Wikipedia:Teahouse

Welcome to the Teahouse...                        

A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Click here to
ask a question

David notMD, a Teahouse host

Question forum

Host profiles

Guest profiles

Experienced editor? Become a host!

Learn more about the Teahouse

Articles to improve

Question archive

Guest archive

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.

Help

Wikipedia

Finalizing Page

Hello, I need to finalize and move Draft:Kalani Pe'a into main space. Can someone review and give me feedback? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allanbcool (talk • contribs) 02:50, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I just added (Infobox Person) in your Draft:Kalani Pe'a . Fill Infobox Person information . Please add more references to make it more reliable article. 649pardeep (talk) 09:43, 4 January 2019 (IST)

Hi Allanbcool and welcome to the Teahouse. The references should be moved to WP:Inline references where each reference comes after the statement that it supports. This makes it much easier to check the facts. See WP:Referencing for beginners. Dbfirs 07:37, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Allanbcool. One more thing that you need to take care of before this gets moved to mainspace is that you need to rewrite the entire "Early life" section. I noticed that a lot of it is copied from this website. Wikipedia articles have to be written in your own words--they cannot be copied from somewhere else, because this is a copyright violation. The tone used in the article is also very promotional, and should be rewritten to be more neutral. Once its rewritten, let me know and I'll be happy to clean it up and move it to mainspace for you. Mahalo. Mcampany (talk) 20:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the updates. I will work on links and maybe I will have to remove the early life section for now and later on write it and have you guys check it again when I have time to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allanbcool (talk • contribs) 11:24, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Instead of removing it, you can expand the Early life section with more details. For instance, I found some information about his early education, a bit about his family, and the place he was born in this article. This LA Times story also cited some of his early musical training. I am sure you can find other info as well. Regards, Darwin Naz (talk) 01:28, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Looking to finalize draft and move it into live space - can you assist? I have finished many edits over past few days. Please advise - See Draft:Kalani Pe'a Allanbcool (talk)

Thank you Darwin Naz for your help. I'm updating it now. Allanbcool (talk) 06:50, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

I have updated the Early Life section but I'm having issues with the inline citations. Allanbcool (talk) 07:44, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Darwin Naz Can you check my inline citations. I have made more updates. Kalani Pe'a Allanbcool (talk) 11:59, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Image of a living person

I want to upload an image of a living person (I mean a couple of wife and husband). Then what license should I give? If the license is image of a living person (unacceptable fair use) then what should I do? And what is bollywood hangama attribution used here and here? How can I use that? Can I use another reliable website here? AnkurWiki (talk) 08 January 2019, 03:16 (UTC)

Hello AnkurWiki, an image of a living person must be licensed under a free license. You use the license which the copyright owner has granted. If you take a photo yourself, you are the copyright owner; so you can choose which free license to grant. Apparently Bollywood Hungama grants a free license under limited conditions (listed on the file description pages you linked to) on photos taken by their photographers. To use that license you make sure that the photo fulfils those conditions and then upload the photo to Commons with the {{Bollywood Hungama}} tag. Most images from other websites are not usable. —teb728 t c 14:00, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

link to other language Wikipedias

Hello Tea house I really love the work you are doing here at Wikipedia. I have a question on a small edit I would like to make. I think it is relevant to place a wiki link on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Crest_Sanitarium_(New_York) to Palatul Bragadiru (https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatul_Bragadiru) under the Notable Patients section for George Dimitropolos. George Gyftakis Dimitropolos | Olympia Hotel proprietor NYC | Director [6] Palatul Bragadiru, 1917 | Source: Death Certificate. George was a director of Palatul Bragadiru and he died at River Crest. His name is "....pulo" in Romanian and "....polos" in Greek. Same person. Can you advise how to make these cross wiki links. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephintechnicolor (talk • contribs) 2019-01-08T05:04:40 (UTC)

Help:Link--Quisqualis (talk) 06:06, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Josephintechnicolor. In my view, the best way to link to other language Wikipedias is to use {{ill}}. This creates a redlink (because the English article doesn't exist) but adds a second blue link to the other-language article, with a label indicating the language; but if anybody does go ahead and write an English article, it will automatically link to that without having to be changed. --ColinFine (talk) 10:55, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine

So if I want to use this Romanian page https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatul_Bragadiru on this US Wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Crest_Sanitarium_(New_York) Can you please give me an example.

Palatul Bragadiru {{ill}}

Josephintechnicolor (talk) 23:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Josephintechnicolor, {{ill|Palatul Bragadiru|ro}}would be shown as Palatul Bragadiru. —teb728 t c 23:39, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very muchJosephintechnicolor (talk) 06:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Frustrated

Hello, I've been trying to make edits to a page that has had false information a long time now. Why is the photo that I own continually rejected when I try to upload even after filing an OTRS. For years now, I have been trying to make these changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malinsworld (talk • contribs) 04:55, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I made this a new section because it appeared to have no connection to the autobiography query. David notMD (talk) 05:05, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Presumably you are referring to files which have been deleted at Wikimedia Commons, not here at the English Wikipedia? The situation with previous attemmpts is explained on your user talk page there at commons:User talk:Malinsworld. The latest attempt is apparently awaiting consideration of the OTRS. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:03, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Malinsworld. The author of the Commons file mentioned above by David Biddulph is given as Malinda Williams, the subject of the photo. Is that you? In general, it is the person taking the photo, not the subject, who is considered to be the copyright holder unless it was some kind of work for hire or there exists a copyright transfer agreement. The file is currenlty marked with c:Template:OTRS received which means that the permissions email that you or someone else sent in to c:COM:OTRS was received and enteredinto the system, but it is either waiting for review or currently undergoing review. There tends to be more emails than there are OTRS volunteers; so, sometimes it takes a little time for the entire process to be completed. If you were the person who sent in the email and would like an update, you can ask for help at c:COM:OTRSN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

That is correct, I am both the subject and the copyright holder. I took the photo, am in the photo and I own the photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malinsworld (talk • contribs) 17:05, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Malinsworld. Thank your clarifying things a bit. Now, a couple of things.

1. Since you took the photo, you should be able to upload it to Commons. Somebody (you perhaps?) has already sent in a permissions email to OTRS; so, you know just have to be a bit patient and wait for the process to be completed. Whoever sent the email should have gotten an automatic reply containing an OTRS ticket number which can be used to verify the status if necessary. The file should not be deleted while the email is being reviewed and the OTRS volunteer reviewing the email will probably contact the sender if there are any issues which still need to be resolved. Just for reference, Wikipedia and Commons are technically separate projects which means Commons issues need to be resolved there. Plese try to understand that the photo looks like it was professionally taken and the subjects of photos are not generally considered the be copyright holder; so, having copyright ownership verified by OTRS will make it known to everyone looking at the page that you as the uploader and as the subject of the photo are indeed the copyright holder.
2. Since you are claiming above to be "Malinda Williams", you are considered to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest with respect to anything written about you on Wikipedia. This means you shouldn't be directly editing the article at all except in certain specific cases. For more information on this, please look at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself. You should also look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content for reference. Basically, you have no final editorial control or any claim of ownership over the article or its content, even though it happens to be about you. Your going to be expected to adhere to relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines just like every other editor, but you going to be expected to use the article talk page to propose any changes that go beyond a simple editorial correction, etc. because the article is about you. If you have any questions about this, you can ask for help at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard or Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard.

Finally, I've added a template to your user talk page which contains some more links to pages which you might find helpful in addition to some of the ones I posted above. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:54, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Moving an article in order to change the name of the article

Hello, there is an article on the Shakespearean and Elizabethan scholar and professor Emma J. Smith that should be moved to [[[Emma Smith (scholar)]] -- to drop her middle initial. This is not controversial, this idea was posted on her talk page a while ago (no one added any discussion). The subject does not use her middle initial when her name appears on the books and articles she has written or when she has appeared in public and as a teacher. She's been presented in a program as "Emma Smith, scholar". I attempted to move it myself, it seems a simple procedure, but I erred somehow. The error was corrected. So if someone could either make this move, or tell me how to do it correctly, (or advise me), I would appreciate it. Thank you. Bitwixen (talk) 16:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@Bitwixen: See Help:How to move a page for a simplified guide on moving pages. If you're still unable to do it, make a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical. If someone disagrees with the new name, you've to start a discussion on the talkpage of the article. Procedure of doing so can be found at Template:Requested move. –Ammarpad (talk) 16:28, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Bitwixen has now moved the article. Maproom (talk) 17:28, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding a company to a list

Hi there,

Can you tell me how I can add a company name to a pre existing list - eg Theatre Companies in London?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by JTyhurst (talk • contribs) 16:27, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@JTyhurst:Hi, I cannot find a list with that name, can you link it? WelpThatWorked (talk) 16:35, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@JTyhurst: I can say in general that such lists are only populated with members that merit Wikipedia articles and(usually) have such an article already. A theater company would merit an article if it meets the criteria written at WP:ORG, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that goes beyond things like press releases and announcements of routine transactions. The lists are not meant to list every possible member of said list. 331dot (talk) 17:57, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi there - thanks for responding, it's this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&action=edit&section=46 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JTyhurst (talk • contribs) 10:26, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Quoting Wikipedia as source in academic papers.

About 12 years ago, when I was my completing a masters degree at Birkbeck, citing Wikipedia was a definite 'no-no' in academic writing. Indeed, I remember even being warned against citing a 'fact' (a verifiable eye-witness account of an event) as it was found ONLY on a Wikipedia page.

Does anyone know of any studies made in the shifting academic attitudes towards citing Wikipedia since its beginning?

I am interested as I now lecture students in the art of factual story-telling and, thus on the use of sources.

Many thanks Blue Badge — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebadge1 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

you may be interested in Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia WelpThatWorked (talk) 18:03, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bluebadge1. Because Wikipedia can be freely edited by anyone, it cannot be considered a reliable source in an academic context. As a matter of policy, Wikipedia editors working on one article do not consider another Wikipedia article to be a reliable source. On the other hand, a well-written Wikipedia article summarizes what actual reliable sources say, and those sources should be cited throughout the article, and will appear in the "References" section near the end of the article. You are free to evaluate those sources and cite them elsewhere. No Wikipedia article should contain an alleged "fact" that appears nowhere else. This violates our policy on verifiability and any such unreferenced claims should be removed from an article if no reliable source verifying the assertion can be found. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

New users requests help to create Summary box in new biography page

Hello

I'm new to Wiki as a contributor and am creating a page for a live author with her consent. I'm not an experienced coder and have created the page in my sandbox using visual view. Having nearly completed the draft including links, references and categories, I can't find any instructions about how to add a summary box which might include a picture - as per the one here on [[Matt_Haig#cite_note-booktrusthaig-5|]] . Can anyone point me to how to do this.

I'd be glad if anyone could give me a steer on this - by the way I didn't use a template, which maybe I should have done.

Thank you for your help.

Susie — Preceding unsigned comment added by WinnietheSuse (talk • contribs) 17:22, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@WinnietheSuse: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are no edits associated with your account(other than the above), so if you created a draft, you must have done it while logged out. Could you link to it?

Since you state you are working on someone's behalf, you need to review and comply with the conflict of interest policy. If you are being compensated in any way for doing so, you also need to comply with the paid editing policy. 331dot (talk) 17:30, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

You appear to be looking for an infobox Wikipedia:List of infoboxesWelpThatWorked (talk) 17:53, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Uploading newspaper page

I've uploaded this newspaper front page File:Wisconsin-State-Journal-1952-09-04-p1-top.jpg, but see a warning in the licensing section about adding a detailed fair use rationale, which I've made a stab at. Is there any way an admin could take a look and see if it's Ok.

Thanks,

MikeB17 (talk) 19:25, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Looks convincing to me WelpThatWorked (talk) 19:40, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Welp. Should I proceed as if all is good and insert into the target page, or would it be wiser to wait till those warnings go away? MikeB17 (talk) 19:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@MikeB17: Go ahead and put it in. The worst that can happen is that someone will take it out and explain what you need to fix. Have fun! WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 21:05, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I wish you success. But your claim that "It will be used once in one article" is not compatible with your using it here in the Teahouse. I've therefore removed the display of it above. Maproom (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help and advice, a new user here feeling his way. MikeB17 (talk) 23:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi MikeB17. Non-free content use is quite tricky and there are ten non-free content use criterion which need to be met for each use. Right now, the file you've uploaded fails criterion #7 because it's not being used in any articles; this means that it will be tagged for speedy deletion per WP:F5 if it's not added to at least one article. In addition, to clarify what Maproom posted above, another one of the non-free content use criteria is criterion #9. This says that non-free content can only be used in articles and this is the real reason why you can "use" (i.e. display) the file on a page like the Teahouse.

Often the hardest criteria to satisfy are criterion #1 and criterion #8 because Wikipedia's non-free content use policy has been set up to be purposely more retrictive and limiting than the concept of fair use/fair dealing as explained here. Wikipedia's mission is to provide free content for unlimited distribution, modification and application pretty much by anyone anywhere in the world; so, although some types of copyrighted content are allowed to be uploaded and used per wmf:Resolution:Licensing policy, non-free content use is generally considered to be limited to exceptional cases where a alternative "free" equivalent cannot be used to serve the same encyclopedic purpose.

Anyway, after looking at the file and the rationale you provided for it, it's hard to see how you can add it to the Wisconsin State Journal article in a manner that would satisfy criteria 1 and 8. There's no really sourced critical commentary anywhere in the article of that particular front page and it's not really needed in Wisconsin State Journal#Views on Senator Joe McCarthy despite the claim made in the rationale; so, the context for non-free use required by criterion 8 is not immediately evident. Moreover, the rest of the text content in that particular section and rest of the article seems perfectly understandable without seeing this particular image; so, it's not clear this how adding the file would satisfy criterion #1. Providing a non-free use rationale is just one (more specifically just one part of one) of the ten criteria, and the file can still be nominated or tagged for deletion/discussion if someone feels that all ten of the criteria are not being met. Since you haven't added the file to the article yet, how and where you intended to use it is still not clear; however, you should try and keep in mind some of the things I posted above, and it might even be a good idea for you to seek other feedback at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions or Wikipedia talk:Non-free content criteria from editors who might be a little more experienced in dealing with non-free content that your typical Teahouse host. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:46, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Copyright Confusion

So, I was attempting to add a new image to the Wikipedia database so I could add it to a Wiki page. I filled out the required criteria not entirely knowing what it all meant but brushing it off as non-important. Turns out it was important. One of the things that I "brushed past" was adding a copyright tag. Now I'm a bit stuck. I don't really know if the image is under fair use and don't know how to figure out if it is. Here is where I found the image and here is where it is in Wikipedia . Assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. BlakeKbelt (talk) 19:57, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I have tagged if for speedy deletion as a copyright violation it clearly states at the bottom of the page "Copyright © 2018 HallyuSG (Hallyu Enterprise Pte Ltd)" It's best not to upload any images unless you hold the copyright or you took them. Theroadislong (talk) 20:05, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

References

DRAFT: Courtaulds Red Scar Works Preston

I have worked hard on an article which I believe to be wiki worthy, and it is extensively referenced and inline cited. I am wondering how long it will be before it is reviewed and then published or rejected?. I know some articles are easier to review than others but …………..

please and thanks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Courtaulds_Red_Scar_Works_Preston — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRALISTAIR (talk • contribs) 20:17, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I have added a template to the top of the page, press the blue button on it to submit. Good luck! WelpThatWorked (talk) 20:30, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

It seems to me like a good article, I've made a slight change to format your link in see also properly though. Thanks, RhinosF1 (talk) 20:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I published a great article with reference that was removed

This is my first time publishing. One of your (wikipedias) bots removed all my work, even though it was cited correctly. WTH! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phwarren360 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

The only edits you made were reverted by a human. This was likely because your "source" was just a sales page for a book, not a citation from the book itself. WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Phwarren360. Use this for the first use of the reference : <ref name="Emery2017">{{cite book |author=Theo Emery |title=Hellfire Boys: The Birth of the U.S. Chemical Warfare Service and the Race for the World's Deadliest Weapons |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=w3KZDgAAQBAJ |date=2017 |publisher=Little, Brown |isbn=978-0-316-26411-2 }}</ref> and <ref name="Emery2017" /> for the rest of the times. If it is removed again, start a new section on the articles talk page with your reasons for adding the material. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:15, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

In the future, if an editor reverts your edit, the proper place to continue the discussion is at the Talk page of the article. Reverting the revert is called edit warring, and can get you temporarily blocked. David notMD (talk) 23:33, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

How do I fill in the "connected contributor (paid)" template on my user page?

Stumped before I got started ... :/ I am trying to disclose my COI on my user page, but when I type in {{connected contributor (paid)}} it just sits there. Feel free to chuckle. I know there are fields to fill in (employer, client), but how do I do that? I am using the Visual Editor, if that matters. . . .

Oh, great, I see in the preview that it gets been properly transcluded here, but it doesn't seem to do that on my user page. And I still have no idea how to fill in the template. With respect, GGSloth (talk) 22:31, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@GGSloth: I'm not sure how it works in the visual editor, but in the source (normal) editor, you can fill in the fields as follows (inserting your relevant information after every equals sign):

{{connected contributor (paid)| User1 = GGsloth | U1-employer = | U1-client = | U1-EH = | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = }}

There is more specific information available at Template:Connected contributor (paid)/doc regarding all the specific parameters and uses of this template. As for transclusion, I haven't seen any problems when previewing on my own user page, but then again, I use the source editor. I hope this helps! ComplexRational (talk) 22:49, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@ComplexRational: Looking at the /doc pages of the "paid" and "connected contributor (paid)" templates was quite helpful -- that, and trying the source editor, and realizing that parameter names might be case-sensitive. There are many ways to go astray, but I have made progress this evening, thanks to you. Cheers! GGSloth (talk) 01:42, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@GGSloth: {{connected contributor (paid)}} is actually placed on the talk page of articles affected by paid editing. I just added some TemplateData to that template so it's easier to use with the VisualEditor I hope. Remember to place that template on the talk page of any article you are paid to edit. As you found out by now, the {{paid}} template is meant for your userpage. I'll add some TemplateData for it as well. Regards SoWhy 13:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

There is an image I'd like to upload to Wikipedia but I don't really know what to do with the whole copyright thing. On a large magority of the images I have found in the Wikipedia Commons Under the licensing section of the page there is a thing called the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. Does this allow me to use any image I want? How would I know if the image will be subject to copyright? The image I want to use is found here. BlakeKbelt (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, BlakeKbelt. We take copyright very seriously on Wikipedia. You simply cannot upload any random image you find on the internet, unless you have rock solid evidence that the image is copyright free, or that copyright has expired, or that the image has been freely licensed by the copyright holders under an acceptable Creative Commons license or equivalent. That image looks like a professional promotional photo for a band, and it is about 99.999% sure that it is copyrighted. I see from your talk page that you already uploaded a copyright violation and have been warned. You must be very, very cautious. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:00, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes I tried to upload the image without realizing what I was doing, this is why I"m trying to make sure what I can and can't do. If I can't upload this image then why are other people able to upload images of bands and be fine? BlakeKbelt (talk) 00:03, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi BlakeKbelt. Images are uploaded to the Commons under a particular compatible copyright license (or as public domain material) because either i) the image bears that license (or as to PD, it falls into it because of release or a legal status such as aging into it), as evidenced from the owner of the copyright (or their legal representative), or ii) the person (or legal representative) uploading the image owns the copyright, and is willing to release it under a suitable license. From the tenor of your question, you don't appear to be the owner so you have no ability to speak for the owner. As to the existing copyright status of the image you link, we assume all images are fully non-free copyrighted unless we have affirmative evidence to the contrary. So, unless you have that evidence (and I see nothing on the image page to indicate its copyright status), that image cannot be properly uploaded to the Commons or used at all. By the way, in some situations we do use incompatiblly licensed, non-free copyrighted media under a claim of fair use, but that would not be suitable here (for some of the gory details, see WP:NFCI and WP:NFCC). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Regarding your second question above, I think what you may be referring to are [low-resolution] album covers. They are one of the exceptions to the normal treatment of copyrighted images, in that, unlike a great deal of other types of content, album covers may often be used under a claim of fair use.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

BlakeKbelt, you ask a good question, "why are other people able to upload images of bands and be fine?" In most cases, the person who uploaded the image is the actual photographer, who is also the copyright holder. My photos are in several biographies here. In a few cases, the band or its management may have hired a photographer who assigned copyright to them, and then an authorized representative of the band uploaded the image under an acceptable free license. If a musical performer is dead and no freely licensed image is available, then a low resolution image can be uploaded here at Wikipedia (not Commons) under the terms of our policy on non-free images, for use only in that biography. This exception does not include living people. The most straightforward solution is for you to take a photo of the band yourself, and upload it yourself to Wikimedia Commons. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:14, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Page Title

How can I change the name of my page title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.100.242.120 (talk) 00:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

If you're talking about changing your user name, visit Wikipedia:Changing username. If you want to change an article name, that's called a page move, and you can do it using the tab feature under the "more" button. But please register for a user name account, and sign your posts using the four tildes ~~~. That shows us who you are and allows us to communicate with you better. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:36, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Where to report

Where to report plagiarism? Also where to report and editor if the list of complaint includes multiple issues with the user? Harmanprtjhj (talk) 02:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Harmanprtjhj. Present your evidence at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and be sure to notify the other editor. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:22, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Image deleting

I have only one question. Why all the time my uploaded images are gone removed from wikipedia page? Freely licensed means? Images, which are being made by myself, is only belongs to me right? Then what is the matter for its license? — Preceding unsigned comment added by A2Zkkkkkk (talk • contribs) 03:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, A2Zkkkkkk. I see that you uploaded an image of a logo to Wikimedia Commons, claiming it as your "own work". Did you design this logo yourself, and do you realize that you are giving up almost all rights to the logo when you upload it to Wikimedia Commons? Did the network agree to give up these rights to their own logo? That seems strange. You can donate photos of people in public, or things like hills, mountains, lakes, rivers, plants, animals and so on. You cannot upload images to Wikimedia Commons of copyrighted things like publications, most logos, contemporary paintings, posters, albums or sculptures, unless you personally are the copyright holder and you freely license the work. Very limited use of such images is allowed here on Wikipedia (not Commons) under the terms of our policy on non-free images. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi A2Zkkkkkk. Commons and Wikipedia are like two siblings who have grown up together, moved out of their parents' house, and are now basically living their own separate lives. Since both projects are operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, there tends to be lots of overlap; however, each project has its own policies and guidelines that need to be satisfied and these are not always exactly the same. So, if you want to upload files to Commons, you need to make sure the files comply with c:Commons:Licensing and if you want to upload files to Wikipedia you need to make sure they comply with Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files because the files will be deleted if they don't. In general, you should assume that pretty much every photo, logo, video file, audio file, textual content, etc. you find online is protected by copyright unless it clearly says that it isn't. Downloading a file onto your computer from some website and then subsequently reuploading the file to Commons doesn't make you the copyright holder of the content if you are not the original creator of the content; so, you cannot and shouldn't claim such content as your own work. Things are often much more complicated than this, but the basic idea is that anything that you didn't create yourself is not going to be something you can upload to Commons under a free license without receiving the explicit consent of the original copyright holder. Certain copyrighted content can, however, be uploaded for use only on English Wikipedia if (as Cullen328 mentioned above) its usage complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy.

One last thing, it's OK to make mistakes when it comes to uploading images, even uploading images to Commons; if, however, you continuously uploaded files with probems to Commons, a Commons administrator may formally warn you to be more careful. If you still continue to upload files with problems even after being warned, a Commons adminstrator may decide to block your account. So, if you want to upload a file to Commons and you're not sure whether you can, ask for help at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright and someone look at the file and tell you whether it's OK to upload. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

If you create an image that is a close copy of a logo that is copyright, then you are still infringing copyright, and cannot claim it as your own work. Dbfirs 08:53, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi A2Zkkkkkk. File:Zee 24 Kakak logo.jpg which you uploaded to Commons looks the same as the logo at zeenews.india.com/gujarati/ which page is tagged "© 1998-2019 Zee Media Corporation Ltd (An Essel Group Company), All rights reserved." This creates the appearance that they own the copyright rather than you and that it is not licensed. If you designed it for them (rather than copying it) and without transferring the copyright to them, then see WP:DCM. —teb728 t c 11:13, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Style for military units/actions

A general review of military unit actions will show that there seem to be two types of style used. One is the regular grammatical style of using "the" before the unit name, "the 51st ……"; and there also seems to be a common use of not using "the" and instead just writing "51st …….". Which is acceptable and why?2605:E000:9149:8300:3D53:631B:A55F:D17F (talk) 08:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

As that is a topic-specific style issue you'd get the best assistance at the Military History WikiProject's Talk page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:18, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

I second Dodger67's advice. I've noticed the edits that you have made to several articles I've worked on, specifically several 300-series Red Army rifle divisions. The use of definite articles in these articles follows the Wikipedia style guide, as well as standard references such as Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. Wreck Smurfy (talk) 22:47, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Ellen Reid (American Composer)

I'm having a lot of trouble trying to get my entry for Ellen Reid, the American composer published. It is because there already exists an entry for Ellen Reid, the Canadian musician and composer. These two women are not the same person. The American Ellen Reid is a rising star in the opera world and definitely noteworthy/newsworthy. I was shocked she didn't already have a Wikipedia page. What do I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LA-KNOWS-THINGS-2 (talk • contribs) 08:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@LA-KNOWS-THINGS-2: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You use of the term "rising star" makes me wonder if this person meets the notability criteria for composers or those for musicians. Generally if someone is a "rising star" that means they aren't yet sufficiently notable. Wikipedia is for subjects that are already notable, not who are just starting out or even just in the process of becoming well known. However, regarding your issue, I would suggest you communicate with the reviewers of your draft and explain this to them, so they can perhaps re-review it with a different eye. They each have a link to their user talk page in their signatures they posted on your draft. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@331dot: Thank you so much for your response! She's definitely notable– her work has been performed in all three major opera venues in Los Angeles and in countless theaters in New York. She's been written about in major publications (such as The New Yorker, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The LA Times, etc). I have been in communication with the reviewers but keep getting rejected. There are so few female composers and here we have a gifted, notable female composer and she can't even get her own Wikipedia entry! Perhaps she's not notable to the reviewers but to me and thousands of other women, she is crucial. I read that very few women edit for Wikipedia, which is why I decided to try this. Now that I've tried it, I can't help but wonder if reviewer bias is hindering participation. Thanks for hearing me out.

@LA-KNOWS-THINGS-2: You are quite correct that gender bias is a problem on Wikipedia, and your work at addressing this is appreciated. As I suggest above, I would avoid using terms like "rising star" which suggests she is not yet notable. I would definitely gather those publications/reviews of her work and incorporate them into your draft(if not already) and, as I said, communicate with the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

LA-KNOWS-THINGS-2, I've accepted the draft, and apologize on the behalf of my fellow AfC reviewers for the rejections based on the fact that there was already an article when there was not. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:10, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@Galobtter: Thank you so so much, guys. Deeply appreciated.

Contested deletion

Since I am the publisher of Trans Asia News Service what is the criteria to retain the text I posted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abulfazal1966 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Abulfazal1966. In principle you could license the text as described at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. But that might be a waste of effort, your article was deleted not only for copyright violation but also for being unambiguously promotional. —teb728 t c 11:27, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

My edits are being reverted without substantive reasons, how do I prevent this?

My edits are being reverted without substantive reasons, how do I prevent this?

I have been making minor edits to the Virtue Signalling page to bring it in line with the pillar of neutrality. To do this I removed a clear editorial bias which conflates two notions without evidence, I make clear that the expression has only very limited usage in academia (two known mentions - same author), and I removed a gross and verifiable misrepresentation of a source. These changes were in line with an edit proposed in Talk by another user on 22 October and I provided extensive reasoning on the talk pages. As it stands the page is highly inaccurate, confused, and misleading. On google searching 'Virtue signalling' the wiki definition is the first returned result in many locations, and the false and misleading information is provided. As such I think making this page neutral is of high importance. I first enacted the minor switch to a more neutral wording and it was swiftly reverted by an editor who did not engage in discussion of the topic. I then replied at length to the editor detailing further why it was to be changed before reenacteing my edit. This was then reverted again by another editor who didn't give any topic-related reasons, merely stating that I'd removed sourced material and claiming that I was the one "repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions", which in fact, is what appears to be happening to me. I also provided a detailed reply to that editor.

I have no problems with people changing my edits whatsoever, I welcome it. What I don't feel comfortable with is people not engaging with the reasons given in talk and simply reverting the edit without consideration of the content of the page. There are clear and verifiably misleading uses of sources on this page, and that seems to me to be fundamentally against Wikipedia's rules and pillars. To do the edit again is now going to take a lot of time as someone else has popped in and made a very minor change which means I can't simply revert back to my latest edit.

Anyway, that's my frustration. I must say this page is great, and it was nice to receive the welcome message on my talk page from the Teahouse.

My edits are being reverted without substantive reasons, how do I prevent this? Pjconnolly123 (talk) 11:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

It is quite common for edits that remove referenced content to be reverted. You are doing the correct thing by discussing this on the talk page of the article, where you should try to obtain consensus. If you can find better references, then you will have a stronger case. I haven't read the article or the references, so I have no opinion on who is correct. Meanwhile, it is best to continue the discussion rather than continue with an edit war. Dbfirs 11:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I totally agree and would like to carry on the discussion on talk, but the editors who have undone the changes aren't engaging in talk discussion relating to the topic, which is the source of my frustration. Pjconnolly123 (talk) 12:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

A) Patience. The other editors may not get to Wikipedia on a daily basis. You just became an editor days ago, so assume that other people have an idea of how Wikipedia works, if not this specific topic. B) Too many words. What you wrote at the articles Talk page went on for paragraphs. Be concise. Other editors will reply - in time. The purpose of Talk is dialog, not polemic. David notMD (talk) 15:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Can you copy someone else's userpage on yours by doing this {{ }}. Thanks HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 14:47, 11 January 2019 (UTC).

Hello HSBC account number is 4598 Your question isn't very clear so it's hard to answer, you can find useful info about user pages here though Wikipedia:User pages. Please note that we are all volunteers here. Theroadislong (talk) 16:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

The answer is no, you can't. It may look like you are, but you aren't. Also, wut? Drmies (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

It seems the editor has apologized; Theroadislong, see their talk page; your good work here is appreciated. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:42, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks that's helped me HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 16:46, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

My Article was declined?

Hi i had a message from Sam Holt.. my article has been declined even though i done thorough research into my subject and kept it neutral.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bon-Bleu#Bon-Bleu

can i have any tips on what to change etc.. to get it publish or any pointers on where i am going wrong

many thanks

Liam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liam23029 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

A useful starting point would be to tie each reference to the text which it supports. See Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Article Appropriate Copyrights

Hi! I have doubts about the Creative Commons Licenses and Copyright Donation Processes. I uploaded an article to Wikipedia and it was deleted with a speedy deletion tag under the G12 Unambiguous Copyright Infringement category. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Illicit_Alcohol) Now, the original paper is on the Euromonitor website, as well in Tracit.org.

The question is: where the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) should be? Has it to be explicit in the paper (both websites or in the original site of publication) or in a specific place on the website, so that once the information is published in wikipedia, it is fulfilling all the copyright requirements?

There is it any other type of license this document could have or is the referred ones (CC Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 and the GFDL) the mandatory ones for it? Is there a license that allows the content to keep uploaded on Wikipedia, without the document being permitted to be modified and adapted by any other person, website and organization?

Once the author has done this licenses processes, where in Wikipedia exactly has to be the link that confirms this article has the appropriate copyright to be uploaded?

The paper is an information to be downloaded at the Euromonitor WebSite and in Tracit.org it is in the following link: https://www.tracit.org/uploads/1/0/2/2/102238034/illicit_alcohol__-_white_paper.pdf

Thank you very much for your help, very appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlcoholEducation (talk • contribs) 15:56, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Please don't ask questions twice. Answers are below. Dbfirs 16:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Notability

Hello, I'd have two questions linked to notability: 1) Would you consider that if a person has a Wikipedia page in a different language then he/she is notable enough to have his/her page, or a part of that page, translated into English? 2) Can references from this other (non-English) page be used on English Wikipedia? Thank you very much!PeSa (talk) 16:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

1) No. The subject needs to meet the specific notability requirements here at enwiki. Other language Wikipedias have different criteria, and (as here) some articles may exist which don't actually meetthe requirements.

2) Yes, though English sources are preferred. See advice at WP:NOENG.

--David Biddulph (talk) 16:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• Hey PeSa. In order to be considered notable, a subject needs to have sustained in-depth coverage in reliable published sources, usually things like magazines, newspaper and books. Having a page on another language Wikipedia doesn't necessarily guarantee that a subject meets this standard, but it may provide a good indication whether they do or not. If you look through the citations that are used on the non-English page, and they appear to be high quality published sources, then that is probably a good indication that the subject is be notable. If there are few or no sources, or the sources used are very low quality, like official websites, social media, or blogs, then this may indicate the the subject is not likely to be notable.

You can't cite the non-English Wikipedia page directly, but what you can do is cite the sources that they cite, if those sources are high quality. Sources on the English Wikipedia don't necessarily have to be in English, if no comparable quality English source is available. GMG^talk 16:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

David Biddulph GreenMeansGo Everything's very clear, thank you both! PeSa (talk) 16:17, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Article Appropriate Copyrights

Hi! I have doubts about the Creative Commons Licenses and Copyright Donation Processes. I uploaded an article to Wikipedia and it was deleted with a speedy deletion tag under the G12 Unambiguous Copyright Infringement category. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Illicit_Alcohol) Now, the original paper is on the Euromonitor website, as well in Tracit.org.

The question is: where the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) should be? Has it to be explicit in the paper (both websites or in the original site of publication) or in a specific place on the website, so that once the information is published in wikipedia, it is fulfilling all the copyright requirements?

There is it any other type of license this document could have or is the referred ones (CC Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 and the GFDL) the mandatory ones for it? Is there a license that allows the content to keep uploaded on Wikipedia, without the document being permitted to be modified and adapted by any other person, website and organization?

Once the author has done this licenses processes, where in Wikipedia exactly has to be the link that confirms this article has the appropriate copyright to be uploaded?

The paper is an information to be downloaded at the Euromonitor WebSite and in Tracit.org it is in the following link: https://www.tracit.org/uploads/1/0/2/2/102238034/illicit_alcohol__-_white_paper.pdf

Thank you very much for your help, very appreciated. AlcoholEducation (talk) 16:05, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

When I download your link, it clearly says Copyright 2018 and "not to be distributed without permission", so I don't see how it can be released under an appropriate licence. Also, Wikipedia does not publish papers; we have articles about topics that are WP:notable, but not original research. The paper may be used as a reference, of course, though secondary sources are preferred, but any article should be written in your own words. Dbfirs 16:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Page Title

How can I change the name of my page title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.100.242.120 (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• Answered, the first time you asked. Drmies (talk) 16:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Clarification of titles and post-noms

Hi, I'm not that new to Wikipedia, but very much still learning the myriad ways of Wiki. I had tried this in HELP, but received no answer, perhaps here?

Rather than fuel an editor's angst, or digress into an editing war, is there someone very experienced who could please tell me if:

1. something overrides MOS:POSTNOM, or if I am somehow misinterpreting it... ie: see Bill Gates post-nominals history, whom, as I read it, is entitled to post-nominals, though not to be styled as "Sir", not being British.

2. this sort of name restyling is advisable, which it does not appear to be to myself... ie: see Infobox top title, etc of Maurice Roche, 6th Baron Fermoy and his father, aka "The Lords..."

Both the post-nom deletions and the title re-stylings (either deleted, or given greater prominence) are on some editorial fast-track (rampant), it would appear. Thank you very much for advice.AHampton (talk) 17:03, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

My article was declined?

Hello!

My article Draft: Coordination Dynamics was declined by AngusWOOF, citing that the article was an abstract or summary of my own dissertation work. This is false. I'd like to improve my article, and would greatly appreciate some help on how to do so. I purposefully wrote the article in an encyclopedic manner, in wiki style. Please help! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmannino (talk • contribs) 17:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Another reason for declining Draft:Coordination Dynamics would be that it doesn't cite any sources (though it does list about 40). You need to read Help:Referencing for beginners. Maproom (talk) 18:10, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Mmannino, the article still reads like a research paper rather than an encyclopedia article. Needs a structure overhaul Intergroup relations. Also some references to common encyclopedias for the term. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:14, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Template for displaying categorys?

Is there a template that will link the categories of a page? Like {{thing|Example}} would produce Category:Example if that cat was on the page. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 18:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Just putting [[Category:Example]] at the bottom of the page should work. WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 18:07, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

No, a template that will produce the output of: the categories of the page that is put in the parameter. Like if you were like "hmm, this page needs the same categories from another page. i'll just use this template to put the categories on the page". It can actually place the categories on the page, or it can just place links to the categories. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 18:47, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

What does this mean? "All IpV6 Are Not Allowed To Edit"

I received the following message from another editor. I was unaware that there are editors that are able to send out under their own address mass messages especially as it has a misspelling and the editor failed to properly follow WP procedure when ending it?

All IpV6 Are Not Allowed To Edit[edit]
All IpV6 editing will be reverted so I suggest that all IpV6 editers to change all their ip address to IpV4 or create a new account for yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.158.230.168 (talk) 16:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
18:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:9149:8300:3D53:631B:A55F:D17F (talk)

It appears he is a selective vandal. You are good.WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 18:40, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

A search shows you are the only user to get that post. The poster has been blocked. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Moravian Orienteers

Can someone help me create this article because my account is not 4 days old. When I find out who will do it I will give them the information. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 18:54, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

You can make a draft and submit it through WP:AFC WelpThatWorked (talk • contribs) 18:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

I Have completed it, it is called Draft:Moravian Orienteers, can someone review it. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 19:27, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Will not be approved. References must be independent of what is being written about. You only ref is the organization's website. David notMD (talk) 19:38, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

I know it's got all the information and people can look through the website to find what they need HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 19:46, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

HSBC account number is 4598 If you have no independent sources, then the group does not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. In order to merit an article, the group must be extensively written about in independent reliable sources, sources that are not associated with the group in any way. You need to provide those sources in the article itself. Please understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a means to simply tell the world about something. If you just want to tell the world about this organization, you should use social media or establish your own website for it. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2019 (UTC).

It's already got a website, there is no independent sources those are the best I could find. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 20:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

HSBC account number is 4598, If there are no other sources, then it may not be notable. WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

If look at the draft HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

HSBC account number is 4598 I'm sorry, but it appears this club does not meet the notability guidelines written at WP:ORG. You need independent sources with in depth coverage, and they just are not there. As I said above, this is an encyclopedia and not just a place to tell people about things. 331dot (talk) 21:57, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

What a person, company or organization writes about themselves can never be accepted as reliable sources. Not website, not blog, not social media. Not. David notMD (talk) 22:21, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations on getting a jump on warm weather and seeking publicity for your organization in January. Social media is designed for just such a purpose. Please use it!--Quisqualis (talk) 03:54, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Don't talk to me like that, I have put it in an article, it's in Scotland a cold country and its not my organization I'm a member of it and I want to write about it. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 09:22, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Q was being a bit snarky, but the other replies are to the point: Moravian Orienteers as an organization has not been written about other than its own website and social media, so what you proposed as a draft article cannot be accepted. In fact, it has been deleted as promotional. David notMD (talk) 14:21, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

And HSBC account number is 4598 has been blocked for making a death threat. Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

DRAFT ARTICLE FOR PUBLISHING AND IMAGE RIGHTS OWNERSHIP

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Snoooze&oldid=877921034

Hello...I am not familiar with posting on this site. How does my article move from a draft to wiki? Please advise.

- Wes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wesleyraz (talk • contribs) 19:28, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I need to finalize and move Draft:Snoooze in the main space? I am unsure how to proceed.

- Wes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wesleyraz (talk • contribs) 19:30, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

It won't be moved to mainspace. The draft is about to be deleted as blatantly promotional, see WP:G11. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hell, no. There is no clinical evidence provided that the product does anything. All the Snooze website (ref #3) points to is some weak evidence for the individual ingredients, not in same amount as in this product, and in some instances combined with ingredients not in this product. All of the other references are about the importance of sleep - true, but entirely not relevant. David notMD (talk) 19:47, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

I am sorry, Wesleyraz, but Wikipedia does not allow promotional content. I have deleted your draft. Please comply with our mandatory paid editing disclosure and follow our guideline for editors with a conflict of interest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Translate articles into another language

How does one go about translating and publishing existing articles into another language version (ex., https://ceb.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Young_Gully)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayoungjr (talk • contribs) 20:48, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Jayoungjr. Please see WP:Translate us. --ColinFine (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Dr Bob Arnot

There is a page for Dr Bob Arnot - he is a medical writer/broadcaster etc.

My name is also Dr Bob Arnot - I too am a published author (cited on a number of occasions on Wikipedia); I work and run development programs in Nigeria and have had an academic career in the UK. I would like to add a note to the established page differentiating myself from his page. Is this possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.184.245.112 (talk) 20:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Try Template:Distinguish, I.E. {{Distinguish|text = custom [[text]], and [[foo]], a common example term}} →

Not to be confused with custom text, and foo, a common example term.

WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 21:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Template:Distinguish is for similar but not identical names. Other templates like Template:For can be used for identical names. All such templates should only be used if there is a Wikipedia article with relevant information to link, not merely one where the subject is named as author of a reference. Are any of the search results on "Bob Arnot" about you and not just in a reference? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:46, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Culbin Forest

Can someone please review the Draft:Culbin Forest article HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 21:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, HSBC account number is 4598. I don't think you've quite got the hang of Wikipedia yet. Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what you know, or what I know, or what any random person on the Internet knows. It is only interested in what reliable published sources say. So, while I'm happy to accept that the forest is where you say it is, and I don't doubt there are reliable sources that say so (though it would still be good to cite one), I would want to ask which reliable published sources has said that it ispopular for Orienteering; and more particularly which reliable published source has said the it is popular for orienteering because of its large size etc. If you can't find a source that says so, then the claim doesn't belong in the article. Also (in respect of the viewing tower) please see WP:NOTGUIDE and WP:TONE. --ColinFine (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I've got rid of the orienteering bit and put a reference. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 09:08, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Note: OP has been indefinitely blocked. — CoolSkittle (talk) 18:56, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Suggestions (Page)

I have been contributing to Wikipedia sporadically since 2017 and have been trying my best to adhere to Wikipedia's policy. In line with the same, i created a page around 3 weeks ago Draft:Optimum_International_School. Would really appreciate suggestions on reform it while it is pending review. AkkiDeutscher (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, AkkiDeutscher. The usual thing, I'm afraid: you need to find some independent sources. Those are not published by the school, it's true, but they are just listings in directories, and the information will have come from the school. What have people unconnected with the school chosen to write about it? That is the only kind of information which a Wikipedia article should be based on. --ColinFine (talk) 22:40, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Felipe Wamerson

Felipe2019, is created photos and pages in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felipe2019 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Felipe. Do you have a question or an issue you want help with? By the way, on project discussion pages like this one, and on talk pages (but never in articles) it's best practice sign your posts so that other editors can see who authored what and when. You can sign by adding four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of a post, or you can place them automatically by clicking on the signature button – – which is located above the edit window. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:21, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Cannot put a caption on article image

Writing sample from the Brockhaus and Efron Jewish Encyclopedia (1906–1913)

Article: Shneur Zalman of Liadi (See my attempted edit in Edit mode.) Why does it not appear?; there wasn't any visible caption previously, either. I copied the syntax of other image captions within the article. The caption I want is "Writing sample from the Brockhaus and Efron Jewish Encyclopedia (1906–1913)" I hope his ghost is not causing this problem...--Quisqualis (talk) 03:35, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Used a different image style WelpThatWorked (talk) (talk) 03:42, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks, WelpThatWorked.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:01, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

CD liner notes

Are CD liner notes considered a "reliable source"? If so, how do you cite this source (what information needs to be included between the reference marks)? Is there a template? An example would be helpful. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcnavin (talk • contribs) 06:34, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Article I would like to create

It is an article on me. I am a professional eduator with 3 advanced degrees in the field as well as four years service as an elected official in the U.S. Will this be OK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlflanders (talk • contribs) 06:59, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

You might like to read Wikipedia:Notability (academics) and WP:Autobiography before attempting an article. The number of degrees is not relevant, but if you have been written about in independent WP:Reliable sources then an article might be appropriate, though it would be better written by someone not connected with you. Dbfirs 07:33, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Carlflanders. In addition, please read our notability guideline for politicians. If you were elected to a national, state or provincial legislature, then you are almost certainly notable. Or if you were elected to a comparable high office. If you were elected to a small town city council or local school board, then probably not. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:06, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Change or delete username.

I was not aware of the self promotion guidelines when creating my username. Is it possible to change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HouseOfPannek (talk • contribs) 08:20, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello HouseOfPannek, I would recreate an account but using something that is unique to you, not any business's or personal attacks (like swears) and finally do not include the word Bot unless it is approved by the administrators. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 09:12, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

You can use WP:CHUS, but as you'd made only one other edit before this it may be easier just to abandon that account and start a new one. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:14, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

adrenocortical adenoma - my own, removed in 2015

My own Adrenocortical Adenoma removed from my body[edit source] "Incidental large adrenal mass. Non-functional. Surgical excision.

MICROSCOPY

specimen labelled left adrenal tumor consists of an unorientated round tumoral mass which has a yellow surface. The lesion has a focal surgical incision within the capsule.

The specimen measures 165 by 120 by 110 millimetres and weighs 1171 grams.

Cut surface reveals a solid yellow tumor with multiple foci of heamorrhage. Adjacent normal adrenal gland is present.

MICROSCOPY Sections of the excision a show a circumscribed and encapsulated tumour, arising from the adrenal gland. The tumor is composed of sheets of cells which show cytoplasm, varying from deeply eosinoplhilic to clear and vacuolated. The cells are arranged in sheets, with interspersed small blood vessels. No nested architectural pattern is noted.

The neoplastic cells show mild to moderate nuclear pleomorphism and enlargement (endocrine atypia). No mitotic activity is apparent in the submitted sample. There is no evidence of vascular Invasion. There is no evidence of necrosis, capsular Invasion or abnormal mitotic figures. The non-neoplastic adrenal gland is unremarkable. The tumor is clear of inked resection margins." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aprilschild (talk • contribs) 09:37, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

At Talk:Adrenocortical adenoma you are apparently asking for medical advice. Wikipedia does not give medical advice. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:45, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Rename article Tienhoven, South Holland

The town of Tienhoven, South Holland is now officially called "Tienhoven aan de Lek". It is no longer a part of the province South Holland since its former municipality Zederik (South Holland) merged into Vijfheerenlanden (Utrecht) in 2019. Can someone be so kind to rename this article to "Tienhoven aan de Lek"? Source: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rtvutrecht.nl%2Fnieuws%2F1827620%2Ftienhoven-heet-voortaan-tienhoven-aan-de-lek.html (original source in Dutch: https://www.rtvutrecht.nl/nieuws/1827620/tienhoven-heet-voortaan-tienhoven-aan-de-lek.html) --Jashaj (talk) 09:41, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jashaj: Hi and thanks for contributing! The page has been moved.Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 21:41, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Jashaj (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:30, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Why is my article taking long to review?

Hello, I noticed that pages I created took long to be reviewed unlike other previous pages I have created so far, which doesn't take much long and all of them meet wikipedia standard, I'm just curious to know why and improve more on it.Amosflash (talk) 10:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

@Amosflash: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Reviews are performed by volunteers, who do what they can when they can. There are over 1200 drafts waiting for review, so you will need to be patient. It is possible that prior drafts that were reviewed quicker simply because someone randomly picked them out of the queue, or saw them in the Recent Changes feed. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

I am new here and need help

Moved from WP:AN

I made a proposal here, but all the permutations and combinations have been rejected by another editor and so, I thought that someone experienced can only add it. Please add what is proposed there to the article in a way that is acceptable according to the rules. It was copied from the List of fatwas article, from the section titled, "Fatwas against terrorism, Al-Qaeda and ISIS". I also wrote about the Trump administration withdrawing aid citing its dissatisfaction with Pakistan's counter-terrorism, but it has been removed as can be seen here. Please modify and add that back to the article in a way that others will accept it, according to the rules. Thanks!-Karumari (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

I have cited references for everything!-Karumari (talk) 04:29, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

ARTICLES FOR CREATION

Hello, why are these drafts taking so long for it to be a proper article, i thought someone had already looked at it. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 12:53, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Those pages were only created yesterday. The new page review process takes days or weeks. Furthermore, you forgot to submit them for review. To understand how to do that, read WP:NEWPAGE and in particular, WP:AFC. Neither article is suitable yet as far as I can see, as you have not yet established WP:NOTE. But you'll get that sort of feedback once you submit it for review. --Yamla (talk) 13:01, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

And how do you submit it, I just created it, can you submit it for review. HSBC account number is 4598 (talk) 13:06, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

This is explained in WP:NEWPAGE and WP:AFC. You can submit it for review. I'm not going to, obviously, because I don't believe the article is ready yet. --Yamla (talk) 13:08, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Your first article draft has already been deleted as promotional and comments to you on the second one pointed out that if you submit it, it will be rejected, as the one ref you provided does not work. David notMD (talk) 14:14, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

HSBC account number is 4598 has been blocked David notMD (talk) 14:46, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

FWIW, I MFD'd the Culbin Forest draft, because Culbin Forest is a redirect to good coverage of the subject. -- a. ^{spam | contribs} 15:01, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Ice Circle of Vana-Vigala

I reviewed Draft:Ice Circle of Vana-Vigala and rejected it because it did not establish notability, with no references and no context without a link to Vana-Vigala. Perhaps I should have declined it rather than rejected it. User:Kruusamägi asked whether I think that the draft is worth pursuing with improvement. I would like the opinions of other experienced editors. I think that, since we have an article on ice circle, it has been agreed that an ice circle is an interesting natural phenomenon that is worth a stub when properly documented. Since we do not have an article on the river, only on the village, a stub mentioning the river is also in order. Comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:54, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

For comparison: that ca 100 km long river has an article in 11 wikis (d:Q773001). Ice circle has an article in Estonian, German and Võro wiki. Ivo (talk) 18:04, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

I created a sub-article for the river and moved the ice circle draft into the main namespace. Please review. Ivo (talk) 19:22, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for creating the stub on the river. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:02, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Šaip Kamberi and User:Špajdelj/sandbox

I reviewed User:Špajdelj/sandbox and declined it, as duplicating Draft:Šaip Kamberi, and as an autobiography and because it has no references. User: Špajdelj replied and said that they did not understand, and that every article on a person is more or less an autobiography. Can someone please explain the difference between a biography and an autobiography? Maybe it isn’t as obvious to some editors as it is to me. I may have been mistaken in thinking that the username of the author was a form of the name of the subject. The draft has no references. However, the subject appears to have ipso facto notability under political notability if a reliable source documents that they served in the Serbian parliament. Do other experienced editors have comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:55, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Hi and thanks for contributing!

• A biography is a written account of a person's life written by another person. An autobiography is a written account of a person's life written by the same person.
• I think the subject meets WP:NOTABILITY by virtue of the fact that he has held national parliamentary office and is a party leader and is a mayor. Now what's needed is some more reliable sources for that. Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

The explanation of the difference was intended for User:Špajdelj. I know the difference, and I agree with the assessment that the subject is notable. See political notability guide, which states that he is ipso facto notable as a member of a national parliament. (Being a party leader and a mayor are addressed by general notability, which requires substantial coverage.) Was the draft written either by the subject or by someone working for him? If so, there is a conflict of interest. If not, not. As the above post says, a reliable source is needed to state that he has been a member of the Serbian national parliament. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

“Member of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia | MP” [[1]]

The party has had its MPs in the Parliament of the Republic of Serbia for many years, too. Riza Halimi was an MP for several terms of office, Saip Kamberi for one, while Fatmir Hasani is the current MP. [[2]] hope, you can open the links.--Špajdelj (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

He is an important person representing the interests of the Albanian minority in southern Serbia. [[3]]--Špajdelj (talk) 22:17, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Unavailability of Zee Keralam & Star Suvarna page

Today I have searched Zee Keralam (an Indian Malayalam General Entertainment Television Channel from Zee Network) & Star Suvarna Channel (an Indian Kannada language General Entertainment Television Channel from Star Network) but these pages are not present here. As I am new here, don't know how to create any new page. But I was trying again and again, but failed all the time. So, I have a humble request, to create both the pages regarding these two TV channels. Any kind of information related to this, I can provide. Please create as soon as possible. Thank you!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by A2Zabcd (talk • contribs) 17:41, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

You will need to be autoconfirmed (with 4 days and 10 edits) in order to create an article, but right now you can go to WP:AFC to make a draft. Please also read Your first article for more info. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 18:22, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Actually Zee Keralam is a protected title, so only administrators can create it. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 18:25, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

How to start my story

I want to know how to start my life story. And when to put pictures in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oomchai (talk • contribs) 19:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, User:Oomchai. You have already written a little bit about yourself on your user page, which is for the purpose of describing your work as a Wikipedia editor. If you are talking about an encyclopedia article about yourself, that is strongly discouraged. Please read WP: AUTOBIOGRAPHY for more information. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:31, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

An author's bibliography

When one lists the books an author has written on his or her article, what is customary to include? Title (of course) Publication year? Publisher? ISBN? Would someone give an example of what is considered the standard format (if there is one)? Regarding citing: Is the ISBN alone enough if the book has an ISBN? What about books without ISBNs (whether self-published or pre-ISBN)? How to cite? Thanks. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:28, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, DiamondRemley39. Please read the appropriate section of the Manual of Style, which can be found at WP: BIBLIOGRAPHY. There is a section that describes how to handle ISBN numbers. Books without ISBNs should have other bibliographic information: Title, Author(s), Publisher, Date. You can also take a look at Template: Cite book Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:46, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:PEACOCK tag on new Olive Grove Records wiki page

Hi,

With reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olive_Grove_Records

I have been trying to start wiki pages for my local independent record labels. New page editor gave generally positive feedback on my effort but pointed out I had WP:PEACOCK language which needed removed.

I've made a small edit which hopefully removes this issue. Would someone be able to verify my edit and lift the WP:PEACOCK tag if appropriate. If there's still WP:PEACOCK i'm going to need some feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itm 20a (talk • contribs) 20:41, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Catalogue numbers do not belong in the table, and might as well get rid of release date, too. David notMD (talk) 02:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Finding users for collaborations

Is there a way to see the user who made an edit without scrolling through the "View history" page? I want to collaborate with some users, but can't find who wrote the edits. GTBlakeman (talk) 23:33, 12 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GTBlakeman (talk • contribs) 21:22, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, GTBlakeman, welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you can get genereral information and an idea of the main contributors via 'Page statistics', which is a link offered to you when you click on the 'View History' tab. For example, you made an edit to Masaccio, which is quite a large and long-established page. Here is a link to the Page statistics for that article. It tells you all you need to know about the page, including who are the main contributors, and when they made their first and latest edits there. Having identified them, you could discuss any issues either with them indivually on their own talk page, or, perhaps better, raise any issue on the article's talk page and 'ping' them so that they receive a notification alert. Come back and ask again if you need guidance on how you do that. Do please remember always to sign every talk page post you leave in future. Just type four consecutive keyboard tilde characters at the very end of you post (like this: ~~~~). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:39, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi GTBlakeman. You can also use the Wikipedia:WikiBlame facility to find who added a precise piece of text to an article by going to a page's history and clicking on the Find addition/removal link at the top off the page, next to "External tools:". Here's a direct link to the tool. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:47, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Reference Tooltips

Hi,

I am putting together some text in my sandbox, and I want to use the functionality of the contents of a footnote are shown, without having to click. I can't seem to get it to work though. I'm using Template:Efn..... It works if i look at an existing article which uses the same note, but not when I try to do it. Can anyone help? Thanks!--Jopal22 (talk) 21:27, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

For instance

--Jopal22 (talk) 21:28, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

References

Hi Jopal22. User:Jopal22/sandbox says: <ref name="List of Winners/Venues"/><ref name="Open - 2018"/>. This is code to reuse references defined by those name elsewhere on the same page, but the page never defines them so you get an error. The Open Championship does define them elsewhere with this: <ref name="List of Winners/Venues">{{Cite web |url=https://fansided.com/2018/07/17/the-open-complete-list-winners/ |title=The Open Championship 2018: Complete list of previous winners |last=Norris |first=Luke |website=Fansided |access-date=9 January 2019}}</ref> and <ref name="Open - 2018">{{cite web |url=https://scores.theopen.com/Heritage/PreviousOpens#!/2018/ |title=2018 |publisher=The Open |accessdate=6 January 2019}}</ref>. You can replace your code with that if you only want to use the references once on the page. See Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once for the system to use references more than once. You can write {{Reflist}} in the place you want references to be displayed. Does this answer your question? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:53, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi PrimeHunter, thanks for your answer, but that wasn't really what I was asking about ( those refs are from remnants from previous edits ). If you look at my sandbox at the table, and see "Scotland", I have copied a reference from a football page because I want to do the same thing here, i.e. if you float you cursor over the reference I want it to show you the content of the reference without needing to click on it. Like is demonstrated in the right top corner of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reference_Tooltips. --Jopal22 (talk) 23:06, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jopal22: I know two such features at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. "Reference Tooltips" only works in mainspace articles and not user pages like User:Jopal22/sandbox. "Navigation popups" works in all namespaces. Don't enable them at the same time. You cannot control whether others use them on a page. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:23, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Oh ok, so I'm doing it right, it's just Sandbox does not show what it will be like in main space. Thanks talk!--Jopal22 (talk) 23:32, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

reverting

I will obviously revert an edit if obvious vandalism/trolling. I will also do it if something is wrong. My dilemma is what to do if the editor is extremely senior >25,000 edits. I truly felt the material was relevant but decided no point being contentious. My question is simply " In the long run, is it best NOT to stand one's ground if it really risks being contentious? " § — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRALISTAIR (talk • contribs)

If you add or subtract content and another editor reverts your edits, the proper place to continue is to start a discussion at the article's Talk. You can ping the other editor to bring to their attention your comment. In this particular example, I agree with BilCat - the fact that Airforce 1 used an airport (once or more than once) is not a useful addition to the article. Please remember to sign your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 23:37, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Move protection

If an article is not semi protected, but move protected, such as these articles (History of art, Oceania, Sea, South America, Literature), is it OK to add a move protection lock for that page? Mstrojny (talk) 23:10, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Mstrojny. Move protection can only be applied by an administrator and is used when there have been repeated incidents of vandals moving the article or there is disruptive edit warring about the title of the article. It is not applied routinely, but all the pages you mentioned have been subject to page move vandalism. Since I see no plausible need to move any of these pages, I also see no need to mark them openly as protected. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:29, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello Mstrojny. There's a bit of a judgment call to make about how useful or distracting the icon will be. Most of those articles already have the {{pp-move-indef}} template, as you can see by the categories they're in and the source of the page. That was probably deliberate. To make the icon visible you use {{pp-move|small=yes}}. Like others I'm not usually a fan of the padlock where there's never going to be a reasonable expectation that the page can be moved. It just adds noise for readers. However if there's neither template nor category (like Literature), then feel free to add the template of your choice (after reading the above). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:40, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328 and zzuuzz for that information. Mstrojny (talk) 00:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

` and ' as diacritic mark

Hi, I was wondering if both marks are considered as a diacritic mark and both do the same job which one is preferred in Wikipedia? Thanks.--SharabSalam (talk) 00:49, 13 January 2019 (UTC) Oops forgot to ping SharabSalam

I can't think of any instance in which one would use`. It is virtually unused, and thus is lower class tilde. Just curious in what instance(s) would you have need to use the ` ?Oldperson (talk) 03:02, 13 January 2019 (UTC):: Oops forgot to ping @SharabSalam:

@Oldperson: well there are many examples primarily in Arabic Ayn letter but I did change all of the `a letters to 'a in this article I didn't know whether I did the right thing or not. thanks for your help. --SharabSalam (talk) 03:22, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@SharabSalam:As-Salaam-Alaikum. I thought that the ` was used primarily in Arabic. But your audience is English as native language, and using this diacritic ` will simply confuse them, or at least have them stop in their tracks, mentally. When in Rome do as the Romans and use this '. Also if you are using a word processor, especially MS Word and wish to create a citation, be aware that wikipedia program doesn't recognize the curly " that are generated by Word, so you will problems if you copy and paste.So create your references in your article or if using a software program don't forget to replace them with the straight apostrophes "Oldperson (talk) 03:56, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Oldperson: Walikum Assalam :) thanks for your help I wasn't sure about that I found some articles that contain `A if it's okay to replace them with 'A but now I think I can do that and that there is no problem. Thanks for your help I really appreciate that. --SharabSalam (talk) 04:05, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Subject

I want to create my own subject matter. How do I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troysmith33 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

You are off to a start, but not a good start. Your User page is for a few things about yourself and your intentions as an editor. You put the identical content in Draft, which is a right place (as would have been your Sandbox). What you have written looks like your own original thinking. Wikipedia is not a place for that. As an encyclopedia, it is for articles about topics that have been written about in multiple published places = references. For example Hypnosis 187 references. David notMD (talk) 01:19, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Larger Font Wanted

I have my browser set to font size 14 as the minimum. I also have the "allow pages to use their fonts instead of yours" box unchecked. Your pages should be LARGE ENOUGH TO READ. Currently, all I see is about bible size font, maybe size 6.

What else can I do to fix it for myself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C5D:7004:100:94E4:492B:338:E147 (talk) 03:27, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

You may zoom in? ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 04:01, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

(e/c) It depends I believe on both your device and browser but on most macs, for example, in both Firefox and Safari, click ⌘ Cmd++ to increase size ⌘ Cmd+- to decrease (and ⌘ Cmd+0 to go back to the default size); on most PCs I think with Firefox and Internet Explorer, Ctrl++ will work, etc., or hold down ctrl and scroll up with your mouse wheel. You can also go to the browser menu → view → zoom → zoom in or zoom out (Firefox on a mac at the least) and something similar I think is available with PCs (which I don't use). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:04, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

You Learn sample of Mr Loverman

Hello I would like to add to the Wikipedia article for the song You Learn by Alanis Morissette. What I want to note in th earticle is that the beat heard throughout the song is a sample from the song Mr. Loverman by Shabba Ranks. How would I go about doing this given that the sources I have are the songs themselves? I'm trying to also find more sources but how do I go about doing this since the sampled beat is notable. I cannot link them due to my screen-reader not picking up on the captchas BTW. thanks. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. You must provide a reference to a reliable source such as an article by a notable music critic that makes the connection that you describe. Your own interpretation is original research and that type of interpretation is not allowed on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

I hate it when people say Reliable source, as reliable is relative. Please define what a reliable source is in a TLDR version. also I can't link things as I said. The sample is notable in the way that it is th eentier beat of the song. A similar case can be found in Ariana Grande's Breathin which uses a beat that is lifted from Drake's Hold On, We're Going Home according to the article entitled "Ariana Grande's 'Sweetener' Is a Leap Forward for the Pop Star ..." from observer.com. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 04:48, 13 January 2019 (UTC) I also point to this song which has been compared to a notable Deadmau5 remix in terms of the sampled beat. As for the case for you learn, whosampled.com has an entry on this song meaning its beat is not original. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 04:53, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

If you want to contribute to Wikipedia, you must learn to love reliable sources because they are the building blocks of this encyclopedia and you cannot be successful editing Wikipedia until you understand that. In brief, reliable sources are published and have professional editorial control, a reputation for accuracy and a record of correcting their errors openly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:56, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

But what about the examples I mentioned above of The Time (Dirty Bit) and Breathin both of which have sources. also whosampled.com states that the beat to You Learn is a sampled beat. Grande's beat for Breathin as stated by observer.com in the article I mention above is from a Drake song called Hold On, We're Going Home. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 05:11, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Also thanks for defining the term Reliable source for me. I do appreciate it. The reason why I don't like the term is not because I don't like reliable sources per say, rathe rthe term is relative. Some see BBC as reliable, some do not. IN my case, some find whosampled.com and observer.com reliable such as myself, others do not. All of those sources check and verify all their stuff, hence why I say they are all reliable. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 05:14, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, let me make things clear for you, then. The BBC is a reliable source for most things, most of the time. Context matters. On the other hand, sites like whosampled.com are absolutely, positively not reliable sources by Wikipedia standards, because they are based on user-submitted, crowdsourced content. They claim 20,000 users. You can consider it reliable for your own purposes, and I have no doubt that it is useful to you. But not for an encyclopedia. Please take this to the Reliable sources noticeboard if you disagree. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

I bring up The Time (Dirty Bit) as an example due to it having a whole section on the vary same thing that Morissette and Grande did. what about the observer? Also what do you suggest I do in the future given that I cannot see a captcha when I go to post a source for things? My GF Nina's always out doing gigs and what not, so I can't just run pu to her and say, "read this visual code for me". JAWS (screen-reading software I use) does not read images. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 05:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC) Impeach the President is an example of an article that mentions a plethora of songs that sample it. Guess where all the data comes from? whosampled. I will for sure take it to the reliable sources noticeboard, thanks for the suggestion. Yes things are case by case. also You Learn does not sample Impeach the President it samples Mr. Loverman, which samples Impeach the President. if one listens to the beginning of mr. loverman and the beat from You Learn, they are the exact same beat complete with the tambourines in the exact same positions, the exact same BMP, etc. no different than what was done with The Time (Dirty Bit) vs. [[You and I (Medina song)|You And I (Deadmau5 remix) which Wikipedia has an entire section about in the article for The Time Dirty Bit. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 05:38, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

I guess what I'm saying is, why is it okay for you to let others do something in one place, but when I want to do the same thing, it's bad? 23.151.192.180 (talk) 12:54, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Cullen has already answered your question about reliable sources. As for captchas, create an account and login, make 10 edits over four days, and you will never get captchas again. —teb728 t c 13:15, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

The beat sampling section in The Time (Dirty Bit) is referenced to an article published in Digital Spy. David notMD (talk) 15:02, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Problems with an Article Title

Hello everyone. I am paid to edit on Wikipedia as well on its sister pages but it appears that the article I have been paid to publish has been deleted twice. The article name is Kushal Moharaz, If my job isn't done, I'll be jobless, please guide me for the article Kushal Moharaz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samcratt (talk • contribs) 10:53, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Samcratt: Thank you for disclosing your status as a paid editor. Note that since you have a strong conflict of interest it is strongly recommended that you do not create articles directly but instead use the Articles for Creation process, creating a draft to be evaluated by editors who are not connected to the person. Now, as for Kushal Moharaz, articles about that person have been deleted repeatedly, under different titles. Many different user accounts have been created against Wikipedia's policy about multiple accounts in order to promote him on Wikipedia, and have subsequently been blocked for disruptive editing. It is extremely unlikely that he is notable enough for a Wikipedia article at this time, and so the best thing he can do is to simply forget about Wikipedia. If and when he does become notable (here are the relevant requirements) somebody who is not hired by him will probably create an article. Sorry to have to be discouraging, but that's the situation at this time. --bonadea contributions talk 11:18, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It appears that many editors have tried to recreate this page which was deleted for its promotional content. The title is now "salted" to prevent any further waste of time. It is not wise to accept payment for creating an article unless you are sure that the subject satisfies Wikipedia's notability conditions. It's probably better to return the money than to waste your time on what might be an impossible task (though I haven't checked for notability). I note that you have declared your WP:paid status for a different article. Dbfirs 11:22, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Editing a declined article

Hello,

I can't seem to able to edit a declined article - there's an 'Edit Source' button rather than an 'Edit' button to edit the content. Is there another way to edit the article or is it through the 'Edit Source' button (if so, how?)?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faridakarimk (talk • contribs) 11:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Faridakarimk: There should be a button in the top right corner of the source editor that should allow you to switch to the VisualEditor. Alternatively, you can append ?veaction=edit to the URL of any page to open it in the VisualEditor. Regards SoWhy 15:18, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Faridakarimk: I dived in without asking, just to give you some prompts. Let me know if you are still unable to edit and save. cygnis insignis 16:01, 13 January 2019 (UTC) Actually, I am not willing to help a paid editor, not that you asked for that. Thank you for disclosing that, it is nothing personal, just my position as a volunteer. Best regards, cygnis insignis 16:07, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

digital dependencies and global mental health and social media addiction

Hi I'm a little bit concerned that these top importance articles are being nominated for deletion, having MEDRS compliant articles deleted without discussion, but digital addict and screen time which are not compliant with MEDRS anywhere near as much as mine are, are just let be. This is a top importance current issue, and no one ever answers a single question for the RfCs other than that they are reliable sources. Linguistic gymnastics is causing this issue to give false balance to the non existence of a medical correlation with ADHD, and that is not fair for women suffering from the condition. Why does no one comment? E.3 (talk) 13:52, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Disengenuous for you to describe these as "top importance articles" given that you created one and have extensively edited the other. And that you have nominated digital addict for deletion. In my opinion, editors interested in the topic are adequately addressing same via edits to the articles, Talk pages of the articles, and at the three AfDs. David notMD (talk) 15:59, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Also, earlier today you posted requests on more than 20 editors' Talk pages, asking for them to look at and help edit the two articles you have been working on. David notMD (talk) 16:17, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

User name issue

Hi Teahouse,

It's Kanika this side. I created my account with the user name "Waliakanika" and now I wish to write an article with a different name. So, is it possible to publish the article which has a different name from my own user account? And if not, what should I do?

Thank you, Kanika