Unfortunately, your post is difficult to read, and is not helping. It reads as if English is your second language, although I infer that your first language is New Zealand English. Maybe you are trying too hard. Please ask for advice at the Teahouse about how to complete the declaration and how to resubmit. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SnowbirdTS (talk • contribs)
Hello SnowbirdTS, I have added the {{connected contributor}} template to the talk page of the article, Draft talk:Tim_Curnow. As it is, it should suffice, but you may wish to say more. Vexations (talk) 12:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing sources

Hey guys. I'm currently in the process of editing the Ojha page and it really could do with some sources. The trouble is that I have no idea where the best place would be to begin looking. Is there a page or repository here that could give me a place to start? LampGenie01 (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question

i have created a page , How can i convert it to a article..? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prakhar Malviya Kanha (talk • contribs) 16:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Case of deletion of (all) pictures on Wikipedia that were uploaded from Voice of America website.

There was a user @Hanooz: who deleted picture

on page Liu Xia (intellectual) recently, saying it is some violation of copyright: User talk:Hanooz#Can you explain your deletion of a picture on Liu Xia (intellectual)?. But there are lots of the pictures like that. So can/must we delete all the pictures uploaded on Wikimedia Commons from the Voice of America? There probably are lots of rare images of Dalai-Lama, Liu Xiaobo, and like that. If not, please, can you roll back the picture and notify the user User talk:Hanooz not to delete anymore pictures on Liu Xia (intellectual) page and all over wiki? --PoetVeches (talk) 17:51, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PoetVeches. The problem is not the whole image, it is that the photographs that the demonstrators are carrying are under copyright. I can see why you are confused about this. The image on Commons is mislabeled, saying "solely consists of material created and provided by Voice of America". But Voice of America did not take the photos the people are carrying. It is OK to use the image in an article about the demonstrations because the photos are only a small part of the image (de minimis). But we cannot use the image to show what Lia Xia looks like in an article about him. That is not minimal usage. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:11, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @StarryGrandma:, I can try to understand this nebulous law about the copyright and De minimis (that looks here on wikimedia also: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:De_minimis#An_example). I just insert then the image below in bio on the same page, that will represent the history of demonstrations to support Liu Xia (intellectual) instead info-box about namely person Template:Infobox person... What about the second part of question, can wiki-users upload images from the Voice of America website on Wikimedia Commons at all?
PoetVeches, yes, but only if Voice of America actually made the content. As VOA says here everything produced by them is in the public domain, but their site and broadcasts may include material from other copyright holders. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot, @StarryGrandma:, for answering. --PoetVeches (talk) 20:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify further, photos and images created by employees of the U.S. Federal government as part of their job duties are copyright free. This does not necessarily apply to images by state and local government employees. Each agency sets their own policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:44, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should a page become protected?

Generally, when should a page become protected? I see many pages that editors work hard to keep free from vandalism, but people still come and change things to inappropriate words. Is there a frequency limit for when pages should become protected? A certain number of vandalizing posts per month? Who decides when a page should become protected, and where and when should I suggest this?

Thank you. Ikjbagl (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Ikjbagl. Requests for page protection are made at WP:RfPP, and that page explains the procedure to follow. There's no specific "frequency limit" with regard to vandalism, but a page is not likely to be protected unless there has been a spate of recent vandalism that can't be dealt with by blocking a particular user. Deor (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merges

How does one effectuate a merge? What are the next steps from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Meristem#Merger_proposal. If there's a wiki article or something on this, I'd appreciate if you could link it.

Thank you, Ikjbagl (talk) 18:18, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikjbagl: Welcome to the Teahouse! See WP:PROMERGE for that. Hope it helps! ⇒ Lucie Person (talk|contribs) 02:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Orange Justice

Draft:Orange Justice I'm not sure neologism, but is my change ok? to solve neologism. 49.148.250.192 (talk) 22:40, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jeep Wrangler

I have a question. What models did the jeep wranglers come with the roll bars that connected with windshield? They would be in 1994 to 1995 i think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edmay111 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse a place for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 02:10, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Edmay111. Please ask this type of question at the Reference desks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:27, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is AD/BC or BCE/CE preferred on Wikipedia?

I'm not sure which one of these is preferred on Wikipedia for date formats. Does it depend on article? I'm asking because there was an edit on Archaic–Early Basketmaker Era changing BC to BCE, and I'm not sure what to do about it. I tried to search for it, but all I could see was a debate that had been closed, and I could not tell what the resolution was. Can anyone tell me which one should be used? Thank you. Diamond Blizzard (talk) 23:06, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Diamond Blizzard, and welcome to the Teahouse. MOS:ERA is what you are looking for. I hope this helps. JTP (talk • contribs) 01:55, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[Edit conflict] see the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, Section 11.5. In brief, neither is preferred (though individuals often have a decided preference on this issue), but in any one article only one or the other should be used. Ordinarily it would be determined by whichever was first used in a given article, but there might be grounds for discussing a change where particular factors are thought overriding: for example, it would seem to me to be odd to discuss 3,000-y-o matters in, say, China using a system with an explicitly Christian reference point. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.202.163.217 (talk) 02:06, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Diamond Blizzard. The article in question, Archaic–Early Basketmaker Era, is about an ancient Native American culture that originated approximately 9000 years ago. That culture had nothing at all to do with Christianity. Therefore, I believe that the neutral BCE is more appropriate in this article than the Christian term BC. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:00, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abbreviations with parenthesis

I am not sure if I am using abbreviations in an article correctly. I looked thru the Manual of Style/Abbreviations, but I was left confused.

For example, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). When I want to use DRC in another sentence, do I need to have it in parenthesis? Would there be any exceptions? And would it be ok in some sentences in another paragraph to use Democratic Republic of Congo again? Or is the rule, once you use an abbreviation in an article, you need to continue to use the abbreviation? thx MauraWen (talk) 23:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MauraWen and welcome to the Teahouse.
This is a fairly widespread convention. You introduce the abbreviation you intend to use, in parentheses, immediately after the fully spelled out version. All later instances do not use parentheses. For consistency, you would use the abbreviation any place where you would otherwise use the proper noun later in the article.
Are there exceptions? There are always exceptions! What do you do when two entities would abbreviate the same way? The abbreviation used on WP should be commonly used in the sources being referred to. We do not make up "new" abbreviations on WP. If you run across a situation where using the abbreviation would cause confusion, it's best to spell the thing out again.
The relevant part of the Wikipedia Manual of Style (MOS) is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Abbreviations. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:02, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmcgnh: thank you for explaining that so clearly. MauraWen (talk) 04:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New articles not found on Google search -- why?

Hello, I've been editing for a couple of years and have successfully created new articles in the past. I recently (in the past week) created TWO new articles. However, neither one is appearing on web search. Is there an easy fix for this? Perhaps there is some index coding I need to add that I simply don't know about! Any step-by-step support would be greatly appreciated. The articles in question are biographies of Michael J. Bobbitt and Dina Ellis Rochkind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rider4151 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Controlling_search_engine_indexing#Indexing_of_articles_(%22mainspace%22)
I'm not totally sure that's what's happening, but it seems to be likely. Basically, new articles are generally not indexed until 90 days have passed, so they can't be found by external search engines.
Diamond Blizzard (talk) 00:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Diamond Blizzard, for this response. I didn't notice a 90-day lag with two articles I previously created! It makes sense, though. I'll just be patient! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rider4151 (talk • contribs) 02:36, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rider4151 and welcome to the Teahouse.
Pages are flagged with NOINDEX until either 90 days have passed or they have been reviewed by a member of the new page patrol team and marked as patrolled. The patrollers do their best to get to pages before the 90 day timer runs out. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 02:51, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmcgnh: Wait if the newly article reached into 90 days so it will appear to the top on search bar or engine like searching google?. 49.148.250.192 (talk) 03:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
After 90 days, the NOINDEX flag is taken off the page. We don't control when Google or other search engines will discover the page after the flag comes off, but they are no longer prevented from seeing the page after that. You should expect to be able to find the page via Google or other search engines very shortly after the 90 days are up or very shortly after a new page patroller has released it. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 05:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a Chinese channel's program

In CCTV, every channel has a category-like program and the actual program is in the "category". I wonder how to describe it in the list page.
(Example: Translated version of SpongeBob SquarePants is brocasted in "Amine World" (动漫世界) program in CCTV-14; "Special Program" Xiang Cun Jing Cha Gu Shi (乡村警察故事) is brocasted in Legal Report (今日说法) program in CCTV-12) Mariogoods (talk) 01:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to change username?

Hi

i am new to wikipedia world. i want to change my username of wikipedia account. can you guys please tell me how to change?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by WithSUHOForever (talk • contribs) 05:28, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WithSUHOForever and welcome to the Teahouse.
Please see the instructions at Changing username. Please take particular note that, when an account has very few edits, it is easier just to abandon the old account (never log into it again) and start a new one. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 05:39, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=850509446"