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


WP teahouse logo.png

Most recent archives
654  655  656  657  658  659  660  661  662  663
664  665  666  667  668  669  670  671  672  673

can anybody help me to make this article error free[edit]

can any buddy help me to make this article error free :( i am very new to Wikipedia :) Sumitmpsd (talk) 07:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

hello @Sumitmpsd, you mean grammar-wise or content wise? Grammar wise seems ok to me, it's very short anyway. Content wise is very little content, and the sources are not in a language I understand so I can't help with that. The problem with that banner is that there are not sufficient sources that prove that this guys is notable enough. Check it out here. It would help to have couple of sources in English. If you think that is not the case anymore since you published enough sources you can delete the banner, I guess. ----Beleriandcrises (talk) 09:37, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello Sumitmpsd and welcome to the Teahouse! The way the article Mahendra Mewati stands presented currently, there are several issues with it. You'd want to check the guidelines for notability and notability for actors. Going by the references, I am unsure with the content in references 1 and 2 for the language they are presented in. Reference 3 is notable, but it doesn't go into the details of the said actor. Reference 4 looks good for the claim of graduation. You might want to find more independent sources that focus on the individual. Further, the 'refname' had been invoked but never used and instead, the same reference had been cited twice. Though I've fixed it, you can read here on how to use the same reference multiple times in an article.
Remember that Wikipedia has guidelines on copyright that need attribution and request from the original author if the content (photograph in this case) is to be published. I can see that the image has its origin in a blog where the author hasn't shared the details of the image. Make sure you have the permission and attribution if the image is copyrighted, else it might be taken down.
Your edits are limited to more or less this article and Anubhuti kashyap, or articles relating to them. Before creating any more articles, please read Wikipedia:Your first article. Henceforth, submit your draft article for review rather than posting it in the mainspace, where there's a good chance for such articles to be nominated for deletion. Until then, you can keep editing (and learn from) other articles that more experienced editors have contributed to, simultaneously improving your article. Good luck! Mark the trainDiscuss 10:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Badly written article[edit]

Not sure where to report a badly written article needing help. ʻIolani_Palace especially Pohukaina section. The writting makes no sense. Sentence fragments, sentences that are confusing, random pieces of info that are of little importance, sections that just are not understandable, etc...

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:01, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I've seen a lot of worse articles than ʻIolani Palace. But if you are aware of errors in it, you could correct them yourself. I've just corrected one. Maproom (talk) 07:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

trying to write an article about a national level scholarship exam.[edit]

but i doubt that whether i should mention the name of the company organising the exam? will it be considered as a promotion of the company? Can you please help me with what i can write in the article and what not for it to get approved?

Samani.khushbu (talk) 06:32, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Samani.khushbu: Hello and welcome. I assume this refers to Draft:KCNS Exam. The primary issue is that the text in the draft seems to be a copyright violation, which is not permitted on Wikipedia; as such your draft will likely be deleted. Leaving that issue aside, you first must have independent reliable sources (click WP:RS to review what those are) describing the subject in depth that support the content of the article, that is, sources not written by or having anything to do with the subject. If you have that, it would be appropriate to mention the name of the company that puts on the exam in its article. However, promotional language like "meritorious", "to inspire the next generation", "huge opportunity for young geniuses", etcetera, must be avoided. Wikipedia articles are written in a neutral point of view(WP:NPOV). The article must also do more than state the technical information about the exam, and state why it is notable(WP:N).
If you are associated with the company putting on this exam, you may need to read the conflict of interest policy(WP:COI) and the paid editing policy(WP:PAID). 331dot (talk) 08:16, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Patronizing welcome?[edit]

Thanks so much for your friendly welcome User:WillKomen. I can't wait to start editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaraLouiseN (talkcontribs) 08:25, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello CaraLouiseN and welcome to the Teahouse.
Based on your edit summary, you felt patronized by either the welcome message or the Wikipedia Adventure game. I assure you, it was not intended to make you feel bad. As you get more experience with editing and start interacting with other editors, it's recommended that you - at least initially - assume they are acting in good faith. I found TWA to be a bit dumb, myself, but it did give me an introduction on a few important aspects of editing here on WP that I probably needed as I was getting started. Don't forget to sign your contributions on talk and project pages, please. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 16:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes, CaraLouiseN, the invitation to the "Wikipedia Adventure" is patronising when directed at adults. Others have complained about it. You are not being singled out. Maproom (talk) 06:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Proposing deletion for an article, should I do it?[edit]

This article:, is not true. There is no construction ongoing in sangley point. There are also no reliable and verifiable sources to prove that this is true. Should I propose deletion? Itsquietuptown (talk) 10:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey Itsquietuptown. If you feel that you've done a thorough search for possible sources, and found that there is not enough coverage about the subject to meet our notability guidelines, then it's perfectly appropriate to nominate the article for a deletion discussion by following the steps at WP:AFDHOW. However, keep in mind that the notability of a subject is based on the available sources everywhere, and not just on the sources present in an article, or the condition of the article as it stands. So be sure you have exhausted every obvious avenue for finding additional sources before nominating, to avoid unnecessarily using up the time of volunteers who participate in these discussions. TJWtalk 10:52, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I only found news articles about proposals but not about the construction of Sangley Point International Airport. I think I could just make a new section about the proposals in the original article,, and then delete the old article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsquietuptown (talkcontribs) 13:56, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Well, Itsquietuptown... We also have to keep in mind that existence per se is mostly irrelevant for the purposes of Wikipedia. There are many things that exist, but don't have coverage in reliable sources enough to warrant an article. Conversely, there are many things that don't exist, or do not exist yet that do warrant an article, because they have received significant in-depth coverage. TJWtalk 14:34, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Also, if you do write a section in Danilo Atienza Air Base, then rather than deleting Sangley Point International Airport it could just be redirected to Danilo Atienza Air Base so it isn't recreated. ~ GB fan 16:40, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm still confused. Should I still delete the article, make a redirect to Danilo Atienza Air Base, then make a new section on it? I haven't found any verifiable sources with proof that Sangley Point International Airport is in construction. Itsquietuptown (talk) 01:22, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

My article never got a visit from new page patrol[edit]

Hi, I wrote an article a little over a month ago and it was never reviewed. How can I request a review?


WikiBear2000 (talk) 15:36, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you look at Special:NewPagesFeed you'll see that there are nearly fourteen thousand pages awaiting patrol, and a backlog of nearly seven months. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello WikiBear2000 -- For all intents and purposes, your article will get an automatic review at ninety days, if an editor hasn't reviewed it. Chances are, dozens have looked at it. Check the Page information. Rhadow (talk) 16:10, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Understood, don't meant to be impatient. I have written articles since that have been patrolled, just want to make sure it wasn't lost in the shuffle. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiBear2000 (talkcontribs) 16:27, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
WikiBear2000 Why are you so eager to see your submissions reviewed? The only reason I know of why editors want their submissions reviewed is the removal of the NOIDEX tag. Some paid editors won't receive their money until the article "shows up in Google". Is what you're trying to accomplish here? Please note that undisclosed paid editing is not allowed. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure Mduvekot (talk) 17:01, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Who wouldn't want their submitted Wiki to be found by search engines? If no one can find your article, what's the point of writing it? But thanks for your help, I will continue waiting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiBear2000 (talkcontribs) 19:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

A creator of an article might well want it to be indexed by search engines. But there'd be no urgency about it. Maproom (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
W - You avoiding answering the direct question - are you being paid for articles? David notMD (talk) 20:13, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Removing a redirect once a new page has been created[edit]

I wrote an article about the Library of Things trend that is happening in libraries and all over the world. Unfortunately, there's still a redirect in place for the search term "Library of Things" ( -- so when someone enters that term in the general Wikipedia search box, the result redirects to the page for "Borrowing Centers" (

How can I remove this redirect, so that when someone searches for this term, it will direct to the new page? (

Thanks very much for your help!

Rkarasick (talk) 17:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey Rkarasick.  Done When you get redirected, the page you end up on should have a little "redirected from Library of things" in the corner. If you click that you can edit the target of the redirect. TJWtalk 17:41, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Super. Thank you! (talk) 17:49, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

How do I respond/ correct objections to draft: Rubber Elasticity/ Integrated Network Models?[edit]

As of ~12/20/2016, I thought that we had convinced the Wikipedia editor/reviewer that our article was acceptable. In July, we received a message from 'HausteurBot' that the article ( Rubber Elasticity/ Integrated Network Models) will be nominated for deletion. Somehow we missed that email. In Sept. another notification (from Legacypac) was sent but it isn't clear what we need to do to remove the 'draft' designation. Can you direct me to the correct person or page to have a discussion about what is lacking or objectionable? Davidhanson471 (talk) 19:48, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are talking about Draft:Integrated Rubber Network Models, the messages on your user talk page tell you how to request its undeletion. You do also need to read the advice you received at User talk:Davidhanson471#Your submission at Articles for creation: Integrated Rubber Network Models (December 20), and the reply you had at User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive 15#Request on 19:49:17, 27 December 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Davidhanson471. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:03, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
e/c Hello, Davidhanson471, and welcome to the Teahouse. First, I must ask you why you refer to yourself as "we"; Wikipedia accounts cannot be shared by more than one person. You may need to review (and comply with) Wikipedia's conflict of interest and paid editing policies.
The article you seem to be asking about is Draft:Integrated Rubber Network Models, which was deleted because it had not been edited in more than 6 months. (Please always use exact article or draft titles, so that we can help you better.) You can retrieve the draft, if you are going to continue working on it and/or submit it for review, by clicking on the red link above and then clicking the link to WP:REFUND/G13.
I am not an administrator, so I can't view the page until it is restored, but you're more than welcome to return to the Teahouse once the page is viewable by non-administrators again and volunteers here will be happy to let you know what, if anything, more needs to be done before you submit the draft again. Indeed, it seems Robert McClenon was the editor who reviewed the draft previously; Robert is a regular Teahouse contributor who I'm sure will chip in if he has the time. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 20:14, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I have restored the Draft so anyone can look at it. ~ GB fan 20:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Much of the content appears to be an unattributed copy of Rubber elasticity#Integrated Rubber Network Models, and therefore a copyright violation. The OP needs to read about copying within Wikipedia. As suggested at User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive 15#Request on 19:49:17, 27 December 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Davidhanson471, it appears that what was intended was a modification to the existing section Rubber elasticity#Integrated Rubber Network Models, rather than a new article. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I am confused by the comment "Much of the content appears to be an unattributed copy of Rubber elasticity#Integrated Rubber Network Models, and therefore a copyright violation.". Perhaps that is because it was originally incorrectly submitted as a 'Creation' rather than a modification of the existing page Rubber elasticity#Integrated Rubber Network Models. The last response that I received from Robert McClenon (' should not be submitted to Articles for Creation, which is for the review of whole new articles. You may either post it to the talk page of the article for comments first, and then add it to the article, or be bold and add it to the article, although I recommend discussion first. I will comment more later. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:47, 28 December 2016 (UTC)') I took the 'Bold Approach' and posted the article as an addition to the existing page. Since I did not hear back from Mr. McClenon, I concluded that the addition had not met with any further objections. I am certainly not adverse to modifying the article to satisfy the editor's suggestions- I'm just not sure exactly what needs to be done. The subject of Rubber Elasticity is of interest to a wide range of people with varying levels of scientific background. The article is intended to be useful to all. Davidhanson471 (talk) 21:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

In that case, I don't see why you would object to the deletion of Draft:Integrated Rubber Network Models, Davidhanson471, given that it was created by mistake. Perhaps you mistakenly thought the deletion message referred to Rubber elasticity? Cordless Larry (talk) 22:49, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Do you want the draft of Draft:Integrated Rubber Network Models reviewed, or deleted, or what? By the way, although in Wikipedia, there is no deadline, there is a 6-month deadline in that drafts become dead if they are not edited in six months. Also, if you ask an editor about something that they did six or nine months ago, they may not be able to answer. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Also, User:Davidhanson471, who are "we"? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Seeking help turning company article to read less like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia[edit]

Looking to create an article for a men's apparel brand ( that was recently acquired by a large global brand, Callaway Golf, which has its own wiki entry. The brand is worthy of notoriety based on this acquisition ($160M), linking to other wiki articles (Callaway itself, sponsored athletes like Andy Roddick, James Blake, etc) and it's familiarity in the men's apparel world. The draft included viable references as well.

Any help to rework the draft page to make it acceptable to be approved would be great. (talk) 20:04, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Actually based on what you have said, it should be added to the main business article instead. Α Guy into Books § (Message) -  22:16, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Contribute to Wiki[edit]

Hello I would like to contribute some pages of interest to wiki I thought wiki was basis and partial I have been looking at wikipedia pages for years and you never have any of the people, places or things that I would like to know more about for example you have up here but don't have VideoStar the app that started it all you have Johnny Orlando but don't have Qeuyl you allow IMDB as sourceable but don't allow IMVDB you accept fan made blogs but don't accept small magazines as sourceable information it seems to me that Wikipedia is very harsh to noobs or maybe I'm doing something wrong . Chrisbrad (talk) 22:36, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Chrisbrad: Hello and welcome. I'm not sure what you've been reading, but IMDB is not considered a reliable source as it is user-editable. I'm sure that it wouldn't be too hard to find it in articles, as this is a volunteer effort and things can only be removed if someone sees them. For information on what reliable sources are, please click on WP:RS. It is true that there is a steep learning curve to Wikipedia for new users, especially if they want to dive into creating articles. Creating articles is one of the hardest things to do here. Most new editors who become successful did so by starting small, making small edits to existing articles, then gradually working their way up to bigger edits and creating articles. You may want to consider making small edits to existing articles, which will help you learn how Wikipedia works. You may also find it educational to play The Wikipedia Adventure(located at WP:ADVENTURE) which is a tutorial of sorts to using and editing Wikipedia. If you have any other questions, please post them below. 331dot (talk) 22:44, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Chrisbrad. A "small" magazine can most certainly be a reliable source, if it has professional editorial control and a reputation for accuracy and correcting errors. With very limited exceptions, IMDb is not a reliable source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:19, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for all your insight I will once again continue to submit my articles on the people, places and things that are missing from the wiki world Chrisbrad (talk) 15:26, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

deleted page[edit]

I tried to create a page for my grandfather who is a relative of two famous actors and had a career himself. The article ended up deleted and I hate that it was. He deserves a page just as much as his brother and sister. How can I get it to stay?

Devilsfanatic3026 (talk) 00:51, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Devilsfanatic3026. The article you wrote was deleted as the result of this debate: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akhtar Hussain (writer). In that debate, you wrote "I feel he has been short changed by the industry because he wasn't as well known as his more famous siblings. It is hard for me to find sources for this outside of IMDB because he wasn't as well known as them." Those sentences were really arguments for deleting the article rather than keeping it. Wikipedia has articles only about notable actors and notable authors, and this is shown by significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Since I am an administrator, I can view deleted articles. The one you wrote was referenced only to IMDb which is not a reliable source for establishing the notability of an actor. If it is true that this person wasn't very well known and that sources are hard to find, then it is a almost impossible to write an acceptable Wikipedia biography of this person. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Devilsfanatic3026 if your grandfather was involved in the lives of his famous relatives, it may be appropriate to add information about his relationship with his siblings. You may want to pursue that angle, but remember that the article needs to be about them, not him. It would only be OK to add information if it's from a reliable source and if he was a significant part of their lives, which is sometimes the case. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:01, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

List of Copts - Page won't link[edit]

Hello Teahouse Members,

I appreciate having been invited here as a friendly learning space. I'm drafting Draft:Wael K. Barsoum who is a member of the Egyptian Coptic Church. I am having trouble getting the [[1]] to display correctly as a category. Can you provide some guidance? Thanks.

Hilda in South Florida (talk) 02:23, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. List of Copts is a list, not a category. Category:List of Copts does not exist. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:00, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
That means you must select from Category:Copts and its subcategories to indicate he is a Copt. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
{{|@DavidBiddulph|@PrimeHunter|}} Thank you both for the explanations and suggestions.

Hilda in South Florida (talk) 12:30, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Tried my hand at creating a new article, disapproved. I really want to add content to Wikipedia. Please help![edit]

Hi Friends,

I submitted which was disapproved.

The reason for disapproval given was "The references cited are either to passing mentions of the subject, financial transactions involving the subject, or to the the subject's own cite. None of these constitute in-depth coverage about the subject, which is required for meeting Wikipedia's notability standards."

The article I created includes links from Hindu Businessline, VC Circle, and Business World. I believe is pretty in depth coverage.

Can someone please point me in the direct of what sort of coverage would be workable for Indian companies? They aren't going to get many mentions in the US press, but this is a very notable and well known company in India. I'm in one of their elevators every day on the way to work as are hundreds of thousands/(millions?) of other people, figured folks would want to know more about them.

I really want to add content to Wikipedia and this was my first try. I'm crushed by the rejection :( . Please point me in the right direction if possible. Thanks!

Bobbydig01 Bobbydig01 (talk) 05:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bobbydig01: Hello and welcome. I'm sorry you have been disappointed. A company or any article subject does not have to be written about in the US press at all, but they do need in depth coverage in independent reliable sources that indicates how the subject is notable per guidelines, in this case the notability guidelines for businesses' If you click WP:ORG to review them, it will explain what sorts of information is being looked for. The source you provide above would not qualify at least as I see it; it is a basic announcement, possibly a press release, of a business transaction which the notability guidelines specifically state is not acceptable. Please understand that not every company merits a page here; even well known companies don't if they aren't usually written about in independent sources.
Please understand that successfully writing a Wikipedia article is one of the hardest things to do here. It takes time, practice, and effort. Most users who are successful at writing articles started small by making small edits to existing articles, then working their way up to larger edits, then finally to creating articles on their own. Diving right in to creating articles, as you seem to have, often results in disappointment and hurt feelings. I would suggest starting out by editing existing pages first before creating articles. However, if you still want to try to create an article, I would suggest reading Your First Article first, as well as doing The Wikipedia Adventure, which is a tutorial of sorts. Both of these will give you a better idea of what is being looked for. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Well, I do not want to double guess the reviewer (Drewmutt) but I would say [2] does constitute a decent source. Not enough to single-handedly prove notability, but still a bit above passing mentions of the subject, financial transactions involving the subject, or to the the subject's own cite. I would say the current sourcing is not enough to pass the page, but by a bare margin, so some encouragement is deserved.
This being said, Bobbydig01, you have made two mistakes in the process of making this draft. First is that you uploaded File:JohnsonLOGO.jpg to Wikimedia Commons, which is almost surely a copyright violation, and I therefore nominated it for deletion; we can have copyrighted logos in articles but with very strict restrictions, please read WP:LOGO. Second, the article itself is kind of an advertisement - everything below the lead is pretty much irrelevant for an encyclopedia article. (Both of these problems are fixable though.) TigraanClick here to contact me 08:53, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Request for assistance on editing content - template message[edit]

Hello. I recently edited the 'The Homes of Football' page, which is about football photography. I thought I edited it to a standard where content no longer read like an advertisement. There is critical response in the entry but all quotations have proper citations and are factual. As a new editor, I would like to ask for some help and response on what could be done to improve this entry to a standard where the template message is no longer necessary. I have removed all quotations and footnotes that weren't proper citations. Any feedback or help would be greatly appreciated so I can improve as an editor. The template message is below:

This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view. (September 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Encyclopediadia (talk) 08:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

It would appear the whole article is promotional, I suggest you concentrate on the article about the photographer, as most the content is duplicated anyway. Α Guy into Books § (Message) -  09:49, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


The next queue 6 is empty, and there are only a few minutes left for the next DYK. I think an admin needs to promote the next prep 6 to queue 6. See the bot's message at Wikipedia talk:DYK Adityavagarwal (talk) 12:17, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

It looks like this has been done, Adityavagarwal. For future reference, the Teahouse isn't really the place to request administrator attention. We have a range of noticeboards for that, and Wikipedia talk:DYK itself. I imagine that if a queue isn't in place, then the current DYKs just stay on the front page a bit longer, which wouldn't be a disaster. I might be wrong about that, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, Cordless Larry is correct. Now that the queues have switched from 24 hours back to 12 hours again, there's bound to be occasional delays as there aren't that many active prep builders/promoters. Alex ShihTalk 16:35, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Notability issue with new page creation[edit]


I am really new here, but I really want to learn. I am trying to create a page on the biggest free web hosting company: , but it keeps being rejected. 000webhost is covered by such media networks as Forbes, TechCrunh, WikiHow, loads of hosting listing sites etc., it is really well admired by hosting community.

How do I present all the sources in a correct way, so that it pass notability rules? I have a feeling that I am doing something wrong, since this company is really big and truly notable.

I do not want somebody to fix it for me - I really want to understand the reason and get some guidance to fix the issues myself.

Thank you for your help and understanding.

Daugis1 (talk) 18:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Daugis1, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read the policies and guidelines linked in the message that says your draft was declined. For starters, Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources, so never cite them. The same goes for WikiHow. Blogs are usually not reliable sources; what makes you think that Mansoor's Blog is an acceptable source?
You can cite hosting listings, provided that they are reliable, but such passing mentions are likely not the significant coverage needed for notability.
You can also cite the company's own web page for some uncontroversial details that you cannot find in other sources, but the homepage does not contribute to notability. Notability is significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic (hence the company website might be reliable, and you can cite it, but it's not independent). In order to show notability, you need more reliable, independent sources with in-depth coverage. The Forbes article is excellent, but it's just one article. You'll need more like it. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 19:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Submitted first article but need to change title[edit]

I need to change "SeaCamp, Big Pine Key, Florida" to "Seacamp Association, Big Pine Key, Florida" I can edit the page but not the title. Do I need to delete the first submission and resubmit a new page?

Next, I need to add it to the list of Summer Camps. Do I need to wait until the page is accepted then add it to the list page?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OddsnEnds (talkcontribs) 18:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, OddsnEnds and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you have had an all too common experience for people that come into this big complicated system called Wikipedia and immediately try one of the most difficult tasks: creating a new article. I see from your talk page that Fuhgettaboutit has deleted your draft as a copyright violation, and explained both that and another pitfall you may have fallen into.
Please understand that Wikipedia is not a vehicle for telling the world about your company (or yourself, your school, your band, or your charity, however admirable any of these may be). People who come here with that purpose often have a frustrating time, and usually will find it better to spend their time and their effort somewhere else. When we do have an article about an orgnisation, we have very little interest in what that organisation says, does, or publishes except as reported by people who have no connection with the organisation, who choose to write about it in a reliable published source. Furthermore, we have absolutely no interest in how that organisation wishes to be portrayed: again, we rely entirely on how independent people have portrayed it, good or bad. Do you see why it does not make a good platform for promoting anything?
The answer to your specific questions is that you rename an article by moving it; but there's not usually much point in renaming a draft: when you submit it for review, the reviewer who accepts it will move it to mainspace and sort out any naming issues. And yes, do not think of adding it to the list until there is an article which has been accepted into main space.
If you choose to try again, please study your first article first, as well as the other links Fuhgettaboutit put on your user talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 19:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm trying to figure out which of my sources are not credible.[edit]

My article was declined. I would like to add more credible sources to it. Would someone be able to tell me which ones aren't good sources?

Parasc650 (talk) 18:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Parasc650. Just a quick response (others may have more detailed feedback), but it's not necessarily the case that the sources you've used are not good or credible, but rather that they do not add up to the significant coverage that is required by our notability guidelines. What you need is sources that are independent of the subject and discuss it in some depth. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:02, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

A fine line between adding notability and promotion[edit]

Hello! I am working on my first article, which was initially rejected for notability issues of a company. There are a number of articles written about the company. In particular the company has been recognized multiple times by a prestigious business organization regarding inner city businesses. It certainly is an art to add this without sounding promotional. Here is my first draft of an edit I am looking to include, any feedback would be welcome.

"The ICIC, Initiative for a Competitive Inner City , founded by noted Harvard economist Michael Porter, selects 100 companies across the US each year and recognizes them for “Illuminating the competitive advantages of being in the inner city”, including publication in Fortune magazine. Talan Products has been so recognized four times."

To me this sounds like promotional language, but adding the info that makes the company noteworthy without doing so is tricky. I do not feel the rest of the article was in a promotional tone, and I was not called out on that by the editor.

The company is included in a documentary which shall be airing on the weather channel. I do feel this company is notable, especially given other companies included in the same industry in Wikipedia ( I know, previous inclusions don't matter). I did add 6 other articles, from different sources and not mere mentions in my initial submission.

I am new, and I wish to learn. Thank you for your time and advice. ~Woodie Woodieand (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Woodieand! You're right: it is a very fine line between trying to make sure that the subject of your article is viewed as notable by readers and sounding "promotional." I find that it's important to ensure that you use neutral wording as much as possible and avoid superlatives. For example, your draft is very good, but this is how I would have written it:
The Initiative for a Competitive Inner City (ICIC), is an organization founded by Harvard economist, Michael Porter. ICIC selects 100 companies from across the US each year in order to recognize them for their work in inner cities. These companies are subsequently published in Fortune magazine. Talan Products has been recognized four times by ICIC.
Even better would be just:
Talan Products has been recognized by the Initiative for a Competitive Inner City (ICIC) four times.
If ICIC is notable, then it should have its own article which explains what it does and how it honors inner city companies.
I hope that makes sense! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Great advice! Thank you. ..and Hi Megalibrarygirl

Woodieand (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Theroadislong for the comment. I don't know how to reply to it except for here. I copied that format from several other company articles. A few of them even longer. I thought it was a bit crazy. I will work on it! Thanks for the comment.

Woodieand (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Intimidation / threat to create a media scandal: specific rule?[edit]

Is there a specific rule against an intimidation for the media to be alerted, like here (last sentence) or here (last sentence translation: "You are well aware that everything is public, and that anyone can post in on Twitter […] (with all the media fuss to come due to some expression used in talk page" (PDD = page de discussion).

I guess it is already forbidden, but I think there it is nowhere specifically written and I think it would be useful. Where to propose that to be written?


Launebee (talk) 19:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Launebee. You may be interested in WP:THREATEN. If you don't think the guidelines page discusses exactly what you are dealing with, you might post on that talk page. White Arabian Filly Neigh 21:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Launebee. Per WP:TPG, talk page discussion is required to be in English. You may wish to warn the editor by placing {{subst:uw-english|Talk:Panthéon-Assas University}} on their talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 23:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Also, I've seen threats to involve the media dealt with by an administrator making an WP:IAR application of WP:NLT. The no legal threat policy is intended to prevent an editor from "chilling" discussion by threatening legal action. That appears to be exactly the effect that the editor is trying to invoke here. In order to have that happen, you'd need to file a complaint at WP:ANI. Just a couple cautions about that: First, Po has been discussed there way too many times. Make sure you support your complaint fully with diffs like you did here and keep it as brief as possible. Second, make sure your own hands are clean (not accusing you of anything, as I haven't, and won't be, digging into it) as everyone involved in an ANI complaint are subject to investigation. John from Idegon (talk) 23:15, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks a lot John from Idegon. It is not the only time he has been using French to get away from control. For example, the edit summaries of the 12 September.[3].
Regarding the warning, it would be better if somebody else does it. That user has been very aggressive and harassing so I prefer not to have too much contact, it would be an occasion to bully me again.
There is an ANI request mainly on other attacks toward me.[4] I did not mention the non-English stuff I think, because it was long enough. --Launebee (talk) 23:22, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I can vouch for the translation of the second diff, but if you go complain at WP:ANI or the like with only what you provided here, you will probably be laughed out. On a random topic, "journalists can see this" would be considered meh but probably not actionable (I am no ANI lawyer though), and on the Panthéon-Assas-related pages which have been a huge troll nest (for some reason I cannot fathom, but I have renounced understanding how they form after reading this other example) it would never ever end up with a sanction. TigraanClick here to contact me 12:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I am trying to get an article accepted and an editor mentioned coming here[edit]

I am trying to create an article on Microsoft Azure Notebooks. My draft is here: Draft:Initial_Page

It was mentioned that perhaps the Teahouse could help me to improve my article for submission

Thanks! crwilcox (talk) 00:07, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Crwilcox. Your draft is now called Draft:Initial Page. Currently, it only has two sources, both of which are published by Microsoft. What is required to write a new article is to show notability by creating references to completely independent reliable sources that have no direct connection to Microsoft or its Azure product. Please be aware that we already have a well-developed article Microsoft Azure, and one reviewer suggested that you add a new section to that article instead of trying to write a new article. Please consider that option. If instead you want to proceed with writing a new article, then please read and study Your first article, and follow all of its recommendations. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the information. That makes perfect sense. I do know of some third party articles. I thought the sourcing direct from the site made sense but I can see the value in other sources. I will take the time to make the changes. I can likely expand further. Thank you very much for the assistance!

crwilcox (talk) 02:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

How do I add an image from a medical journal?[edit]

Hi. I'd like to add an image from this medical journal ~ Rohrich, M.D, R., Smith, M.D., P., Marcantonio, M.D., D., & Kenkel, M.D., J. (n.d.). The zones of adherence: Role in minimizing and preventing contour deformities in liposuction. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 129(5S), 86S-93S. Retrieved from ~ to the page. I'd appreciate guidance so I can do it correctly. Thank you!

Juliet Sabine (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC) Juliet Sabine, September 21, 2017 Juliet Sabine (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Juliet Sabine. That medical journal article has an unambiguous and prominent copyright notice, and presumably all of the images are copyrighted too. An image from that article could only be used on Wikipedia if you could convince the American Society of Plastic Surgeons to release the image in writing, under an acceptable Creative Commons license. While not impossible, I consider that to be highly unlikely. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your response, Cullen. I to consider it to be highly unlikely as well that the American Society of Plastic Surgeons would release the unflattering, life changing images to be used on the Liposuction Wikipedia page. I'm glad I asked here before trying to put the picture on the page. Much of the information and the photos on the Liposuction page go against true long-term outcomes and seem to make assumptions that are bandwagon theories, but go against science. A group of health care professionals, myself included, have been studying this subject for many years. I'm unsure at the moment what the best way is to proceed with making changes to provide the public with vital information. I have many journal sources. One that I posted yesterday got undone, and I asked why, but didn't get a clear, satisfactory answer. Clearly, there are people who have financial incentives for these procedures to continue. If we have releases from individuals to use photos of bad / tragic outcomes, may we use those, or do they have to be journal pictures? Juliet Sabine (talk) 02:45, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

It looks like an explanation for the revert was given in the edit summary used here, Juliet Sabine. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Oh, I see, it looks like they are saying that the researchers documented their own experience? Liposuction, (adipose removal), is proven to increase visceral fat, which negatively affects the pancreas and insulin resistance as well. I'll certainly continue on this Wikipedia learning curve. I appreciate the help! Juliet Sabine (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Well, they're documenting their own research, so it's a primary source, Juliet Sabine, whereas Wikipedia articles on medical topics should rely on secondary sources that report on the results of primary sources. Ideally, systematic reviews are the best sources here. See WP:MEDRS for more information. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:35, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Got it! Thank you so much! Juliet Sabine (talk) 06:41, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


My father was a recipient of the Belgian Croix de Guerre with Palm in WWII, his name is not on the list of recipients, We have tried to put it on but when we go back and check, it has been removed. He was devistated that his name came off just before he died. I now need it added to the list as I believe he deserves to be noted. He was a hero and his name should be on the list. Can you please help me. Deborah76.64.204.86 (talk) 04:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

How do I add a name to the recipients list for the Croix de Guerre with Palm for WWII. I have tried editing the list but my Dad's name keeps getting removed. Can someone please help me........He was so excited when he saw his name on the list but when he went in to show one of his grandchildren, it had been removed. He was devastated......I really need to get this issue corrected. He has passed away and I really want his name showing for his grandchildren and the world to see...Thanks so much......Deborah76.64.204.86 (talk) 04:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings (Deborah), and welcome to the Teahouse! I completely understand your frustration and disappointment that your father's name is not on the list, but unfortunately the Croix de guerre (Belgium) page is not intended to list every recipient of the medal. This is covered in WP:What Wikipedia is not. This is not because we wish to diminish your father's accomplishment, but it would be impossible to list every recipient of every medal; instead, we list recipients that are have received sufficient independent coverage in reliable sources to be considered notable in their own right. Your father's name was removed because there was no evidence given that he meets this criterion. If you feel that he does, I recommend that you start a discussion about him at Talk:Croix de guerre (Belgium). I hope this helps! CThomas3 (talk) 07:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

How to add the picture of the Aircraft Warning Corps?[edit]

How do you pictures to the page of different Air Force SquadronsHawkeye195528 (talk) 05:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Hawkeye195528, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have gone ahead and added the image to Aircraft Warning Corps. You can take a look at the page itself to see how I did it. I notice that you claim that this is your own work; this is perfectly fine if you did take the picture yourself and upload it. Do you have any other information about the insignia, for instance where you obtained it, who it belonged to, etc.? That would be interesting information to add to the image file's description. CThomas3 (talk) 07:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
The (good) answer above is "a fish", the "fishing rod" can be found at Wikipedia:Image tutorial. (But do come back if something is unclear!) TigraanClick here to contact me 12:02, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

How do I refer to the same study in a different paragraph?[edit]

If I already cited a study, but I refer to it in another paragraph, how do I link to the same endnote? Thank you! Juliet Sabine (talk) 06:07, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Juliet Sabine, and welcome to the Teahouse. The way to do that is to name the original reference (<ref name=xxxx>...</ref>), and then use the same name whenever you need to refer to the same source (<ref name=xxxx/>) For more information, check out WP:REFBEGIN#Same reference used more than once. CThomas3 (talk) 07:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Request to publish Article.[edit]

I would like to know why my article titled "Kibaha education center " has been reviewed but not yet published? Mwakibinga (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Mwakibinga The article Kibaha education centre has been published. You did that when you created it. After it was reviewed the noindex tag was removed, and a search engine may pick it up at some point. We have no control when that happens. Mduvekot (talk) 16:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Mwakibinga, welcome to the Teahouse. There is no article called "Kibaha education center" with that spelling of "center". The article Kibaha education centre with "centre" has been published since you created it five days ago. If you refer to indexing by external search engines then it's currently allowed and I see the article in Google, Yahoo and Bing, but it can vary how long it takes for different search engines to index articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Kibaha education center is now a redirect to Kibaha education centre. Maproom (talk) 19:31, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Request for progress of my article[edit]

Dear anyone concerned!

I would like to know the progress status of my article titled: "Tanzania Media Service Act, 2016". I highly request you to review the artcile and when necessary to publish it. Thank you.

Hello Alfred Mwaseba That could take a while. There is currently a backlog of 13943 unreviewed pages going back to about March of this year. A small group of experienced editors are working very hard to clear that backlog. Note that Tanzania Media Service Act, 2016 has been published. It is available to any reader of Wikipedia, it just hasn't been indexed by search engines yet, Mduvekot (talk) 16:55, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Mduvekot. I've done a copyedit. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Request of review progress[edit]

I would like to know the progress of my article titled; "Tanzania Media Service Act, 2016". I highly request you to review the article and when necessary to publish it.

Thank you. Alfred Mwaseba (talk) 16:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Alfred Mwaseba: as mentioned in the reply to your previous request, there is a large backlog, so you need to be patient. RudolfRed (talk) 17:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I am a Music Artist and I would Like To Have my "Biography" LISTED...[edit]

WIKI, Where is the best place on Wikipedia to post my Music Artist Biography for my 'fans' to read about...I had a POST recently DELETED for 'self-promotion!?! but there were no SUGGESTIONS as to where I could POST!?!Peter Frank Santovito (talk) 16:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Please help!

Thank you, Sincerely,

Peter Frank SantovitoPeter Frank Santovito (talk) 16:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Peter Frank Santovito: Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (music) to see if you can find reliable sources that verifies the basic criteria of notability for biographies of living persons. Alex ShihTalk 16:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello Peter Frank Santovito Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an outlet for promoting youself. We have some suggestions for alternative outlets. Mduvekot (talk) 16:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Good example of a SaaS company page?[edit]

I submitted a draft for a fintech company (Nvoicepay), and it was rejected for reading too much like an advertisement. I'm wondering if I should just copy the structure & source types of a similar company that's already published on Wiki? I looked up a partner of theirs called Coupa >> Does this sound like a good plan?

Thanks for you help! Cat lvr89 (talk) 17:19, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Cat lvr89 Unless you know how to assess article quality, please don't use an unassessed article or a stub as an example and read WP:OTHERSTUFF to get a sense of why many editors don't feel that just because something else is even more promotional, we should publish yet another promotional article, or that a company should have an article because a competitor does. Such arguments don't hold water here. "Good" or "featured" articles are good examples, but a competitor's page is likely just as problematic as the article you're trying to create. Note that "good" her means that it meets our good article criteria.
I'd also like to point out that copying the structure of another article to make the promotional nature of an article less obvious is probably not going to work. I speak as a new page patroller here, but we tend to be quite forgiving about formatting errors and things like adherence to the Manual of Style. Such problems are easily fixed, and we don't mind such mistakes. Where we look really carefully is sourcing: is the article based on in-depth coverage in independent, reliable sources, and does the article accurately reflect what those sources say? New pages about fintech and saas companies are, in my experience, often rife with marketing slang, promotional language and written by editors with a conflict of interest. Sometimes that can be fixed by normal editing, and sometimes it can't as happened with your submission.
To be fair, there are very few featured or good articles about companies. For starters, only 0.09% of our article are "featured" and only 0.48% are "good". Most of the featured company articles are probably no longer up to our current standards, and none of them are about fintech or saas companies. I know of only one "good" article about a financial services company: UBS. To the best of my knowledge (based on a database search, I'm not making any of this up) there are no featuread articles about fintech or related companies. The article you propose to use as an example is particularly problematic, because it has contributions from a paid editor (and thus a conflict of interest), who tried to ensure neutrality by not editing the article directly. Please note that paid editing is strongly discouraged, and that undisclosed paid editing is not allowed. All the best, Mduvekot (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

How do I code a side photo for an article?[edit]

I added a photo to my article, Richard Coons via upload ot Commons:

Because I loaded it into Commons, there wasn't a choice for the description. I want the description under the photo to read like the photo in this description:

Richard Coons Born December 13, 1929 Los Angeles, California Died November 28, 2003 (aged 73) Bishop, California, United States Known for Landscape painting Movement California Plein-Air Painting, American Realism

What is the code for this? I'd like this under the photograph. yosemite4 Yosemite4 (talk) 17:23, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you look at the wikicode for the article to which you refer, you will see that it uses {{Infobox artist}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:29, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Think I'm getting it.

Richard R. Coons
Richard Coons at work in the Eastern Sierra Nevada
Born 1929 December 13
Los Angeles, CA
Died 2003 November 28
Bishop, CA
Years active 1972-2003
Known for Sierra landscapes, marines
Movement California impressionism, Realism

For instance, on birthdate: | birth_date =

I want to use: For people who have died, use {{Birth date|YYYY|MM|DD}} But how should it ultimately look: | birth_date = |1929|December|13| ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yosemite4 (talkcontribs) 19:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

It would be:
| birth_date = {{Birth date|1929|12|13}} --David Biddulph (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Got it - thank you! Yosemite4 (talk) 19:51, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Help required on an AfD nomination[edit]

Hello, I think i messed up somewhere while nominating an article (A. V. Thomas) for deletion. Can someone kindly guide me. Mark the trainDiscuss 17:34, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mark the train: Fixed. Alex ShihTalk 17:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: Thanks a ton!! Mark the trainDiscuss 17:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

i wrote an article but it got rejected i don'tknow why[edit]

Hi, I wrote an article about somebody but i don't why it got rejected twice. 17:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaurav.suri2 (talkcontribs)

@Gaurav.suri2: The submission templates state that the first decline was for a lack of reliable sources. We require that all article content be supported by reliable reference material, but enforce that especially strictly in biographies of a living person, which you're writing. The second time around, it looks like you had tried to put some citations, but the formatting is broken and it's not clear what article content the citations are meant to support. For information on using inline citations to support specific article content with a particular reference, see WP:CITE. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
i am not able to find the article which i was writting

17:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)~

It is here Draft:Jatin Suri Theroadislong (talk) 18:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
i have added references in a correct manner this time. Will it get approved this time.

18:29, 22 September 2017 (UTC)~

Well, I'm not the reviewer, but I wouldn't approve it if I were. The Times of India reference is a good one, but we usually don't want to base an article off a single source. It's not appropriate to use other Wikipedia articles as references. What you'd be looking for is more references like that Times of India piece. If that's the only one out there, it might be a bit too soon for an article about this individual right now. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Gaurav.suri2, are you signing your posts here using four tildes (~~~~)? You seem to be signing with a timestamp but no username. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:14, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Move an article from my sandbox to live on the site[edit]

I have created an article called Johnny Burgin and do not understand how to move it from my Sandbox to being a live article on Wikipedia.Msblues (talk) 18:56, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Msblues: I've moved it from your sandbox to Draft:Johnny Burgin. But it's not ready to be a live article yet, the referencing needs to be converted to a more standard style. See Help:Referencing for beginners. Maproom (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Input on a new article I'm creating, please[edit]

I have written an article called San Eng, who is a Tim Cooke kind of person: here. I would love to get some comments on it before I submit it, please. Thanks. I may still do some fine-tuning, for instance, in case I spot typos.

Angelina Souren (talk) 19:20, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Angelina Souren I think you meant Tim Cook? Comparing San Eng to Tim Cook is a bit of stretch, no? Anyway, the first thing I noticed about you draft on San Eng is that your use of external links does not comply with our guideline because they are WP:LINKSPAM. Mduvekot (talk) 20:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Mduvekot thanks for your feedback. Can you explain to me how providing sources for things stated in the article can be spam? I checked the page you added, but I don't recognize anything in it that seems to apply. Is the problem that many links are in other languages? (Also, ehm, is this some sort of regular comment for every new article because I remember I got a similar comment the first time I created an article. Back then, it was not called spam but something else, but it boiled down to the same. The references were fine. I added more, and not even one was removed in the end. Is this some kind of deliberate deterrent to make sure the references are genuine?) And yes, I was very tired when I wrote my initial question so I rushed it.

(PS I'll work on the references. Two are actually on the company site, so those are not good, for starters.)


I registered and have tried to add a famous person who lived somewhere. Is not showing up on the page as added.Ljayson (talk) 19:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

This is he only edit you've made. Are you sure you saved the edit? RJFJR (talk) 19:23, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
@Ljayson: Which page are you trying to edit? RudolfRed (talk) 19:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I typed it into the edit box with citation and hit save. Trying to edit on Penn Yan,va town in NY State. I did not add the /*Editing*/ first or check off minor edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljayson (talkcontribs) 19:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ljayson. It may be that when you clicked save, the resulting page asked you to fill out a captcha, or advised you had a "loss of session data" (especially common when there is significant lag time between when you clicked edit and the time you attempted to save) or something else. Regardless of the reason, your edit did not save. It's not uncommon not to notice that the resulting page did not say "your edit was saved", or contained some further step. Anyway, the person that you tried to add to the page, I assume at the section Penn Yan, New York#Notable people: does Wikipedia have an article on them already? While we do allow red links in articles, when the person is clearly notable but does not yet have an article, and when their name comes up naturally in the course of writing an article, we generally do not include red links in such sections unless an article already exists. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Need to know about notable, sufficient sources for Wikipedia Article that was not approved.[edit]

Hello everyone! I was an editor on Wikipedia years ago under another name. I've begun compiling sources for a company that I came across in the past, and they have a lot of published news sources online. However, I was notified that the sources don't provide the sufficient "notability" that is required. This company is the largest branch of one of the largest financial services institutions in the U.S. and has several high profile founders and members. Can someone help me get the appropriate citations? This is the draft: I appreciate any information. What kind of sources do I need? Should I take out some of the more detailed elements of the article so far?

HadsinTexas (talk) 20:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello HadsinTexas, this article explains what we're looking for. You say you edited under a different name "years ago". It looks to me as if your name change is from the day before yesterday, and your account was registered only two months ago. Can you clarify what your relationship with Private Advisor Group is besides "coming across them"? Mduvekot (talk) 21:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi HadsinTexas. It looks like I may have a similar problem with the article that I'm creating. For me, it's even harder as many of the materials are in Chinese and it's hard to tell which sources are more reputable. Several things are easier with western material. Finding the resources is one of the hardest things because the best ones are often print-only and therefore hard to find. There are one or two artists that I would love to write an article about because they deserve it, but because I have no access to the various art magazines and art books, I know that I will likely have trouble tracking down good sources, and that's stopping me. To get back to what you wrote, the PR News item you list may be a press release that was actually created by the company your article is about. I haven't looked into it, though. Here is an example of what is probably seen as very good source, a newspaper article: (except that it does not seem to link to content that is in your article, so it could be good to use the information in that newspaper article). Nasdaq, in my view, can also be an example of a good source: particularly if you want to substantiate some fact. Here is another one that may help: and this one or this one: (You'll have to see what you can actually do with them.)

Angelina Souren (talk) 23:13, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

adding copyrighted pictures to commons (with permission)[edit]

Dear collective wisdom, I got an email from the trust of a photographer granting me permission to upload some of his images to Commons to illustrate an article (copy of the email bellow). How do I indicate this when uploading the image to Commons? I know creative commons is preferred, but there are definetely other examples of images that fall in this same category of copyrighted material uploaded with permission (I'm thinking specifically of Tarsila do Amaral's Abaporu in the Portuguese Commons).

On behalf of The Carl Van Vechten Trust, I am pleased to grant you permission to include a Carl Van Vechten photograph of Ladybird Cleveland in a Wikimedia Commons as part of an article. I would only ask that the photograph be identified and being Photograph by Carl Van Vechten (c)Van Vechen Trust.

Permission must be released to use the photo for any purpose, not just for a Wikipedia article. See WP:IOWNfor help on this. RudolfRed (talk) 00:23, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Need to help setting alerts on an existing page[edit]

I hired a 3rd party company to develop a wikipedia page for a client. I would liket o take stewardship of the that page how do I handle that?Antrejony (talk) 01:19, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Oh, wow, were you duped. You can't take "stewardship" of any Wikipedia page, please read Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Also, any paid editing of Wikipedia MUST be disclosed publicly by the Wikipedia terms-of-use (see Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure). Wikipedia articles can, and will, be edited by others and any article created by or edited by paid editors are automatically put under a cloud of suspicion that taints the article. About the worst thing one can do is pay someone to create a Wikipedia article for anyone. --Jayron32 01:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello, Antrejony, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia actually has strict restrictions on paid editing (click to read the relevant policy). Please make a declaration on your user page about your financial relationship with this client, and please also identify the Wikipedia article in question by its title so that we can better help you. You should also be aware that Wikipedia's articles do not "belong" to either the editors who worked on them or the subject of the article (click); your "stewardship" would be limited to suggesting (or opposing) changes to the article, since you have a conflict of interest (click) in regards to the article. Thank you in advance for complying with Wikipedia policies. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 01:34, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Traffic Monitoring[edit]

I would like to be emailed or pinged when specific pages are edited, how do I set that up?Antrejony (talk) 01:48, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Antrejony. Please comply with Wikipedia's paid editing policy (click here to review it) by making a declaration on your user page regarding your relationship with your client. If you do not do so, you may be blocked from further editing and we will not be able to help you. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 02:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm not in violation of the terms nor is anybody else. the page in question is properly cited and has been vetted. I want to make sure that it continues to be accurate. I have not made any changes to any pages. Please answer the question or leave me alone.Antrejony (talk) 02:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Why don't you tell us what page it is so that we can verify that the paid editor has followed the rules? Meters (talk) 02:43, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Greetings, Antrejony, and welcome to the teahouse. The policy on paid editing has nothing to do with whether or not the article is properly cited or vetted. Without proper disclosure of your conflict of interest, you and your paid editor are indeed in violation, regardless of the state of the article itself. As stated in the policy, If you are being paid for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must declare who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship. You may do this on your user page, on the talk page of affected articles, or in your edit summaries. The community expects paid editors to declare that they are being paid whenever they seek to influence an article's content. While it may appear to you that are not being paid to directly contribute to Wikipedia and are thus exempt from the policy, the fact is that you are being paid to influence Wikipedia's content, which you have done by hiring an editor to create an article for your client. I hope this helps; we are not trying to gang up on you, but it is in all of our best interests (including you, your client, and your paid editor) to ensure that editors with conflicts of interest are properly identified so that their contributions can be reviewed appropriately. Presumably you would want to know if anyone was being paid to add incorrect, libelous, or even merely misleading information to your client's article, correct? CThomas3 (talk) 04:38, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[edit]

I have stumbled across a page which seems to be a long list of Buddhist temples in the world. The text is on the left and photos of the temples are on the right. In between is a vast amount of space. I am wondering if I can volunteer to improve this page. I am thinking about a a table structure for the content but I need some tips as I am a new editor.JediOne (talk) 06:37, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Realated to twinkle use[edit]

Hi, I recently started using Twinkle and when I edit any article or page with twinkle, It add that article/page in my wishlist. Can anyone tell me how to prevent that? – 1997kB 07:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)