Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Contents

WP teahouse logo.png

Most recent archives
783, 784, 785, 786, 787, 788, 789, 790, 791, 792, 793, 794, 795, 796, 797, 798, 799, 800, 801, 802


New Article - erased as I was working on it.[edit]

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

Welcome to the Teahouse RosyCanfield. I can see how this can be a frustrating experience. You do have the option of contacting the administrator who may have deleted the information. I see that your sandbox now contains content so at this point your problem may have already been resolved. I've taken a look at your sandbox and unfortunately it has some major problems and should not end up being an article on Wikipedia for a number of reasons. First, you have a conflict of interest assuming that it is not coincidental that the article is about something that seems to be named after you. Basically, Wikipedia is written objectively and honestly, it is considered very difficult for anyone related to the topic to be objective. You just can't write about yourself or your company. Second, Wikipedia is not a marketing tool . Will you find articles on Wikipedia that are clearly promotional? Yes. But there are legions of editors who will eventually cull these articles from Wikipedia. Sorry for the bad news. I hope you will stick around to be a contributor to Wikipedia and become involved in topics and articles that interest you. Best Regards, Barbara   13:55, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Also note that switching between the source and visual editors is not recommended as your changes can be discarded when you make this switch. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 17:49, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
@RosyCanfield: your draft does not appear to have been deleted. It can be found here. \\\Septrillion:- ~~‭~~10Eleventeen 04:26, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Writing about a company w/o sounding promotional[edit]

Hi there!

I am trying to write my first article (hopefully of many, if I can get the hang of it) on a cloud storage startup that has been written up by the Boston Globe. The post started out very long, but over the course of many rejections for sounding too promotional, I've tried to trim it down to just the bare minimum facts. This, however, still gets flagged. Does anyone have any suggestions? Is there enough notable information out there?

For reference, I am talking about this page. I also put a request in the requested articles section on businesses that reads: "Wasabi is a cloud data object storage service, similar to services like Amazon Web Services S3 Storage, Microsoft Azure Storage, and Google Cloud Storage. The company was founded in September, 2015 and launched its cloud storage product called "Hot Storage" in May, 2017." With articles from the Boston Globe, Venture Fizz and Forbes as sources.

I appreciate any help! Roger Bevins The 3rd (talk) 14:36, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I looked at your latest version. Still too promotional, and references a mess. Take out the text about comparative costs. What, if any, is your connection to the company? David notMD (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Roger Bevins The 3rd, concentrate on the history of the company, not the latest news/PR, that's what really contributes to a reasonable article anout a company. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:09, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Roger Bevins The 3rd - I did some minor editing to help you. You'll need more sourcing and more info to flush it out, but you're getting closer. Don't be surprised if it's rejected again, but you may have time to beef it up before it's reviewed. If it is rejected before you can do anything, before submitting it again I recommend having at least 8-10 good sources to demonstrate breadth of coverage, and they can't be rehashes of press releases. You may be able to take some info from your Wasabi Hot Storage draft[[1]] - you're better off doing the company article first. However, if you're connected to the company, you'll want to read WP:COI about proper disclosures. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 06:42, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Article deleted[edit]

Hi friends I want to create an article on a well known, famous motivational & public speaker of our region (Tamil Nadu). She is carrying out a wonderful work to the society particularly for women empowerment & student community. I tried to create one, but got deleted. Can anyone please help me to create an article. RaRaBa (talk) 10:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Gave this query its own section header. If you want help, need to name the person in question. David notMD (talk) 10:29, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @RaRaBa: This must be about Shyamala Ramesh Babu. The article was deleted under the speedy deletion criterion A7 because it did not make a "credible claim of significance". What you would need to create an article would be to demonstrate that person is "notable" in Wikipedia's meaning of the term, i.e. written about at length by independent reliable sources. If such sources do not exist, do not bother writing the article, because it will be deleted, no matter how wonderful that person is. TigraanClick here to contact me 11:22, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @David notMD: Thank you so much for your response, and yes it is about Shyamala Ramesh Babu as rightly pointed out by *@Tigraan: thank you too. Sure, Will check out for the independent reliable sources. Is it possible to help me out to check out those sources which I provide before I publish ?
    @RaRaBa: Sure, post a couple of refs here and we can tell you whether they seem good or not. (Notice also that sources need not be online, even if it helps, of course.)
Please do not forget to sign your posts - especially if you try to ping someone, as you did, because unsigned posts cannot generate pings. TigraanClick here to contact me 15:56, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Tigraan: Very kind of you. will post the references available with me, here, as you said. Thank you. RaRaBa (talk) 10:26, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

edit needed on the Wikipedia page for Jelena Kovacevic[edit]

Hello, perhaps I might get advice for the best way to make a small change to a living person's Wikipedia page without having content flagged or the page frozen. This is for our incoming Dean Jelena Kovacevic. First, I would like to add both the Czech 'hacek' diacritical and acute accent diacritical to, respectively, the first and second "c" in her last name, per "Jelena Kovačević". Also, since she starts very soon as Dean of NYU Tandon, on August 15, and no longer works for CMU, I would like to flip the positioning of "Dean-designate of NYU's Tandon School of Engineering" and "Head of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University" in the infobox, and add "Former" to the beginning of her Carnegie Mellon designation, since she's no longer there. I work for NYU so I do not know if I can do this myself because of conflict of interest. I have asked this question already on the "talk" page associated with her page. Kgberg (talk) 12:54, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

@Kgberg: On the article talk page, you can place the {{request edit}} template just above your suggested changes. That will place it in a queue of requested edits and get the attention of editors who watch that list. I have done that for you at Talk:Jelena Kovacevic.
Thanks also for declaring your employment with NYU. I would advise that you use the {{paid}} template on your user page as an easily seen disclosure. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:02, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
@Drm310: 🍁 Thanks for doing that for me. Looks like  spintendo  was gracious enough to make one of the changes vis the diacriticals in the spelling of the incoming dean's last name. I will do as you suggested for the second correction, involving the infobox content. And yes, I will put the {{paid}} template on my user page as well. Kgberg (talk) 18:46, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
@Kgberg: Are you employed by the University in a public relations / marketing capacity, or simply an academic with a personal interest in seeing your colleagues' articles up-to-date? The latter case would not require {{paid}}, but you should still note what your role is to avoid any misunderstanding. Pelagic (talk) 20:50, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
@Pelagic: Yes I'm a PR person here at the university, so {{paid}} for sure. I have one more requested change on her entry, so I'll use this template and also insert {{request edit}} above my request. thanks again Kgberg (talk) 21:00, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Change Table Box Background Color in Visual Editor[edit]

I've been on Wikipedia for 3 and a half years, but I figured this would be a good place to ask this, because I can't figure it out. How do I change the background color of a box in a table in visual editor? Additionally, how do I center text in visual editor? Are these possible or do I have to switch to edit source every time and then switch back? (See my sandbox.)

Thanks, AvRand (talk) 18:53, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Update: My question is still unanswered, someone help me with this? AvRand (talk) 19:33, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Service award time requirements[edit]

Are the time requirements on the badges supposed to be upper bounds or lower bounds? For example, to go from Registered Editor to Novice Editor, do I have to complete 200 edits within one month, or just complete 200 edits and have an account at least one month old? Ikjbagl (talk) 21:59, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

The awards at Wikipedia:Service award should be read to mean 'complete 200 edits and have an account at least one month old.' Stuartyeates (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2018 (UTC) (technically a Master Editor II, but can't say I've ever checked before)
@Ikjbagl: If you don't want to pull out a calendar to check the dates, you can use {{Service awards}} or {{SA user topicon}} on your user page. Add the date you created your account (follow the links for instructions) and your number of edits, and it figures out the rest. When you periodically update your user page, update your number of edits as well. Just watch that you don't contract WP:Editcountitis. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:41, 19 July 2018 (UTC) I like to say that I'm a veteran of the edit wars (VEW).

I'm American too[edit]

Hello everyone,

Huge thanks for your contributions. Wikipedia is a real source of high quality information.

I'd like to ask something that probably has been discussed here before but maybe it's a sensitive topic for US citizens: as you know, there are lots of countries in America, but it's been generally used the demonym of the continent to only refer to the United States. This is wrong in the terms of people from other countries, say Mexicans or Brazilians, for example.

I've been talking with lots of people in my country and certainly there are lots of persons that disagree with the use that European or US people gives to the word "American".

Having told this, millions of articles on Wikipedia must be corrected replacing the word "American" by "U.S." or "U.S.A.", this is for sure the correct and fair use of this demonym, for example: Wikipedia has an article for Kansas, the state, and says: "Kansas is a U.S. state..." but there's too the Kansas' band article (love their music, by the way ;) and says: "Kansas is an American rock band..." and must say "Kansas is an U.S. rock band..."

By the way, I'm not a U.S. citizen, I'm Ecuadorian, consequently I'm American too. Got it?

Thank you for your valuable points of view.

Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmfloyd (talkcontribs) 00:15, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

I think you have a perfectly valid point of view. Trouble is, people from the USA invented Wikipedia, and they will give you all sorts of allegedly English language based reasons why America means the USA here. (But I sometimes wonder if they find it all too hard to change, or even recognise other people's claim to the word.) It's a useful convention much of the time, and isn't going to change. Just accept it, and go with the flow. Welcome to Wikipedia, and good luck. HiLo48 (talk) 00:40, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Hello Bmfloyd and welcome to the Teahouse.
I am on your side to the extent that it's unfair to substitute "America" when what is really meant is "United States of America", leaving out all of the other countries in the hemisphere. This convention is, however, so widespread that Wikipedia is unlikely to change in advance of what the rest of the world does. Frank Lloyd Wright tried to popularize the word Usonian in place of American, but that didn't go very far. The terms Yankees or Yanks don't do the job, either. I'm afraid we are stuck for now. There is a section of the Manual of Style about preferring US over U.S.A, however. You can find it at MOS:NOTUSA.
While I'm quite sure your broader question has been discussed, and discussed repeatedly, on Wikipedia as a policy issue, I'm am not at the moment finding an archive that I can point you to. Perhaps one of the other helpers knows where to find them. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 00:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm with you Bmfloyd, it must be bothersome to see the US dominating use of the term "American". And it's not just the Usonians who do it; Europeans and Australians also write "American" for want of a better term, as jmcgnh points out. But consider this: if I write “Air is a French band” or “Air is a European band”, either is correct. To change “Cream is an American band” to “is a US band”, you would run into arguments that American is not untrue, just less specific. On the other hand, we wouldn't write that Baja California is a state in America, but rather Baja California is a state in Mexico. I'd say focus on areas where changing "American" is a clear improvement and is easily defensible. Pelagic (talk) 21:59, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Citing from a Museum[edit]

Hello! So, I've been looking for an online reference for a detail I would like to add to the Warren Mott High School page (the detail in question being that it was formed from the merger of two pre-existing schools), and while I wasn't able to find any sources online that held any credibility and were also easily accessible, I did find a credible source offline.

The Historical Society of Warren runs a museum of sorts about the city's history out of one of the former high schools that was merged to create WMHS (which has since been converted into a city operated community center), and I recently visited it. Since the museum resides in the former high school, it had a section out on it and its history, where it mentions that Warren High (the high school in question) and another high school were merged to create Warren Mott in the 90s. Now, I think that a section of a museum run by the Historical Society of the city that Warren Mott resides in would likely have no issues with credibility, but I have no idea how I should go about citing it on Wikipedia. So... Are there any tips you can give me on this, or have I reached another dead end? Finchwidget (talk) 03:53, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Finchwidget. There is no requirement that a reference be available online. For example, you could use a local weekly newspaper article. You should provide full bibiographic details, and perhaps a quote from the most relevant sentence or two. The problem with museum exhibits is that the exhibit might be removed. Unless a catalog of that exhibit was published, the content then could not be verified, and that violates policy. Newspapers are kept in libraries so claims can be verified. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:43, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Finchwidget! Glad to see you at the Teahouse. My suggestion would be to talk to one of the curators or docents at the museum and ask if they have built a file on the construction of the exhibit. There might be some published documents you could use there. John from Idegon (talk) 05:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Save Page[edit]

Hi there,

I´m currently writing an article in Sandbox mode. The template sandbox box says that I can save the page by pressing the "save page" button. However there is no button. How do I make sure I don´t delete everything when closing my browser?

Thanks in advance

Troajan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troajan (talkcontribs) 06:47, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Troajan: welcome to the Teahouse. The template has not been updated, unfortunately - the button is now called "Publish changes", so if you click that one your sandbox content will be saved. There is no autosave, so closing a window without clicking "publish" will discard the text. --bonadea contributions talk 06:52, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Troajan. The software has recently (actually, not so recently now, but it seems that documentation is still catching up in places) been changed so that the save button is now labelled "Publish page". Cordless Larry (talk) 06:53, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Ah I see. Thank you for the quick answer :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troajan (talkcontribs) 06:55, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Troajan: I've put in an edit request on the {{User sandbox}} template to fix the text that referred to the old button label "Save page". This change had already been made to the {{Userspace draft}} template. As we track down the places where the old label occurs, we'll eventually get them fixed, but reports like yours are very helpful in moving the process along. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 07:35, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Check on activity[edit]

It appears that User:User:5a1amm60 is removing links to other languages in many articles without explanation. Could someone check to see whether these edits are appropriate? HopsonRoad (talk) 11:21, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi HopsonRoad, links to similar articles in other language Wikipedias are now handled by Wikidata, so removing them from articles is indeed correct. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Not correct to remove valid links if they don't exist in Wikidata. There are, of course, situations in which Wikidata can't cope, because of its limitation to one-to-one mapping. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:40, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, David Biddulph. The links that I saw removed were legitimate and their removal left the article unlinked to the appropriate other-language article. The removals were made without edit comments. HopsonRoad (talk) 13:23, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

How to move from Sandbox to Wikipedia[edit]

Hi All, I created an article in my Sandbox and want some advice on how I can move it to Wikipedia. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleveranalyst (talkcontribs) 11:24, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Cleveranalyst: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is that you should not do so at this time. Your draft appears to have no independent reliable sources whatsoever. In order for a subject to merit an article on Wikipedia, it must have in depth coverage in independent reliable sources, that indicates how it is notable as Wikipedia defines notability. From viewing your draft and seeing your username, I would wonder if you are the originator of the methodology you wrote about. Please also see Your First Article for more information on what is being looked for. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi 331dot, I am not the originator of the methodology. This methodology is patent pending and I am a user of it which I find to be innovative and wanted to share it with the public. As technology continues to evolve, there are allot to knowledge and innovation which we all should be aware off. Please advise if there is anything I needed to amend, perhaps I can get the patent number and add it as a reference? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleveranalyst (talkcontribs) 11:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

The patent number will not help to establish that the subject is notable. If the subject has not been discussed in reliable published source, then it doesn't warrant a Wikipedia article. Maproom (talk) 11:59, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
@Cleveranalyst: Please understand that Wikipedia is not for merely sharing information. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia only summarizes what independent reliable sources state about a subject; that is, what sources not associated with the subject have chosen to write about it. This methodology will need to have been written about in such sources with in depth coverage in order to merit an article here. The patent will not help as a reference. If you just want to tell the world about this, social media or a blog would better serve your purposes. 331dot (talk) 12:01, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Screenrant[edit]

Hi there. I have to ask that is screenrant a reliable source? DCEU (talk) 12:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Last evidence I can find is that it was considered as situational. Although that's a few years ago. Best place to ask is at WT:FILM - X201 (talk) 13:32, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Edits are subjected to reversion most of the times.[edit]

Salam every one! I want to ask you guyz why edits are subjected to reversion by fellow Wikipedians without specifying reasons for it? I've added info to the infoboxes of some pages regarding their alma mater n occupation etc. I haven't added any controversial info nor do it was for any promotional purpose but still it was subjected to reversion. It was pretty discouraging for me as a new Wikipedian. Kindly explain this to me??? (UsamaAhmadKhan 17:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saamikhan01 (talkcontribs)

Hello, Saamikhan01. Ideally, editors will always give a reason for reverting, in their edit summary - you can see this by looking at the history of the article (sometimes they don't but this is the exception, and if that happens it is reasonable for you to ask them on their User Talk page). So, for example, if you look at the history of NA-13 (Mansehra-I), you'll see that SheriffIsInTown reverted one of your edits with the comment "Unnecessary change based on original research of current scenario", and Jibran1998 reverted another with the comment "The reason your edit was reversed because you did not include references". You may or may not agree with their reasons, but you can't say they didn't give any. Please note that reverting edits is a normal part of how Wikipedia achieves consensus, and how new editors learn how Wikipedia works: please read WP:BOLD. --ColinFine (talk) 19:16, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

no wrap[edit]

I know I have seen somewhere how to prevent a phrase from being split as the text moves to the next line, but I have looked all over the Manual of style and can't find it. Can someone tell me what form that should be in? Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:13, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Try reading {{no wrap}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:18, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for responding! Do I put it in front of the text only? Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Tried it--didn't work. More ideas? Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:05, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
No, Jenhawk777, you put the text inside the template. See the "Usage" examples on the page David Biddulph linked to. --ColinFine (talk) 19:09, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
The tl| then the text, then the no wrap? All inside double brackets? Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:59, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Okay--no wrap in front, then text. Thank you!!! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

No Subject[edit]

Hello
why my article was declined???  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayed Aagha Reza (talkcontribs) 19:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC) 


Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! This Article?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 19:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
@Sayed Aagha Reza: Your article was declined because
  1. it makes no claim of notability: Wikipedia only includes articles on people who are in some way notable, as evidenced by the fact that they have received significant coverage in independent media;
  2. it is unsourced: Wikipedia requires that all biographies of living persons have at least one source to verify the content of the article.
In general, it is considered a very bad idea to try to create an article about yourself. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:07, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Actually, declined twice. You would be considered notable by Wikipedia's criteria if other people published articles about you and your accomplishments. Until, then, social media more appropriate. David notMD (talk) 00:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Creating a article[edit]

I am a official representative of a writer Shaunak Chakraborty can I create a page on him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupa Banerjee (talkcontribs) 19:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Rupa Banerjee: Because you work for him, you should not. See WP:COI and WP:PAID for more information on why.
If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything, here are the steps you should follow:
1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.
2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.
3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.
4) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.
5) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.
6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.
7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.
8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).
Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:35, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

The "should not" is not absolute. From WP:PAID "Editors who are or expect to be compensated for their contributions must disclose their employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any paid contributions. They must do this on their main user page, or on the talk page accompanying any paid contributions, or in edit summaries." If you decide to go ahead, there are also recommendations to submit it to Articles for Creation rather than posting directly. Everything Ian outlined above applies. P.S. Sign you questions here and your contributions to article Talk pages by typing four of ~ David notMD (talk) 00:32, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Contributor undoing my revisions[edit]

Contributor undoing https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palace_of_the_Parliament&oldid=851021541 my revisions based on "we do not usually add rankings from blogs with Alexa ranking below 3000 to the lead sections of articles". Is that true?! The site in the link is "most visited architecture website worldwide" according to many.--81.101.159.55 (talk) 20:10, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Asked at the help desk here and answered. Contributor undoing my revisions. NZFC(talk) 23:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

How to Show the Person is Notable[edit]

Hi,

I am writing about Lena De Winne. She is notable, not only because she is an author of several books but because she is in charge of leading a new Space Nation called Asgardia. They are working to become a recognized nation in the U.N. and have the first colony of humans on the moon. I was told that my draft does not convey that she is notable. How should I do this? One suggestion was to add book reviews of her books but what about when it comes to her role in Asgardia?

Thank you, --LenaDeWinne (talk) 20:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@LenaDeWinne: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would first note that if you are not Lena DeWinne, you will need to change your username. You may do so at WP:CHU, using one of the two methods there. 331dot (talk) 20:46, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Jessica. You got several answers - including that you should change your username immediately - when you asked two days ago above. --ColinFine (talk) 21:10, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
I've decided to soft block her for the name since she was already made aware. 331dot (talk) 23:15, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Can't get references.[edit]

I'm writing an article about Major General Marvin Gilbert McConnel. He was the Idaho Adjutant General for 22 years he fought in World War 1 World War II multiple military citations and awards through his military career and is responsible for the hundred and 116th Calvary combat team being formed which is still in use today but the United States Army Idaho National Guard. He has a very interesting story. I originally did the edit for the Idaho State guard page putting an infobox updating it with an Idaho State guard photo patch from the uniform and put all the necessary information in. When it came to putting the generals information it said there was no known page for the general or the page didn't exist yet. So to educate the readers of the article further I decided to create the page. But I only have one reference these reference tells his entire story in a 4 Page write up of his military exploits that's the only reference I have to go on. It's from a legitimate government website from the Idaho Military Museum and it's directly sponsored by the Idaho National Guard. Wikipedia tells me I don't meet the requirements for references. How can I if I only have the one paper to go off of. And to boot from a legitimate government website from the state of Idaho. I found his grave at Find A Grave online so I tried to use that as a reference....but no luck. He's a real person from history who not only serve the state of Idaho and was solely responsible for the creation of a major military unit we have today but he was the leader of the Idaho State guard all of that is pretty historical and seems like it should be an article on Wikipedia but how do I get a round only have in the one reference? I'm new to this I've really liked somebody to help me or for somebody to even help me get the article written so it's acceptable for Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 19Marc86 (talkcontribs) 21:18, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@19Marc86: Try Google Books. Focus on professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources. Gov't websites can also be good, especially if they help show that someone meets the standards at WP:MILPEOPLE. Anyone can edit Findagrave, so it's not a reliable source. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:21, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, 19Marc86. Please be very careful of the spelling. His name was Mervin Gilbert McConnel. You will have better luck searching for sources if his first name is spelled correctly. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Here is a link to a 1940 newspaper article about his promotion to general. You will have to sign up to get the full article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

May Day[edit]

The use of May Day for sinking ships and planes that are about to crash needs to be mentioned.Ojai Eyes (talk) 02:31, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Ojai Eyes! I think we already do: the article you're looking for is at mayday (no spaces). :) Writ Keeper  02:40, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Adam Martin (author)[edit]

Hello,

I am looking for a basic example to create an author Wikipedia page for my published novel "Xenoman." I have already published it, and I do have an ISBN, and plan to publish more works, and reference for other works I have written as well.

Thanks, Adam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avery1966 (talkcontribs) 05:05, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Avery1966. I'd suggest that, first up, you have a read of WP:AUTHOR, and then let us know if you think you meet those requirements. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:35, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Avery1966. I fear that you are making a very common mistake, and supposing that Wikipedia has anything whatever to do with promotion, or anybody's online presence, or telling the world about a subject. Please read What Wikipedia is not. --ColinFine (talk) 09:05, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Editing my company's Wikipedia page[edit]

Hi, I was trying to update my employer's (Abiomed) wikipedia page. Looks like there are many steps for doing it. Naively, I just edited the page. Can somebody walk me through the process? Also, what happens to my changes? Were they deleted? Thanks, Uma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uma Chandrasekaran (talkcontribs) 12:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Per what was posted on your Talk page, employees have to announce their PAID and COI situation, best if on their own User page and at Talk of the article being edited. You have done neither. Also, if PAID, there is a STRONG recommendation that any proposed edits be posted at the Talk page of the article in question, so that an independent editor can review and decide if appropriate to incorporate into the article. Lastly, press releases and information from the company or company's website not acceptable as citations. David notMD (talk) 13:01, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Something about wikis being unacceptable external links[edit]

Hello, i added the BeamNG official wiki to the BeamNG.drive page under "external links", but it quickly got reverted by another editor. He stated that wikis were unacceptable external links. If that is so, how come the link for the official Minecraft wiki is still there on Minecraft's wikipedia page?

you can see the comparison here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BeamNG.drive&type=revision&diff=851156483&oldid=851156274 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minecraft#External_links

P.S: This is not a complaint. I only noticed the comparisons between the two examples.

SuperEmbracer (talk) 13:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello SuperEmbracer. Welcome to our Teahouse, and thank you for presenting your question in a very clear and helpful manner. It's an interesting one, and probably not one that I would have bothered myself about. However, reading our policies and guidelines before answering you, I think Lordtobi was correct in reverting your 'good faith' edit. To find out why, there are two page sections to refer you to on our 'External Links' guidelines: Firstly, WP:LINKSTOAVOID gives a list of links that are best avoided, whilst WP:ELOFFICIAL and following subsection makes it clear that only one official website link to a company or product should be used. viz.: Normally, only one official link is included. If the subject of the article has more than one official website, then more than one link may be appropriate, under a very few limited circumstances Now, on the BeamNG official website there is an obvious link to their instructional wiki, which is clearly part of the same domain name. In contrast, the Minecraft wiki is hosted on a different domain, so it could be argued that there is more than one official website which therefore should be linked to. Personally, I'd have left in the link to the BeamNG wiki as being helpful to users. Whilst wikis aren't acceptable as references, this one looked to be fairly formally run and could have merited an official link in my view had it been on a different domain name. But I'd probably advise against adding it back in as the balance goes slightly against you, and slightly more towards that of the reverting editor. I hope this makes sense? Welcome to Wikipedia and don't be downhearted by the occasional revert. It happens to all of us. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:09, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Why is everything Bold?[edit]

On my talk page, all of the entries are Bold. Not my idea, and I cannot figure out how to fix it. David notMD (talk) 13:26, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi David notMD. Interesting. I've corrected the error on your page now. I initially thought I should look for an imbalance in the usual markup commands (three apostrophes) to open and close emboldening around sentences, but couldn't find any. Then, noting where the bold text started, I looked at the source code and found that Tribe of Tiger had used bold commands <b> bold text </b> in their signature, but that the closing command had somehow been left off when you subsequently rearranged your barnstars and removed the timestamp with this edit. I've added that back in, and your Talk page looks OK to me, now. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Article Not Approved - Appears to match other existing articles exactly[edit]

I am trying to add to the set of Wikipedia Pages for The New York Times Non-Fiction Best Sellers by Year. Wikipedia currently has pages for 2000-2018, and a few years scattered between 1931 - 2000. I submitted a page for 1999, following the same style as the pages for years that had previously been reported and apparently approved. The reviewer denied the page saying 'Lacks significant coverage in multiple independent verifiable secondary sources'. The currently existing pages for 2000-2018 have very few references, all from the NYTimes itself and no other independent secondary source. How can I improve the page so that it's approved? Should the pages that exist now include more references? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charmquark2 (talkcontribs) 13:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Inserting a new section in an existing article[edit]

Hello,

While I've been able to add text to an existing article, I am confused about how to add a new section to an existing article. I should probably have been able to work this out; I'm sorry I haven't! Please can you explain it?

Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GW1649 (talkcontribs) 15:08, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

If you want a new section which is formatted like the one your question (and my reply) are in on this page, you put '==' both before and after the text you want to be in the heading. If you want to see how it's done, click the 'edit' link that's to the right of the section name above, and this will show you the code of this section. Actually, this is how most of us learned the syntax of Wiki-code originally - find a page that already contains the formatting you want to put into another page and look at the source code to see how it's done. Neiltonks (talk) 15:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Photo use[edit]

Hi there, I'm a teacher and am wondering whether I can copy a photo from your site and use it on a research mat that may be sold through TPT? What are the copyright rules for use of photos found on Wikipedia? Thanks. S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.136.16 (talk) 15:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status varies depending on the image, all of which are hosted on Wikimedia Commons. The copyright status is listed below the image over at Commons, and explains the rules regarding use. What is the image in question? Stormy clouds (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
I want to make a correction here. Wikimedia Commons hosts millions of freely licensed imagesand copyright free images. Here on Wikipedia, we also host images. Most commonly, these are low resolution images of things like book and album covers, movie posters and company logos. Our policy on use of non-free images allows limited usage of these type of inages, but these images cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:55, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

So if the image says public domain, I can use it? I'm looking for a few different images. The first one is File:Cetorhinus maximus by greg skomal.JPG. Based on what I've now read, it looks like I can use this image. Is this correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.136.16 (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Tht's right, IP user. Most of the text in Wikipedia, and many images in Commons, are licensed under a license such as CC-BY-SA, which says that you can reuse them for any purpose as long as you attribute the source. But that particular image is public domain, so you are not even required to attribute it (though I would recommend you do so). --ColinFine (talk) 18:21, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

question[edit]

i am new here and i dont know about wikipedia very much and thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammad alna (talkcontribs) 16:11, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

During the period of your block from editing you need to read and understand the messages which were placed on your user talk page, and then you'll know a bit more about Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Discography template[edit]

Does anyone know of an unconventional discography template that would allow for a track listing as well as the title, year, etc. of the album? I know that we usually just list album titles in the Discography sections of music articles that don’t have separate discography pages, but I’m currently sprucing up an article that has the tracks of each album listed, and I don’t want to eradicate that content just because it’s not standard to do so. But I’d like to put the data into a nice, clean chart. And I’m mostly just a cleaning and remodeling gnome, so I don’t know anything about code or programming in order to make a chart from scratch in the case that such a template (or one I could easily modify to serve this function) doesn’t exist. Please help! WikiEditorial101 (talk) 19:55, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Have you checked the Template:Track listing page? If you want to share the name of the article, I can take a look and see if anything comes to mind. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:06, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Joint editing[edit]

Hi! I would like to start editing wikiarticles with friends and groups. Is there an easy way to do this? How do other Wikipedians work collaboratively? is there a live editing platform, like google docs, that works well with wikipedia?

The platform is pretty collaborative and resilient as it is. You can discuss planned edits on the talk page before implementing. You can start a draft of a major planned revision in your sandbox, and post a link on the talk page encouraging others to edit there, if you want to get consensus before going live. If you are going to be doing a major edit to the page and are worried about edit conflicts, you can use the Template:In use, and if you are just actively editing with a group, the template Template:Under construction might work better. There's more info there about when to use which template. One thing to consider - if you try to edit the entire article and copy it to your sandbox with the intention of eventually overwriting the entire article with your new text, you'll have to be careful that you take into account any edits that occur to the live article after you start your sandbox version. Hope this helps. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:56, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Parmar Agro Agency[edit]

agricultural shop in bhiwani — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikas Vir S. (talkcontribs) 01:07, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:NOTWEBHOSTThegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:22, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

How do I join the counter vandalism unit?[edit]

Hi everyone. I noticed that a number of editors are part of the “counter vandalism unit” and I want to focus mostly on vandal fighting so I’m interested in joining. What do I need to do to become a member? Thanks to anyone who can help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosstacker (talkcontribs)

You could start by learning not to plagiarize other web sites in your edits. And especially not to plagiarize web sites that have nothing to do with the topics you are editing. That way people might not start thinking you are a vandal yourself. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Good article nomination[edit]

I am currently nominating the article "Mila Rodino" to good article, an article that I have improved greatly. Just asking, how long is the time needed to review this kind of nomination ?--Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 02:23, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Reviews are not in chronological order. It takes an editor with a general knowledge of the topic to volunteer. Within the category of your nomination, some have been waiting for a reviewer as long as eight months. Once a reviewer agrees to the process, typically 5-10 days. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

What are your thoughts on this article?[edit]

Greetings,

I recently submitted an article and I was wondering does this article demonstrates the subject's notability? What are your suggestions for improvements? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aduf10 (talkcontribs) 02:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Success_Rate_(in_Sports) is about a statistical measure of success. To establish that it is notable, you will need several citations of reliable independent published sources with in-depth discussion of the measure. The draft cites seven sources, but none of them discuss the measure. Maproom (talk) 07:12, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Question on citing my own website as a reference[edit]

I am a historian of early rock and roll artists (1954-1963) and, at one time, published a fanzine containing first-hand interviews and articles written from first-hand interviews with these artists. Some of the detail of these artists online is very sparse, even though their songs may have been hit records and still played on the air today. I am slowly converting these print interviews and articles to digital format and featuring them on my website. I would like to add data that will be corroborated by these first-hand interviews, and it appears that in order to do that, I need to cite the source. I see some guidance that citations should not be of one's own website. I intend no self-promotion, but would like to see some that some of these artists whose careers are not well-documented receive some recognition by having accurate biographical information available on wikipedia. Please advise so I can follow through on this endeavor without violating rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmirrione (talkcontribs) 03:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Jmirrione, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is, Probably not. It's not just the COI issue - if that were all, the recommendation would be to make suggestions on the article's talk pages and ask for somebody uninvolved to decide what edits to make. But unless you are a recognised authority on the subject (at a minimum, have had several artices on the subject published by mainstream, reputable publishers), your website is not regarded as a reliable source: please see WP:SELFPUB. Furthermore, even if you can establish reliability, information from interviews with the subject can only be used in limited ways, as it is regarded as a PRIMARY source. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 08:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Jmirrione. There is some advice on this at WP:SELFCITE, but as Colin indicates, the main issue is likely to be whether your website is considered a reliable source according to Wikipedia's standards. You could ask for opinions on that at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

"Fringe"[edit]

You can't have a leftist edited narrative where people who disagree with progressivism are labeled as "fringe". You will lose all your credibility regardless of your donors. It's as simple as that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.245.63 (talk) 05:15, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.
Wikipedia has a number of acknowledged systemic biases that editors need to be aware of and work to properly balance in the spirit of neutral point of view. If there's a specific area where you feel like NPOV is not being respected, please bring it up on the talk page of the article in question and, if there's no satisfaction there, to the appropriate noticeboard. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 05:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

First article! Several questions and request for feedback[edit]

Good evening to the Teahouse,

I'm excited to say that I've just created my first wikipedia article, Monoswezi! And now I'm a little bummed to discover that it was already written in the french wikipedia. But anyways, I've got a few questions regarding this article as a beginner editor:

1. Do I need references for the music genres?

2. Can I get basic band details (members, instruments) from their website as a source?

3. Is pulling a picture from the band's facebook page legal from a copyright standpoint? I read up on copyright, but am still not really sure how to apply the rules yet.

Thanks in advance and I appreciate any feedback you may have!

--Everydaycurious (talk) 05:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Everydaycurious, and welcome to the Teahouse. Well done for writing an article - don't worry about it already existing in the French Wikipedia: each Wikipedia is a separate project, and while it is common to create an article from translating another one, it is often the case that they are written completely indepedently. To answer your particular questions:
  1. Yes, I think you do need a reference for the genre. Sometimes it will be obvious, but when it is more controversial, putting your judgment in would count as original research, which is not allowed. You might like to look at WP:GENRE.
  2. Yes, you can take uncontroversial factual data from a non-independent source, as long as the bulk of the article is from independent ones.
  3. Probably not. Normally all images used must be freely reusable for any purpose which means they must either be in the public domain (either explicitly, or by reason of age) or have been explicitly released by the copyright holder under a suitable licence. You need to check the copyright on their image, but it is unlikely that it will be suitable. Sometimes we can use non-free images under "fair use" rules, but one of the conditions for this is that there is no practical possibility of ever obtaining a free image, so this is hardly ever relevant for images of living people. Sometimes people have had success asking public figures to release images in this way: but you would need to make them aware that they are giving permission not just to use the image on Wikipedia, but to release it so that anybody may use it for any purpose, including commercial. See WP:DCM. --ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Do you supply a citation in an article when mentioning a subject's appeared on a major magazine cover?[edit]

An editor recently mentioned a "sky is blue" type standard re: adding facts to an article, in that not every, commonly verifiable thing must be cited when it appears on Wikipedia. Which leads to my question:

In the existing paragraph closing the Early Life and Family section on actress/author/socialite Brooke Hayward, I added the second sentence, which I have emboldened here:

<< Hayward attended Vassar College and studied acting with Lee Strasberg at the Actors Studio.[13] While taking acting classes she worked as a fashion model, appearing on the August 1959 cover of Vogue magazine. >>

The initial editor in the above quote cited the Actors Studio association, which is understandable to me, as enrollment info at that institution is not readily available to the public (to my knowledge.) But if someone has appeared on the cover of Time, Life, or Vogue or some such widely circulated and catalogued publication, does one need to provide an inline citation for it if adding a mention of that? I am guessing that if someone doubted the statement in question they could do a quick image search for "brooke hayward vogue cover" and the cover would come up as part of the Getty Image Collection, and the verification would be complete. I do not see it as being particularly contentious, but I'm not sure of the Quality of Care in such things.

TLDR: Do I have to look for a reputable source that specifically mentions Hayward was on the cover of Vogue, and then actually reference that?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts on this, and wishing all a good weekend.

Codenamemary (talk) 06:41, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Codenamemary, I think the simplest option would be to cite the copy ofbthe cover at Getty. A media appearance isn't quite at the level of "sky is blue" obvious, finding a copy of a particular magazine is not as effortless as looking at the sky. BTW Vogue is published in multiple editions in several countries, so you should specify which one (US, UK, Australia, etc) is relevant. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Table creation[edit]

How an information table is created? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anand Raj Baghel (talkcontribs) 08:08, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Anand Raj Baghel, and welcome to our Teahouse. I'm afraid as a new user you may find tables a little difficult to come to grips with at first. However please read Help:Tables and the introductory links at the top of that page for an introduction to how they work. I would advise you to do any testing in your sandbox, rather than in a live article, as it's very, very easy to make a mess of things. Previewing and regularly saving your table edits is really useful. Another good tip is to find an existing article with a simple table that you do like and view the source of that page to see how the table is constructed. It is always best to start off by making small edits to existing tables first. Hoping this helps, and good luck on your Wikipedia journey. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello Anand Raj Baghel. While Nick's answer is correct, I have a suspicion that he may have misunderstood your question, and you may actually be asking about the table of basic information that appears at the top of many articles. That is called an Infobox, and you can find information about using them at Help:Infobox. --ColinFine (talk) 09:43, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Is this spam?[edit]

Please help me about the draft Draft:Antony Coia I created. In Nominations and Criticism section I added some quote as references for helping reviewer to understand if subject is notable or not. Are the quotes ok or are they spam? Thanks (Marion994 (talk) 08:14, 21 July 2018 (UTC))

How can I take the Wikipediholism test?[edit]

I came to know about the Wikipediholism test. I want to take it and see how I am in Wikipedia. Can anyone guide me how can I take part in the test Map Collector (talk) 09:32, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

See WP:Wikipediholism test, Map Collector. --ColinFine (talk) 09:48, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
But I have saw the article but no piece of info is given about taking the test Map Collector (talk) 09:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
In the lede there is a Wikilink to an automated version. David notMD (talk) 10:59, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

My name is clank and nobody welcomed me. I need someone to welcome me because I just joined today.--MrClank (talk) 11:20, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@MrClank: Being welcomed is not inherent. If you want a sincere welcome message, then consider making useful or constructive contributions. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello again[edit]

I do want to become adopted as I am seeking adoption. --MrClank (talk) 11:55, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome, MrClank. You've asked about adoption. Might I suggest that you first demonstrate your interests in simple editing, including introducing yourself and your interests on your user page? So far, apart from trouting another editor for reasons that elude me, you've not yet made any edits to articles. Most new editors now find they get the help they need and very quick replies to most simple questions by asking them here, rather than entering into a 1:1 relationship with a single editor via adoption. (It's a big commitment for both parties involved) My personal view is that adoption better suits the committed new editor who has already been editing for some time, has demonstrated their broad commitment to this Project, and now needs more structured support and guidance. So, if you do have specific questions, why not just ask them here to start with? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:30, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you nick, I am just seeking adoption because I don’t know how to become a Wikipedian. But thank you for your advice --MrClank (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

How to suggest a change to a Wikipedia article?[edit]

Regarding the article on Mercy Otis Warren, there is a reference (#10) which links to my old domain name (samizdat.com). The content referenced is now at my new domain seltzerbooks.com Also there is a wealth of imaterial by and about Mercy Otis Warren at seltzerbooks.com/warren You can reach me at seltzer@seltzerbooks.com Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.138.182 (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello 24.45.138.182, and welcome to Wikipedia. I've made the edit you pointed out, but next time, you can simply click the edit button on the top of the page, or at the corresponding section header and add what you want yourself. Editing is open to everybody, and we are always happy to meet new users who want to make improvements to the encyclopedia. — Alpha3031 (talk | contribs) 13:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Actually, it is a better idea for you to suggest, rather than directly make, edits when you have a conflict of interest (as you do, when it is a link to your own website that's involved). The talk page of the article in question is usually the best place to place the request, and you can post the template {{request edit}} followed by your request, on the talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 15:35, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Who is the founder of Wikipedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmomin (talkcontribs) 17:42, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Jimmy WalesThegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 18:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Please don't forget Larry Sanger - co-founder. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Where i open move option in my page for move article page ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmomin (talkcontribs) 17:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Jmomin. I realise you have been blocked from editing, but should you ever return, you might find Wikipedia:Moving a page answers your question. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:03, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Category : Alumni of UniversityName vs Category : UniversityName alumni[edit]

Please which of the two format above is the consistent and best-practice format for creating categories for alumni of a University on Wikipedia? HandsomeBoy (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

[edit]

How can I change the Wikipedia logo on my userpage?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 19:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Posting references[edit]

I have no clue how to do so. If anyone would be so kind to walk me through that it would be lovely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1015:B110:8484:BC5E:136F:5D8A:1F76 (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Start by reading Referencing for beginners and come back here to the Teahouse if you have specific questions. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:10, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Difficulty with an admin on Wikimedia[edit]

I have a problem on Wikimedia Commons with an admin that is unfairly pursuing me and has placed a 3-month block on my account, with no means of appeal. The supposed offence is disruptive editting, which I refute, in fact I claim that I was merely rectifying disruptive edits by other editors (mates with the admin, I suspect). How do I go about appealling this nonsensical block when the Admin in question leaves me nowhere to post an unblock request or appeal to other admins?--Petebutt (talk) 21:04, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Themightyquill You may wish to comment here.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Petebutt  InvestigatingThegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:10, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
I found this on your Wikimedia Commons Talk Page, Which Explains it:"Please stop your disruptive edits.

The unidentified/uncategorized aircraft categories are under discussion. Please do not move them again. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Your disruptive behaviour has continued as you have emptied Category:Unidentified propeller-driven aircraft. If these edits continue, you will be blocked. Please consider this your last warning. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)" Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:12, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

  • This board is for assisting new users with using Wikipedia. We have nothing to do with the operation of Commons. If they have blocked you and removed your talk page access there, there is nothing we can do here. You will just have to wait out the block. I don't know if they have an off-wiki appeals process like the WP:UTRS for Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 21:15, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
That said, if anyone has specific questions, I'd be happy to answer on Commons. But I should think the commons user talk page, his contribution list and block log say it all. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
I also want to add that you were saying "Why don't YOU stop YOUR disruptive edits!!!!--Petebutt (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)" Which I don't think you should do, as this shows you are yelling (Caps). On the English Wikipedia this is considered uncivil(WP:CIVIL). I am not sure about Wikimedia Commons. (But I am sure they have the same rule) Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:17, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Petebutt Wikimedia Commons is a separate, albeit related, project to English Wikipedia. It has it's own set of conventions, rules and admins, different in many ways. You need to address the reason you were blocked on Commons through Commons procedures, coming here is completely useless or nearly completely useless.
@Thegooduser: It's not a good practice to copy other people's comments, complete with signatures, from one project to another. We have perfectly good tools for making and following links and that's a better way to achieve your purpose. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 21:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Sorry about that. Forgot about the Link Part.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:28, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
jmcgnh I thanked your edit, because you helped me remember to not do that againThegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 21:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Question[edit]

How do I nominate a page for deletion? RickAndMorty2003 (talk) 22:15, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. WP:CSDThegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:16, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Help me to properly link external and internal links.Integral59 (talk) 22:26, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[edit]

Hello, Thank you for your kind invitation. Earlier I tried to learn how to write the correct article for Wikipedia, but I did not succeed. Now I'm determined to learn how to write articles for Wikipedia, but I still can not solve some problems. For example, I could not correctly link references and bibliography in my draft article. I do not understand what my mistake is. Please help me correct errors in the article and edit it correctly. Thank you in advance for your kind help. Sincerely, Integral59 (talk) 22:26, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@Integral59: Internal links (links to pages within the site) use [[two brackets like this]] around the article title, using a "|" between the title and what the link displays, [[like|this]] if that is needed. External links (links to other sites) go in a pair of single brackets with the address first, then a space, then the title for the link, [http://www.example.com like this]. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:30, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
However, @Integral59:, I'm seeing further problems with your attempted draft. It reads like a resume/CV (which we do not host) put up for the purpose of promoting Khalilov's career (which we do not allow). If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything, here are the steps you should follow:
1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.
2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.
3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.
4) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.
5) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.
6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.
7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.
8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).
Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:32, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
And there were copyright violations. Had to delete it. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

I thank you for your prompt and detailed response. Regarding external and internal links, I think I understand everything and try to fix it. As for the subject of the article, I want to consult. I have cited several references to external sources and ask you to kindly see which of them are considered authoritative:

Extended content

1. MAIN PUBLICATIONS

  • Khain V.E., Khalilov E.N. Cyclicity of geodynamic processes: its possible nature Scientific World, 520 p.Library of Congress USA
  • Khalilov E.N., Bagirov R.A. Natural zeolites, their properties, production and application. Elm, 350 p.Library of Congress USA
  • Mehdiyev Sh.F., Khalilov E.N. Rhythms of Earth’s catastrophes.Elm. 1988 Library of Congress USA

2.Bibliography

  • Elchin Khalilov biography in Book: Dictionary of International Biography. 1995. Twenty third edition. Who Will Be Who in the 21st Century.International Biography Center, Cambridge, UK, p.308. ISBN 0948875410.
  • Elchin Khalilov biography in Book: Men of Achievement. 1995. Sixteenth Edition. 1994 by Merlose Press Ltd, Cambridge, UK, ISBN 0948875461
  • Elchin Khalilov biography in Book: Famous Scientists of Azerbaijan.Baku, Adiloglu, 2003, p.62. ISBN 9952250145
  • Elchin Khalilov in Book by Frederic P. Miller, Agnes F. Vandome, John McBrewster. Alphascript Publishing, Feb. 16th, 2011, USA, ISBN 9786134280105

3. External links Publication on the UN website; Publication on the NATO website; Publication in the State Information Agency of Azerbaijan; The show is on the central television channels of Turkey.

I would also like to ask, if in the text I'm talking about a member of a particular organization, for example, the International Academy of Sciences, can I link to the official website of this Academy? Thank you for your kind help. Yours faithfully, Integral59 (talk) 23:09, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion: Article creation date[edit]

Useful information about the articles or pages, is the creation date, although they have the last edit date. I suggest that the text line w/ the article date should be changed from "This page was last edited on ___." to "This page was created ___ & last edited ___.".104.178.189.70 (talk) 01:02, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Featured anthem article[edit]

Are there any articles about national anthem that had obtained the featured article status?--Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 02:50, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jeromi Mikhael: National anthem of Russia ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Biography[edit]

How can we post a Biography on wikipidia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohit9639 (talkcontribs) 03:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Question, is my wiki page accepted for my "Sammin" draft?[edit]

Look at title — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1kwwisjwksek (talkcontribs) 04:05, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

No ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Why not any reasons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1kwwisjwksek (talkcontribs) 05:22, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

how to get images uploaded here, which im looking for is the Jdp or jpd — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abboushi4 (talkcontribs) 05:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

I write first article but it's not approve, What's wrong in it i can under stand[edit]

I write first Wikipedia article but it's not approve. What's wrong in it i can under stand.....Please Help Me !!!