Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Scc Ghim (talk | contribs) at 10:12, 28 October 2018 (→‎Follow-up to Inquiry on a delayed update: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Help with editing Wikipedia page Stanfords

Dear all, I joined the Wikipedia community close to 20 years ago and have not made many contributions but enjoy the small edits that I can assist with. Now I need some help editing a page that I am closely linked to personally and am concerned that the actual editing should be done by someone other than myself. The page is for Stanfords a UK business that my brother and I are shareholders of and I am now Chairman and CEO (now you see the conflict). I can provide content and fact checking if requested. Thanks for offers of help. Vivien Godfrey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vgodfrey (talkcontribs) 20:55, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Vgodfrey and thanks for your honesty. Please read the policies on conflict of interest and paid editing. Use the article talk page to propose changes, and provide links to reliable sources. See Template:Request edit for the code that will bring your request to the attention of other editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:15, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You may also consider asking for input at the relevant wikiprojects, see the article's talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:02, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Vgodfrey. I contributed additional info to the article, including several reliable sources. I have also added sections to give it more coherence. You can check the changes made by comparing the edits to the previous version in the article's history. I would like to confirm the case of Staunton & Son. Was it acquired? Your website only stated that the company "was in a position to acquire...". Feel free to revert the changes. If you have questions, please let me know. - Darwin Naz (talk) 23:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have an interest in a couple articles that I think are in need of cleanup/merging. Cobra is a stub that has high priority in the reptiles project, so I was going to add some relevant information. However, upon arriving it appears to just be a list of animals that are not part of the "True Cobra" family (Naja) that are named "Cobra", the most ridiculous example therein is the False water cobra (the "false" in the name of course refers to "Cobra" not "water"). To me, this page makes much more sense as a sub-section on the cobra (disambiguation) page, and forwarding traffic from "Cobra" to "Naja" as is commonly done with other genus with a common name. Does this seem reasonable?

Cheers, Mstearnsa (talk) 22:31, 23 October 2018 (UTC)Mstearnsa[reply]

I think the status quo is reasonable. The cobra article is a WP:Set index article, since "cobra" generally refers to a "cobra" snake, and unfortunately there is no single taxonomic group of snakes that fits that name. Naja doesn't contain them – a prime example being the king cobra, which may be the most well known "cobra" of them all. It is not in Naja, and there are various other "cobras" that are also not in Naja (e.g., the ring-necked spitting cobra, the shield-nosed cobra, the black tree cobra, and Goldie's tree cobra). The article also very clearly distinguishes the false water cobra from the others – e.g., it does not include that species in its list of "cobras" and instead discusses it separately, below the list. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:23, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My only problem is that, as a high priority page in the reptiles project and extremely high in the Africa project, it seems kind of ridiculous for it to be a stub. Because the species listed have very few similar traits, it's difficult to piece together information about a group so general. Maybe I could make it more like wasp in that it could have the history of the general "cobra" relationship with humans. Cheers, Mstearnsa (talk) 20:48, 24 October 2018 (UTC)Mstearnsa[reply]
I don't think it's a stub. It's a WP:Set index article. It's not marked as a stub. I don't think set index articles need to be lengthy, since their purpose is primarily to list other articles rather than to contain extensive discussions. I think all of the species discussed there are venomous elapids, except the one that is called "false" (which is venomous, but not an elapid). Most of them are highly venomous and primarily neurotoxic. They are all relatively thin-bodied and most of them also rear up and/or produce a hood. I think it is the combination of such characteristics that leads to the use of the common name "cobra". The basic problem is that "cobra" is a "common name" term rather than a scientific classification, so it does not align perfectly to the taxonomic classifications. It might also be better to have this discussion at Talk:Cobra rather than here. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:25, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't look like Talk:Cobra is frequented... by anyone. Speaking of Talk:Cobra though, this is the very first thing on the page: "Cobra has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Biology. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as stub-Class." I'm just trying to help by improving the pages that appear to be marked for improvement... Mstearnsa (talk) 19:36, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Mstearnsa[reply]

Analysis of Template:One source articles

Hello,

I would like to review articles with the template above. Filtering: article names containing "(Unix)". Sorted by age descending. Is this possible? Many thanks. --Hundsrose (talk) 18:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hundsrose. It's a short list so the sorting is not important: intitle:Unix hastemplate:"One source". PrimeHunter (talk) 22:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello PrimeHunter, thanks a lot, exactly what I needed. :) --Hundsrose (talk) 16:57, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Draft

Hi, I'm creating now my first article's draft and I need some help with how good it's and if it's good enough to move to mainspace Draft:Smartworks, Hope you all enjoying your day Rou-2 (talk) 01:07, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you offer to help me, please? Rou-2 (talk) 21:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Rou-2, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry you've had a long wait for a response from us here. Although well structured and laid out as an article, I suspect it would not survive for long in mainspace as it's hard to see how it meets our criteria of notability for companies. You can read these criteria at this link. Your article is typical of many I see which seem aimed at promoting the company, and are wholly based on insider business websites, rather than demonstrating notability with good, in-depth coverage in independent sources. A minor point is that you've used a few poor wikilinks to Disambiguation pages. see  Indian, Amazon, Carrier and Otis. If you work for, or have been paid by, the company, you must declare this (see Conflict of Interest) and this policy on declaring any paid work. Best wishes Nick Moyes (talk) 00:03, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nick Moyes, It's ok about waiting for a response as long as it will be useful and helpful. I did not mean to promote for the company, also nor did I get paid to write this article so will listen to your advice and have a look at Indian, Amazon, Carrier and Otis. to decide if i will continue working on it or not. thank you for advice it's really inspired. Rou-2 (talk) 00:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sincerely apologise

I sincerely apologise for my copy in the article that i created and i hope that to would not repeat it again. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunging (talkcontribs) 02:08, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Dunging. It's great that you appreciate where you went wrong; listening to the advice of other editors is a great attribute for new editors here. Thank you for stopping by the Teahouse. (Please may I ask you to sign all future talk page posts? You simply do this by typing four keyboard tildes (like this:~~~~) at the very end, and the software automatically adds your username and a timestamp. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:44, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete sentence in entry on Critical Theory

This entry seemed quite clear and lucid until I reached the short section on Communication Studies. The lone sentence in the second graf is a dangling phrase. Since philosophy is not my field at all I do not want to post an edit, but I venture this guess: that the first word "When" should be edited out, and then it is a sentence. I do not have resources to check whether it would be accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JustinThorson (talkcontribs) 02:17, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, JustinThorson thank you for bringing this to our attention. I've fixed the article, but there are two things worth saying:
  • Concerns over content are often best left on the article's own talk page, where interested/involved editors are most likely to see it
  • A good tip when you find an error like this is simply to go to the View History tab and look at an earlier version in case there had been some accidental or intentional damage done to the article.
In this case, the 'dangling phrase' had gone unnoticed for well over a year. I had to go back to this version from Christmas 2016 to find the original sentence which should have read: When, in the 1970s and 1980s, Jürgen Habermas redefined critical social theory as a theory of communication, i.e. communicative competence and communicative rationality on the one hand, distorted communication on the other, the two versions of critical theory began to overlap to a much greater degree than before.

Hope this helps, and that you've now the tools to spot and correct such mistakes yourself. Sorry for the long wait for a reply. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:58, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2nd attempt at article draft - is there a submission process?

Good morning, I work at a school and have been asked to create a Wikipedia entry for this school. The page I initially created was removed as I had just used content from our website. Having learned from that, I created a second draft using my own language, including citations and keeping to just the basic facts. I took my cues from another Catholic School Wikipedia page in Cambridge, MA. I have also disclosed my relationship to the school on my user page. Now my page is in DRAFT mode - but I did not see where I can submit for review, or is this just a natural queue where all drafts eventually are reviewed? Here is the page that I have created: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:St._Peter_School

In addition - we have many photos of our school from over the years - the two or three that I had tried to upload resulted in an error saying possible copyright conflict. Is the only way to upload a photo to a Wikipedia page if I go out and take my own photo of the school? That is possible, but we have, for instance, a logo - which I assume the school has copyright on, and an old photo of some Nuns which I have NO idea about - probably a digital image taken from an old physical photo. Is there a good resource for understanding how to manage photo copyright in Wikpedia?

Thank you. --ALB (talk) 12:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alewisbowen: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I see that you have declared your conflict of interest, thank you. If you work for the school, you will need to declare as a paid editor per the paid editing policy. You may add this declaration to your userpage as you did with your COI declaration.
Regarding your draft, I will shortly add the appropriate template to allow you to submit it. If you had any independent reliable sources to add to the draft, that would help a great deal. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
On photos, I suggest you take a photo yourself. You can then go to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard and submit your photo to Wikipedia Commons. Ask for help here or there if you get stuck. Once a photo is uploaded into commons there is a simple means of copying that into your draft. Other people can advise on how to use a logo image. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Er - not sure what the reply protocol is but @331dot: thank you for your reply. I just declared paid interest but it seems that perhaps the best avenue for school articles is to have another outside entity who is not paid by the school to make the Wikipedia page - a good example would be a parent. I did just read the page about Wikipedia Articles for Schools but I did not see a topic about best authors. I may just delete this page and ask a parent to try again, with a request that their COI state they are a parent? I guess a parent at a school has a bias. It's hard to figure out who should be the best most objective of anything if you care to create an article about it - you must have a bias.
@David not MD: thank you for your advice. I'll upload a photo of the school that I took myself and see how that goes. Thank you. ALB (talk) 13:23, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you ask a parent to write the article, then they would have a COI as they would be editing at your request. You are proceeding in the correct manner for someone with a COI/paid editing status in creating and working to submit a draft. You are free to give up and allow an uninvolved editor who takes note of your school to write about it if you wish. A parent could if they did so on their own without you or a school representative asking them to. 331dot (talk) 13:39, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, I believe we edit conflicted reviewing the draft, but I declined it, and suggested Alewisbowen abandon it. The school he's writing about is an elementary school, and it will likely never meet the requirements for a lower school to have an article. We generally don't have articles on lower schools and I can't see any reason this school should be an exception. John from Idegon (talk) 15:48, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missed that. Thought it was a high school, based on the well-composed query from Alewisbowen. David notMD (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John from Idego Thank you for your response. Per my comment on your Talk page I'm seeing other Catholic K-8 article pages on Wikipedia. I hope I am following correct protocols as this is my first time doing anything with Wikipedia. 331dot, Thank you for your response. It seems the same level of COI if me or a parent, so I did go ahead and try and submit it, and now the issue seems to be if a lower school would qualify. Per my comment to John from Idego I'm just trying to discern the correct policy. I wonder if it would be more appropriate to have a Parish page that includes the school mention - in the vein of [1] and finally, David notMD Thank you! ALB (talk) 16:52, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

Comment créer une page

Pouvez-vous m'aider à créer une page et me dire un peu d'anglais.

Merci beaucoup!

Hjik hljio purt (talk) 15:48, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir, Hjik hljio purt, et bienvenue a la maison du thé. (And that's about as far as my schoolboy French gets me.) Because this is the English Wikipedia, all our dealings here must be in English. If you want to write about a notable topic, you should read Wikipedia:Your first article which will guude you. If your English skills are similar to my abilities with the French language, then you might be best off creating your page there, instead. But if you want help to translate a page into English from another wiki, please see this helpful guide. Bon chance! Nick Moyes (talk) 16:27, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)
@Hjik hljio purt::
Translation: Could you help me create a page and tell me a little English. Thanks a lot.
Qu'est-ce que tu essayes de faire?
What are you trying to do?
Créer une article en anglais?
To make an article in English?
Une article à propos de quoi?
An article about what?
Si tu veux écrir une article en français, tu peux l'écrir a Wikipédia en français.
If you want to write an article in French, you can do that at .
Note: you appear to have written a different question below and signed it with a different name. I had written this answer before you did so, so I'm replying to this question anyway but... please don't make fake signatures. Also, that username looks similar to an insult in Spanish, so you probably want to stop using this account and create one with a better name. – Pretended leer {talk} 16:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I misread that, you were trying to sign that comment. The correct way to do that is adding {{unsigned|their name}}
@Hjik hljio purt:: Sorry for writing like you had written the other comment. I misread the diff. Désole, je n'avais pas lis bien le diff, et j'ecrit que tu avais écrit ce question que Hodarima avait écrit.
Ton nom est assez similaire au une insulte en espagnol ("hijo de puta"). Peut-être tu devrais le changer. Your username is somewhat similar to an insult in Spanish, you might want to change it.Pretended leer {talk} 16:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will change it Hjik hljio purt (talk) 16:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to activate the page live on searching engine

good day and thank for the opportunity

I have created the personal biography on wikkipedia but whem Im searching the name via google I cannot see it,is there any help to make it happens on google searching engeen? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hodarima (talkcontribs) 16:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hodarima - welcome to the Teahouse. So far, you have drafted an incomplete page about yourself as a DRC politician. This is in your 'sandbox' - a special please each user has to work on preparing content. Sandboxes are not indexed by Google, so you will not find it by searching for your name. You would needd to work on this and base it purely on independent published soiurces if you really expected it to go into the main encyclopaedia. Whilst not totally banned, Wikipedia very strongly discourages editors from creating pages about themselves. Not only are editors unlikely to be able to write in a neutral, encyclopaedic manner about themselves, they are also unlikely to want to include negative media articles about themselves - though they will have no right to remove them if they do exist, as nobody owns pages here. As a politician, you might find this potentially awkward. So you might like to read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for some idea why we do discourage self-promotion.
I have left you a welcome message on your talk page related to autobiographical drafts, but I would also ask you to read how to declare a Conflict of Interest, which you should really make clear on your main user page. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:05, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would someone please help me submit information that can't be found in other media?

Hello. I have written a "first-stab" at an article to describe something that is not described anywhere on Wikipedia or any other reference publication. It is a bit obscure...but would be a valuable listing to anyone investigating the possible use of this material. Would you please look at this and guide me on how to get it published? Any help you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Here it is:

Extended content

_______________________________________

Zinc abrasive media

Zinc abrasives are zinc particles that are used as abrasive media. They are usually available in a single teardrop shape (shot) that addresses different industrial applications.

Zinc shot refers to teardrop-shaped grains made of molten zinc through an atomization ("granulation") process, available in different sizes. Zinc cut wire refers to pure zinc wire that is cut into extremely small pieces that may also be used as abrasive media.

Contents • 1Properties o 1.1Recyclability and environmental impact o 1.2Hardness o 1.3Bulk density • 2Industrial applications o 2.1Cleaning o 2.2Flash removal o 2.3Surface preparation • 3Industrial uses • 4Production • 5See also

Properties[edit] Most zinc abrasives are made of a mainly zinc composition, the best compromise between mechanical properties, efficiency and durability. Some properties for zinc abrasives include hardness, size, shape, durability (the time it takes for the particles to break down) and bulk density (the abrasive power of each particle). The most important property differentiating zinc abrasives from steel abrasives is malleability, as zinc’s considerably-higher malleability makes the zinc abrasives gentler on blasting equipment than steel.

Recyclability and environmental impact[edit] The recyclability of zinc shot ranges between 4500 cycles (for zinc cut wire abrasives) to 14000 cycles (for hard cast zinc shot). Due to its high recyclability level, zinc shot generates less waste and almost no dust when compared to other expendable abrasives.

Hardness[edit] Zinc shot is usually available at different hardness levels, ranging between 60 and 91 Knoop. This is so soft that it does not register on the Rockwell or Vickers hardness scales. However, its relatively high bulk density still allows it to be an effective blasting media.

Bulk density[edit] Zinc shot has a bulk density of 240-250 lbs/ft3. This is slightly below the bulk density of steel shot, 280 lbs/ft3. Industrial applications[edit]

Cleaning[edit] Zinc shot is used in cleaning applications for removal of loose material on metal surfaces. This type of cleaning is common in automotive industry (motor blocks, cylinder heads, etc.) and in removing paint from metal surfaces (gas cylinders, powder coating removal, paint removal).

Flash removal[edit] Zinc shot is also used in applications for removal of flash and other excess metal resulting from the metal casting process (mostly zinc, aluminum and magnesium castings).

Surface preparation[edit] Surface preparation is a series of operations including cleaning and physical modification of a surface. Zinc shot is used in surface preparation process for cleaning metal surfaces which are covered with mill scale, dirt, rust, or paint coatings and for physically modifying the metal surface such as creating roughness for better application of paint and coating. The zinc shot pieces are generally employed in shot blasting machines.

Industrial uses[edit] Zinc shot addresses numerous sectors since cleaning, surface preparation or flash removal applications are used by many industries as a part of their construction, renovation or repair processes. The main industrial sectors employing zinc abrasives are: • Automotive industry • Diecasting industry • Paint and coating removal industry

Production[edit] The annual zinc shot production in the USA is estimated to be above 1 million pounds, the USA’s largest producer being Transmet Corporation by production and capacity.

See also[edit] • Abrasive blasting • Abrasive machining

Bob K

— Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertKaynes (talkcontribs) 16:53, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RobertKaynes, and welcome to the Teahouse! Sorry, but "not described anywhere on Wikipedia or any other reference publication" makes WP the wrong place for this. What we do here is summarizing stuff that has been written in reliable sources. Other stuff we call Wikipedia:No original research and WP:SYNTH and kick it out. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:04, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why isnt my page published

Why isnt my page published, when I search on google for the wikipedia that I created it says that id doesent exist?????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emibekaa (talkcontribs)

Hard to say, your account has not created or edited any articles. What article are we talking about? Or did you mean something different? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Emibekaa, welcome to the Teahouse. I guess you refer to User:Emibekaa/sandbox. Userspace pages (pages starting with "User:" or "User talk:") are not indexed by external search engines like Google. This is the English Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org. An Albanian page belongs at the Albanian Wikipedia https://sq.wikipedia.org. I don't know their policies but I guess they want sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:06, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Emibekaa, English Wikipedia very strongly discourages writing about yourself: see AUTOBIOGRAPHY. I don't know the policies of sq Wikipedia, but I would be surprised if that was different. --ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know what is going on

Hi! I got a message based on my IP that something happened to some text i may have edited in the past though i don't understand what it is or why or where do i find the URL to that said page nor do i remember the page itself i edited, nor am i the author of said page. It's the only time i ever edited something at all, i did a correction on a misspelled word i believe but i can't seem to remember either the word nor the topic the page is about. I looked up User "FeatherPlume" here on Wikipedia who would apparently have been unsatisfied with anything on said article there it said the User had been suspended.

I do not have the slightest clue of what is even going on. I'd be happy to get enlightened on the matter if at all possible. Thanks much — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.119.92.6 (talk)

Hello! This is the only edit from this IP, so it's hard to give a good answer. However, IP:s change and shift around, so it may be that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:50, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)
It seems someone made an Articles for creation request that got denied and later deleted after a period of inactivity. I can't see the IP or username that created the request, but I can see the log entry for the deletion:
The Sphilbrick (talk | contribs) was made of links, but I'm leaving them unlinked so that this reply doesn't show up as a message to them. – Pretended leer {talk} 17:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As an administrator I can see edits to deleted pages and the IP does have old edits. The message at User talk:91.119.92.6 is from 2014 where somebody else probably had your current IP address. Just ignore it. The box at the bottom of the page says: "This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users." The IP address 91.119.99.47 created Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/GBC Gold Backed Coin in 2014. It was edited and resubmitted by 91.119.92.6 a month later. The submission was declined and the page was later deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:53, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid in future by becoming a registered user. David notMD (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changing a title

Hi there! I recently created Oval Office Tapes and realized the podcast is called The Oval Office Tapes instead of just Oval Office Tapes. Is there a way to fix this and add the word "the" to the title? Please advise the easiest way to correct this. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgelberg007 (talkcontribs) 18:05, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done It's a move, which you do from the More > Move tab on top. I did it for you. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:12, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! This is perfect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgelberg007 (talkcontribs) 18:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prompt to add a summary comment

Is there a setting in the Preferences to force me to add a summary comment after an edit? I find myself forgetting to add the summary comment when I actually need to add one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlosXing (talkcontribs)

Hi CarlosXing, welcome to the Teahouse. Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing has: "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". PrimeHunter (talk) 18:17, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks PrimeHunter for your reply. I have set that preference. It does not work for me. I have made several attempts with variations such as changing browsers (chrome and IE), logging out and logging in. I even rebooted. I have made multiple tests on my user page. Wikipedia publishes without a prompt. Do you have any other suggestions? ... UPDATE: It worked when I attempted to publish this comment. I do not know why it would not work before, but I will take it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlosXing (talkcontribs) 19:34, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I accidentally erased a code that looked like the following {{ref}} or something similar in the source code. I want to replace it.

I went into the editing the source code instead of using the Visual Editor. I highlighted a code that looked like {{ref}} or close to it. Then I hit ENTER key. It wiped the code out.

How can I replace the code?

Thanks,

Bodvar Antonio Gregersen--Bodvar Antonio Gregersen (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bodvar Antonio Gregersen, welcome to the Teahouse. Special:Contributions/Bodvar Antonio Gregersen shows no edits since August. Which page are you referring to? See Help:Reverting for general help. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:14, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Prime Hunter,

My Wikipedia page is General Juan Francisco Morales Llerena.

Right now the first 9 references are evenly aligned on the left and are evenly aligned on the right. However, the #10 reference goes underneath an image on the left side and stops at the left margin. In other words, it does not stay lined up and squared with the other 9 references.

I cannot center the list of references between two images where one image is left=centered and the other image is right-centered. And the list of references are between the two images.

I have just about finished inputting and editing the web site, except for squarely centering the list of references.

Also, when I go to editing the list of reference, I get a message that the reference section cannot be edited with the Visual Editor and that I must edit the source code. What does {{Listaref}} mean and how does one use it to edit the reference section when I go to the source code.

If you go to the website, you will get a better idea of what I am trying to do.

Thank you.

Bodvar Antonio Gregersen--Bodvar Antonio Gregersen (talk) 22:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bodvar Antonio Gregersen: I copied your above post from my talk page. Please keep discussion in one place. Click the "Edit" link at a section heading to continue the discussion. This is the English Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org. I guess you refer to es:Juan Francisco Morales Llerena at the Spanish Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:48, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Bodvar Antonio Gregersen: I examined all your 25 October edits in the page history [1] and didn't find any removal of ref code. References are usually edited in the article section where they are used and not where they are displayed in a references section. {{Listaref}} at the Spanish Wikipedia only tells where to display them. Each Wikipedia language makes its own policies and guidelines. I don't know the image policy of the Spanish Wikipedia. Here in the English Wikipedia we wouldn't display an image to the left of the references, and our Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images#Horizontal placement warns against sand­wich­ing text be­tween two im­ages that face each oth­er. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:39, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing, here at the English Wikipedia we wouldn't use |center (|centro in Spanish) to center a narrow image. It causes a lot of whitespace around the image. And we would place image code for a right or left aligned image at the start of the relevant article text. Then the text flows next to the image. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which US papers and UK ones are considered suitable for validation?

Is The Sun OK?

Pretty much no, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources. On WP there's always the question for what/in what context, but no is the very likely answer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:10, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable sources have professional editorial control, and have have a good reputation for accuracy, fact checking and error correction. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:01, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Glock article update.

On the "Glock" article it says that "The Glock Model 35 is the current service pistol for the Kentucky State Police". An article of the Kentucky Law Enforcement magazine dated July 25th 2017 (https://www.klemagazine.com/home/2017/7/25/better-bullets) states that they changed from Glock 35 to 9mm weapons. How to edit that? Remove the sentence or is the article up to date? Any suggestion? Thanks. --Anon_york (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One possibility would be for you to change the "is" to "was", add wording along the lines of
", but by the Summer of 2017 they had reverted from the Glock 35 back to to 9mm weapons because of improvements in 9mm bullets, making them superior to the Glock 35's .40 ammunition in performance and economy as measured in the standard "FBI Protocol" tests",
and cite them to the source you mention above. I am assuming that the online magazine concerned can be considered a Reliable source, and that in the context of the article this will not be considered too trivial a fact: if other editors disagree and revert your edit, you can discuss it with them on the article's Talk page.
This is a good illustration of why it's usually a bad idea to use terms like "currently" in Wikipedia articles – even if the specific information you have found (for which thanks, Anon york) were not available, an edit to replace the "currently" terminology with more date-dependent wording (e.g. "On such-and such a date the KSP adopted the Glock 35 as . . . .") would have been advisable.
I wonder in passing if we should have an article on the FBI Protocol? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.14.42 (talk) 21:19, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 2.218.14.42, thanks so much for your suggestion, this has been amended and respectively cited. I agree with you about the use of the word "currently" in any wikipedia article due to constant updates and changes that occur in any subject. I will keep this information handy for future reference.--Anon_york (talk) 20:53, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google Indexing

Hi there

I created the page Jean Morrison but for some reason the page is not being indexed by google at all, even after searching "Jean Morrison wikipedia" in the google search bar. Any idea why this might be happening? I checked for no index tags but cannot find anything. Thanks - Tommyvanj (talk) 21:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tommyvanj: Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, the answer is simple. Virtually all new pages created here now go through a process of review - or new page patrolling. Until they do, Google isn't permitted to index them. This stops spammers trying to promote their favourite subject on search engines, and introduces an opportunity for some quality control and feedback to article creators. Then, of course, there's the catchup for Google to actually crawl and index the page. There are currently 3,675 such pages awaiting 'patrolling' by a small band of experienced volunteers here, and this review process can take between a few minutes for straight-forward pages and (at the moment) two months, so please be patient. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:39, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, thanks for the info. - Tommyvanj (talk) 07:50, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick Moyes Just to clarify, are you referring to pages that have already been approved? So there is now a second review step once a page has been created and approved? - Tommyvanj (talk) 18:35, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tommyvanj: Yes. Pages that are moved into mainspace from Articles for Creation are still subject to the normal New Page Patrol. And any page can subsequently be put forward by any editor (including a reviewer) for a deletion discussion. I think a good, current example of that would be Wests Illawarra Aquatic Swim Club. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Logged out be accident and forgot password

David notMD here. I always stay logged in. But in a moment of distraction, I logged out. Back when there was that "your password may be compromised" event, I had changed my password, but did not write it down in a secure place. To compound this problem, when I tried to use the recover password process, it appears that I had not registered an email address for my account, so entering either my User name or either of my email addresses does not send me a message with my password or a temporary password. Any ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.127.202 (talk) 10:49, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry. But without an email there is no way to recover your account. Sorry. Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 02:17, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
David notMD here. Anyone else have a different take on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.127.202 (talk) 02:21, 26 October 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]
Thegooduser is correct. 331dot (talk) 02:23, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
David notMD here. Now I'm sad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.127.202 (talk) 03:09, 26 October 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

AND I'M BACK!!!. I have a folder with a page of passwords (very 20th century techno-peasant). My old Wikipedia password was crossed out. For some reason I had written the new one on the back, where it is the only thing on the back. Anyway, Hi. David notMD (talk) 03:19, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David notMD, have you enabled an email address so that you have options in the future?
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:38, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You might also want to look at Wikipedia:Committed identity. TigraanClick here to contact me 09:14, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Added email address to my preferences this morning. David notMD (talk) 10:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

vague phrasing - how to spot it?

On the following page - Warrantless searches in the United States - there is a notice from 2007 complaining of vague phrasing. Since it has been ten years, I've decided to fix these problems. Can someone please review and notify me of the vague phrasing so I can fix it. Thanks! Seahawk01 (talk) 03:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find the vague phrase - so deleted the tag. See Category:Articles_with_weasel_words for more work :-) . Regards, Ariconte (talk) 03:56, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help, I also bookmarked the link! Seahawk01 (talk) 04:25, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ariconte and Seahawk01: I fixed the category link in Ariconte's post above. The trick to make a link (rather than categorize the page, or include an image, or...) is to start the link with a colon. TigraanClick here to contact me 09:11, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

blacklisted link notification

Hello, yesterday I fixed a blacklisted link notification. It took me about two minutes to change it into a book citation instead. The notification was pretty big, on top of the page and two years old. Is there a list of all pages that have this warning? I would like to spend some time helping out Wikipedia by making corrections. Thanks! Seahawk01 (talk) 03:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please give a link to what you are talking about. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 04:07, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This was the notice I fixed:
{{Blacklisted-links|1=http://www.econlib.org/library/NPDBooks/Pigou/pgEW8.html'Triggered by <code>\beconlib\.org\b</code> on the local blacklist''|bot=Cyberbot II|invisible=false}}
Hello, Seahawk01. A list of these pages can be found at Category:Tagged pages containing blacklisted links. JTP (talkcontribs) 05:32, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi NotTheFakeJTP, perfect, thanks for the help! Seahawk01 (talk) 05:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion

Hello! I want to know how to nominate an article for deletion. Hamim000000 (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hamim000000. See WP:Guide to deletion. --ColinFine (talk) 09:05, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to change wrong info on someone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danielle_Kang

She never played on symmetra tour. Not joined 2011, never was a member. Joined tour as a rookie in 2012 on the LPGA

How to correct it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.250.254.178 (talkcontribs) 08:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP user. I am puzzled: you had already removed the information from Danielle Kang when you posted this question here. You did exactly right: any user may remove unsourced information from an article. --ColinFine (talk) 09:03, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Special:Contributions/60.250.254.178 shows the question came first. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. It appears that signatures appear in UTC, but times on the contributions list are local (which for me at present is +1 (BST). I'd never noticed this before). --ColinFine (talk) 14:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RP is not working

I am trying to use the {{RP}} template in some new editing, but right now it is not working. It does not list the page numbers. My previous uses, several years ago, are still working just fine. The documentation is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Rp. What is the problem and how can it be solved? I put up a discussion at the Talk page over there. Thank you. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 10:50, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. Seems to be working as documented. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:11, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

backgrounds

So here's the thing. everyone knows Wikipedia as it is, however every gamer worth there salt also knows that white background and black letters are horrible for the eyes, while a black background with white letters are best for the eyes and makes it easier to read. now i get that Wikipedia has been around for a while with its current background but is there any chance there is a way that it can be changed to black background with white letters. call it the new look if you have too or something but i was just seeing it could be done. people read a lot of wiki everyday im sure someone is visiting the wiki pages but it gets harder to read from time to time trying to read a bright page with dark words.

please and thank you for your time sincerely fan of wiki's.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:603:c80:aa0:5d54:96c5:ce8b:c394 (talk)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would strongly disagree with your assertion; I would find it very difficult to read if the pages appeared that way. However, if you created an account, you should be able to configure your settings to display Wikipedia however you wish(though I am not knowledgeable enough to know exactly how). If you want to formally propose that the default display should be as you describe, you will want to visit the Village Pump and post in the appropriate section. 331dot (talk) 11:20, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The instructions for doing that are at Help:User style. That being said, you'd have to make a lot of rules, and it won't necessarily work well when pages (or the templates they use) try to define their own colours for some elements. Infoboxes, userboxes, even some of the stuff you use while editing replaces the background without replacing the foreground, and then things get even worse for the eyes because now the foreground and background colours are too similar to each other. I tried making such a style, but it looks pretty ugly, and I can't get the editing tools to look right. If you still want to see it, here it is. I'm linking to a past version because I don't like using it myself. But it's a start if you want to try and modify it to look better. – Pretended leer {talk} 13:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bobbie Drew

Bobbie drew has recently been changed to the new mayor but when I change it to Bobbie drew someone changes it back to Tom Rowett can someone help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BOOBIEDREW (talkcontribs) 13:43, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For those as mystified as I was, This is about Township of Scugog. At the moment, the info box does have Bobbie Drew as Mayor. An editor had reversed the change (and may reverse it again) because while Bobbie Drew won the election, does not officially become mayor until December 3. If that happens, wait to the date and then make the change again. Same may apply to those who are on the Council. David notMD (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, this usually happens with US presidents. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:58, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google Crowdsource Icon/Screenshots

Hello,

I am working on an article for the Android application Google Crowdsource, which is a requested article on the Google WikiProject (currently still working in my sandbox). I am trying to add pictures to my article, so I tried uploading the Google Crowdsource icon to Wikimedia Commons, but it was deleted due to copyright/permissions concerns. I know that a logo like this should be fair use, so how should I label it as such when I request un-deletion?

The images I plan to use can be found on the Google Play page for the Crowdsrouce app, here

GCSChris (talk) 16:18, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey GCSChris. The image looks pretty simple, and Google is a US company, where the threshold for originality is pretty high. I wonder if User:Jcb would consider restoring the image as too simple to qualify for copyright. Otherwise, after the article is published, you can file a request at Files for Upload and we can get it added under a claim of fair use. GMGtalk 17:09, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, GCSChris; Logons are one of the common uses of non-free content, and I would guess that icons might meet be seen the same way; but they must be uploaded to Wikipedia, not commons, and one of the non-free content criteria is that the item is used in at least one article, and may not be used in drafts. So wait until the draft is accepted as an article, and then upload and add it. --ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks so much! I will put the article into mainspace and then look into uploading it to Wikipedia instead of the commons. GCSChris (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article to write

Hi, thanks for inviting me. I would like to write my own article. I am thinking of maybe doing one on COLOPL, Inc. because they make games I enjoy, and there is no article about them. Should I do it, should I not? Also, I would like help if possible. Thanks. Nbissocool (talk) 16:23, 26 October 2018 (UTC) Nbissocool[reply]

Hey Nbissocool. The first thing is to gather up what sources you can find that meet Wikipedia's standards for reliability, which usually means things like newspapers, magazines and books. Looking around, it does seem that there are quite a few to choose from. If you want you can start the article as a draft using the Article Creation Wizard and submit it for review at our Articles for Creation project, where it can be reviewed by an experienced editor who can offer feedback prior to publishing. GMGtalk 17:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Nbissocool, and welcome to the Teahouse. You certainly can write a new article, once you've determined that the subject meets the criteria for notability; but it is quite hard to write an article in a way that is accepted, especially for a new editor, and I suggest you don't rush into this. We have millions (literally) of existing articles which could be improved. In any case, I suggest you read the essay your first article. Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 20:30, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

why do i have to type in the capatcha again even if i get it right? (sometimes)

the question is above. answer the question below. (and please leave a message on my talk page when you responded to this question) 174.60.119.235 (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey anon. I'm not really sure unfortunately. It sounds like it might be a technical problem. While there is no requirement on Wikipedia to register an account, doing so would help you avoid certain nuisances, such as the need to enter captchas at all. GMGtalk 17:14, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Images deleted

Hello, a user deleted all the images in my article, saying they’re horrible low quality and/or copyrighted. Since the same images where already in the Wikipedia database and used for the Italian page, I’m not sure of what I can do about it. I received permission from the owner to use on Wikipedia. Plus, the page is now marked as “multiple issues”, because someone thinks I’m Carlo Prevale or something. I’m definitely not. How can I prove that the whole page is totally legit?

Thanks in advance for you help! Kodymix (talk) 17:00, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kodymix: Permission "to use on Wikipedia" isn't sufficient.
The copyright holder needs to send a declaration of consent, releasing the photograph under an acceptable free license. See WP:CONSENT. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:06, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist: I get it! Thank you so much! Will this solve the “autobiography” issue too?Kodymix (talk) 09:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kodymix: No, that tag will stay forever, if you're referring to Prevale (DJ). The best way to get that removed would be to move it back to draft space and submit it for review via Wikipedia:Articles for creation. If that article is about you, you should never have moved it to main article space yourself due to your conflict of interest. Only a neutral reviewer should do that. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:40, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding my picture

I am new in here. I can't add my picture in here. So can you tell me that how to add picture in Wikipedi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rithik Debnath (talkcontribs) 17:50, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See the reply above regarding copyright. The photographer owns the copyright, not the subject. As for uploading images, try Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reference desk feature effectively closed to users

So you have effectively stopped to take new questions from ordinary users.is this going to be permanent??oh no please revert.103.24.109.210 (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Reference Desks were subject to a DDOS-type attack during the previous week that resumed within a few minutes of protection expiring. The current protections will automatically expire within a few days (check each page for the date and time that expires) and if the troll who was attacking the reference desks doesn't come back, we'll be fine. If they do, we'll have to return the protections. This may be inconvenient for you, but there's really nothing else that can be done. --Jayron32 18:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...other than register an account. shoy (reactions) 18:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've registered several accounts and made 10 edits each, now just waiting for the protection to expire :) 45.119.91.111 (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Making a new page for my company

Hi everyone!


I'm a new registered editor, previously anonymous (IP addressed) editor, and I wanted to inquire about the best way to create a page for the company I'm currently working for.

The company is an expanding freight/transportation business and would like to have a credible Wikipedia page. I was looking on other freight/transportation companies, such as FedEx and United, to get an idea of what information is appropriate to list on such pages. I do not want to make this page an advertisement, as no Wikipedia page should never feel like it's an advertisement, but I've noticed many of the other pages list services.


My questions are:


- What advice can you give for uploading a company Wikipedia page for the first time?

- How many citations and sources are needed to make the Wikipedia page most credible?

- Are there any hard dos and don'ts I should be aware of in regards to creating a company Wikipedia page?

- Are there any resources you can recommend for someone who hasn't created a new Wikipedia page before?


Thank you in advance for any and all advice.


- Jeslynra

Hello Jeslynra, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry to be negative, but it is probably a bad idea to even try. If you do decide to attempt this anyway, please take your time and read WP:PAID, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and Wikipedia:Your first article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has two "needs". First, it needs a heavy copy-edit. It really doesn't read well. Second, it then needs acceptance. Can someone here provide the copy-edit to bring this up to minimum standards for article space? Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert McClenon. I'm afraid I don't have time to offer to go through this myself right now, but I am going to ping Zircon 2 who has created a lot of really new geological articles (including his recently created Geology of Nevada). I'm sure his input here would be really useful. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Did you use bold in the headings? Well, I guess that's easiest to fix in the source editor. It could probably also do with a couple of links. I'm editing it right now (in case someone else sees this and doesn't know if someone is already working on it). If I don't write anything within ten minutes, it's probably okay for others to start editing it too. – Pretended leer {talk} 19:34, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That references section was created manually, which means I have to move the references into the text and check they're in the right places. Probably taking another ten minutes. – Pretended leer {talk} 19:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Taking even longer... maybe I should save the part I've already done. – Pretended leer {talk} 20:56, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The formatting was easy enough, the references took some time. Working out what some text is intended to mean is tricky. Did you use speech recognition to write it? I'm guessing you wrote "relief" instead of "reef".
I've tried to wikify the first parts of the article, but I'm too tired to finish today. If anyone else wants to, they can try to improve it further. One thing you could try to do is making the language more formal. Another is adding internal links where relevant. Just don't have multiple links to the same article.
I guess the writer might want to read the Manual of Style. – Pretended leer {talk} 20:56, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert McClenon: Having come back and read through this draft in detail, my recommendation is that it is declined, predominantly on the grounds that a similar article already exists which gives a more technical and far less fanciful version of events. There is far too much overlap between this draft and the Geology of Nevada article, and far too many gross errors and flights of fancy in it, to justify spending time trying to copy edit and to check references to end up with something that, in essence, already pre-exists.
That said, I then spotted this diff in which the article creator stated that they are a university geology student, and asked you for a peer review on the article. This suggests they do accept your rejection, which I think is fully justified. So, I would offer the following observations and criticism to a student of geology, which perhaps I would not offer in such a manner to another new editor had they not requested it:
  • The quality of writing and lack of proper structure suggests that the page creator is a first year student, and that this may be their first writing assignment, and that English may be their second language. I wish them well in their studies (it's a fascinating science), and I'm sure they will look back as their course progresses and recognise their mistakes here. The good news is that their geological skills will only improve from here on in. Great teaching makes great students great. But right now, some basic errors are unforgivable from a geology student! e.g.The geologic history of Nevada begins around 3.5 millions years ago. I don't need to explain this - they should instantly appreciate their error.
  • I have a basic geological understanding (though none of it relating to this geographic area), but feel that the article creator's has written in a voice more akin to a fairy tale than to the neutral voice of an authoritative and well-researched encyclopaedia article. That's not to suggest that it is not based on factual sources, but I couldn't distinguish fanciful writing from fact. I expect clear, factual, simple-to-read statements distilled down and presented in simple terms, but based on well-cited academic sources. I couldn't tell whether they were based on nursery books. I do apologise if this sounds harsh, but that's the reality when I read sentences like: One day, a large meteor, travelling faster than 20,000 miles per hour, fell down in Nevada, 100 miles north of today's Las Vegas.
  • In terms of Wikipedia's requirements for a draft article, the following apply:
  • The title of the article should be emboldened within the lead paragraph per our Manual of Style - it is missing completely. The lead does not effectively summarise the article, as one would expect it to. It should have introduced both the area and summarised the geological timespan of the article.
  • It's was good to see quite a few inline citations, and correct use of repeated citations - something new editors often overlook. So, well done there. However, the references are not well structured to Wikipedia's standards and, where available, could have been hyperlinked to online versions. Page numbers could have been used to show where statements came from in the original sources.
  • The use of headings and subheadings is good. Though I think another editor has since formatted these, removing inappropriate emboldening, for example. The actual heading titles themselves are not acceptable. Unless "The big squeeze" and "The Great Nevada Meteor impact" are formal terms, these are not OK to use. We want children to be able to understand our articles, but we're writing encyclopaedic pages, not museum information leaflets, so we shouldn't make up titles that are suggestive of genuine technical terms. Headings should also be in sentence case, per WP:MOSCAPS.
  • I really don't know where to start in critiquing this sentence, so I shalln't: After a few decades of the Alamo Breccia impact, what we call Pangea started to create an extraordinary look to all the continents together.
I could go on, but I'm feeling bad enough already by laying into the author (Maitraye) in a way that normally we would never do at the Teahouse. But that was the invitation made to us, so I earnestly hope this helps, and I ask them not to be too downhearted by my harsh words here. (My first essays at uni were pretty rubbish too, but I gradually improved, as no doubt their's will, too. I could certainly never have written one in a second language, as I don't really have one!) My suggestion, Robert, is that you move the draft page back into their personal sandbox, and paste these comments from me wherever seems most appropriate. (If you make a direct link back to the Teahouse it will later need updating as, after three days or so, our links to this page get broken due to archiving)
Finally, I have just worked through the existing article on Geology of Nevada by Zircon 2 and have flagged quite a number of paragraphs where citations are completely absent and most definitely needed. So even that article isn't perfect. If this student wants to, adding inline citations could easily be one task that a geologist with access to good sources could usefully contribute towards. I wish them well in their studies... ...and their next assignment. Geology rocks! Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:21, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are the prime steps I have to follow for a established person's editing.

If I will start a edit for a person. Who is established in his career, social life etc. what prime steps I need to follow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeslynra (talkcontribs)

Hello! Your question is unclear, but if you mean that you'd like to create an article on someone, you can find guidance in the following: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography and Wikipedia:Your first article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"...for a person." implies that you either know the person or are being paid by the person. Different rules apply. If so, say so here and you will get guidance. David notMD (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I correct a caption artwork that I have already downloaded to a site.

I have made a typo in the caption of the Stage (Celerity) Wagon on the site I have been working on titled "Butterfield Overland Mail." I misspelled the word "celerity" as celeity. How do I correct this and any other caption on my added artwork-media? Gerald T. Ahnert (talk) 19:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Gerald T. Ahnert[reply]

Hello, Gerald T. Ahnert. You have added the image to the article without giving an explicit caption, so the software has just used the name of the file. So the easiest change is to edit the caption to the image in Butterfield Overland Mail. However, this will leave the name of the image file with the error in it, which may or may not worry you. If it does, you need to go to it in Commons commons:File:Butterfield's Stage (Celeity) Wagon partly designed by John Butterfield. Sixty-six were employed from Fort Smith, Arkansas, to Los Angeles, California.jpg and request a move (rename) there (it's under "More" if you've got the relevant gadget enabled in Commons, which it is by default). Once it's been renamed in Commons, there will be a redirect left there, so the link to it from the Wikipedia article will still work; but it would be a good idea to update that link.
If you are going to rename the Commons file anyway, I would advise renaming it to something much shorter, such as "Butterfield's Stage (Celerity) Wagon.jpg". The longer text is still there in the description, and can be added in the caption if the image is used in any other articles, but the name is not so unwieldy. --ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer. I will give it a try. As a follow-up question, where is the explicit caption entered on the commons form? Gerald T. Ahnert (talk) 21:32, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Gerald T. Ahnert[reply]

Hello again, Gerald. The caption isn't in Commons: it's something that you set when you link to the image from Wikipedia (and you might well use the same image in different articles with different captions). See Help:Files#Using files. --ColinFine (talk) 22:44, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I "publish" a draft page?

I created a page, in sandbox I believe, and would like to publish/add it to wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:La_Venganza_de_Cucamonga — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdiede (talkcontribs) 2018-10-26T22:57:22 (UTC)

Hello, Gdiede, and welcome to the Teahouse. (Please in future sign any contributions to discussion pages like this one with four tildes (~~~~) so that we don't have to go hunting to see who is asking). There are two ways of getting an article from draft space into main space (but I don't recomment you use either of them right now - see below).
If you're very sure that the draft is in an acceptable state, you can simply move it to mainspace; but if you do this, it is immediately subject to all Wikipedia's rules on notability, sourcing, neutratlity etc, and it may get deleted it if it is not satisfactory. A better approach in most cases is to submit it for review, and I have added a box to Draft:La Venganza de Cucamonga with a button to submit it when you think it is ready.
As I said above, I advise you not to submit it at present, because it will certainly be declined, because it does not reference any sources at all. A Wikipedia article without sources is nearly worthless, because a reader has no way of knowing whether anything in it is reliable (even if it started that way, it might have been vandalised). Please see referencing for beginners, and Your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

People from Enfield town

Hello, I was thinking it would be good to add Dusty Springfield (Mary O'Brien) (and a link to her Wikipedia page) to the "People from Enfield Town" web page.

I assume you mean the category with that name.  Done. Rojomoke (talk) 06:02, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with Info Box

Hello everyone. I am new to Wikipedia. I have made a few edits using visual editor and am planning to write an article using the same method. Visual editor is pretty user-friendly, but i dont know how to add an info box using it. Can please anyone guide me. Also has anyone used the visual editor to write an article? If yes, then some tips would be really welcomed.Tasneem.tech (talk) 05:27, 27 October 2018 (UTC)Tasneem.tech[reply]

Hello Tasneem.tech; welcome to the Teahouse. To add an infobox in the visual editor, click the "Insert" option in the VE toolbar, and select "Template" from the drop down menu. You should now see an "add a template" field, where you will put the name of the infobox without the Template: prefix (e.g. Infobox person, infobox film), and click "add template." Fill out the name field first, which will usually always be the name of the page (e.g. John Smith), but if the page is disambiguated, then it would be without the disambiguation (e.g., put John Smith for the name parameter if the title of the page is John Smith (military)) and then click "Add more information." Here, you can add a number of customizable parameters by clicking "Show [X] more fields." For example, if you're using {{Infobox person}}, you might want to scroll to "Birth date," click that, and then enter the parameter. However, most fields are not necessary in infoboxes except in special cases, so you should only fill out the ones necessary. You can typically find information about when fields should be filled out and what they should contain on the documentation page of the infobox template; for Infobox person, it would be add Template:Infobox person/doc. When you're done, click "Insert," and remember that you can always modify the infobox later as needed. This may seem complicated, but it's actually fairly straightforward once you get the hang of it. Don't hesitate to let me know if you have any further questions. Regards, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:11, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Profile publish

Hi,

I'm new to editing at Wikipedia and was just invited to Teahouse.

I like to know what next to do for a profile page to be uploaded.

Thank you

Abide880 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Abide880 (talkcontribs) 2018-10-27T06:39:10 (UTC)

Hello, Abide880, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. I'm guessing you are wanting to create an article about Ayodeji Abidemi Olarinoye. Note that I say "an article about", not a "profile for" - Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and contains articles, not profiles. The main difference, as I see it, is that an encyclopaedia article should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject, and not on what the subject says or wants to say.
Writing a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, and I always advise new editors that their time would be better spent, and the value they can add to the encyclopaedia hugely increased, by spending a few weeks or months improving some of our millions of existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before trying to create a new article. In any case, please read Your first article before you try it.
Forgive me if I'm jumping to conclusions, but from your user name, I'm guessing that you might be Ayodeji Abidemi Olarinoye. If this is so, then please understand that writing an article about yourself is a very bad idea. It is strongly discouraged (see the essay I linked to) and may not be what you want anyway: see An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. You may share some information about yourself on your user page, but this should be primarily about you as a Wikipedia editor, and it must not be made to look like an article. (User pages are not indexed, so it won't show up in search engines anyway).
I hope you will stay and help us improve the encyclopaedia: perhaps you can provide some expertise for articles about sport in Nigeria. (You might like to have a look at WP:WikiProject Nigeria and WP:WikiProject Sports). But if you were thinking of writing about yourself, please give up that idea.
Finally: when you post on a discussion page like this one, please sign your post with four tildes (~~~~): it enables people to find you and reply to you more easily. --ColinFine (talk) 09:50, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A question

Hi there ~ I'm a newcomer here. Recently I've noticed something: You can publish an article without making it a draft and waiting for review. Just search for something, and there'll be a sentence "You may create the page ###" . So what will happen if I create an article like this? Will it still be reviewed afterwards?
Well, the reason why I ask about it is that my draft was just declined for its content, which is about a self-published manga. I've been told that it's not notable and shouldn't be a Wikipedia article. So I want to just create the article. Is that capable? (I just want that article to be kept in Wikipedia, even not in the encyclopedic space)
Thanks!Brotherdogger (talk) 05:43, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brotherdogger. Articles can be created directly in the mainspace, and many do people choose this method. Many times, however, such articles usually end up WP:DELETED for one reason or another; sometimes they're speedily deleted, sometimes they're WP:PRODDED for deletion and sometimes they're deleted as the result of a review. There are almost six million articles, with more being added everyday; so, it can be hard to thoroughly check out every new page/article created. It might take a long time to find, unless the article for some reason starts to attract lots of attention, but the hope is that eventually someone will get to them (e.g., a new page reviewer) and find the clunkers and tag them for deletion.
Now, if you've been told that the manga you want to write about is not a suitable topic for a Wikipedia article, then I'm assuming you were given that advice in good faith. If you then still push ahead and create said article, then it will almost certainly end up deleted. So, you need to ask yourself not only whether it's worth your time and energy, but also whether it's worth the Wikipedia community's time and energy to do such a thing. If you're interested in manga, then you probably can find many other already existing articles about manga which you can help improve. Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga see if anyone in that WikiProject can offer any suggestions on articles which could use some work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Once deleted, a search on the title will go to a note that there had been an article by that name, since deleted, but only administrators, checkusers, and oversighters can view the content of deleted articles. David notMD (talk) 09:07, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How active are the stubs' "talk" page?

Hi, I'm new to editing. Posted two questions on stubs' talk here and here. Will they be picked up usually, or should I submit an edit directly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rason.lyc (talkcontribs) 10:21, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've seen most talk pages aren't even that active to begin with, were the articles stubs or not. Usually when I leave something to a talk page I just mark the page as watched and forget all about it, so that when and if someone replies or creates a new topic to the page I'll get a notification. If it's urgent I'll either boldy edit the article or choose a person whose contributed most from the history page and ask them on their talk page. To answer your solfege question, yes citation is required. (sign your comments with four dashes in the future) NinuKinuski (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

EverybodyWiki Bios & Wiki site

Hi I found a site called "EverybodyWiki Bios & Wiki"[2] it looks very similar to wikipedia and it has some articles that do not exist in Wikipedia. I was wonder if its related to wikipedia or if I can copy paste some articles from it to here. SharabSalam (talk) 14:26, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, SharabSalam. I think what you are suggesting would be a really, really bad idea. Did you read its stated purpose, which says:
  1. Everybodywiki tries to save articles which are currently marked for deletion on WikiPedia.
  2. You can write your own biography, even if you're unknown. An article on Everybodywiki doesn't need to meet any kind of notability standards or arbitrary requirements, nor be famous to be kept.

So, we've got a site that has lifted Wikipedia content of pages flagged for deletion, plus biographies that anyone can write about themselves, no matter how non-notable they are, and based on nothing but their own opinions about themselves! On every level, trying to add content from it back into Wikipedia would be an extraordinary bad idea, and I urge you not to try, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:33, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: Thank you for your advice and your answer. SharabSalam (talk) 22:40, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to publish an article from draft ?

I am new to Wikipedia , i had written an article on one of the fast growing media houses in south India but the article is in draft but i am not seeing an option to publish the article .

Here is the article link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:South_Indian_Logic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goutham0006 (talkcontribs) 16:46, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the submit button yourself in this edit when you removed the line that included the note " Important, do not remove this line before article has been created". The draft is obviously not yet ready to be submitted for review as it has no references. Please read about notability, about references, and the other advice in WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How can I create eg. WP:OR link in edit summary?

I wanted to request a rollback first, but seeing as there isn't a simple way to do that other than finding a user with rollback rights and ask them directly I decided to manually edit it out. However I don't know how to create a link inside the edit summary, so I'm hesitating on editing the article in question. How do I do this, I've seen other people do it so..? NinuKinuski (talk) 17:26, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NinuKinuski. The same way you would in the article text: [[WP:OR]] should do that. At least in the source editor. – Pretended leer {talk} (edited message, so replacing timestamp)17:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC) – 17:59, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Gansz Jr.

My article for Frank Gansz Jr. was not approved, citing that because he has only been an assistant coach, he doesn't meet notability guidelines. However, I will use the example of Jerry Schuplinksi, an assistant coach with the New England Patriots, who has a Wikipedia page, to suggest Frank Gansz Jr. should have one as well. Gansz Jr. has several years of experience working in the National Football League, and on that basis, should be equally as notable as Schuplinski. Can this be re-reviewed?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamiltontigercats (talkcontribs)

See WP:OSE. All articles are judged independently. It's possible to have two assistant coaches, one notable, one not notable. See WP:NOTABILITY or WP:NGRIDIRON --which was already shown to you in the draft-- to see why. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding fields/text to bio boxes

I would like to add a field called "influenced" to the bio box on the right side of this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Komlos I'd like to put this new field under the "influences" field. While Wikipedia allows me to add the field (and names) in edit mode, it does not publish the changes I make. Any suggestions? Thanks for your help.

Hello @JHKomlos:, and welcome to the Teahouse. Generally templates (incl. infoboxes) only accept parameters that are pre-defined in the template, unknown parameter names are ignored and may result in an error message during preview. You can check a list of valid parameters in the template documentation (usually available at Template:template name). Adding "new" fields in that sense is only possible by changing the template itself based on consensus. Per the RfC at Template talk:Infobox economist the parameter "influenced" was removed from this particular template after some discussion, so you cannot use it at the moment. But for more technical details and background info it might be better to ask at the linked talkpage or one of the involved editors in the linked discussion. For general technical questions WP:VPT is also a good forum (see info on top for more details). GermanJoe (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please read also WP:COI, and especially WP:SELFCITE, in case you are the author of the cited publications. I have left you some additional information on your user talkpage, and removed some of the more problematic edits. When in doubt, please suggest such changes on the article's talkpage instead of adding them yourself. Thank you for your consideration. GermanJoe (talk) 21:37, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Biography Nisha Mandani

Hi I need your help regarding creating my Biography Page for Nisha Mandani, i posted it on sandbox but it was rejected because it says it is party about the person and partly about organization. but i was very carefull when i was writing that page. please help me our and guide me how to make my page again .

thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nisha Mandani (talkcontribs)

Nisha Mandani Hi there and Welcome to Wikipedia. Your Draft has been rejected because it does not cite any sources, Please see This page for more information on how to cite pages. Also I have tagged your article for speedy deletion under the criteria WP:G11. Please don't be discouraged that your article has not been accepted, it happens all the time. (If you look in my talk page you'll see that all my articles submitted have not been accepted.) Thanks for reaching out to the teahouse and Happy Editing! :) Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:29, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nisha Mandani: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm very sorry, but I needed to delete your draft, as it was promotional in nature. You seem to have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not social media or other forum for you to tell the world about yourself and your organization. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources state about article subjects. Autobiographies are strongly discouraged per the autobiography policy. People naturally write favorably about themselves, and it is exceedingly difficult for people to write about themselves with the neutral point of view required by Wikipedia. To succeed, you would have to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on what independent sources state. Most people cannot do that. I would strongly advise you against further attempts to write about yourself here. 331dot (talk) 20:31, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Email Notice

What happened to the Email Notices? Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:22, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thegooduser. There are many types of email notices. What do you have in mind? If you mean on-wiki notifications that another user has mailed you via Wikipedias mail interface then it works for me. It requires that "Email from other user" is enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:47, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

writting an article

I would like to know how can I write an article, and get feed back.Thank you kindly,Clarence C.

See Wikipedia:Articles for creation and Wikipedia:Your first article. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:08, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page Ratings

Hi group! Just made my first official contribution, and I'm super excited. My article was assessed as a "C", which left me happy at the chance of an approval and sad at the rating. Is it possible to improve the "rating" of a page, and is there a way I can see how Wikipedia pages have been rated, for my personal review. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DemolaSNC (talkcontribs)

Helps if you add the article name to your query with [[ ]] bracketing the article name so people can visit it. Wikipedia:Content assessment describes grades (class rankings). David notMD (talk) 01:41, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

editing the wikipedia content

I had edited the content of Aniruddha Jatkar and provided sources where they were available. I am Aniruddha Jatkar's mother and hence had edited the content -i.e. corrected where wrong information was provided and added where the information was lacking. The entire information was deleted. My queries are

!. It is mentioned that he was born in Karnataka. Infact he was born in Mumbai but brought up in Karnataka. Now what kind of proof is required for this information. Do you need his passport copy / birth certificate and if it is what proof or source was provided by the previous writer?

2. I had mentioned in the relatives segment Dr. Bharathi Vishnuvardhan as his mother-in-law and provided source of two media clippings where there relationship was clearly mentioned. still it was deleted. why is this?


Why my new article on wikipedia decline even i give my west ?

Hi , currently i know about a hosting company which is not on wikipedia . So i think to write about it in wikipedia but my article declined . Please any one see this article and tell me what mistakes shall i do ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinesh.shar (talkcontribs)

@Dinesh.shar: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As the decline notice indicates, the sources given do not indicate the subject merits a Wikipedia article. Not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. To merit an article, the company must have significant coverage in independent reliable sources that indicates how the notability guidelines for companies are met. The sources you offered do not have significant coverage of this company. If such sources do not exist, the company would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I secorate my user page?

I notice alot of the user pages have nice decorations and boxes saying where the user is from, what they do what their interests are? How do I do this too?HOWARD ROARK laughed (talk) 09:51, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there! Sophia Ghim again here. It has been now almost ten weeks since I have resubmitted my page for Dr. Paul (Sung Ro) Lee, and it has been sitting under a reviewing process for a while. Is there anything I missed or should I just keep waiting for the review? I'll appreciate hearing from you in this regard.

Kind regards. Sophia