Wikipedia:Teahouse

Dbfirs, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)

Question on a punctuation issue that prevents a wikpedia link from working in Gmail.

Links for these two pages...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr. and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Jr.

...are not working when used in a Gmail. The link is made with a Command C, copies well including the period at the end, but when a receiver clicks on the link, it doesn't work because the period at the end is not being included in the link.

Does anyone know how to make this work?

Hathalm (talk) 14:56, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Try adding a slash(/) at the end; like so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Jr./ The hash sign (#) might work too, instead of slash. If it's practical, you can link to the first section of the page instead like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr.#Early_and_family_life/ If that doesn't work, try posting the question atWP:RD/C. That's where technical questions are answered. In here at the Teahouse, editors share their experiences in editing Wikipedia. There is no guarantee someone who's adept at technical things will pass by. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 15:17, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hathalm, welcome to the Teahouse. You can also percent-encode the period as %2E. I guess https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr%2E works in Gmail. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:18, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

I have made an edit [1] to Template:No article text which looks for a page name with an added period. It means that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr now displays "Did you mean: Joseph F. Ware Sr.?" PrimeHunter (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you all. :) You solved it. :) 184.88.249.16 (talk) 15:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

My edits - Are they trolling?

I was reading User:Jimbo Wales and saw a word in a sentence that added nothing it. I removed it with an edit summary of better. User:Serial Number 54129 reverted the edit with no explanation as to what was wrong with the edit. I restored my edit and used a better edit summary, "unexplained revert, no need for either of these words, they add nothing to the sentence" Serial Number 54129 again reverted the edit without explaining why. I went to User talk:Serial Number 54129#User:Jimbo Wales and asked for an explanation why they reverted the edits. The response was that user pages shouldn't be refactored. I discussed that doesn't apply to that page as Jimbo has specifically said that he wants people to edit his page. Their response is that you can edit but the edit might not stand. I responded that I accept that but not that no valid reason is given to revert the edit. The response is a huge picture of books. With that being their only response I removed the word again. This time the revert had a reason, "rm trolling". As this was their 3rd revert in 3 hours, I left an edit warring template on their talk page and explained I was not trolling but making an edit I thought was an improvement and no one had countered. Those two edits were reverted by User:Bonadea with an edit summary of "Well, this is certainly trolling". I left a message for Bonadea asking how that is trolling (they have yet to edit since they reverted the edits). Then over an hour after Serial Number 54129 made their last revert, they left a warning on my talk page calling my edits; "test edits". I would like someone else's opinion. Are my edits trolling? And if you feel they are trolling, please explain how they are trolling. 155.178.180.12 (talk) 17:10, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

If you make one edit, and it's reverted, that's not trolling. If you make it three times, and it's reverted each time, then you aren't listening. As Administrator Iridescent advised you, in the case of this particular paragraph the wording was carefully chosen by him to address particular issues (that sources differ regarding his name and date of birth, which causes obvious issues when it comes to being the figurehead of a project based on only reflecting sources), and probably shouldn't be changed without good reason ([2]). Not me, not Larry Sanger, and not you. Incidentally, Bonadea was referring exclusively to your edits on my talk, which by then was patent trolling. ——SerialNumber54129 17:27, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Like I said, I want someone else's opinion. 155.178.180.12 (talk) 17:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

When you make stylistic changes to the prose on a user page, you have not improved it. By insisting on repeating that change, you become a pest. Please do not persist.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, what would you have done if I had logged into my account and made the same edit. ~ GB fan 18:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Filed against you at WP:ANI, GB fan, probably. After all, logging out and making disruptive edits is not exactly approved of. I'm far more lenient with transients. How goes the retirement? ——SerialNumber54129 18:14, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, What I am asking is if I had made the exact same edit from my logged in account as I made from the IP, what would you have done. Would you have reverted the edit with no edit summary? I have not made any disruptive edits, I am not avoiding scrutiny. I made an edit that improved the sentence and you disruptively reverted without explaining why. ~ GB fan 18:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

You keep telling yourself that. You really think you know better than Iridescent? One does not "disruptively" revert an unnecessary edit to another user's talk page. ——SerialNumber54129 18:26, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I didn't say that the revert was disruptive. I am saying reverting without an adequate explanation why you are reverting is disruptive. ~ GB fan 18:31, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Would you have reverted the exact same edit made by this account without explaining why you were making the revert? ~ GB fan 18:33, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

So, to clarify, you thought it would be a good idea to log out and then edit the most high-profile user page on the project? Incredible. ——SerialNumber54129 18:36, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I logged out over a month ago except for a single edit. I was reading and noticed the extra word and removed it. I did not log out to edit the page. You still haven't said if you would have reverted without explanation if my account had made the edit. To me that indicates you wouldn't. ~ GB fan 18:39, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello IP user, as per our article on the subject, Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an ad hominem attack, suggesting a negative motivation... If you would like to further explore the topic, you can raise the question at the reference desk. The Teahouse can only tell you what you can do with the issue you have encountered. When someone reverts you for the first time without a summary, you are within your rights to revert it back and ask for an explanation in the summary. But, if it's reverted again, you have found yourself in a content dispute and are advised to follow dispute resolution procedures, even if the other user doesn't give a reason for the revert. At the very least, this gives you a highground if you end up having to seek third party intervention. You should not violate the WP:3RR rules, and can report the other user to WP:AN3 if they do. Keep in mind though that, in a highly vandalised page like User:Jimbo Wales, experienced editors of good repute might have a valid case for violating 3RR, as vandalism is an exception to that rule. The WP:TALK could be invoked and work in their favor as well, despite the fact that the user specifically asked you to edit (Note that the user has also said that vandalisms will be reverted promptly by watchful others.). Now, with regard to the content dispute, per WP:BRD, you should take the matter to the talk page of the relevant page, which is user talk:Jimbo Wales. Taking it to the editor's talk page had better be done only if the editor doesn't respond to a call for discussion on the relevant talk page. Note that a user talk page could be watched by many of their friends, and you might find yourself a minority pretty quickly. Alternatively, they might have pissed off a lot of disruptive editors in the past, and the opposite might happen. As such, that is not a neutral ground for seeking consensus over a dispute. When and if you can't resolve the dispute between yourselves, you can ask for a third opinion, and if that doesn't work, you can start a formal Request for comment. Refer back to WP:DR for full details and procedures. If the other editor is uncivil or displays disruptive behaviour during your attempt at dispute resolution and consensus building, you can seek administrator support at WP:ANI. I would add that WP:POINT and WP:IAR also exist and should be kept in mind when you enter a formal process in Wikipedia. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 19:03, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

User:GB fan, if you are indeed the one who was asking the question as an IP, I would remind you that the Teahouse is a place for novice editors to seek guidance, and definitely not one to make a wikipolitical WP:POINT. I advise you to seek resolution through the channels I advised of above, which you might already know of as well. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 19:03, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Whilst the Teahouse has been specifically designed to make it easy for new users to ask questions, it is not solely a place for novice editors to ask questions. In fact, anyone can ask a question. Also, this (to me) seems WP:NOTPOINTy (making a point is different that disrupting to show a point). --MrClog (talk) 22:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree you have a point, but I also stand by my original remarks, LOL! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 22:31, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I would just like to weigh in here for a moment and make some commentary on the actual stylistic consequence of the removal of the word that is at the heart of this matter. The editor changed the sentence People sometimes assume that "Jimmy" is just a nickname for "James" to People sometimes assume that "Jimmy" is a nickname for "James", and I would register my disagreement with the suggestion that the word "just" there is a word that, to paraphrase the poster, adds nothing. I would actually suggest that it in fact adds nuance. Compare for example the circumstance where you say that somebody "is a lyricist"; if you were to append that sentence to say that the same somebody "is just a lyricist" you have immediately signaled your view that a lyricist is a lesser thing than some other quality of thing. In exactly that way this sentence signals that a nickname is actually understood to be considered to be inferior in some sense or to some degree to the name that it is derived from, and that this person in fact does not consider their name to bear such a badge of inferiority to the name from which people might incorrectly assume that it was derived. StewBrewer (talk) 16:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@StewBrewer: If "somebody 'is just a lyricist'" that would mean that he only write the words as against a lyricist/composer or singer/songwriter, I don't see it as demeaning lyricists. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:53, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

This may indeed be true, but even if it is not taken as demeaning, it is still setting it apart from the other thing. I would continue to maintain that the sentence has a different meaning with it from without it. StewBrewer (talk) 17:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Kundan Srivastava Human Rights activist

Hi Team,

I came to know that some people tried to submit an article about Kundan Srivastava and the article was rejected 3-4 times a few years before because of lack of resources.

Now he has handsome of sources. Can we have a Wikipedia profile of Kundan Srivastava? Can you verify his reliable sources are mentioned below. I’ll be highly grateful to you.

If you will allow then will submit the article about Kundan. He’s a noted Indian human rights activist. Below is the google knowledge panel source.

Google: https://g.co/kgs/xPUYac

Bio:

https://www.celebrityborn.com/biography/kundan-srivastava/15801

https://popularwikibio.com/kundan-srivastava-bio-wiki-human-rights-activist-more/

Interviews:

https://writingtipsoasis.com/an-interview-with-kundan-srivastava-activist-and-author/

https://www.bepositive.online/kundan-srivastav-human-rights-activist/

Mentions:

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/South-Asia-shares-blame-for-Gulf-migrant-abuses

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/gesellschaft/panorama/moderne-sklaverei-in-indien-verschwinden-jedes-jahr-rund-100-000-kinder/13690830.html

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/gesellschaft/panorama/moderne-sklaverei-in-indien-verschwinden-jedes-jahr-rund-100-000-kinder/13690830.html

Awards:

https://www.internationalnewsandviews.com/a-human-rights-activist-wins-veer-putra-samman-award/

Works:

http://www.ptinews.com/news/8174159_Man-held-for-beating-septuagenarian-mother.html http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/man-held-for-beating-septuagenarian-mother/1/831889.html

https://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2017/03/02/indian-american-girl-racially-abused-in-new-york-train423030/

https://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-indian-origin-physiotherapist-harassed-on-new-york-subway-2339919

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/sushma-takes-up-indian-worker-s-ill-treatment-with-saudi-authorities-after-video-plea/story-EkN4Kpi8Z33gVlOqZnSwrL.html Sushma Swaraj

https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/indian-migrant-jail-saudi-arabia-working-conditions-314379-2016-03-22

https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/cheated-exploited-and-trapped-untold-stories-indian-migrant-workers-saudi-arabia-43048

http://indianexpress.com/article/trending/this-is-serious/watch-70-yr-old-delhi-woman-brutally-beaten-by-son-helped-by-neighbours-video-goes-viral-4417492/

http://metro.co.uk/2016/12/10/horrific-images-show-70-year-old-woman-brutally-beaten-by-her-own-son-6314076/

https://www.mid-day.com/articles/viral-video-pune-back-bank-of-maharashtra-fastest-cashier-social-media-social-activist-kundan-srivastava-news/17726180

https://www.deccanchronicle.com/lifestyle/viral-and-trending/311016/the-reality-behind-a-viral-video-mocking-a-bank-cashier-is-inspiring.html

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/The-good-people-of-internet-take-down-the-video-mocking-Pune-bank-cashier/articleshow/55185926.cms

https://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Scary-video-Indian-woman-beats-chokes-mother-in-6758996.php

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Shocking-video-of-woman-assaulting-mother-in-law-emerges-online/articleshow/50537993.cms

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/Woman-arrested-after-video-of-assault-on-mum-in-law-goes-viral/articleshow/50552827.cms

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/up-police-arrest-woman-for-torturing-beating-up-mother-in-law/story-fuesuogpgxe16eYzRnaoyH.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.in/2016/01/12/woman-assault-mother-in-l_n_8959668.html

http://www.asianage.com/india/woman-held-beating-law-420

Social Media Profiles:

https://www.facebook.com/thekundansrivastava/

https://www.facebook.com/engineerkundansrivastava/

Surbhi20 (talk) 18:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Surbhi20, this appears to be reference bombing. Many of the sources you cite do not mention Srivastava at all, and those which do (at least on a spot check) seem only to be a name drop or brief mention. No number of mentions or name drops results in notability. The requirement is that multiple independent and reliable sources (which your top two are not) cover the subject in depth, not just mention them. That still does not seem to be the case here. If you have some sources you believe satisfy that requirement, please note two or three of those and those particular ones can be evaluated, but a bunch of passing mentions won't do the trick. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Seraphimblade,

Thankyou for your reply. Sir, all the sources I cite do mention Srivastava’s works.

I understood your words for the independent and multiple sources that you mentioned.

Out of these 6 sources mentioned below ..how many you consider as reliable sources for Wikipedia?

Google: https://g.co/kgs/xPUYac

Bio:

https://www.celebrityborn.com/biography/kundan-srivastava/15801

https://popularwikibio.com/kundan-srivastava-bio-wiki-human-rights-activist-more/

Interviews:

https://writingtipsoasis.com/an-interview-with-kundan-srivastava-activist-and-author/

https://www.bepositive.online/kundan-srivastav-human-rights-activist/

Awards:

https://www.internationalnewsandviews.com/a-human-rights-activist-wins-veer-putra-samman-award/

Surbhi20 (talk) 02:31, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Surbhi20, hi - I'm afraid that from a quick check, none of those sources look suitable to me. I've never heard of 'Celebrityborn', 'writingtipsoasis' or 'bepositive' before, but none of them look like reliable sources with reputations for fact checking to me. The name of 'popularwikibio' implies that it is UGC, so also not reliable. INVC might be a bit better, but to be honest that looks like a rehashed press release, and winning a non-notable award (we don't have an article on it, so I assume it is not notable) doesn't make the subject notable. Is there any significant coverage of him in national news media? That would be a good start. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Seraphimblade,

Thankyou so much for making me understand. Will search his significant coverage of national news media and will get back to you soon.

Surbhi20 (talk) 19:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Seraphimblade,

Hi, I hope these sources will works ..Significant coverage of national news media

https://www.freepressjournal.in/lifestyle/kundan-srivastava-the-man-who-fights-for-human-rights

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Press_Journal

https://www.deccanchronicle.com/entertainment/bollywood/190719/ill-always-be-there-for-people-who-have-been-ill-treated-kundan-sriv.html

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deccan_Chronicle

BBC Interview of activist Kundan Srivastava:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03mcy46 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35846269

Awards:

http://www.internationalnewsandviews.com/a-human-rights-activist-wins-veer-putra-samman-award/

Biography:

https://popularwikibio.com/kundan-srivastava-bio-wiki-human-rights-activist-more/

Surbhi20 (talk) 14:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

For your main question ‘Can we have a Wikipedia profile of Kundan Srivastava? ’ the answer is: NO.
Wikipedia is not social media (see WP:NOTSOCIALMEDIA) – we don't have 'profiles' of anyone. We have articles about notable subjects, with specific criteria of notability (see WP:NOTABILITY). --CiaPan (talk) 06:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Highway Reststops

As we've driven across the U.S. multiple times it has occurred to us that there is no easy way to identify public rest stops along the major interstate highways. We use the wiki mobile app along our routes the navigator of our car reads out points of interest along the highway. I'd like to see if there is any interest in creating a series of pages along major Highways that have a standard template of features and links.

Users of the mobile app would be able to see these major points of public interest.

It would be nice if someone could click between these public rest stops along the major Interstate routes. Here is an example of a website that could be used as a source.

Interstate 20 Highway rest stops

Any interest?

Razinni — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razinni (talk • contribs) 03:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I am not even sure that you are talking about Wikipedia but since no one's replied, I would like to say that The Teahouse is not equipped to handle the discussion of a proposal such as yours. If Wikipedia can do anything about what you want done, I think the best place to start would be at WP:Village pump, although I suspect they might direct you to the phabricator instead. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 13:18, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I think WP:NOTGUIDEBOOK might apply here. John from Idegon (talk) 06:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Honeybee subspecies - A. m. carnica or A. m. carpatica?

Moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science § Honeybee subspecies - A. m. carnica or A. m. carpatica?

Open Proxy

Where can i report Open Proxy(s)? -- CptViraj (📧) 13:27, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello CptViraj,How exactly did it harm the project?Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 15:18, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@CptViraj: open proxies can be reported at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Add a photo on someone profile

How can i add a photo on someone profile? like someone profile pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MONZUR MORSHED (talk • contribs) 16:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

MONZUR MORSHED, Hi! For a Userpage, or for an article? I would recommend using the upload Wizard at Wikimedia Commons

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegooduser (talk • contribs) 16:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

MONZUR MORSHED, just be aware that such a photo generally needs to be freely licensed. Either you as the photographer are willing to grant such a license, or the original copyright owner has explicitly released the photo under a sufficiently free license. You'll find more details at Commons:Commons:Licensing or can ask at Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright if you are unsure about the licensing for a particular image. "Fair use" photos of living persons taken from the Internet are not permitted. Hope this helps a bit to avoid some of the common pitfalls, but please feel free to ask here again if you have further questions. GermanJoe (talk) 09:07, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

page deletion

Hi,

Hope you're well.

I have edited the AdviceUK page on Wikipedia, however it has been deleted for copyright reasons. The text has been used from our website and it is our context, it is not copywriting. Can you please explain why this has been taken down?

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Kind Regards,

Aashish Parmar — Preceding unsigned comment added by AParmar2019 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aashish. Even if you own the content, you cannot use it on Wikipedia as it would still be copyright (you would hold the copyright) and Wikipedia requires all content to be copyright-free. You would need to donate the material under an appropriate license, and you can find more information about that here: Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.

Also, I can't see the deleted page so I'm not sure what the background is or what you mean by 'your website', but it's worth noting that if you work for an organisation that is related to the page you are editing, then you should be aware of our policies on conflict of interest and paid editing. I hope this helps Hugsyrup (talk) 16:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Also, AParmsr2019, even if you donate the material, it is most unlikely that the content of the organisation's website will be suitable for a Wikipedia article about the organisation. A Wikipedia article should be almost entirely based on material which people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject. What the subject of the article says or wants to say about themselves is almost irrelevant. Most of the factual content of the website will be inadmissible unless it is also published in independent sources; and the way that material is presented is not likely to be neutral. --ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I seem to be incapable of typing your user name right. Repinging again AParmar2019. --ColinFine (talk) 18:11, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Log in and Synchronization

Since a while my Tablet Fire HD (Fire OSD 6.3.0.1) stopped synching with my Android one smartphone. The moment I log In Wikipedia on my Fire tablet I get the message “logged in”. Unfortunately, Wikipedia keeps showing “LOG IN”. I guess I’m not properly logged in and thus synchronization does not work? This worked in the beginning. Both devices update OS automatically. It is impossible to know this problem started after a certain update. Thank you for helping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dqcrob (talk • contribs) 17:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Clear your browser cache to log out. If on a PC do the same and then flush your DNS. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 17:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Publishing About A Comoany.

I have a company registered in London. I want to put my company details on the wikipedia for better understanding about my company. But when i placed my article Wikipedia have deleted my article. How can i put my company information on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by UKTASK (talk • contribs) 17:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I have blocked the user, who seems to be only here to promote their company. That's not what Wikipedia is for. Bishonen | talk 18:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC).

Blocked on account of your User name (which can be remedied) and because Wikipedia is not media for explanation of companies. Rather, what is essential is content written about the company by people completely unrelated to the company. Without seeing what you wrote, guessing that the company has not reached that level of notability. David notMD (talk) 18:22, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Fair use quotation

Hi, I want to ask how much text can we quote? [Like X person said "...........".] How much text are we allowed to quote from what a person said?--SharabSalam (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi! See MOS:QUOTE. Use common sense. If more experienced editors say you are overdoing it, either take heed or if you disagree, ask a few more experienced editors. If more than three experienced editors say you are overdoing it but not a single one comes to your defence, you are probably overdoing it. Be BOLD with what you think is good for the encyclopedia and just wait for others to disagree with you, so you can discuss it with them and reach a consensus on what's best. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 18:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, I'd missed the copyright part the first time, WP:NFCCEG doesn't specify how much, just says it must be attributed with inline citations and put in quotations, and any deviations from the source must be clearly marked. As such, the answer is still the same as before though. Read WP:NFCCEG, especially the "Text" subsection and again use common sense. Copyvio is taken seriously, and could get an editor immediately banned. So, if it's too long, and you're unsure, better to propose it on the talk page or ask an experienced editor, in each such case. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 18:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@SharabSalam: Check WP:COPYQUOTE for guidance on quotations and fair use. RudolfRed (talk) 18:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool and RudolfRed: can you see if this is an appropriate use of quotations?--19:06, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that one has copyright. Even if it did, I suppose those quotes are short enough to be acceptable. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 20:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Don't forget the inline citations though. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 20:20, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Street success

Oh what a blessing, oh what a lesson that the street could bring don't wanna miss it just like child lean a.c.d 123 as I step to the street o Lord have mercy, street success Lord never make me ckik buket gat make money filled ma pocket (yeah) street might be hard but never too bad just wanna find away to succeed now, street is rugged money matter you get I get that's it better you been through I been through you know how it is money talking buisness — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zealmoses (talk • contribs) 18:56, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse is a place to ask questions about how to edit Wikipedia, and your User page is a place for you to provide information about yourself that will help people understand your qualifications and interests in being a Wikipedia editor. David notMD (talk) 19:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The letter "m" in edit summaries

I seem to have been noticing the letter "m" with nothing else at the top of page histories. I was going to ask what this meant, but have now discovered that it indicates a minor edit. Assuming I've correctly perceived that nothing else is there (I'll be checking on this), does this mean that I don't have to enter an edit summary if I mark my edit as minor? Or are editors who do this remiss and should enter an edit summary as well? Thanks. –Roy McCoy (talk) 19:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Roy McCoy: It is good practice to always include an edit summary, even for minor edits. See WP:ES for the guidance. RudolfRed (talk) 19:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Roy McCoy. Please read Help:Minor edit for information about when and when not to mark an edit as minor. I agree with RudolphRed that best practice is to provide an edit summary for every edit. These can be very brief, like "typo" or "rvv", which means "revert vandalism". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks RudolfRed and Cullen. I'll note with interest possible future pages with "m" only, but in any event will avoid posting edits without summaries myself. –Roy McCoy (talk) 20:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Uploading Business Logo

Hello. From what I am reading, it seems like if a logo for a business is uploaded with the permission of the owner, there are no restrictions on re-use. Doesn't this mean that anything (for example the Nike Logo or a a famous picture of a celebrity) that is on Wikipedia can just be used by anyone, anywhere, legally? I find this hard to believe.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertgomez87 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Robertgomez87: Some items on Wikipedia are used under WP:FAIRUSE, and are not licensed for reuse. RudolfRed (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Robertgomez87, On occasion, the copyright holder of a logo will freely license the logo so that I can be reused although almost always with the attribution restriction. However, this is extremely rare for large well-known companies and almost always involves small relatively new companies. In some cases they may know what they're doing but in many cases my guess is they don't. The vast majority are fair use, and should not be copied or used elsewhere. S Philbrick(Talk) 01:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation item without article link

On a disambiguation page, it is possible to add an item that does not have its own article, within WP policy? I recently had an edit reverted because there was no article to link to, correctly I think; I then made an addition to a main article first, which was OK. Now, I would like to similarly add a usage to a dab page where again there is no main article. Specifically, I would like to add culinary usage to Gigot, see Talk:Gigot. How strict is the WP policy on requiring a main article to link to on a dab page? Would a reference in the body of an existing article do? Or add a description with no WP link but a good cite? --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 21:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi D Anthony Patriarche. Every entry must have a link. It can be a main article about the subject, another article which includes something about the subject, or in certain cases a red link. But Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The top right of Gigot links to Wiktionary which is a dictionary and includes your meaning at wikt:gigot. See more at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages. Lamb and mutton and Scottish cuisine define gigot but nothing else. They are potential but weak link targets for a see also entry like:

• Lamb and mutton, a cut of leg is called gigot in Scotland

PrimeHunter (talk) 12:53, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Gigot isn't actually a disambiguation page but a page about a surname so a non-surname entry should be linked in a hatnote if at all. Red links should never be in hatnotes. I think "Leg (gigot in Scotland)" in Lamb and mutton is too little for a hatnote. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:15, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

The page is locked from editing. I have noticed that fictional characters are listed as historical characters. Also names are misspelled. I am curious if the page can be unlocked so I can edit it? If not, can someone correct these mistakes? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk • contribs) 23:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Samurai Kung fu Cowboy, to get that to happen, make edit requests at the article talk page. Be clear (replace x-line in section-a with y-line), and be sure to provide a reliable published secondary source for every fact you propose. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 04:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Retitle a draft (on the one concerning contradiction in Poetics 14)

Is it possible to rename a draft? "Problem" might be better than "contradiction," and omit "the"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_contradiction_of_Poetics_chapters_13_and_14Cdg1072 (talk) 01:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

The draft can be moved to Problem of Poetics chapters 13 and 14. You can click the "Move" tab at the page top of the draft, change the title, and click the "Move page" button.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:16, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

You can do that, but honestly, why? The title can be corrected when it is moved to mainspace and prior to that time, the title doesn't matter. It isn't indexed anywhere, and the title is not relative to whether or not it will make an acceptable encyclopedia article. John from Idegon (talk) 04:23, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok. No reason to do it since it's irrelevant to the decision.Cdg1072 (talk) 04:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, Cdg1072. The eventual article title, if the draft is accepted, should definitely mention Aristotle. Otherwise, the title is a confusing jumble. But focus on the article content at this time, not the title. That comes later. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:53, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I see what you mean, Aristotle should be in the title because it's not common knowledge that he wrote the Poetics.Cdg1072 (talk) 06:35, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

There is another issue about the article, that those who evaluate it (whatever their decision) might miss. I think it's clear that Dacier's theory on the problem is notable, and it's necessary to point out that he changes the numbering of the four treatments of the 'terrible deed', though of course he rightly uses Aristotle's ranking of them. But Dacier's new numbering is on page 256 in the 1705 English volume containing his notes, while that pages jumps to 241, so Dacier's solution to the problem is on page 245 in that translation. So the page numbering in the 1705 book has this odd break, and so awkward that it's best not to mention in the article. Perhaps if some third-party report of Dacier existed then this glitch could be bypassed. But it is best to use this direct source. I'm just using the page numbers as they are and leave it at that.Cdg1072 (talk) 15:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

blocked by another user

Hello, I am a rabbit vet trying to update the page on myxomatosis by adding a section on North America. There are currently sections on Ireland, Australia, France, Britian, and New Zealand. However my content (though perfectly accurate) was removed and I received an email saying that North America didn't deserve a special mention. This makes no sense, my patients are dying from this disease and situation is very different here than in Europe and Australia for multiple reasons. How do I respond to this person? He threatens to block me if I add the section back in. I wrote back in the same window but got no reply. Below is the conversation:

Your edits to Myxomatosis Welcome and thanks for your recent contributions to the myxamotosis article. However, you shouldn't just revert the contributions of other editorsto your preferred verison. Nor should you make edits without reading the article. You have done this in your latest edits, and as a result you have duplicated large amounts of information. There are a few Wikipedia policies you should familiarise yourself with. The most important are WP:BRD and WP:3RR. In short form, when you make an edit and someone removes it, don't just reinstate it. Instead, start a discussion on the article talk page. If you reinstate the material more than three times, you will be blocked from editing. As far as your actual edits, they are good, but this is a global English encyclopaedia, not a US encylopaedia. See WP:GLOBAL. The US isn't exceptional and doesn't deserve special mention just for being the US. As a general rule of thumb, if the article couldn't handle material of the same level of detail for all 120 odd nations on the planet, don't add it for the US. IOW, this article clearly wouldn't be readable if we had hundreds of words on the disease in Canada, Mexico, Slovakia, Fiji etc. So unless there is something highly notable about the US, please don't create a US specific section. We have sections on Australia in this article because it is commonly and notably held up as a globally relevant example of succesful biological control. The treatment and spread of the disease in US domestic/feral rabbits isn't particularly differrent from anywhere else on the planet and so isn't obviously notable. That the disease is native to the US is notable and has been retained in the appropriate parts of the article. Thanks for yourcontributions, keep up the good work, but please familiarise yourself with the rules of Wikipedia to avoid irritating other contributors andpotentially being nlocked from editingMark Marathon (talk) 23:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mark, Sorry if I am a bit clumsy with editing, this is the first time I have tried it. I was in the middle of clarifying some points, and got called away for an hour. I see now that I should not do editing on the live site, but on a word document on by computer so that I can insert the finished product all at once. I am a veterinarian that works with rabbits. My patients are currently dying from this disease. I was trying to add a section on North America because no one here knows about the disease. It has gotten so much more press in Australia and England! I am certainly not trying to remove content, just add to it. But in reorganizing it I have incurred your wrath I see. Why can I not add a section on North America? There already exists sections on Australia, New Zealand, England, France, and Ireland. Are we not worthy? I did not put it under the "population control' heading because the disease here is endemic. Please respond. I do want to add a section on North America, but don't want to be blocked by you. Thank you, Rabbit Vet (talk) 00:17, 17 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabbit Vet (talk • contribs)

The place to discuss the article on Myxomatosis is its talk page: Talk:Myxomatosis. David Biddulph (talk) 03:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Rabbit Vet, what you do for a living is completely irrelevant here, as is what you know. Encyclopedias are tertiary. So take your knowledge of veterinary medicine, use it to find reliable sources, and make arguments at the article talk page supported by those sources. We have very strong sourcing requirements for human medicine, and to be honest, I'm not sure to what extent, if any, they apply to veterinary medicine and perhaps another host can clarify that for us. Experts are very welcome here, but remember that your expertise cannot be used as a source. Your far greater familiarity with the literature is where your expertise will benefit the encyclopedia. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 04:18, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

... and please don't compose a new article in Word and then replace content on the Wikipedia page. This can cause problems with Wikipedia markup, and is likely to be unpopular with other editors. It is much better to make small edits (after having discussed them on the talk page, as recommended above) to gradually improve the article. Dbfirs 07:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi John! Veterinary medicine has the same strong sourcing requirements as human medicine. I am currently writing a paper on myxomatosis for a journal and have 60+ references at my fingertips. I will be sure to use them. Thanks for letting me know about Word, I will keep it in mind! Rabbit Vet (talk) 08:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Rabbit Vet: Just for clarity: Mark Marathon did not 'threaten to block you' when talking to you. He just tried to warn you that repeated reverting Wikipeda articles' contents, whether whole or in parts, especially if not discussed, is considered disruption – and disruptive editors are usually blocked from editing. It didn't mean Mark Marathon would perform a block himself, nor it would be his own arbitrary decision.

Repetitive reverting is a form of edit warring, which is defined in Wikipedia:Edit warring policy. The main borderline is defined by 'The three-revert rule' there (see section WP:3RR), and crossing it usually results in a block.

I'm sure you understand such large project like Wikipedia must have some rules to work successfuly. And as a new Wikipedian you're not familiar with most of them. Just take it easy, make small steps and seek Consensus when someone objects, Assume good faith and remember there is WP:NORUSH. Good luck & happy editing! --CiaPan (talk) 09:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Forgot to add: you have successfully ;) passed two phases of the WP:BRD cycle – now it's time to discuss and then go on again. :) CiaPan (talk) 09:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

For editing content away from article and then reinserting, I find that my own Sandbox is perfect for this task. I can move a section or sub-section there, edit, check that I have formated the references correctly, then copy into the article. Helpful to other editors is to include a useful Edit summary, and if the change is likely to be debated, start a new section on the Talk page of the article. On selecting references, Wikipedia's critera for medicine and health WP:MEDRS is not to cite or use information from in vitro work or individual trials. Rather, limit to reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Don't 'reference-bomb' the article with dozens of refs when a few will do. David notMD (talk) 10:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Best part to be a genuine Wikipedian.

How to be a genuine Wikipedian ? After how many times of edits to be considered an elite Wikipedia editor ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexandria76 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

This isn't a video game. You do not level up by gaining more experience points here. John from Idegon (talk) 04:04, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

To be fair there are these Wikipedia:Service awards but they are only used for fun. Otherwise John from Idegon is correct. MarnetteD|Talk 04:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Alexandria76. Everyone who makes at least one productive edit is a "genuine Wikipedian". The quality of your edits is vastly more important than the quantity of your edits. It is far better to make ten excellent edits than a thousand mediocre edits. We do not have elite editors, but rather we have respected editors who are recognized as people who are working hard to improve this encyclopedia. Some of those people may have 1000 edits while others may have 50,000 edits. People look at the quality of the articles that you have created or expanded, and how helpful you have been, and whether or not you work to resolve disputes and help create consensus. This is a collaborative project to create a free encylopedia, not an MMPORG. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

How to I move my first article from Draft to Wikipedia?

I have published my first article. It is in Draft wikipedia. How do i move my article from Draft wikipedia to Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chintan P Bhagat (talk • contribs) 05:37, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Chintan P Bhagat: It might help if you post a link to your draft. But generally you don't move article you wrote from the Draft: space to article space. You should just insert this code: {{subst:submit}} at the top of your draft article and wait for some editor to validate your submission. --CiaPan (talk) 06:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

A reply not expected anymore – the account has been blocked indefinitely at 06:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC) --CiaPan (talk) 11:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Notability Source clarification

I have created my first draft in wikipedia and i need a clarification about the notability source. Do the pages or sources we are linking need a clear mention about the topic i am talking about or just a reference would be enough? For example can we give a back link as the source link that we got in the topic that i have drafted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stylus123 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Stylus123 and welcome to the Teahouse. Short version at WP:GNG, a little longer at WP:NORG. You need to find sources that at the same time are independant of the topic, reliably published and more than briefly mentions the topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:16, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Article rejected, reason is "undefined"

Hello All,

A draft article was rejected and the reason left by the reviewer is "undefined". This is not helpful as i don't know how to imrove my article. Is there any other way to receive feedback on a draft in order to hopefully publish it? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by JAmbrogi (talk • contribs) 08:15, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JAmbrogi. I can see how that would be confusing. However, if you go to Draft:"Draft" Eurodiaconia, you'll see that the reviewer has left an explanation below the decline template at the top of the page. It seems that the submission was a duplicate, and the other version will be reviewed instead. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:18, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Except, checking the two drafts, they differ and the other one hasn't been submitted for review. Could you clarify, Dan arndt? Cordless Larry (talk) 08:21, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

The other one seems to have COI issues. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 08:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the response. Could this version be considered instead then? Thanks, JAmbrogi

This first arose when I tried to move Draft:"Draft" Eurodiaconia to Draft:Eurodiaconia and discovered there was already a draft in existence. My suggestion is that JAmbrogi undertakes a cut & paste exercise moving the relevant sourced information from Draft:"Draft" Eurodiaconia to Draft:Eurodiaconia. Noting that JAmbrogi's draft does include some close paraphrasing from a number of sources and a fair amount of extraneous non-encyclopedic (almost promotional) information. Dan arndt (talk) 09:40, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I have now transferred the relevant information to Draft:Eurodiaconia and also tried to make the description more encyclopedic. Please let me know if it's ok like this. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by JAmbrogi (talk • contribs) 12:47, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This draft (or one of the drafts about this subject) was previously discussed at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 974#Why was my article rejected?. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:56, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Creating multiple copies of a draft is not recommended, as it often leads to confusion (as here). Maproom (talk) 14:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Deleted article info?

Hi, dear people, a person asked my, why his article was deleted - of course i have no idea, because i didn't even know there existed an article on him - i don't know this person very well, but he knows i write for the wikipedia, so he asked me. Is there a place where one can see which article has when been deleted and why? Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Gyanda. Clicking a red link to a deleted page like Locker Okorie will show its deletion log. The exact name can also be entered at Special:Log/delete. Administrators can search deleted page names at Special:Undelete without knowing the exact name. See more at Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:24, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick answer, i searched and cannot find a deleted article with his name. I just tell him that - i don't want to put much time into it, i don't even know this person well. You are wonderful here at the teahouse, one gets answers within short time. Thank you very much! Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 12:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gyanda: I'm afraid you will not find an article just by searching its name if it got deleted. See, 'deleted' means, more or less, 'you can't find it'... You need to know the exact name to look at the article location, where the deletion message will appear. Or involve some admin to search through logs if you're not an admin yourself. --CiaPan (talk) 12:42, 17 July 2019 (UTC).

We can search for it if you name him. I'm an administrator. Note that some readers and new users incorrectly assume an article was deleted if they see a red link. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

You people are really wonderful. He's just a facebookfriend and is very annoying in his comments, so i won't put energy in it. Perhaps will even unfriend him, don't know him in person and he's kind of picking on wikipedia all the time. As said, annoying. I guess for sure the article got deleted because he is not way so important as he thinks he is :-). Thanks for all your efforts, i'm really thankful for that! Kind regards, --Gyanda (talk) 14:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Policy compendium

Does Wikipedia have a compendium of all policies and guidelines, similar to the U.S.C.? --Puzzledvegetable|💬|📧|📜 13:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Puzzledvegetable You might start by visiting WP:POLICY and scrolling to the bottom of that page, where there is a template that lists many policies and guidelines, though I'm not aware off the top of my head of a specific "compendium" of them. 331dot (talk) 13:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, in that regard it's more like the British Constitution. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230 195} 2.122.177.55 (talk) 23:49, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

How to publish a profile

Hi,

Am trying to publish a profile on wikipedia like Aliko Dangote how do I get the template to follow on publishing articles like that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amexmedia (talk • contribs) 13:35, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Amexmedia: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "profiles". Wikipedia has articles about subjects that get significant coverage in independent reliable sources and meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in the case of a person, that at WP:BIO).

From your use of the term profile and your username, I gather that you wish to edit on behalf of a client. You will first need to change your username immediately; I will post information on how you can do this on your user talk page in a moment. You will also need to read the conflict of interest policy and the paid editing policy, as you have some required declarations to make. Those pages will also make it clear that it is inadvisable for you to attempt to edit about clients directly. 331dot (talk) 13:41, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Roux Shabangu (the subject of your deleted draft) may meet Wikipedia's definition of notability, but be aware that neither the subject of an article nor the creator of an article "owns" the article. Any such article on RS would surely be subsequently edited to include all the financial misdeeds RS is either accused of or has been convicted of. David notMD (talk) 13:53, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

New editor looking for the best place to find things for editing

Hey, I am a new editor. I am wondering where the best place to find things to be edited are. I have been looking in the article creation requests area and the proposed deletion area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GingeBro (talk • contribs) 14:19, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion and WP:AFD is not a bad place to start, if you can find articles that are up for deletion but you could improve by re-writing or finding better sources, then that's always a great way to spend your time. You could also look at the various backlogs at Wikipedia:Backlog as there are lots of things that need attention here. Hugsyrup (talk) 14:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@GingeBro: I have to disagree with Hugsyrup's advice here. Many articles at proposed deletion / AfD are very likely to be deleted in the near future, which would mean your edits go down the drain as well. Understanding the argument for deletion is hard; sometimes, fixing the root cause is just not possible. So you would need a good understanding of what the deletion argument rests on, and make edits to dispel it. That can be very hard even for somewhat experienced contributors.

In contrast, when something has been marked for a maintenance task (as shown in the community portal suggested by Teblick), a specific problem has been identified, so it is easier to know what to fix (assuming the editor who tagged the problem correctly identified it). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 10:21, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi GingeBro—the watchlist can be helpful in this regard. Bus stop (talk) 14:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello GingeBro. I recommend that you visit the Community Portal. It has links (which I think change daily) to articles that need help, with the articles divided into nine categories. You might also scroll down on that page to look at the box titled Active Wiki Fixup Projects. It has links to still more opportunities for improving articles. Eddie Blick (talk) 18:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Excluding infobox categories from user page

Hello, I used the Wikipedia category|hidden=yes template to prevent my infobox from showing a gender category under my profile. However, now I'm getting a transgender gender icon plus the tooltip is filled with something about maintenance categories. How do I fix this? NinuKinuski (talk) 15:11, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

All you have to do to exclude categories in an Infobox is to not put them in there. LPS and MLP Fan (LittlestPetShop) (MyLittlePony) 15:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

That doesn't really answer the question and you know it. NinuKinuski (talk) 18:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@NinuKinuski: It varies how to avoid categories from templates when it's even possible. Template:Infobox Wikipedia user mentions nocat. I have added | nocat = true.[3] {{Wikipedia category|hidden=yes}} is unrelatred and only had an effect here because it damaged a parameter used to determine which category to add. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:49, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Logging in to an older Wikipedia sandbox

I have a Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datar%E2%80%93Mathews_method_for_real_option_valuation) and had a sandbox with the user name "Scotthmathews". I can no longer log into that sandbox because my registered email address is not available to me -- I am retired from my former company and no longer able to access this email address. How can I access this sandbox and register a new email address? I would like to continue contributing to my Wikipedia page. Thank you. Scott Mathews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:3023:75C:E000:4428:A9A4:FB3F:9177 (talk) 17:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I assume that you mean you have forgotten your password and are trying to recover it(as you don't need your email address to just log in). I'm afraid that your only option would be to create a new account and identify it as a successor to your prior account, as there is no way to recover a password without the associated email address, and I believe no one can change it except for you. 331dot (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

But note that there is no such concept of "logging into a sandbox". You log into an account (or don't) and you can immediately edit most pages in Wikipedia. In particular, you can continue editing the article Datar–Mathews method for real option valuation, which does not belong to you or anybody else. You (or anybody else) can also continue editing User:Scotthmathews/Sandbox - though since it appears to be largely a duplicate of the article, this may not be a good idea. I also note that if you are the Mathews referred to in the title, then you probably have a conflict of interest, and should avoid editing the article in question, and it probably needs more citations to sources unconnected with you and fewer to sources derived from you. In general Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article, or people closely connected with the subject of an article, say or want to say about it: it is only interested in what people wholly unconnected with the subject of the article have chosen to publish about it - and if there is little or no such independent material, then the subject fails Wikipedia's test of notability, and no article is possible. --ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I assume that you are also ScottMathews as well as Scotthmathews? --David Biddulph (talk) 18:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

How much time will it take to approve an article on wikipedia?

Hi everyone, Just created my first page and would like to know how much time it takes for it to be approved Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Upwork.w.a (talk • contribs) 17:20, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Upwork.w.a: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to the draft you created that is in Hebrew, it will not be accepted as this is the English Wikipedia(unless you were to translate it into English). There is a Hebrew Wikipedia. Leaving that aside, there is no set time frame for reviews once submitted through Articles for Creation(you haven't submitted your draft for review). There are currently over 4000 drafts awaiting review, and they are done in no particular order. 331dot (talk) 17:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, you can just take your work over to the hebrew wikipedia and submit it there. In addition to that, it looks like your username may represent an organisation or a group. Wikipedia doesn't allow certain kinds of usernames to be used. You might want to refer to WP:UPOL to see if you need to retire this account and register a new policy-compliant username, assuming you wish to continue editing at the English Wikipedia. If you are receiving payment from a client for any of your edits here, you need to disclose that as well. Please refer to WP:COI for that and other kinds of conflicts of interest that an editor should manage. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 18:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

when an article does not exist in English but does exist in German

OK so I started writing an article in myspace which I think is needed about dimethylol propionic acid - it is here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GRALISTAIR/Dimethylol_propionic_acid this was after I searched and searched Wikipedia and the article did not exist.

On further inspection there is Wikidata for this molecule and an article in German

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q27260246

Should I finish the article in English - or is it beeter to try and get a translation of the German page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRALISTAIR (talk • contribs) 20:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

​You can do a combination of both, if you want. See Wikipedia:Translation for guidance on translating pages. Eman235/talk 21:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR: One thing to remember though is that each Wikipedia project is separate from one another and each project has its own policies and guidelines. There may be some overlap when it comes to policies, etc., but there might also be some important difference. So, the fact that an article exists on one Wikipedia doesn't automatically mean it should exist on other Wikipedias. So, an article existing on German Wikipedia doesn't necessarily mean the same article should be on English Wikipedia as well. Basically, only subject considered to be Wikipedia notable are supposed to have stand-alone articles written about them, and how that is applied to this subject is going to ultimately determine whether such an article will be kept. Moreover, what's considered to be a reliable source for English Wikipedia purposes might not be the same as German Wikipedia. Another thing to consider is that maybe someone already tried to write such an article, but it was deleted for some reason, or the content was incorporated into another already existing article. So, you might want to ask about this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals since the members of that Wikiproject should be able to provide you with some more specific advise. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly your post, though correct in general is irrelevant in this particular case. Chemicals are one of a few classes of subjects that are "inherently" notable. As with biological taxa, minerals, inhabited places and astronomical objects, the notability standard is simply proof of existence. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

How do I join - I am a research chemist by occupation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRALISTAIR (talk • contribs) 01:22, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi GRALISTAIR. You already 'joined' Wikipedia when you registered your account in December 2011. Do be sure to check out your talk page regularly for messages from other editors. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:40, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi again GRAILSTAIR. If, by chance, you meant "how do I join Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals?", then there's no real formal application process. The project page's description says "To join, simply list yourself at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals#Participants by adding your name (and table format) to the section." All you apparently need to add your name to the table. The list of participants looks like it's alphabetized by username; so, add yours in the appropriate spot and just format the entry like the rest of the table. There's also a corresponding userbox you can add to your userpage if you want, but that's not required. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:10, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

• GRALISTAIR: I recommend simply putting both WP:WikiProject Chemicals and also WP:WikiProject Chemistry on your Watchlist, and asking questions there (on the talkpages of those projects) as needed. Softlavender (talk) 03:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

My article has been tagged with ‪"Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Noman Javed‬"

How do I improve my article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anoshasays#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Draft%3ANoman_Javed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anoshasays (talk • contribs) 04:07, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Anoshasays. The article was tagged under criteria G11 which means that it was seen as purely promotional in nature. It has now been deleted so I can't see the draft and comment on specific details, but here are some general pointers:

• Do you have any connection with Noman Javed? It is almost always best not to write about yourself or people you know, as this will usually come across as more promotional.
• Did you have good sources for everything in the article? Everything on Wikipedia needs to be backed up in reliable sources (quality newspapers, books, peer-reviewed journals, that sort of thing). Even if you know something about someone, it shouldn't go in the article unless it is backed by a source.
• Make sure the tone comes across as balanced, not promotional. State facts, not opinion or things that could be open to interpretation,

I hope that helps. Hugsyrup (talk) 08:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

How do I add a book reference

Hi. I would like to know how to make a book reference please.MetroManMelbourne (talk) 10:24, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

The easiest way is to use the template {{cite book}} and fill in the relevant parameters. David Biddulph (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi MetroManMelbourne - note that you can use the Cite tool just above the editing window for this. Click on the 'Templates' drop-down menu, select 'Book', and then just fill in the blank fields, and the citation will be added automatically. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

If the book you want to cite is on Google Books, you can also copy and paste the URL into this tool and it'll create the citation for you. Just make sure to check that the results are correct. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 23:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks very much. MetroManMelbourne (talk) 00:30, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Request for Deleting Redirect Page of Mohammad Qasim

Hey, i want to make request to delete a page Mohammad Qasim on WP which is redirect to another person Moulana Mohammad Qasim, i dont know why Mr. Saqib redirect it to another page and giving political benefits to that person, if u see Mr Saqib talk page he already make alot to changes and give benefits to other people and senior users removed his changes, kindly remove/delete that page Mohammad Qasim so i can make a page for another well known personalty in Pakistan so people have a chance to find more about that person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah1440 (talk • contribs) 10:58, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Abdullah1440, you could create the page at Draft:Mohammad Qasim, and submit the draft for review at WP:AfC. If it is accepted, the redirect could be replaced with your content. I would note however that the content you added in this edit would likely not be accepted as an article: the text is not written neutrally, and the sources are mostly YouTube videos about the subject. If you could find more independent sources writing about him, and phrase the content in a way that does not put his claims and assertions about his dreams into Wikipedia's voice, you would have a better chance of having the draft accepted. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:11, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

ok thank you for your reply, there is more independent sources are available, in news papers and on english news sites i will add them, thanks for the guide, regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah1440 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

​OK - do please take a look at our notability guidelines, especially the general notability guideline, and at reliable sources - these explain the sort of sources that are required, and how they can establish notability. cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 11:26, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

There are at least three bios at Wikipedia of people, whose names contain 'Mohammad Qasim' (see the Search results HERE), so the redirect should not be removed, but rather replaced (or at least accompanied) by a DAB to link to them all. --CiaPan (talk) 11:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done good point. Polyamorph (talk) 12:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Applying an image.

How can you put any format of an image on a wikapedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clayton425278299 (talk • contribs) 11:40, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey, welcome to Wikipedia! You can find instructions on how to add images to articles at Help:Pictures. Regards, MrClog (talk) 12:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

CONFLICT OF INTREST WHILE CREATING A PAGE WHEN THERE IS NONE

I want to create a page called Thevansh and when i proced with creating the page it says to name the page and when i name the page Thevansh it says that there is a conflict on intrest and a page called Thevansh is already created so i try to lcik on that page and it again says that the page is not created and you can create it but i cant as when i put the title as Thevansh it starts to do the same thing again(confilct of intrest) but there is no page called Thevansh. So can you please help me fix this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Devansh03 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devansh03 (talk • contribs) 11:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Devansh03: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You are attempting to edit your user page, which is not article space. It is a page for you to introduce yourself to the Wikipedia community as a Wikipedia user or editor. You have not had your account long enough to create an actual article and do not have enough edits yet.

It appears as if you are attempting to write about yourself; this is highly discouraged per Wikipedia policy on autobiographies. Wikipedia is not interested in what article subjects want to say about themselves. Wikipedia also has no interest in aiding search results for you or enhancing your internet presence or career. Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources say about you. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media or your own website. 331dot (talk) 11:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Appears you first started on your own User page, since deleted, and then created Draft:Thevansh. Unless there are articles written by other people - about you - that can be used as references, your draft will not be accepted as an article. In draft state, it exists, but does not show up on internet search engines. David notMD (talk) 13:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

If you decide to withdraw your draft, at the top of the draft type double curly brackets {{ }} and inside those type Db-g7. An administrator will see this and take it as an author/creator request to delete the draft. David notMD (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Regarding article declination

SohamKurulkar (talk) 12:04, 18 July 2019 (UTC)Hello, Im a begginer and want my page to get published. i need some guidance and help regarding why my article ius not being published. please guide me through as soon as possible.SohamKurulkar (talk) 12:04, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

SohamKurulkar The advice given to you on your draft by the reviewer was that your references to sources should be in-line citations. You've written a lot of text there, and provided some links at the bottom of the page, but you haven't cited the source inline as you go along to show which source supports each assertion. You can do this using the 'Cite' tool, just above the editing window. I would note that the Wikipedia article you've included as a reference shouldn't be there, we don't use Wiki pages as sources, but you can link to it in the text. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 12:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I'd also add that you need to make the text a lot more neutral and factual. Sentences like "Her fresh and charming smile and lovely eyes have become an instant hit among teenagers all over Maharashtra" are not consistent with the neutral, encyclopedic tone we aim for in articles. GirthSummit _(blether) 12:17, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

How do I reply to an editor

I want to reply to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gabesasso#Conflict_of_interest_editing I am not sue how or where to reply to User:Marchjuly I'm not affiliated in any with the subject other than being a fan. How do I go about resolving this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabesasso (talk • contribs) 12:30, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gabesasso: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The easiest thing to do is simply post a reply in that same discussion, it is likely Marchjuly is following your page to watch for any replies. You can also reply on their user talk page by clicking the word "talk" in their signature, which takes you to that page where you can make a comment. However, try replying on your own page first. 331dot (talk) 12:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gabesasso: I posted something more on your user talk page. If you've got any questions, feel free to ask there. Other hosts are welcomed to offer suggestions as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:07, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Contact Admin/Editor

Hi, I am starting a researched-based club at school and would like to talk to someone with experience on Wikipedia. Is there anyone I could talk to who could answer some questions for me and my club? Owenwitt (talk) 14:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)Owenwitt

Owenwitt You are welcome to pose your questions in this discussion, or you may use the Help Desk. And please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~; instructions to follow on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:14, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Please do not remove the comments of others, thank you. 331dot (talk) 14:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Request to have an article created, unsure where it fits.

I've tried to figure out how to create an article myself, but to my dismay, I just don't get it.

I'd like to create an article for Non-Emergency Medical Transportation. This is a benefit available to many people on Medicare/Medicaid who need assistance getting to doctors appointments.

Where would this fit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smngg7 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Advice is available at WP:Your first article. David Biddulph (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

That does not help me figure out what category this article should go in. --Smngg7 (talk) 19:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Smngg7, Category:Ambulance services? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:54, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Help me to bring an article into encyclopedia

I've create an article called AirAttack 2 and tagged with review to be encyclopedic page. But the page still isn't appeared as encyclopedia. For example when I search it, it doesn't exist online. What the matter? I want to haste the article to be posted in encyclopedia, not only to the project. How Life Changed (talk) 16:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@How Life Changed: Your article is in the main encyclopedia. It has not yet been formally reviewed, which is required for it to appear in search engines like Google(which is what I think you are referring to). It also takes time for search engines to index articles, and we here at Wikipedia have no control over that process. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I also recommend submitting the article at the copyeditor's guild for copyediting, as it is very difficult to comprehend and follow. I think it's at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. Fellow editors, please correct me, if I'm wrong. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 16:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Outsourced companies to create an article on a public figure and his organization.

Someone I know paid $900 to a company that says can write an article for him and his company. After paying everything they are now saying that the sources are not enough for Wikipedia to approve the article. They only wrote 20 short sentences on him and sent him a link to the article for him to approve.

How does it work? How many sources are accepted by Wikipedia and how do we know that those people are even legit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dedillo1$ (talk • contribs) 16:58, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Which is a good example of why you shouldn't pay someone to write an article, even if you technically can; or at least don't hand over the money up front. No one can guarantee anything(such as writing an article that won't be deleted). There isn't a certain number of sources that are required, though three is generally considered to be reasonable. What really matters is notability. 331dot (talk) 17:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

The company should be able to identify User names their staff write as, and identify articles that were successfully created. Wikipedia requires that people who are paid declare that on their User page, so the User pages should display this information. Undeclared paid work gets people blocked. David notMD (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Putting it bluntly, those people are not legit. As far as we at Wikipedia are concerned, they are undeclared paid editors, and should not be allowed to exist (but we find it difficult stopping them). As far as their customers are concerned, they are taking payment for a service which they don't know how to provide. Maproom (talk) 21:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

How do I "publish" my first Wikipedia article so that it shows up in searches?

Hello, I've created an article and a few users have edited it. I'd like to "publish" it in Wikipedia so that it will show up in searches, but I can't figure out how to do that. Thanks, Peter --psa1966 19:06, 18 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psa1966 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

If you are referring to Draft:Stormwater Cycletrack, you haven't yet submitted the draft for AFC review. To do so, you would need to add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

That worked! Thanks!--psa1966 19:05, 18 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psa1966 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

shipping products

I would like to ship a product from Powhatan to another out state location;;Auction — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:247:C002:C340:702C:2FD9:BA0:8F1E (talk) 19:03, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

This forum is for questions on how to use Wikipedia. You will need to ask your postal service or other shipping company for help. RudolfRed (talk) 00:05, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Color-coded text in Diff mode?

I'm looking for a way to make the text appear color-coded for the various markups, like it does in source editing, on page version comparison. It would make finding the ends of references (and thus resumption of article text) much easier, (especially ones with long titles).

Any advice or preferences or tools for this? Thanks! Cheers~ Elfabet (talk) 19:45, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Elfabet. I have long thought this would be a very helpful facility. However, I've pored through the list of available userscripts at Wikipedia:User scripts/List, and the nearest I could find is Evad37's script just for toggling diffs so that they only show the text, though there's no way of actually colour-highlighting the diff content. See User:Evad37/TextDiff. Regards from France, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Admin Request

Do you have a bureaucrat? I want to be an admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPUser6 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Administrators are just unpaid volunteers with a few more powerful editing/managing tools than other editors. Criteria are typically thousands of useful edits over period of years before applying to be an administrator. David notMD (talk) 20:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Users are not generally considered for Admin 'privileges' until they have been editing on Wikipedia for at least a couple of years, have made several thousand (perhaps 10,000) good and useful (not trivial) edits, have no history of vandalistic or disruptive edits or behaviour (beyond beginners' errors that many people make at first), and have displayed a thorough knowledge of Wikipedia policies and procedures by participating in numerous administrative-related discussions.

Moreover, being an Admin is a bit like being a janitor in a school: Admins are trusted to have a few tools not available to ordinary users to help them in their tasks, but these tasks are largely boring maintenance for which they get little or no thanks but sometimes abuse, and no kudos of any kind.

If you're still interested, the place to apply is here. Be aware that Admins make up only about 0.1% of our regular active Editors (who number about 100,000 in any month), and you will have to convince everyone in the process that you have earned the trust necessary to join them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.55 (talk) 20:50, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Possible addition to article on Poe's "The Gold-Bug"

Perhaps add reference to M. R. James' "The Treasure of Abbot Thomas" in dealing with solution of cryptograms for finding buried treasure. You have done very good article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3dnomyar (talk • contribs) 20:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, 3dnomyar. You may make your suggestion on the Talk page of "The Gold-Bug". Use the "New section" tab at the top of the page, and please be precise in stating what you want to change in the article.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Wrong information

The Mayor of Barlow Oregon is Michael Lundsten. Please correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.105.65.136 (talk) 21:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for the information; can you provide a source for it? We need more than just your word. You may want to post this on the relevant article talk page.331dot (talk) 21:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Created a page for a biography of an author. How does it get on Wikipedia for all to read?

Wrote a biography about author Shirley A. Martin, but it doesn't show up when I tyoe in the name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viola Randall (talk • contribs) 22:42, 18 July 2019

@Viola Randall: I'm sorry, but I don't see any articles by that title. Maybe you created the article under a different account name, and it was deleted? Wikipedia will periodically delete unedited drafts, but it usually takes at least six months for this happen. If you remember any other details, that might help us find your lost article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:01, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Did you create the article while logged in to your Viola Randall account?--Quisqualis (talk) 05:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Where is the "talk"-page on a keyword ?

I was more or less happy with "silica gel as a cure for paranoid schizophrenia" appearing in the associated expression's "talk"-page, but these pages seem out of order. Sincerely Lutz Fehling — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.15.237.13 (talk) 00:08, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The query in your title above is unclear. Articles have associated talk pages; if you mean the talk page of an article on the subject of some "keyword", you need to tell us clearly what that keyword is.

The phrase you quote above is the title of a section added in August 2018 to the Talk page of the article Silica gel, and was added by someone signing themselves Lutz Fehling, presumably yourself. The text under that section title is, frankly, incomprehensible, and contains no mention of silica gel, or any source linking silica gel and schizophrenia as a cure or otherwise.

I'm afraid you will have to restate your query more clearly before anyone here can respond to it meaningfully. Perhaps you can also clarify what you mean by pages (which ones?) being "out of order" (in what way?).{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.55 (talk) 09:13, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

(1) It seems that using the "mobile view" for smartphones makes the "talk"-page unviewable.

However, I remember my comment on the entry "Paranoid Schizophrenia" had been visible even in "mobile view"-mode.

This now has gone (that's why I said "out of order").

I'll just wait and see If you can accept this new attempt to express myself clearly.

(2) Why you're saying that my -other- comment on entry "Silica Gel" is incomprehensible I can't understand because it's short and simple, just saying that in case of madness take some silica gel. Sincerely Lutz Fehling

Somebody seems to be using my account and is making all kinds of editing - maybe it's vandalism

Somebody seems to be using my account and is making all kinds of editing - maybe it's vandalism

what can I do to fix this situation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.32.179.178 (talk) 00:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

You are currently not logged in. I suggest logging into your account and changing the password. RudolfRed (talk) 00:55, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

If you're referring to the edits at Special:Contributions/185.32.179.178, those edits were likely made by a different person using the same IP address. Many IP addresses are shared or periodically reassigned to different people, so that's why you might see edits you didn't make on your contributions page. This can be a problem if someone on the same IP is vandalizing Wikipedia, so if you want to avoid these issues you should create an account. Hope this helps. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 01:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Bored... new article ground is scarce

Hello, Wikipedians.

Are there any topics or articles that you think I am interested in? I’ve been bored and can’t find anything to edit on the encyclopaedia. Either I want to create a new article but it’s been covered by Wikipedia already. I do want to make my own articles though. Could cover new ground on the Simple English Wikipedia.

I would like some recommendations for articles to edut. My interests are listed below:

• Space
• Sci-fi
• Science
• Physics
• Quantum Physics

That’s all I can think of, to be exact.

• Sincerely,
• --A diehard editor (talk) 02:08, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi there. A good place to start would be looking at WikiProjects related to your interests, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomy and Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics. These pages have lists of related articles and discussion about articles needing improvement on their talk pages. You can also use User:SuggestBot to get suggestions for pages to edit - just follow the directions on the user page. If you want to write an article on Wikipedia, you should read WP:Your first article first. Note that the policies and guidelines on English Wikipedia and Simple English Wikipedia are different, so what applies here might not apply there. Hope this helps. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 03:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Anything obvious probably already has an article. Science fiction is a bit easier than other topics, though, because there's a limit to how many scientific theories can be published in a given time, but there's an endless stream of new science fiction being published. It's easier if you look outside the mainstream. For example, an independent Canadian film will be less likely to have an article than a Hollywood blockbluster. The problem is that finding sources for obscure topics is much harder. If you'd rather stick to non-fiction, it might be easier to write new articles about scientists than their discoveries. Quasar already has an article, of course, but what about the major researchers? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:27, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate the help. Now I’m going to leave the Teahouse to go to the WikiProject store. Just need to do some chit-chat.

After 30 minutes of chit-chat...

Bye! I’ll leave the Teahouse now!

The door at the Teahouse opens and closes, as A diehard editor leaves the building and walks to the WikiProject store.

At the Wikiproject store

Yey.

A diehard editor (talk) 08:45, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

add a name to a list

I'm new to editing Wikipedia. There is a list of athletes on a page that has omitted a certain person. I'd like to add that name to the list, but I don't know how. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:2880:241E:85B0:6C20:AD0C:D706 (talk) 03:24, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

You can add that person IF they already have an article on Wikipedia. See the article Help:Editing for how to make an edit.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:21, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? What exactly is 'a list' you're talking about? There are at least two, essentially different kind of 'lists of' in Wikipedia: there exist articles which lists people, things or places (and those listed are usually links, but not always – for example see Olympique Lyonnais#Current squad, and they may link to articles which do not exist yet – like in Olympique Lyonnais#Current coaching staff), and there exist categories of articles, which list ONLY existing articles (e.g. Category:Olympique Lyonnais players). Adding a person to a list of the first kind requires editing an article with a list, whilst adding a person to the second kind listing requires creating a new article about that person (or finding it, if it exists already) and assigning it to some category. Without a detailed information regarding WHERE an athlete is omitted we can't help. --CiaPan (talk) 11:16, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Why do I get search results from Websites in Greek writing?

I entered a search term in English (in my favourite search engine), but the website was written in Greek. This happened several times and is a waste of my time. Why is this? I mean: when I wanted a website written in Greek, I would already write my search term in Greek. --Steue (talk) 09:25, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Steue Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This page is for asking questions about using Wikipedia; we can't really help you with search engine issues, though you could try the Reference Desk, if you didn't wish to contact the search engine itself. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry and thanks. --Steue (talk) 09:32, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Follow-up: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing#Why do I get search results from Websites in Greek writing? --CiaPan (talk) 11:05, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

How to Create a Page

Hi,

I am trying to create a new page, it was deleted. So please help me to create a page

--Aadaikalam 09:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC)Vinoth aadaikalam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinoth aadaikalam (talk • contribs)

It was made crystal clear to you on your user talk page at User talk:Vinoth aadaikalam#Undisclosed paid editing - 2nd notice, and subsequently, that you need to respond to the concerns raised regarding paid editing before you make any further edits. If you fail to respond you are liable to be blocked indefinitely from editing. David Biddulph (talk) 09:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Actually, they responded at Drm310's talk before posting here. Regards SoWhy 10:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

New Statesman - Broken reference links

The New Statesman page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Statesman ) has a broken reference link. The following link ( https://www.newstatesman.com/node/194341 ) is a working link for reference 32 on the New Statesman Wiki page.

I would have made the edit myself but when clicking the "edit source" button for references, I am faced with " ==References==

" of which I have no clue how to proceed.

Best,

D T — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dubby Traveller (talk • contribs) 11:42, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@Dubby Traveller: You need to click a minor up-arrow next to the reference number - it's a link which will skip to the place where the reference is inserted. That is in the section New Statesman#Since 1996, second paragraph, just after the words 'criticisms in a subsequent issue'. HTH :) CiaPan (talk) 11:55, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@Dubby Traveller: Done: Special:diff/907009348. --CiaPan (talk)

25 Articles

Hi, how to write 25 good articles without them getting redirected. Reliable Prognosis 7 (talk) 14:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC) Reliable Prognosis 7

You'd need to come up with 25 notable topics that aren't already covered. But why? Is this some sort of task you've been set? Let's start small to begin with and focus on writing one good article. Do you have any topics in mind? Familiarise yourself with the notability guidelines and make sure your topic can meet them, then you can create a draft and submit it by following the instructions here. Hugsyrup (talk) 14:56, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Is it because you are hoping to acquire the autopatrolled user right? Hugsyrup is right - don't focus on the number of articles, focus on writing good ones. Think about engaging with a Wikiproject in an area that you're interested in, and see whether they have a list of articles that need writing. GirthSummit _(blether) 15:00, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Draft of CV of late Franz Gehrels

Dear All, because I am still a greehorn on wikipedi.en I should like to ask for advice in drafting an entry on my oncle, late Franz Gehrels who died end of 2018 at his home in Germany. My draft of the English CV was rejected because:

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)."

However, in my view, the references given are published, reliable, independent and pertinent sources according to international scholarly standards (I am econmist, retired academic and for decades editor of a scholarly journal myself), namely:

* Hesse, Jan-Otmar (2010): Wirtschaft als Wissenschaft: die Volkswirtschaftslehre in der frühen Bundesrepublik [Economy as science: the economics in the early Federal Republic, in German]. Frankfurt: Campus, 2010, S. 170

[1] Necrology, Faculty of Economics, LMU Munich, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 13 November 2018

[2] Best Article Award, Atlantic Economic Journal, December 2006

Hesse, Jan-Otmar (2010): Wirtschaft als Wissenschaft: die Volkswirtschaftslehre in der frühen Bundesrepublik. Frankfurt: Campus, 2010

In addition, the entry Franz Gehrels had been accepted already - in German language - last year on the German wikipedia website: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Gehrels

No offence meant, but I can't help thinking that the English and German wikipedia websites apply double standards.

Regards, Dirk-Franz --Dirk-Franz (talk) 15:36, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Dirk-Franz, Welcome to the Teahouse! English and German Wikipedias are their own independent projects, which have their own communities, and standards that those communities have agreed on. That is true of any two different language wikipedias you'd want to compare. Therefore, different language wikipedias don't necessarily agree on what is enough to establish a subject's notability. In general, English Wikipedia has stricter requirements than other language wikipedias. Individual editors only follow what the community consensus is. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 15:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Adding films in which a song appears

Hello all, I have a question on articles about a song. There doesn't seem to be a standard way to add information about films in which a song appears on the article about that song. I've checked a few songs I know appeared in several movies, but could find no mention of that on their page. Are there good examples I missed, or a reason why that isn't done? It would be useful to de-orphan some articles about movies, if nothing else (looking at Blayqe on a Horse right now, an orphan with notable songs in its soundtrack). Cheers! Robincantin (talk) 15:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a standard format for this, but the most common approach would probably be a new level 2 header 'In popular culture' with TV, movie and maybe advert appearances below that. Although bear in mind that additions need to be sourced with reliable sources, and given that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, I'd be cautious about going onto every song and listing every film/tv show/advert that uses it. Hugsyrup (talk) 16:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

That, basically. Use in films should probably only be noted in the song's article if the use has been noted by reliable sources. If no RS cared about it, we shouldn't either. Regards SoWhy 16:08, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Good point about sourcing. Ok, looks like this article will remain an orphan for now. I appreciate the comments, thank you. Robincantin (talk) 16:23, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

In the dim and distant early days of the 'pedia there were lots of these sections in song articles. Then WP:TRIVIA came along and many were removed. That guideline is less stringent than it used to be but there is still a general feeling that the use of the song in a film should have some degree of notability. For example the use of The Blue Danube in 2001: A Space Odyssey (film) is considered iconic while use of the Symphony No. 7 (Beethoven)#II. Allegretto in The Black Cat (1934 film) isn't. As I mentioned the attitudes about this has been fluid over the years so I am just noting what I've seen and others may feel differently about the situation. MarnetteD|Talk 16:36, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

What SoWhy said, that is my own approach anyway. Existing is not enough, a decent independent source must have noticed. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:13, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Question

Dear hosts, I am around a month here and i know some basic things, but i want to ask a question. I am interested in writing articles very much (i started one-this). As i am Greek, i discovered that the most articles articles about Greek automobiles company are very small, like drafts. I would like to ask if i can make this articles drafts again to improve them, and if there is an other way to do this with not disturbing mainspace wiki. Best regards, Enivak (talk) 17:21, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey Enivak. You can always work on drafts in your sandbox (User:Enivak/sandbox), and then add content to the article once you're finished with it, or you can just work on the article directly. Wikipedia is always a work in progress, and nothing is ever expected to be completely finished or perfect. GMG^talk 19:21, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) You may add {{in use}} to the top of the article to inform others that a major edit is underway. --MrClog (talk) 19:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much! If i understood well, i cannot make an article draft again, but i can expand it in my sandbox or add a tag about a major edit, right?Enivak (talk) 21:20, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

User name and article name

I created a user name and I wanted to find out if the user name is also the article name? I assumed I was creating an account and from there I can create a new article. If the user name is also the article title, how can I change it? David — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andradegroup (talk • contribs) 19:18, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Do you want to write your autobiography on Wikipedia? That is not a good idea. Please read and understand the link given. Also see WP:Your first article.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:48, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Usernames and articles are in different spaces in Wikipedia, sort of like different folders of a computer. So, you can have both the article and the user of the same name. But you don't have to create a user of that name to create the article. You can use this account to create any number of articles in many different subjects. If you have created another account, just don't use that one. Always edit wikipedia using only one account. To create an article using this account, read the WP:Your first article as the previous answer suggested. If you still don't find a way after that, it's probably better if you focus on making edits to existing articles for a while, as that is much easier. You can also work on a new article, by writing what you want to put on the article on this page. The sandbox is your private page where you can work on articles or make other test edits. If you get enough content for the article in your sandbox, you can ask here again, and we will move it to draft and help you submit it, so that it can be published. By the way, Wikipedia doesn't allow usernames with names of celebrities, organisations, products, etc. as well as usernames that suggest they're used/shared by a group of people rather than a single person.Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 20:07, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Notable person or Autobiography

I am newly Trademarked model, musician and radio personality. Should my team create a notable article for fans to search my Biography or autobiography article?

T.I.A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tia Tropicana (talk • contribs) 19:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Tia Tropicana Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a means for people to tell the world about themselves. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(specifically in this case notable people); Wikipedia has no interest in what a subject wants to say about themselves, nor does it have an interest in furthering your career, aiding search results, or publicizing you to the world.

Writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged, as people naturally write favorably about themselves. If "your team" attempted to create an article about you, it would be a conflict of interest, and if they are being paid to do so they must declare that per the paid editing policy. If you truly meet the notability criteria, independent editors will take note of you and write about you. I would urge you to not attempt to write (or have written) an article about yourself.

Lastly, please understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. Any information, good or bad, can be in an article about you as long as it appears in an independent source. You cannot lock the page to what you want it to say, or prevent others from editing it. 331dot (talk) 20:03, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

A page I found with mistakes.

Look, I'm just hoping someone will care and fix this, since I don't know how to do it.

1963, Donald Rusk Currey cuts down a tree. What he didn't know was that this tree was close to (and maybe exceeded) 5,000 years of age. This whole thing followed him for the rest of his life making it a noteworthy part of history since he killed one of the oldest living things we knew of at the time.

Oops, right?

The page on Donald Rusk Currey shows factual mistakes. I pointed out the mistakes (and my evidence) that I found in the Talk section of the page. I don't know how to do this responsibly so I just left a record so that hopefully someone who does knows how and cares enough to do it, can fix the page.

I thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.29.97.151 (talk) 20:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

A link: Talk:Donald Rusk Currey#This page has factual mistakes that are easy to spot. Can somebody (who knows how) fix it?. --CiaPan (talk) 21:04, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

If anyone is willing to fix the page, I'd be very grateful to know about it, you can just let me know right here. Thank you again. -OP

External links section

Is it policy to place a link in the external links section pointing to the same article in Wikipedia, but one that is in a language other than English? Thank you --UberVegan🌾 21:21, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

No, but if you want to add a link to the same article on a different language Wikipedia, you can do so by clicking "Add links" under "Languages" on the left side of the article. --MrClog (talk) 21:25, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

(ec) @UberVegan: No. As a WP:UGC, Wikipedia is not WP:RELIABLE enough to be WP:SOURCE for Wikipedia, either in the same or another language. However, if you mean just to link two articles on the same subject, written in different languages, then you can do it through WikiData. Which articles are you thinking about? --CiaPan (talk) 21:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, both! Yes, I understand that Wiki is not a reliable source. However, on virtually all actors pages, at the bottom, there is an External links section, where their website is listed and their IMDB page... both obviously not RSs. With that, I was thinking that a wiki page from another language might be acceptable. UberVegan🌾 22:20, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:External links might be of help here. I don't have any more info than what's there and what seems to be tolerated on pages that are on mainspace. CiaPan, although correct, may have slightly misunderstood the intent of your question. So, we can safely leave that particular thread at that, and discuss the question you raised. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 22:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! UberVegan🌾 23:13, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia entries in other languages are linked via Wikidata, as above. Reliability is an issue for external links, but it's very relaxed compared to citations. Some unreliable websites are included in the external links if they still have useful content. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:18, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

new profile

just added a new profile for erez bustan, but got a speedy deletion. please example in detail what am i doing wrong.. it seems the only way to get something on wikipedia is to pay someone ( which is not fair ) im adding all the right features and notes that are needed.. are you able to tell me in detail what am i doing wrong so that i don't get deleted all the time — Preceding unsigned comment added by MHJunior21 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Pinging the deleting admin: Creffett Fastily. --MrClog (talk) 22:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

(ec)Hi MHJunior21, it is difficult for everyone to get a hang of things at first. I had my first 2-3 articles speedily deleted or discussion deleted in the beginning too. The sandbox is a place for editors to make mistakes. So, unless it was something serious, they wouldn't have deleted it. The reason given was misuse of wikipedia as a web host. That means the page had no chance of becoming a Wikipedia page. For specific details, you can ask this same question to the deleting administrator at their talk page, since non-admins can't see what was in the deleted page. We have a few admins at the Teahouse. Let's see if one of them drops by and can tell you more. Paying someone else is a bad idea. If the article doesn't deserve to be here, it will get deleted even if it is created by paid editors. If the article deserves to be here, some volunteer here will come around to creating it for free, without even being asked. If you would like to take a crack at it yourself, we are here to help always. Paid editors are technically allowed, so they are tolerated/accommodated. They don't get any special treatment. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 22:23, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

MHJunior21, I tagged the page for deletion because it looked like the kind of thing you'd see on a company's "About Our Leadership" webpage, not an encyclopedia article. Additionally, it used language which is strongly associated with promoting a subject (such as "visionary," "innovative," pretty much anything involving the phrase "providing solutions"). If someone is going to have a Wikipedia article, it needs to be neutrally worded, factual, and have reliable sources (such as newspaper coverage, and NOT blog posts or the subject's website) showing that the subject is notable. As far as I can tell, the subject you wrote about does not meet those notability requirements, so I'd recommend picking a different topic. creffett (talk) 22:32, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

One other thing - Wikipedia pages aren't "profiles," and Wikipedia is not a social network. Wikipedia pages are encyclopedia articles. creffett (talk) 22:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)