Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:TH)
Jump to: navigation, search

Question forum »Host profiles »Guest profiles » Welcome to the Teahouse! A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Contents

WP teahouse logo.png

[edit]

Greenwood Meadows F.C. now have a new logo. After a new owner and management team the club have new image. The Image can be seen on their Twitter page. Could you replace the image, I don't want to try and do it myself and make a mess. Thank YouArnold villa (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I want to write an article about a podcast in Pakistan[edit]

Podcasting is new in Pakistan and this podcast is an effort to make to create awareness about social issues like Harassment etc. How to avoid speedy deletionMzaidkhan1 (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

To avoid speedy deletion, follow the guidance at Your First Article, make sure your subject is notable and that you provide citations to reliable sources. RudolfRed (talk) 19:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

how can i translate a page which is in English into persian??[edit]

hello.my teacher asked me to translate 10 article into persian and then save in wikipedia.the translated page should be linked to the English one.the problem is that i do not know how to link the translated page. Rzaahmadi69 (talk) 17:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Rzaahmadi69. For translating articles, please see WP:Translate us - note that you must credit the original article properly, or you will violate the licence under which almost all material in Wikipedia is released. To add language links, pick مورد دیگر in the sidebar, and that will bring up a window where you can add links to articles in other languages. See WP:ILL for more information about these. --ColinFine (talk) 19:06, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Fix a Language link on an article[edit]

Hi, I'm trying to fix a link from the English page of Cambrai to the French one of Cambrai When on the English page, the French link points to Ducasse. I've tried editing the link on Wikidata but it is correct there, pointing to Cambrai.

Is there a way to force the English page to synchronize with wikidat? I've raised the problem on the talk page of the English page, where another person noticed it as well but was also unable to fix it. MaximilienThiel (talk) 15:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Simply cured by a colon in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Wouldn't have thought that the page itself would affect the links since they moved to wikidata. Cheers! MaximilienThiel (talk) 16:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Links hard-coded on a page will over-ride anything in Wikidata. This is necessary because Wikidata is severely flawed, particularly as Wikidata is limited to one-to-one mapping whereas the scope of articles may easily differ between different language's Wikipedias. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Need help with a problem.[edit]

Okay, here's the situation. IP editor User:141.51.213.208 has been editing Megalia for about 2 minutes now, however, both edits are marked as vandalism. I went ahead and reverted them, but they've contacted me on the matter saying this:

"Hello. The edits made on Megalia were clear vandalism. He even removed all the NPOV and OR templates. Just read to the article, it is just a rant about the website." They also sent [link]. To me, ZERO2CT's edit looks alright. What I'm asking for is a second opinion.

Oh, great and wise Teahouse Hosts, please help me with this problem.

The Phase Master 14:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC):

The edits by ZERO2CT aren't technically vandalism (not by our definition, anyway) but they are an attempt to push a particular position on the article, which isn't acceptable. The best advice I can offer would be for you to try and bring the parties concerned to the articles talkpage, where they can discuss how much of the new information to include, and how it should be phrased (pro-tip: not like ZERO2CT was phrasing it). Yunshui  15:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
TPM: Agree with the above. For edits to constitute vandalism on WP they have to be intentionally disruptive, and this does not cover edits, no matter how disruptive, that are done with the intention of improving the project, no matter how misguided that may be. That doesn't mean they won't result in a block or ban, but that would likely be something along the lines of a WP:CIR sanction rather than for vandalism.
On their face, the edits to appear to include quite a bit of unencyclopedic information, and have definitely not been done by a native English speaker. Personally, I would revert, especially since they may have tangential BLP implications, and then the edits can be discussed piece meal on the talk if necessary. TimothyJosephWood 15:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How to use Wikipedia information in my own book, copyright articles, photos[edit]

I am expanding my family geology booklet to include associated historical information using Wikipedia as my source. I extract parts of a Wikipedia search location and paste them into my file within my own text. . I do that also with photos. This becomes a significant portion of my book which I want to copyright. What is the acceptable procedure to identify the Wikipedia items extracted? I presently identify each extraction(s)from an article with the prefix {wik: search source} For each photograph I include the {wik:search source + photographers name}. I request information that allows me to proceed legally and within your guidelines, and ultimately get my book copyrighted. It will become a 'History book based upon my family genealogy'.

69.121.255.231 (talk) 14:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, you should find your answers in Wikipedia:Reusing_Wikipedia_content. You mention that you want to copyright this, but you didn't say what copyright license you intend to use. The easiest way to do this is to use a copyright license such as "CC BY-SA 3.0 License" that is compatible with Wikipedia, and then do the things needed to comply with that licence. ϢereSpielChequers 14:51, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Please note that we allow several different free licenses for images, so make sure you check each image and its license terms individually. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 16:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

How to add a logo of any organisation. Because they are copyrighted. But i see them in many pages.srini (talk) 10:40, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Example, This page has one, and I would like to add this image to this page.--srini (talk) 10:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi srini - please see WP:LOGO - Logos are used under a claim of fair-use, which means they must be uploaded to en-wikipedia, not wikimedia commons, and a fair-use rationale added (please see WP:LOGO and look at the rationales for similar logos). They can, normally, only be used once, in the article about the organization, not on associated pages about their town/city, competitions they compete in, etc. - Arjayay (talk) 10:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How do I get a Wikipedia page back up?[edit]

I was editing an existing Wikipedia Page for someone but the page has been deleted since then. Can someone give me any inputs on how I can get it back up?

Nivedita Ranit (talk) 10:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Nivedita Ranit. Assuming you are referring to Suresh Rangarajan, you can find the deletion discussion here. As you can see, it was the consensus of those who contributed that Rangarajan did not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, because there were not substantial reliable sources about him. (Remember that an article cannot be based on what you know, or what I know, or what he and his associates have said or published: it must be largely based on what people who have no connection with him have published about him; and if there is little or no such published material, there will be nothing that can go in an article.
So my advice to you would be first to read the link above to understand what we mean by notability, and then look for suitable sources. If you cannot find these, give up and don't waste any more of your time. If you can find them, you can ask for the article to be restored to your user space: see WP:REFUND. But my suggestion would be to read your first article and start again, because my guess is that your draft will not be very useful, because you almost certainly made the (common) mistake of writing it from what you know rather than from what the independent sources say.
One further point: you say you were editing the page for someone. If by that you mean that you were editing on his behalf, then you need to know that Wikipedia discourages you from editing articles about people you are associated with: please read WP:COI carefully. --ColinFine (talk) 11:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Split[edit]

1- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Split_(2017_film)&action=history

2- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Split_(2016_American_film)&action=history

Both the titles have own group of editors. They are editing the same film as different article? Marvellous Spider-Man 10:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, that's problematic. It looks like the article originally existed at Split (2017 film) but was https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Split_(2017_film)&oldid=748344993 moved to Split (2016 American film). An IP editor then attempted to revert the move (badly) by restoring the old content at the redirect and ended up forking the page. I'm not sure if it's fixable but I think the thing to do in cases like this is a request a history merge. – Joe (talk) 11:34, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
I have redirected Split (2017 film) to Split (2016 American film).[1] It is not suited for history merge due to interleaving edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

New pages for a film[edit]

Hello. I prepared a page about a short doc that was shortlisted for the Oscars. When I search for it on wiki I find it. It says its an orphan but I've tried linking as much as possible. How can I publish it. And, a HEBREW page exists for the film but when trying to link the two together, wiki couldn't find the Hebrew article. This is the page in English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mute%27s_House and this is the page in Hebrew: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/בית_האילמת Arielgrichter (talk) 08:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

It's true that no other article links to The Mute's House, but it's not a serious problem. A greater concern is that it cites no references. It lists some references, but it doesn't cite any of them. Maproom (talk) 08:46, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Links between corresponding articles in different languages are made through Wikidata. I've now linked the English and Hebrew articles, so you should see the other language link at the foot of the left-hand toolbar in the English version (foot of the right-hand toolbar in the Hebrew version). --David Biddulph (talk) 13:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

contribuite[edit]

as I can contribute more with the wikipedia?Pedro nduca (talk) 07:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Anyone can contribute to Wikipedia, Pedro nduca. You can find some ideas on what to do at Wikipedia:Introduction. – Joe (talk) 11:42, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Can I Create and upload an article of a film for which I have purchased the rights to release?[edit]

Hi Wiki team. I am entering into the Film Production Business and have recently acquired the Rights to Dub and release the movie in another language. I have the following query - Can i Create and Upload an article about this soon to be released film?Niranjankumaryadav (talk) 06:57, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

@Niranjankumaryadav: You should not do that because you have a conflict of interest and such action could be seen as promotion or advertising (which Wikipedia does not allow). Ian.thomson (talk) 07:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse,Niranjankumaryadav. I have a slightly different view than Ian.thomson. Because of your business relationship with the film, you definitely have a Conflict of interest, and should be very careful when editing. It is possible to edit with a disclosed conflict of interest, but it's not easy. Do not use Wikipedia to promote the film in any way. Any article must be neutrally written and not an advertisement for the film. Please start by studying our notability guidelines for films. If principal photography is underway or completed, and if the production has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, then perhaps an article about the film may be justified. Read and study Your first article. Because of your conflict of interest, use the Articles for creation process, so that experienced editors without a COI can review the article before publication, to be sure that it complies with our most important policies. Good luck. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How to insert some form of Contents box?[edit]

Hello humanoids, I've spent about 3 solid days working on an article "Reverend John Davies (Shon Gymro)". I've got a fiar bit done but it clearly needs some more structure, ie, contents page. I've seen them on other articles and think I could use one on this article. Very much appreciate the help. Ian Iantheluke (talk) 04:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Iantheluke. A Table of Contents is generated automatically when an article has more than three sections. You create a section by putting two equal signs before and after the section name. The wikicode look like this:
==Section name==
Add sections and you will get the Table of contents. Read more at WP:TOC. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Info Box Book?[edit]

Hi there,

Can someone please add the book cover to the info box of this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_The_Cannibal%E2%80%99s_Pot:_Lessons_for_America_From_Post-Apartheid_South_Africa

I can't for the life of me figure it out.

Thanks.

Kc2290Kc2290 (talk) 04:20, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

It seems that Graeme Bartlett has done this, Kc2290. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How to make a brand-new page available for everybody?[edit]

I have created a page for the biography of Silvia Osuna Oliveras and it is not available yet. I can find it on my sandbox but there is no title and I couldn't find the way to make it public. Do I have to do somethig elese apart from writing the content of the page or just wait until it is published?

Thank you in advanced

Sfdezmartin (talk) 03:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sfdezmartin. Moving a draft from a user sandbox to the article namespace is something that can technically be done by pretty much any editor, even yourself, but this does not mean that the article will not be nominated for deletion. Another option for you to try would be to submit the draft for review via Wikipedia:Articles for creation by adding Template:Userspace draft to the very top of the page, and then clicking click "Save changes". You should then see a blue "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top which you can click whenever you feel your draft is ready. Submitting your draft for review will allow experienced editors to assess it an proved suggestions on ways to improve it. Drafts submitted for review do seem to have a better chance of surviving since the reviewers job is to weed out those which are likely to be quickly deleted for one reason or another.
After taking a look at User:Sfdezmartin/sandbox, my recommendation would be for you to submit your draft for review because it does not appear quite ready for article status. The are some problems with the formatting/markup such as embedded external links and the lack of proper sections, but the main issue is that's not clear (at least at first glance) whether the subject of your draft satisfies Wikipedia:Notability (people) or Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Formatting issues, etc. tend to be things which can be easily fixed through copy editing, but Wikipedia notability (or the lack thereof) tends to be one of the main reasons why newly created articles end up being deleted. It might be a good idea for you to take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article and also ask for some feedback from editors who belong to Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science and Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry. Editors from those two WikiProjects would probably be most familiar with the type of research Oliveras is engaged in and would be able to provide more specific feedback on ways to improve the article or suggestions on where to find additional sourcing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How to edit an inline reference[edit]

I have had some help recently and with thanks for an entry called Signals Through The Flames (film).

It contains book references.

There is something wrong with the formatting of the References area. When viewing the draft, inline citations edited by admins show as indented 1.) and 2.). But using the edit button shows something different: my hand-entered entries which wind up being duplicates.

I have searched for how to edit an inline reference and only find how to make it, not how to retrieve and edit it for accuracy. Bringing in a fresh template does not seem reasonable.

Advise, please.Loninappleton (talk) 01:58, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

@Loninappleton: Inline references are usually edited in the section where they are used and not in the references section where they are displayed. Draft:Signals Through The Flames is so small that you can just click the "Edit" tab at top to edit the whole page. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

¿como puedo editar los cuadros visuales que salen?[edit]

al poner en google algo sale un cuadro al lado de las paginas para buscar y quisiera saber como puedo editarlo porque ay contenidos de wikipedia que no concuerdan y quisiera saber como hacerlo para que concuerden con el contenido de wikipedia K.Kapoor (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi K.Kapoor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'll try to translate your question into English below, so that other editors may also attempt to answer your question. However, I fear that, without the specifics (Which Wikipedia topic? In which language did you Google? etc.), we won't be able to assist you too much.
Rough translation of K.Kapoor's question
Heading: How can I edit the visual boxes that appear? When searching for something in Google, a box appears on the side of the search results pages, and I would like to know how I can edit this information, because some content on Wikipedia are not correct and I would like to know how to make it so that it matches with the content on Wikipedia [sic].
To better answer your question, it would help if you could provide more details about your problem. If the issue is that some content on Wikipedia pages are incorrect, and you can find reliable sources for them, I'm sure other editors here would be more than happy to help you out. If the problem exists outside of Wikipedia, however, I'm not sure that we can help you.
Finally, please note that this is the English Wikipedia, and most (if not all) of our editors will generally use English here. If you would prefer, you can also try to ask your question at the Spanish Wikipedia (especially if the content issue is located there).--talk2Chun(talk) (contributions) 23:26, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

academy award[edit]

Hi, I'm trying to add a notable person. he won a technical achievement academy award which shows in the academy's database via the academy's search function but it does not show on a permanent webpage that could be linked as a reference. has anyone successfully jumped thru this hoop? thx!Naiadescoven (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

What is their name? maybe there is information on another site, but no one will be able to help you, if they don't know who the person is. Svrangerchrista (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
@Naiadescoven: I assume it's about User:Naiadescoven/sandbox/David Johnsrud. You can use |at= from Template:Cite web#In-source locations to briefly specify a search, e.g. |at=Search on David Johnsrud.[1] Omit details like "Enter the name in the Nominee field".

References

  1. ^ "The Official Academy Awards Database". Oscars.org. Search on David Johnsrud. Retrieved 23 January 2017. 
Hello, Naiadescoven. I found this article in Variety, which says, "Gary Nuzzi, David Johnsrud and William Blethen for the design and development of the Unilux H3000 Strobe Lighting System, a high-speed strobe lighting system that generates a high intensity light pulse with a duration of only 1/100,000 of a second, the effect of which is to freeze an object moving at a high rate of speed so it can be photographed with extraordinary sharpness." I suspect that wording comes from an Academy press release. It is a start but sources providing more significant and truly independent coverage are needed. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Article Creation[edit]

Hi! I've heard a very interesting Pakistani group, and I see that they have not a page on Wikipedia. I was looking for information and they have been interviewed in Daily Pakistan, and on a music magazine of their country, are those two sources sufficient for a short article? Thank you!Ane wiki (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Ane wiki and welcome to the TeaHouse. The problem with those interviews is that they contain what the group has to say about themselves. Such sources can only be used for limited basic claims, and they must be only a minor part of the sources that support the article. The sources we need are where reliable, independent sources have written about the subject. --Gronk Oz (talk) 22:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Requesting second opinion on first Wikipedia article & help with alternate account merging[edit]

Hi, I've recently posted my first article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopi_Krishnan) directly into the main page without going through the Draft stage (I realized my mistake after I had already posted the article, sorry about that). I also admit I have an acquaintance with the subject though I have not been asked to post this article and I've added a COI template for that reason.

Now that it's already posted, I'd like a second opinion please on the notability of the subject. I wanted to write about Gopi Krishnan because I feel he has made big contributions in bringing technology to banks in the Middle East and he's won awards for his contribution. I spent a couple of hours searching for sources that I think are not primary. If anyone could please take a look and tell me if the subject is notable enough to be included?

Also, I have two accounts on Wiki, an old one I used for Wikimedia Commons and another I've recently created for Wikipedia. Without realizing it, I seem to have violated policies by unknowingly editing my own article with my alternate account. Please help! I don't want to get in the bad books of Wikipedia, I intend to help to contribute for a long time. Is there a way I could merge my two accounts without losing edits on either account?

Thanks so much for your time.

Kaybee85 Kaybee85 (talk) 22:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Linking to posts in members-only forums?[edit]

Title says it all, really!

I want to include a quote that would link to posts from a members-only forum. (Not a private forum, just one you have to join to view.)

The post is by a respected published author in the relevant field and I can't any examples of them saying anything similar anywhere else.

Is this allowed? Funky1&2 (talk) 21:35, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Let's take the bits one by one, FUnky1&2:
  • References do not have to be easy to access, just possible. In particular, sources that you have to pay to access are not prohibited. I haven't found a clear statement on sources available only to members: it seems to me that if membership is open to anybody, even if there is a cost, that would be all right; if membership is not generally available that may be more problematic; but the Resource exchange may still be helpful. See WP:SOURCEACCESS
  • Normally forums are not acceptable as sources, since they are user generated; but WP:SPS says "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications", and from your description that might be the case here.
So, the answer is "it depends". Please read the whole of WP:VERIFY (two of the links I gave above are to sections of that page), and make your own judgment. Alternatively, you could ask about the specific case at the WP:RSN. --ColinFine (talk) 23:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

It's not a paid forum, just one that has to be joined before viewing is possible. The author concerned is indeed an "expert [whose] work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." In fact, he is generally regarded as the leading authority on the subject, so I suspect the quote will be justifiable. Will check out the link first though.

Thanks again.

publishing a article about other person[edit]

Hi, please help me! if i wanted to write something about some famous person. or making a page Tapannaubagh (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)for other person what should i do.

some regional actor and actress doesnot have there identity on wiki, though they are very famous on some regions. so, i wanted to write about them and make their page too.

i try to create on sandbox too, but after 2 days the article is been deleted by admin with some reason.

Please help me. Thanks Tapannaubagh (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Tapannaubagh, an admin probably deleted your sandbox for copyright violations. I didn't double check, but generally that's the only time a sandbox will get deleted. If you want to write a page for somebody, you'll have to get sources like magazine articles about them and then rewrite it in your own words. White Arabian Filly Neigh 19:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
The deletion log at User:Tapannaubagh/sandbox says that it was deleted under criterion U5: misuse of Wikipedia as a web host. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi Tapannaubagh. In many cases, it helps to check your talk page, which I've linked to here: Tapannaubagh's Talk Page. It seems that your sandbox article was tagged for speedy deletion, which list the limited specific cases in which an administrator may delete an article without discussion. In your specific case, your article was deleted under the so-called U5 criteria (criteria for speedy deletion of a user page #5), which is the case if an administrator agrees that the content of your sandbox article is against the goals of Wikipedia as an encylopedia (the criteria specifically states: "U5. Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host: Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals, where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages, with the exception of plausible drafts and pages adhering to Wikipedia:User pages#What may I have in my user pages?").
For the future, may I suggest that you read Wikipedia's policies on what Wikipedia is not to avoid deletion? You may also want to read some of the Help Guides posted on your talk page, including Your first article and How to develop an article.--talk2Chun(talk) (contributions) 19:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Copy-right rules in different countries[edit]

Hello!

I put some links on books in Russian the an article about Russian Said Gafurov to the source that is censored in Russia but available for example in Germany. It is an electronical library which has a huge corpus of books in Russian - Flibusta.

Then a bot removed the links.

I think that these links are important, and that they should be used for all the Russiams who wrote books starting with Tolstoy and Dostoevskiy.

What are the rules about such links?

Thank you ARussian (talk) 15:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

It is probable that the reason why the bot reverted your links is that you were placing external links within the article text, rather than as reference citations. Please read WP:External links and Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Catholic Church[edit]

What is the origin of the Catholic Church?Josietony (talk) 06:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Josietony! SNice.svg This page is for getting help using Wikipedia so it is not the proper place for your question: that would be WP:RD. If you have a question about using Wikipedia, please feel free to come back and ask a new question here. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 06:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@Josietony: You could also see the "History" section of the article Catholic Church. --Gronk Oz (talk) 12:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Being asked to rewrite but don't know why[edit]

It would be helpful if someone could give me an example from my attempt, that indicates specifically why it needs a 'major rewrite' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Digital_Literacy_Coach eg, you have written this "...", which is unacceptable because "..."... please? I've modelled my post on other Wikipedia articles and asked friends to proofread, and can't see how to move this forward. Having already committed many hours to this, this is now extremely frustrating. :( Mistermchugh (talk) 06:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello Mistermchugh and welcome to Wikipedia! SCongratulate.svg The reason your draft was rejected was primarily one of WP:TONE. As reviewer David.moreno72 wrote:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

That is good advice. Following the advice on the pages WP:NOTESSAY, WP:TONE, WP:MFA and WP:SMOS will help you get your article approved. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 06:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Mistermchugh. Your draft does not read as a neutral encyclopedia article about the topic of a "Digital literacy coach" but rather a review of the literature discussing the topic and also as an advocacy piece more or less arguing that this job title is a good idea. It comes off almost as a manual for implementing the position within an an organization. There are stylistic issues as well. We do not use the formula "Smith and Jones (2005) argue that . . ." Instead, we provide full bibliographic information in footnotes (also called references), rather than shortened bibliographic information in the body of the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I've already rewritten the article in a neutral tone, this seems like an extremely subjective matter, so I'm asking if someone could illustrate exactly how the tone of my article is inappropriate with a specific example. I've read the pages you've linked to, but I feel the text confirms these expectations. Specific feedback would be far more helpful than generic criticism.

Mistermchugh (talk) 07:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen that's more helpful, I used the text in this Wikipedia article as guide, who use exactly the formula you've described.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formative_assessment For example where they say, "Kluger and DeNisi (1996)[26] reviewed over three thousand reports on feedback..." So it's acceptable in that post but not in mine? This is the subjectivity I'm struggling with. Again, a specific example would be far less ambiguous and far more productive. Mistermchugh (talk) 07:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. The use is just as wrong in that article as it is in yours. Generally, if you want a guide from which to base your article off of, you should use a featured article. Some new users choose to create articles themselves after having become auto confirmed rather than via the WP:AFC process, or articles are simply updated by newer users who don't know the proper way to WP:CITE; thus some sections of Wikipedia receive more scrutiny than others. But the existence of a problem with one page does not justify the existence of a problem on another. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 07:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
No, it is not acceptable in that article either, Mistermchugh. That article should be copy edited to remove that type of prose. We have well over five million articles and probably one to two million of them have glaring problems and need work. That does not mean that we should add new articles that also have glaring problems. Instead, we want well developed new articles that comply with our core content policies and at least approximate compliance with our Manual of style.
As for a specific example, consider this sentence: "Attempting to provide technical skills training onsite to teachers in the use of technology has been found to be insufficient, and teaching skills in isolation can be ineffective in ensuring that teachers develop this kind of knowledge, for example, how to use technology to teach content in differentiated ways according to students' learning needs, or technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK); how technology can be used to support the learning of specific curriculum content, or technological content knowledge (TCK); or how to help students meet particular curriculum content standards while using technologies appropriately, (technological pedagogical and content knowledge, or TPACK) in their learning; this is where employing the services of a dedicated DLC has been found to be useful." With all due respect, that sentence is excessively long and convoluted, uses excessive jargon and acronyms, and is confusing to me even after I have read it several times. Instead, we want neutral, descriptive prose that is concise and clear, and avoids any trace of advocacy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Jim, this is much more helpful. Trust me to pick an article as model that is flawed. This gives me the direction I needed, your time and specificity is much appreciated.

MisterMcHugh (talk) 08:08, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

It seems to me that there's another issue, unrelated to those described above. The writer is too close to the subject, and "can't see the wood for the trees". The article appears to be addressed to readers who already know what a DLC is. many readers won't know, and the article doesn't tell them. For example:
The first sentence says that DLCs are empoyed at schools that have "a 1:1 provision of devices". It says nothing about what kind of device. A fountain pen? A cricket bat? I guess it means a personal computer; if so, the article needs to say so.
The second paragraph preaches aboout how schools don't employ enough DLCS. But while the reader has no idea what a DLC does, it is unclear why they should employ any at all. There's a mention of "expensive hardware": maybe the DLC's job is to prevent the pupils from stealing the "devices"? Maproom (talk) 09:54, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I can understand your confusion. While I cannot say with certainty that the duty of a DLC is not to assure that devices aren't stolen, I believe that the main job of the DLC is to help teachers learn about and use the technology that the school is paying for. I agree that this absolutely should be stated in the article. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 11:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

How long of a wait?[edit]

How long does it normally take for a new page to be approved? Jacob Long 06:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacobLong01 (talkcontribs)

Welcome to Wikipedia, JacobLong01! Draft Wikipedia articles are approved via the WP:AFC process. This can sometimes take quite a long time - currently 20% of articles there (78 out of 377) have been waiting for three weeks or more. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 07:06, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@JacobLong01: There are a number of things that Psiĥedelisto didn't mention to you in his answer. Firstly you have an unterminated comment at the start of your sandbox draft, so all the rest of the draft (including the submission for review) will be ignored unless and until you terminate the comment. Secondly, the "Quick Note" at the start of the draft, requesting donations, is unacceptable here in Wikipedia. Thirdly, the draft contains a lengthy stream of text without references to reliable sources, so you need to read about verifiability, and also about notability. Fourthly it appears that the subject of the draft may be a fictional character but you have failed to explain the context. Fifthly it appears that your draft is a somewhat incomplete and malformatted copy of an existing page in another wiki. Such copying seems rather pointless, and you have not given proper attribution for the copying, so it is plagiarism. I would suggest that you read WP:Welcome, and particularly the guidance at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:20, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Alternative account for Wikipedia Adventure?[edit]

I though it would be best if I asked first, so here goes. I really want to see what I can learn from the Wikipedia Adventure. However, for (irrational) reasons, I don't really want traces of this on my main account. Would it be considered as a legitimate use of an alternative account solely for running through the Wikipedia Adventure? Or would it be considered a sockpuppet? Thanks for indulging in this strange question. --(talk) (contributions) 21:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Talk2chun. There is no prohibition on having multiple accounts. Sockpuppetry is when you use multiple accounts in a way that is disruptive. I see no problem with your idea. However, don't ever edit the same article with two different accounts, and declare any alternate accounts on your userpage. John from Idegon (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC) John from Idegon (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I do not think there's anything wrong with idea. Although i have been wrong before :)

Jacob Long 06:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacobLong01 (talkcontribs)

It's recommended in the adventure hangout to use a specific account for testing, so I would reccommend using this account:

  • Start over fresh with a new account: Like User:OcaasiTWA17 (these are legitimate alternate testing accounts and are not considered sockpuppets)

That's just what I've read.Svrangerchrista (talk) 01:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

how to incorporate an emoji[edit]

Hi again. I know how to use this emoji SCongratulate.svg, but it isn't quite my style. I'd prefer to use File:Emojione 263A.svg, but I've abandoned all hope of figuring out how to use it by myself. File:Emojione 263A.svg doesn't work. Might one of you know the secret? Before you answer, consider whether you really want lots of newbies to learn how to scatter emjois all over the place....SCongratulate.svg Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 20:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

What about {{p|smile}} Face-smile.svg LouisAlain (talk) 20:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, looking at the way that the {{oldsmiley}} template is designed, I assume that [[File:Name of file on Commons|18px]] would produce Emojione 263A.svg? --talk2Chun(talk) (contributions) 20:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
It worked even for me! Emojione 263A.svg
You have opened a whole new wonderful world for me and so many newbies!Tournesol.png Thank you
DennisPietras (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
You're welcome, and I trust you'll use this newfound power wisely.--talk2Chun(talk) (contributions) 21:52, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
...and be careful not to waste too much of your life playing with the options at Wikipedia:Emoticons, {{Smiley}}, {{Smiley2}}, {{Oldsmiley}}, {{Sert}}, {{Emoji}}, etc. --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:27, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Archiving from WIkiProject main page[edit]

The advice for reviving a WikiProject at WP:INACTIVEWP advises to "Archive old clutter" from the project page. Is there a method for doing that for the main project page rather than the talk page, or does this really mean to edit as for any other page (with appropriate discussion in the talk page)? DferDaisy (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

DferDaisy, welcome to Teahouse. It would help us answer your question if you would tell us specifically what project you're concerned with. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 19:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello John from Idegon, thanks for taking the time to reply. I've been looking at WikiProject Veterinary medicine, and was wondering how best to help revive it. I won't make any changes without discussion on the talk page of that project first, but I wanted to determine what was possible/recommended before I proposed anything on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DferDaisy (talkcontribs) 19:53, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Award[edit]

How do i get a award — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joba Chamberlain (talkcontribs) 18:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Joba Chamberlain, and welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia has many informal awards. See: Wikipedia:Awards – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Is an information from a famous blog post a credible source?[edit]

Hey, I want to edit a profile and I found an information in the blog of a famous blogging website. Is it a credible source? Please help! JennyGon (talk) 15:26, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JennyGon. The vast majority of blogs are not considered reliable sources. The only rare exception is if the blogger is a widely recognized expert about the topic. Please see WP:BLOGS for details. Also, Wikipedia consists of articles, not profiles. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Disagree with interpretation of reasons given for article rejection; how to resolve[edit]

Hi. I submitted Draft:C4LD and finally got reviewed. Thanks to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NewYorkActuary for doing the review.

Reason given for rejection was "The draft does not demonstrate that the subject has received substantial coverage from non-local reliable sources." I think it is a mistake to say this, as The Globe and Mail newspaper is national in scope, regardless of whether it is based in the same city where the event occurred. Should references from that paper not count? Specific Generalist (talk) 15:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Specific Generalist. The first thing is to engage with NewYorkActuary: as far as I can see, you haven't posted on their User Talk page. You have posted at WP:AFCHD, which is not a bad place to do so. You have also been answered there. Whether you like the answer there or not, asking the same question here looks like Forum shopping, and is not acceptable behaviour. Please either take up the discussion with the reviewer, or continue it at AFCHD. --ColinFine (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
No forum shopping intended. Actually, the response at AFCHD was made by actually reviewing the article. Then the third comment in there was made by myself again (much too verbose, really), with no response since. So bringing it up here has more to do with asking a simpler question than the one at AFCHD. Thanks for the tips. Specific Generalist (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Specific Generalist. The Globe and Mail is certainly a good source, but will only count towards significant coverage of it covers the topic in some detail. If it's just a passing mention, then it doesn't help much. Since the article doesn't seem to be online, I've not been able to check myself. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:14, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
There are some good sources here, Specific Generalist. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Specific Generalist. Please remember the reason we all should be editing this encyclopedia is to improve it as a whole. Everyone starts somewhere, and you've started on this particular subject. Assuming good faith is a pillar policy. The reviewer reviewed your article in good faith and gave you very constructive good faith advice on things that needed fixing. It would show good faith on your part to address the mechanics issues that were presented to you by him. Fix the headers, match the references with the facts they are referencing. And he was also quite correct that you need out of town sources. So please go work on your draft and address the issues you were presented before you run to every forum we have. Once you've addressed the issues that were presented to you in good faith, then if you need further help, ask. If you need help with the mechanics of fixing the issues you've been presented, ask. The only side the majority of editors here have is the side of improving the encyclopedia. The reviewer did not criticize your draft because he has a position on its subject. He did it so you'd know what to fix. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 19:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone. Cordless Larry gave some useful feedback. Part of my problem is how to get from Point A to Point B. I have beside me a file folder 2" thick of newspaper clippings and other papers from the event. I tried to translate some of those clippings into Wikipedia citations by using the Citations tool and supplying newspaper name, page, title, etc. I hoped that would be enough for someone else to see what I see, which is the full article. Apparently it is not. I'll have to investigate whether for certain newspapers I can turn those into direct links. Thanks to John from Idegon for pointing out how this is a community. I'll try to tidy the article up, as per NewYorkActuary. Thanks again to NewYorkActuary also. Regarding out of town sources, my problem is still that I don't really understand how this applies here. The Globe and Mail is a paper of national scope, so it should represent the whole country, not just Toronto. Newspaper coverage originating in other provinces and countries did exist, but is harder to find through Google. I can try the suggested books and see if those are accepted by people. Specific Generalist (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Note that sources that are only available offline are perfectly acceptable, Specific Generalist. It's good practice to link to them if they are available online, but they don't have to be. I can see how draft reviewers struggle to assess notability if they can't access the source though, so they have my sympathies there. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I edit topics associated with Chicago frequently. It is always contentious when a guideline requires geographically disperse sources where the local paper is also a regional paper. I've seen Articles for Discussion deletion discussions go both ways on the regional/local paper issue. AFC's primary mission is to help you create an article that will with certainty survive a deletion nomination. Hence, the more conservative view that you need out of town papers or nationally circulated magazines. Template:cite news is fine for offline newspaper articles. Template:cite magazine works for offline magazines. Best of luck. John from Idegon (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Infobox settlement - how to define metro area[edit]

The template:Infobox settlement includes population_metro but it is not clear how this is defined and how to match this with numbers from the Statistics bureau. We try to fix the Oslo article. — Erik Jr. 15:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

The current number is based on a 100 km radius from Oslo. This includes the villages along the Swedish border, Notodden and several other places that probably do not form part of any meaningful entity with Oslo. This creates a larger metro area than f.ex London. 109.202.107.10 (talk) 01:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, we need a clarification of what metro population means in WP context. Currently the footnote states that the number is based on 100 km radius, this is OK as it is explicitly stated. But we need another number within a more reasonable radius, but for that we need a definition. --— Erik Jr. 10:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

how to find edited articles for reference[edit]

hey teahouse, how to find edited articles for reference?kindly help ..please and how do i type 4 tildes please someone help. 117.202.105.95 (talk) 12:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I'm not quite sure what you are asking. Do you mean, how can you find reliable sources to use as references? That is the $64000 dollar question, and one of the things that makes writing Wikipedia articles challenging.
One tool you may find useful is the template {{find sources}}. Suppose (for the sake of example) you were researching Nikola Tesla. If you place {{find sources|Nikola Tesla}} somewhere (eg on your user page, or temporarily on the draft page you are working on) it will produce the following:
Find sources: "Nikola Tesla" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference.
You can use those links to try and find sources. (But obviously for a subject like Tesla, who lived long before the Internet, many sources will not be available on line, and you won't be able to find them online. You may have to go to a large library for your research).
As for the tilde: it should be somewhere on your keyboard. On my (UK) keyboard it is next to the Enter key, as Shift/#; on my Android phone, where I use the Minuum keyboard, I have to go into numbers and then it is available as a shift. Alternatively, if you are in the desktop version using Javascript, there should be a "signature" icon above the editing window. --ColinFine (talk) 16:27, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Image Upload help[edit]

Firstly, I would like to thank Finnusertop for the constructive response regarding the article Stanley Leopold Fowler. Secondly, I will be, probably asking a lot of questions and at my tender age of 53, although a tad savvy with the laptop, I get lost in the abbreviated and technical jargon. The question: I have permission from Stanley Fowler's daughter, Sally-ann, to use images and videos to support the article and possibly a few more articles to come, to celebrate her father's extraordinary achievement. When trying to upload the screen asks to tick a box as if it's my work. What do I need to do to pass this hurdle? Thank you for the answer in advance (as sometimes I dont know how to reply to messages :/)

Thewayweis (talk) 12:12, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Thewayweis. If the daughter owns the copyright to the images and videos, then she must consent to an appropriate Creative Commons license in writing. You cannot upload the images based on verbal consent. The easiest and quickest way is for her to open her own account at Wikimedia Commons and upload the images herself. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:12, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Question about length of articles/entries[edit]

Hi! I just had a question about the length of an article, if there were requirements. I scroll through the Deaths in a given year and do a general check to make sure the dates match, i.e. if Joe Smith died on January 1, 2017, I always make sure the corresponding article is listed in the right category (i.e. 2017 deaths), etc. On occasion, I will come across a person or two who has a very bare article, maybe a sentence or paragraph or two; (see: Hubert Lucot or Roland Glavany) and as a common sense idea I would add the hatnotes regarding reference improvements or notability or anything that would indicate the article needs more information/substance.

For whatever reason said edits would be reverted by the same user because an article was undergoing a “major edit” and the author deemed my edits unnecessary. (ex: “Undid revision 760917608 by Snickers2686 (talk) Chill out, this is in use”)

Now I understand nearly anyone can revert for any reason but my question is, if an article is too short and I think it needs to be improved upon to be more substantial, what else can I do in terms of tags and/or other notices? Or should I just leave it be?

I did try to talk to the person who reverted my edits but he/she just pushed me off on another user and never responded. Any input would be appreciated.

Snickers2686 (talk) 07:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I have re-added the hatnote to Hubert Lucot, as it clearly still applies. Once Zigzig20s has finished the major edit, it may be appropriate to remove the hatnote. Maproom (talk) 07:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
What exactly is the point if it's in use/under construction? Sorry, I never really do this, but with the inauguration I have not had the time to work on them properly. I also asked another editor on my talkpage to help with this. The hatnotes seem utterly pointless for articles we are clearly working on.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:01, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Problem solved by the great User:LouisAlain!Zigzig20s (talk) 16:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

hi, I am inspired by a spiritual motivator who has travelled to 111 countries so far in just 2 years and also create a bio page for his Global contribution for spiritual work and wwikipedia for have traveled 111 countries within 2 years. Please advice how this can be done.[edit]

How do we make an entry for the 'List of people who have traveled most number of countries in the world' what kind of references can be shown as evidence so that the same could be accepted on Wikipedia and remains there with the link to the biopage of the person.Fulchand 06:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atma Siddhi Shastra Mission 142 (talkcontribs)

Articles should be created by people who are not affiliated with the topic in question, based on professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources which are likewise not affiliated with the topic but are specifically about it. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:25, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Providing Edits & Reversions[edit]

Hello, there. I am currently attempting to point to a number of peer reviewed articles in various Wikipedia Pages. As an example, I added a small paragraph to the [E-Book] section in Archival Storage, seen below:

The difficulties surrounding the storage and curation of e-books have continued to expand as technology grows and evolves. Simplified “strategies of preservation, upkeep, and ongoing access in the print medium have changed little since the arrival of the mechanically-produced book, though the details of those systems have undergone changes when technological developments enabled certain strategies.”[1] Three critical components have been identified[2] as major obstacles to preservation and archival strategies. These include the speed of rapidly changing technologies, the malleability of electronic materials, and proportional changes in e-book functionality, with respect to the user.

This section was reverted. However, I don't see it as in any way promotional, incorrect, or unhelpful. Should I simply press this matter into the Talk page and inquire about whether or not others agree? If I put this through the talk page, how long does it typically take to come to some form of consensus so the section I have written above can be added to the relevant place? Thenewpulp (talk) 23:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I'd agree with the addition of the content you wrote above. However, it's a good idea to take it to the talk page and see what others think. I've never edited on that topic, but it generally takes less than a week to get talk replies. White Arabian Filly Neigh 23:42, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
(e/c) Hi Thenewpulp. There may have been a good reason for the revert but the edit summary by MrOllie is opaque, stating "Rv Siemens SPA", which seems to translate to "revert unintelligible word single purpose account—and the edit looks helpful to me. My first guess was that the editor reverted thinking you are a sockpuppet of some account they are familiar with named Seimens, but no such account exists. Anyway, yes, certainly, take it to the talk page – post to the user's talk page; seek a third opinion if applicable; read WP:BRR; follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution – but now that the user who reverted has been pinged here, maybe they can explain what they intended? Certainly I've left a few unintelligible edit summaries in my time, but I do try to be very clear when I am reverting, and most especially when the issue is not obvious (which I think applies here). At times, when something similar has happened to me, I have reverted right back, stating something in the edit summary like "If you revert again, I will attempt to discuss with you, but since I cannot understand your edit summary, I see no basis for your reversion..." or words to that effect. Of course, once you're here a long time, you can step a bit heavier. As a brand new user, being cautious is good. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:49, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I reverted him because he was systematically adding references to Ray Siemens, head of the Electronic Textual Cultures Laboratory to Wikipedia articles. Thenewpulp has since disclosed (elsewhere, not here or on the talk pages of the articles in question) that's because he is a paid editor who is being compensated by the Electronic Textual Cultures Laboratory for his editing. - MrOllie (talk) 23:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, this is the sort of thing that can be hashed out on the talk page. My observation is that your addition contains too large a quote and is expressed in somewhat vaporous language, not really appropriate for Wikipedia.
But that's just my opinion. Welcome to the Teahouse, Thenewpulp. I hope we can help.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 23:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Siemens, Ray; Dobson, Teresa (2011). "HCI-Book? Perspectives on E-Book Research 2006-2008". Papers of the Bibliographical Society of Canada/Cahiers de la Société Bibliographique du Canada. 49 (1): 53. 
  2. ^ Siemens, Ray; Dobson, Teresa (2011). "HCI-Book? Perspectives on E-Book Research 2006-2008". Papers of the Bibliographical Society of Canada/Cahiers de la Société Bibliographique du Canada. 49 (1): 54. 
I agree. Take out the superfluous language. The addition does have merit, though. Justin15w (talk) 02:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Note I've also reverted edits by this editor. As can be seen in this diff there is a strong, paid, connection and subsequently a conflict of interest exists regarding all articles connected to the Electronic Textual Cultures Lab and inke.ca. As I've posted on the editor's talk page, a disclosure of a Conflict of Interest does not give editors carte blanche to post content regarding the people who are paying them to edit - in fact, they should restrict their edits to suggestions on talk pages, taking care to ensure they disclose their Conflict of Interest when making these suggestions. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 01:15, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Note Before seeing this, I also pointed out COI and SPA issues at Talk:E-book. Objective3000 (talk) 01:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

hi[edit]

I need some help Abraham Sackey Ohene Gyan (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

What exactly do you need help with? We'd like to help, but it's hard to help without specifics. White Arabian Filly Neigh 23:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Welcome to the teahouse Abraham Sackey Ohene Gyan, how can we help you? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

What should I do when a user keeps adding unsourced statements and ignores attempts to get them to go to talk page?[edit]

Right to WP:AIV? This is a current event and its page was already protected: 2017 Jallikattu protests. Usually I stay away from current events but I saw the article about this and didn't understand what it was all about so I did a lot of research (Background section). Anyway, as I wrote on the article's talk page I'm going to bed now. It's not extremely important to me that Saffron White Green's unsourced POV [2] stays out - what can I do after all, that's why I tend to stick to uncontroversial subjects, but for some reason his stonewalling me and another editor is really offputting. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 18:43, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, check out Dispute Resolution at WP:DR. Also, feel free to browse the different sections of the Administrator's Noticeboard to see if this issue is relevant enough to bring up: WP:AN. Personally I would warn the user with escalating tones about providing unsourced content. After four warnings you can request a temporary block if an admin sees fit. I use WP:Twinkle to revert and warn. Furthermore, if you request input and consensus on the article's talk page from users besides the "offender," that will stand as the status quo and any further edits by that user will result in warnings. Justin15w (talk) 19:40, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Quick question: do new questions in the TH go on top or on bottom nowdays? Justin15w (talk) 20:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Still the top for some reason, Justin15w. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Hey Psiĥedelisto. For purposes of setting up a report at WP:AIV, please see the template series (which I've just tweaked): {{uw-unsourced1}}, {{uw-unsourced2}}, {{uw-unsourced3}} and {{uw-unsourced4}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
The Twinkle tool provides an easy way to revert and warn with pre-made templates like this. It's great for users who want to patrol in a web browser. Justin15w (talk) 01:47, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Need another opinion[edit]

I wrote an article at (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zephyr_Headwear) where I disclosed my conflict of interest and did my best to use only sourced material in a neutral way. The subject has been written about in detail in multiple reliable sources as well as cited in the Wall Street Journal. I believe it passes the notability test, but needs a second opinion to review the content and formatting. Please assume good faith as I believe this article improves Wikipedia.

For some background, the company in year 2000 was once the largest seller of American college licensed products, outselling even Nike and Adidas. It has sold over 60,000,000 hats. Pwgormley (talk) 18:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Pwgormley - I do agree that this company is notable but after reading the article, it does sound promotional. Right now, this article is just a stub - I would work on cleaning up the refs and finding good secondary sources, and then expanding into product line, etc. Justin15w (talk) 19:54, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
For example, I would change this line: "Realizing that his current hat suppliers were not meeting his customers' demand, he starting producing hats and focused on the college headwear business rather than the pro leagues." to something like this: "Zephyr focuses on producing collegiate headwear, rather than professonal headwear." (Just a quick example). Justin15w (talk) 19:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Pwgormley Symbol move vote.svg Please understand that Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything which a subject (whether a company, a person, a band, a charity, or anything else) says or wants to say about itself, including anything published by an independent source but based on an interview or press release from the subject. An article should be close to 100% based on what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places; and in any case, every single fact or claim in an article should be derived from a published reliable source. Please see WP:V for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 00:04, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, ColinFine, I completely understand. I simply wanted others to look at the topic and make their own judgments about notability and what should or shouldn't be included. I'm trying to remove myself completely from the content.

Just a note, Pwgormley has been apprised of his conflict of interest and I've added the COI template accordingly, as well as attempted to edit that page with NPOV. Also, remember to always sign your posts with four tildes! Justin15w (talk) 01:37, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Does language of the references matter?[edit]

Would it be possible that the reason of declining of a new article can be that the references i've been given are not in English? That is why it is impossible to verify for only English speaking audience? I am writing about Turkish musician, so the references in majority are in Turkish.Asya Kush (talk) 18:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Asya Kush - you can absolutely use non-English refs. See WP:NOENG. Justin15w (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi Asya Kush, welcome to the Teahouse. As Justin15w noted, the language of the sources are not a problem, although here, at the English Wikipedia, sources in English are naturally preferred. However, assuming you are referring to Draft:Yalçın Hasançebi, the reviewing editor has provided you with some reasons why the draft is not sufficient (specifically, in his replies to your questions on his talk page). May I also be so bold as to recommend that you read what Wikipedia considers as reliable sources (this was one of the problems that the reviewer had with your references)? --talk2Chun(talk) (contributions) 20:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

I would like to remove an amendment[edit]

I made an amendment to the Cypress Grove (musician) page and Athena07 has requested information I don't have, please delete my information, I don't know how to do this and didn't realise that the information was a breach. I know it to be factual but I cannot verify it. Many thanks 85.144.169.102 (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, IP user: don't worry about an honest mistake: Wikipedia's policies take a lot of getting used to. There's nothing you need to do - Athenaathena07 has already reverted your edit. For future reference, you can see who has edited a page and what they have done by looking at the 'History' tab; and you can undo the most recent edit by picking 'Undo' next to that change in the history. --ColinFine (talk) 18:10, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I think I broke 3RR...[edit]

If you look at my contribs (accessible by clicking on Master on my sig), the last five edits are on the same page... and within 24 hrs. Something tells me I broke the 3RR. Did I?

The Phase Master 15:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Never mind. 3rr means three REVERT rule, not three edit rule. #oopsdefense
The Phase Master 15:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Self-answering questions; that's what we like, The Phase Master. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

AfD discussions[edit]

Just a question related to AfD discussions. There is an article, in which I have a conflict of interest, that has been nominated for deletion. It is in its second round of discussion and after a day I'm the only one who has commented. I am new to this process -- Is there an acceptable way or place to call notice to the discussion so we might come to some sort of eventual consensus? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Johnson_Family_Enterprises)Wax86 (talk) 14:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Wax86. I'm not sure that more eyes would help until there is some material for them to look at. Anything you can provide to support it, even if it isn't in a form to include into the article yet, would help to inform the discussion. --Gronk Oz (talk) 16:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Correcting capitalisation of a Wiki page[edit]

How do I correct capitalisation of a page eg RAeC instead of RAec? Petechilcott (talk) 13:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

There is no page RAec; RAeC redirects correctly to Royal Aero Club. If a page has capitalisation which is definitely wrong, it can be moved, but see WP:Manual of Style#Article titles, WP:Article titles#Article title format, and WP:Naming conventions (capitalization) before trying to do that. A credible alternative capitalisation can be made a redirect. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikivisually and Wikipedia link[edit]

Hi Teahouse,

May I know how does wikipedia link to wikivisually? How can I edit articles on wikivisually, and are all articles on wikipedia on wikivisually?

Thank you! Avataron (talk) 12:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikivisually is a Fork of Wikipedia, that copies our material, and adds adverts and pictures. It appears to be a real-time copy, rather than a database download, so probably accesses all of our content. - Arjayay (talk) 12:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Having experimented, it does not seem to be able to cope with redirects. As an example, if you enter Mohammed here you are automatically redirected to our Muhammad article, but if you enter Mohammed at Wikivisually, you do not have a way to access our Muhammad article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Image Within text[edit]

Hello,

I have a question regarding Image text.

I want to add image with in text of Wikipedia page. so anyone can help me about this?. Dilipjrajpurohit (talk) 10:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Sure! SCongratulate.svg Welcome to the Teahouse Dilipjrajpurohit.
If your image is already somewhere else on Wikipedia or one of its sister projects such as the Commons, follow the instructions below:
  1. Click "Edit this page".
  2. Click "Insert".
  3. Click "Media".
  4. Search for the image you want to use. Many, many images are available. Click on it.
  5. Click "Use this image".
  6. Make any changes you wish, then click "Insert".
If your image is not here yet, please see WP:CMF for guidance. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 10:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Creating hierarchical charts[edit]

Hi I would like to create hierarchical charts for some drafts dealing with chain of commands that I am working on and I would like them to be in color I understand MediaWiki has a specific add on tool you can use to create them any feedback would be appreciated.--Navops47 (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello Navops47 and welcome to the Teahouse. SCongratulate.svg The MediaWiki extension FlowchartWiki is not available here, but you can get much of the same functionality via the {{Chart}} template. Without a more specific example of the hierarchical chart you'd like to add it's hard to give more specific advice. SNice.svg Psiĥedelisto (talk) 10:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks for highlighting the page for me to use surprised though as there are so many military and business related articles that would benefit from the FlowchartWiki extension.--Navops47 (talk) 03:46, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Can the color of text be specified?[edit]

Hi! Can the color of a particular section of text be controlled? Specifically, I'd like to have a word appear yellow. Is there some wiki code like <yellow></yellow>? (I tried that, without success) Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 08:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

You're becoming a regular here at the Teahouse. Glad to see you again.
For nearly all article-space pages, making color changes for the text is not advisable.
Elsewhere, for instance in signatures, you might want to play with <span style="color:yellow"> tags.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 08:45, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
An easier way, also, is to use the {{color}} template. SNice.svg Psiĥedelisto (talk) 09:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Tournesol.png Thank you
If you want to check it out, see the caption of the tulip at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variant_of_uncertain_significance  And let me know if I'm becoming a pain in the you know what...No, wait, don't tell me SCongratulate.svg  I've got to get to bed...DennisPietras (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
The problem there is that some readers will struggle to read the yellow word. We try to make Wikipedia friendly to all. If you really want the word in yellow, perhaps a dark background would help readability? Dbfirs 09:43, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Please read WP:Colour contrast which explains the accessibility problems for people with visual problems (about 10% of males have some form of colour blindness, and it is not all red/green) and WP:COLOR which covers other issues. Please remember viewers use different coloured screens, typically blue, black or white, and your colour needs to be readable against all these. Yellow on a white screen will almost certainly not meet the minimum requirement of "WCAG 2.0's AA level". Furthermore, as with bold and large text, colour should not be used for emphasis in bodytext. - Arjayay (talk) 09:56, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
My example above wasn't quite compliant at the AA level. This would be, just. The best policy is not to use colour in captions unless it is really important to do so. Dbfirs 10:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Wow, don't you folks have a life either? 8-) Nice to see the flurry of activity on the page. I've changed the caption to the AA compliant suggested above. Thanks again all! DennisPietras (talk) 11:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I have removed that formatting, partly because I am a humourless git, partly because it hurts my eyes and brain, and partly because it is completely at odds with Wikipedia's style SCongratulate.svg. --Slashme (talk) 11:45, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

A compromise has now been suggested with a more detailed description in plain black text, and this seems to me to convey more information than any colour coding, so I perhaps even the readable (but rather garish) colour that I suggested is not a good idea in this case. Wikipedia's style is to avoid unnecessary use of colour in text. Dbfirs 13:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Trouble with accounts[edit]

I am a disabled musician with a large library of music and recordings. I thought I was doing the right things about logging in,etc. But,I have only been on-line for about one year. I am almost 60 ,and have been allowing my Macbook to guide me with Safari passwords,but they are too complicated for me to remember. So,I use my Preferences thing to retrieve Passwords ,and I keep being unable to log in to contribute anything. I am worried about adding more User Names,but the one I thought was yours isn't connecting,and I find i have 4 different attempt files saved with the letters "wiki" attached. I needed more help setting up,but I tried to do it by myself and here we are.

I don't have much money ,but I believe if I can get this solved and not have an impossible time of trying to connect,or get answers about which group I should be using ,etc. ,then I could donate a very small yearly sum to help keep this encyclopedia running. I worked in my college library ,so I am big on encyclopedias.Can you help me do this right ?2605:A000:D014:8A00:4860:4724:C443:21DF (talk) 05:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello IP user and welcome to the Teahouse.
Sorry to hear of your troubles. If the usual methods of retrieving a forgotten password are not working for you, the easiest solution may be to simply abandon your old account(s) and register a new username, carefully recording your information so that you will be able to use it consistently in the future. Use of multiple accounts is potentially troublesome, but non-abusive creation of a new account is generally okay. There are also have many editors who do not register accounts at all and you could choose to work as they do.
While the WMF is happy to accept donations, your contributions as a volunteer editor may be more valuable to the long-run health of the encyclopedia. Thanks for taking the effort and the Teahouse is here to help.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 08:26, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

are there more images like {{oldsmiley|10}}? I need them, now that I know there probably are more![edit]

Please tell me there is a list of emoticons! Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 04:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Plenty! Way before my time on Wikipedia, apparently, someone decided that they would rather have the smilies in the {{smiley}} template, so they moved replaced them and moved the previous versions to {{oldsmiley}}. I (obviously) don't agree with this change, so I've continued to use the "old" smilies as I find them more visually appealing. There is also {{smiley2}}, {{emoji}} (you can use this if you know the Unicode code of the emoji), and you can see a grab bag of icons on Template:BotComment#See_also. Clicking any of the links in my answer with {{}} around them will bring you to a page explaining all of the different smilies available in that template. Happy editing! SCongratulate.svg Psiĥedelisto (talk) 04:52, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
@Psiĥedelisto: Tournesol.png Thank you
 DennisPietras (talk) 05:43, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

How to merge 2 wp articles[edit]

@Dodger67:Folks, believe it or not there are wp articles Variants of unknown significance which is a stub and Variant of uncertain significance which as best I can determine was almost abandoned until moved out of the draft space by Dodger67 earlier this month. I am determined to bring the second version up to high quality. The question is, what to do with the stub? Is it OK if I just delete everything on that stub and make it a redirect to the longer article? It was created by an unregistered user, has only 1 reference (from 2000) and nothing on the talk page. Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 03:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello DennisPietras and welcome back to the Tea House. SCongratulate.svg We always enjoy your visits here. Guidance is provided in this case by WP:MERGE. I believe that this is an obvious merge, so I would simply go ahead and be WP:BOLD and perform the redirect as that page recommends, and then follow the process only if there is a conflict. After you do the merge you may consider adding the source in Variants of unknown significance to some of the statements in Variant of uncertain significance as appropriate, as Variant of uncertain significance has problems with not having enough reliable sources. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 03:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll just do it. BTW, the least of the problems with the long page is not enough reliable sources, IMHO, and the one from the stub isn't going to help! I'll be adding lots from my own searches. Maybe even an image or 2, if I can strap up my courage and delve into that quagmire again! SCongratulate.svgDennisPietras (talk) 04:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, as I noted on your talk page, if you need help with images just let me know what you want them to look like, maybe show a copyrighted image I can use as a guide, and I can take it from there SFriendly.svg Psiĥedelisto (talk) 06:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
DennisPietras Go for it, but first take a look through the literature which title is more common; "unknown" or "uncertain", then merge the content to that title. (Per WP:COMMONNAME) If neither is clearly more widely used then it doesn't matter which page gets the content and which gets the redirect. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Unable to upload photograph[edit]

I am unable to upload my profile photograph FinancialEducator (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello FinancialEducator. You appear to be trying to write an autobiography. This is very strongly discouraged in Wikipedia: please see WP:Autobiography for why. In any case, you are writing it in the wrong place for an article, and Exemplo347 has already nominated it for speedy deletion. Your user page may contain some information about you if you wish, but it is about you as a Wikipedia editor, not about your activities unrelated to Wikipedia.
If, despite the recommendations in the guide I linked to, you decide to press ahead and create an autobiographical article, please read and follow Your first article, and create a draft in draft space that can be reviewed by other editors before it is moved to main space. And remember that Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that the subject of an article says or wants to say: it is only interested in what people with no connection to a subject have published about the subject in reliable places. --ColinFine (talk) 00:45, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello FinancialEducator and welcome to Wikipedia! SCongratulate.svg Unfortunately you have not provided us with enough information to help you properly. What happened when you tried to upload the file? Did your file go through, and then it was deleted by an administrator? Here is some general help: If your image is free to use (see c:commons:Licensing), try your upload at c:Special:UploadWizard. If your image is copyrighted but you believe it is fair use, I recommend that you use the WP:FFU process. You may also read about WP:FAIRUSE and use WP:UPLOAD yourself. Be sure, of course to follow ColinFine's advice above: your article has bigger problems than a missing photo. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 00:48, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi Ok,

Sorry guys i am totally new to putting anything here and I though I had written this like everyone else's.

Not sure what im doing wrong.

Ill leave the photograph for now as I rthink it was due to the number of edits at the time but ;its more important to have the page and understand how to write it firstly.

Ill sort the photograph upload later. FinancialEducator (talk) 01:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

So when they delete my page am i never able to upload one again? FinancialEducator (talk) 01:12, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
No, definitely not. Having one page deleted does not prevent you from contributing to Wikipedia, but if you ignore Wikipedia's policies over an extended period and refuse to engage with other editors trying to help you you may be blocked from editing. However, you're engaging with us now and show a willingness to learn, so you are doing great SCongratulate.svg! There is an excellent guide that I recommend you read before recreating your user space draft, and that is Wikipedia:Your first article. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Psiĥedelisto (talk)
Don't worry about it, FinancialEducator. Unfortunately, many people have the mistaken idea that Wikipedia is something to do with promotion or online presence. It isn't. Promotion of any kind (whether of self, band, company, charity, or anything else) is strictly forbidden; and since nobody has any control over an article about them, it is not usefully part of anybody's online presence either. --ColinFine (talk) 09:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

A Second Opinion?[edit]

Hello Wikipedia,

I'm curious if there would be consensus among the Wikipedia guard in evaluative rejection of my proposed article on The American Musicianship Suite? I am a Wikipedia novice, but it’s difficult to imagine that such a modest, abbreviated, accurate entry on such an important organization and work as The American Musicianship Suite is unsuitable here.

If unambiguous validation and specific praise from the eminent professionals who've publicly endorsed this work—including no less than Elliot Carter and Sylvan Kalib—are insufficient justification for a Wikipedia entry, then indeed, this work, and its article, have no place here. If this is the case, I will pursue it no further. Are others of similar mind?BelaB (talk) 23:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, BelaB. Notability on Wikipedia is determined by the existence of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. You haven't cite any sources in your draft at User:BelaB/sandbox, so it's hard to tell whether the subject is notable. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
A clarification of the point that was made above: you have quoted two eminent people who have said positive things about the AMS, but you haven't cited the quotes. You need to include enough information for editors to find the quotes: where and when were they published? Furthermore, as Larry says above, there needs to be significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. That means that more than one source with editorial oversight, like a book or a magazine, which is not connected with the AMS or its parent or sibling organisations, needs to have discussed it at length. --Slashme (talk) 09:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

have i used an allowed source[edit]

I am taking part in #1lib1ref so am totally new to this. I added a citation about "Mick Lally" appearing in ads for home equity release by providing the details of the company's website which has links to the actual ads. Is this allowed? I am now thinking this might not be as it is a primary source and a form of advertising in itself. Thanks Janlib (talk) 20:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Janlib.
Yes, that is a primary source and might well be considered promotional. It would be preferable to have a citation from a source that is not the advertiser itself, which could possibly be an advertising trade magazine or other news organization.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 08:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll start looking for a better source. Janlib (talk) 14:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

My page creation has been rejected for notability[edit]

I'm trying to create a page for the Cacoo product (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cacoo); the product has been featured in a number of prominent articles including Mashable, Tech in Asia, CNET, Lifehacker, but I've been rejected twice on the ground of lack of notability. I was looking at similar product pages that have been published on Wiki and they appear similar in content/source and were accepted. Can you please recommend how I should address thisBhan33 (talk) 16:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bhan33. The draft review process is still relatively new, so it is possible that other articles you have seen did not pass through it. There are lots of poor articles on Wikipedia, but these are liable to deletion, whereas an article that has been through review is much more likely to be kept, so it's worth getting this right. I have taken a quick look at Draft:Cacoo. You have cited plenty of sources. Our notability guidelines require significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. "Significant coverage" isn't just about breadth of coverage - it's also about depth, and I wonder if the sources perhaps only mention Cacoo in passing? That could be one reason the draft has been declined. Second, if they are largely based on press releases, they won't be considered sufficiently independent of the subject. I haven't looked at all of the sources, but that would be my initial response. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

writing about my grand father and his family history[edit]

I wish to write about the life history of my grand father, He was a freedom fighter in India. However, being a right wing never came to lime light after independence. I have very few references with me, but hope to find more over a period of time. Can I write an article about him. I also wish to write about the family tree in a separate article. My ancestors were on the battle field and were a link between the Britishers and the Nizams. My great great grandfather the last among them fought vehemently the last battle at Nagpur but got killed. His wife reclaimed the town which was jahagir and brought up her only son ie my great grand father. Can I create this page? No references right now though. Please reply. Advandana (talk) 00:03, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Advandana, welcome to teahouse. The very nature of an encyclopedia is we do not allow original research. An encyclopedia does not write about a given subject; rather we write about what is written about a given subject. If you have no references to detailed discussions of your relatives published in reliable sources, you have no basis for an article. Further, you are strongly discouraged from writing about subjects you have a close connection with, such as your family. See WP:COI for further information. John from Idegon (talk) 03:13, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Maybe Wikipedia is not the right forum for this writing project. Have you considered writing it up on a blog? There are many free blogging services, for example the ones listed at Category:Blog_hosting_services. --Slashme (talk) 09:13, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

please check my first article[edit]

Hi there,

recently i created an article about a new art called sand picture,

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

my grandfather 50 years ago had one of them, and now i buy one of them. but after 50 years this type of art is unknown for too many people so there's no many things in internet about it, but i searched and found about 12 reference, please check my links and edit my article and don't let my article be deleted. 868,383,950edits (talk) 21:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Related link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sand picture.
Hello 868,383,950edits and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry for the delay in responding.
The AfD discussion for your article is going to give you a broader range of opinions than we'll be able to give you at the Teahouse. If you understand and respond to the critiques given there, you may be able to improve the article to the point where it will not be deleted.
I wonder that you call this "new art". As best as I can tell from your description, variations on this idea have been available as novelty "kinetic art" products for quite a long time, perhaps of the same vintage as the Lava lamp. If you take a look at that article, it may give you an idea of the sort of coverage that would make good additions for your article.
I, too, wonder if you've come up with the correct name for this item. I haven't found anything better in a quick search, but finding the right name may be the key to having a proper article.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 09:04, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I've made a comment at the deletion discussion. It would be reasonable to rename the article if a better name can be found, but deletion is IMHO not the right solution here. Also, someone is trying to delete the pictures that User:868,383,950edits has uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I also strongly disagree with that deletion request. --Slashme (talk) 09:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

OK, after looking for reliable sources, I really can't find anything which passes Wikipedia's notability criteria, so I've changed my comment to recommend that this material can be merged to a larger article for now. --Slashme (talk) 11:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

tnx, please stay in talk page project.868,383,950edits (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

How can I fix incorrect sorting in World population table[edit]

The problem occurs on this page: List of countries by population growth rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate

The sort for the CIA WF 2014 column incorrectly sorts the negative population growth numbers. Whether you sort that column ascending or descending it incorrectly sorts the negative entries. The negative entries are sorted in the inverse order of what they should be while the positive values are sorted correctly.

This is only the case for that column as all other columns sort the negative values correctly.

I was planning to edit this but I cant figure out how to change the sort of a column to fix this particular problem.

Leighton 2602:306:BCCA:CD00:E023:1F01:25D0:B61 (talk) 19:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Same as the answer to another question here recently, you need data-sort-type="number"| . See this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:54, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
... and presumably the reason why that column behaved differently is that the column concerned had one entry with a dash rather than a number. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:57, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the info,

I see that you edited it already. Thanks for that too.

Leighton2602:306:BCCA:CD00:E023:1F01:25D0:B61 (talk) 10:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

how to add image to my articles.[edit]

Hello everyone, my question is how do I post my contributions with files, like image. And can I upload a pdf file to an article ? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuel Daniel (talkcontribs) 09:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Samuel Daniel and welcome to the Teahouse. You can upload files here. Follow the instructions very carefully. We take copyrights especially seriously. PDF files can be uploaded using the same process. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 17:26, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
But in addition to Finnusertop's advice, Samuel Daniel, I would add that it is very rare that it is appropriate to upload a PDF. Uploaded material can only really be used to illustrate things, not to demonstrate or verify them, because nothing in a user-contributed site such as Wikipedia (or Wikimedia Commons) can be regarded as reliably published. Hence most uploads are images, and some are video or sound files; but textual uploads are rare. --ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Paying someone to fix my wikipedia entry[edit]

I am an author who has a wikipedia entry, kindly written without my knowledge years ago and very helpful to me. It is however out of date. I just want to add the names of my two most recent books. Know anyone who can do that for me? I have tried editing myself but I am old---71---and can't seem to figure it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.75.108 (talk) 06:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello 66.215.75.108 and welcome to Wikipedia! SCongratulate.svg Typically, new questions are put at the top of the page in the Teahouse so editors are more likely to see they are unanswered and lend a helping hand, but we can reply just as well to new questions made at the bottom of the page.
There are people you can hire to edit for you, but I wouldn't know any, and Wikipedia generally discourages WP:PAID editing. If you tell me the name of the article you wish to change, I am happy to do some research and add the books for you. Generally, we do not recommend that people edit pages about themselves: this is a conflict of interest, but if you're going to be making many of these types of edits, there is advice on the process of how to do so at WP:PSCOI. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 06:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Link to an image[edit]

I found an image online and I'd like to add a link to it in a wikipedia article. Is this permitted?

http://docenti.lett.unisi.it/files/3/1/15/3/Calice_di_Niccol__IV_Assisi_Guccio_di_Mannaia.jpg

TimeForLunch (talk) 15:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

PS I think the system on the teahouse page has put my question automatically at the bottom of the page. Is this the new way of doing this or ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimeForLunch (talkcontribs) 15:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, TimeForLunch. I'm afraid the answer is, probably not. Part of the point of Wikipedia is that all the material in it may be freely reused: this means that copyright images may not usually be used unless the copyright holder has explicitly released them under a suitable licence (such as CC-BY-SA. Images of unknown provenance are usually assumed to be subject to copyright, unless they are uncontrovertably old enough (1923 in the US) to be public domain. That photo has no copyright information on the site, but the home page of the site says "© 2005 Università degli Studi di Siena, Centro Servizi della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia - Laboratorio di Informatica". (By the way, I assume the artifact is old enough to be out of copyright, but that does not tell us whether the photo is also).
It is possible in some circumstances to use non-free images: such use must meet all of the non-free content criteria: if you think your proposed use will meet these, then you can upload the image to Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons) as a non-free file. See Help:Upload.
The third option is to link to it as an external link. That does not give any copyright issues, but it may not comply with the policy on External links: if you want to insert the link, you'll need to show that it does. Note that if it does go in as an external link, the image won't appear in the Wikipedia article: readers will have to click the link to see it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks ColinFine (talk) for the detailed input. I've taken a look at the third option, and it looks like it will work as an External Link. TimeForLunch (talk) 11:02, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Grammar/copyright implications of verifiable lists[edit]

I do not understand the copyvio problem, as Wikipedia is full of lists, and Wikipedia has to be verifiable, when I place sourced lists on Wikipedia, the lists are removed because of copyvios; giving a free pass only to unverifiable lists. Wikipedia must be verifiable, with lists as no exeption. Lists are part of Wikipedia, so why did, out of the necessity for verifiability, verifiable lists get deleted, because their verifiability triggers the Earwig Copyvio Detector. The fact that it is impossible to reword a list can be interpreted as a copyvio, as the proper nouns that make up the list cannot be reworded. And it has. Try rewording "Massachusetts" and stating it in your own words. Most lists are made completely out of proper nouns. (David Dylan (talk) 22:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC))

Hello David Dylan and welcome to the Teahouse.
You seem to be confused. Lists on Wikipedia are compiled by editors from verifiable sources, not copied from other sources.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:26, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
@Jmcgnh: Well, let's start with basic English. Is it possible to reword a proper noun. Do you know how to reword "Massachusetts". If you can't, try to reword the following.
List of states in New England/York
  • Massachusetts
  • Connecticut
  • New York
  • Vermont
  • New Hampshire
  • Maine
  • Rhode Island
In other words, there is the same amount of plagiarism without copying and with copying.
I hope you can find out what I should do. (David Dylan (talk) 19:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC))

Does anyone know what I should do.— Preceding unsigned comment added by David Dylan (talkcontribs) 21:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Copyright in lists is complicated. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@David Dylan: I'll reiterate. The "list of attractions" was compiled by the site you referenced and you copied it (although that must have taken some work, since the site does not present the list in this format). Taking a list from a single source, where it can be argued that editorial judgement has been exercised in creating the list, constitutes copying or plagiarism. Normally, when a copyvio is discovered, an admin is asked to delete the revisions that contain it, since otherwise they remain available to all users who know how to look at an article's history.
The difference between the "list of states" and the "list of attractions" is that the list of states is a simple factual matter, even if I've never heard of a grouping called "New England/York" before. The "list of attractions" is not so clearly a simple factual matter. If you independently compiled the list by finding just those sights that have Wikipedia articles about them (or, arguably, if you had used that to filter the kctrailillinois.org list), then I would expect the list to be allowed. But other editors with more experience may have a different view, so what I say here is not something that can be blindly relied on. (Thanks to Finnusertop for the pointer.)  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hi David Dylan, welcome to the Teahouse. As Finnusertop noted, copyright law (especially where it concerns lists) is extremely complicated. I've had a look at the list you added (which was subsequently removed for copyvio). I'll try to (crudely) summarise the issue at hand (as I understand it).
The issue with copyright on lists is not only that the text may be copyrighted, but also the selection criteria and manner of arrangement (see Wikipedia:Copyright in lists:"Copyright in a list may exist in the content of the list or in the way that the content was selected and arranged. Copyright does not protect facts, but it does protect opinion. If a source is based on "value judgments", it may be protected by copyright, even if it looks very similar to fact. And even if the source is fact, copyright may still protect its selection and arrangement if these are creative."). The list you created was about attractions along the Kaskaskia–Cahokia Trail. While the proper nouns (i.e. names of attractions) cannot likely be reworded (and is probably uncopyrightable), it is completely unclear what the selection criteria was that lies at the heart of KCTrail Illinois's inclusion as 'attractions'. Furthermore, 'attractions' is likely a subjective selection criteria, which is likely subject to copyright (see Wikipedia:Copyright in lists#Selection). Furthermore, as the arrangement of the enumerated attractions do not seem to be based on an uncopyrightable method (such as alphabetical or geographical), the order in which the 'attractions' are listed/enumerated/grouped is also likely subject to copyright (see Wikipedia:Copyright in lists#Arrangement).
Hopefully this answer helps you a little bit. As I'm not an expert in US copyright law, I could not even begin to provide any guidance in how to include these attractions. Wikipedia:Copyright in lists#Copyrightability of other factors does list a suggestion: "The best approach in the latter case [i.e. where the fact in a compilation are not copyrightable, but only the arrangement is copyrighted] is to utilize an entirely different arrangement, one which is either a "mere mechanical grouping of data" or creative in patently different ways. In the former, we may need to vary the selection by drawing in additional information to form a compilation around a different criterion or to limit it substantially in a new and different way". Unfortunately, I fear that you may run into problems with Wikipedia:No original research in such a case.--talk2Chun(talk) (contributions) 23:17, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
@Talk2chun: Ok. I will create the list in a different arrangement. I was thinking that too. (David Dylan (talk) 23:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC))
@David Dylan: That might help, but I fear that it still might be removed for copyvio, since the selection of the attractions may also be subject to copyright. Your best bet would be to discuss this on the Talk page, and to involve the editor who originally removed your list.--talk2Chun(talk) (contributions) 23:44, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok. I just did that. (David Dylan (talk) 00:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC))
@Jmcgnh: Do you understand that Attractions lists are based on views of the sites, not opinions.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by David Dylan (talkcontribs) 00:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

@David Dylan: I'm glad we've been able to help, at least a little bit.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Could anyone create the list in a way that is not copyrighted, and does not omit information.

Wikipedia Adventure[edit]

I try play but it not working i press 1 and i don't see anything. Kovilan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kovilan, and goodbye. Sorry we weren't able to be more help.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 21:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Editing image on wikipedia page protected from vandalism[edit]

Hi, I wanted to know if the picture of President Trump as shown on wikipedia, which cannot be edited as it is protected from vadalism, can be changed,to the picture which is found at this link <http://truthuncensored.net/donald-trump-as-president-i-will-not-take-the-4000000- salaery-video/> which I think is a better picture,and one that presents in the most optimal manner. 2600:1004:B05C:CA13:0:45:4498:1 (talk) 04:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)Albert Davis.

Yes it's a nice picture. Did you take it? If you did and are willing to donate it to Wikipedia we can use it, otherwise the answer to your question is no. Please read WP:COPYOTHERS (and no, there is no possible way we can justify fair use of this image if it is not free}. Meters (talk) 05:00, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Is it possible to change the title of an article?[edit]

The article "Ngawang Chophel" is misspelled. It should be "Ngawang Choephel". Is it possible to change it? Depthburg (talk) 02:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I will move the article. You have enough edits that you could have done it yourself using the "Move button". Meters (talk) 03:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I use Wikipedia on iPad, which is a bit different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Depthburg (talkcontribs) 05:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Creat own biography[edit]

Hi i am just wondering how creat own biography in Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arafat786au (talkcontribs) 19:26, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Arafat786au, and thanks for asking. I'm afraid my answer is, Please don't! It's not forbidden, but it is strongly discouraged: please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for why.
If after reading that you decide that you do meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and you think that you can write sufficiently neutrally to try it anyway, please read Your first article carefully.
Symbol move vote.svg Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in anything which a subject (whether a company, a person, a band, a charity, or anything else) says or wants to say about itself. That includes anything published by an independent source but based on an interview or press release from the subject. An article should be largely based on what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places. In any case, every single fact or claim in an article should be derived from a published reliable source. Please see WP:V for more information.. --ColinFine (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

@Arafat786au: Please note this incident, where someone created an autobiography. They are on the verge of being blocked now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Dylan (talkcontribs) 01:53, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

ISBN error I can't resolve[edit]

Today I tried my first inline reference for a book contained in the draft entry Signals Through The Flames(film). I redid the inline entry twice from a library printout of the reference. It has a problem with length. My entry from my library ref is:

9780802150301 0802150306

Trying to get to Grove press all that happened was an Amazon reference to purchase popped in. That showed differently formatted ISBN info:

Paperback: 159 pages
   Publisher: Grove Press (January 7, 1994)
   Language: English
   ISBN-10: 0802150306
   ISBN-13: 978-0802150301
 Also the wiki drop down box is unclear to me in referencing a translator, the original French published date of 1938 (rather than the Grove edition.)  Also  birth and death info is available at the library notation.  Is that included?  Is there a long form to do this I am unaware of?
I cannot resolve these errors.

Will watch the tearoom for replies.Loninappleton (talk) 21:10, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

ISBN corrected in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

What is Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous210210 (talkcontribs) 16:37, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Records of marriages[edit]

Where can I find records for marriages in 1947 at the st Ann's church st Ann's well rd Nottingham — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cullington (talkcontribs) 20:17, 23 January 2017 (UTC)