From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Most recent archives
953, 954, 955, 956, 957, 958, 959, 960, 961, 962, 963, 964, 965, 966, 967, 968, 969, 970, 971, 972

(Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.)

Is the article for Hainuwele too off-topic?[edit]

I am a newbie Wiki editor and stumbled upon Hainuwele through the Random Article feature.

Reading through this page, which ostensibly is about the origin/creation myth of several Indonesian tribes, I realized that far more of the article is dedicated to the various trading relationships and contact with outside society these tribes have had than is dedicated to the actual Hainuwele myth.

The rub is that the argument being presented posits that the Hainuwele myth either explains or is affected by these outside contacts. I am too new to this process to be able to make the determination, but would someone mind reading through this article and defining whether it is on-topic or not?

NawtAGoodNinja (talk) 17:06, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @NawtAGoodNinja: My personal opinion (for what it's worth) is that the analysis following the myth does relate to the topic since it attempts to put the myth in context and interpret its meaning. Since we draw content from what third-party sources say about the subject, I suspect the majority of them analyse the myth, rather than just present it, which is why those sections in the article are so robust. Orville1974 (talk) 18:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I concur. This seems to be a good example of Euhemerism done correctly. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 00:25, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
My suggestion regarding the analysis part is to rephrase it because the section currently reads as if the author of the article is making his own assumptions and is the one doing the analysis and interpretation using sources such as Jensen to support his arguments. Darwin Naz (talk) 23:54, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


Hi There, I'm Made Thug. I joined Wikipedia last year and I've made a couple of edits but my problem is adding references.Could you please assist me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madd Thug (talkcontribs) 08:30, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Madd Thug. See Help:Referencing for beginners. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:02, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
@Madd Thug: Although I and others always point to [[Help:Referencing for beginners]], I actually think it's the worst help page we have here, as it's so long and off-putting for beginners. Can I just point out that you will inevitably be using one of our two editing tools (called Source Editor or Visual Editor) to add text. Both of these editors have an obvious tools menu. Just Look for the button labelled Cite. Then position your cursor at the end of the factual statement in the article that that you want to add a reference to, and simply click 'Cite' to reveal a box or select a simple template into which you can enter all the author, title, date, publisher, url details of your reference.
Each editing tool varies slightly in how they operate. In Source editor (which you will have used for editing this page) you do have to click a further Template button on the left hand side. This lets you choose the best template into which you paste your reference details, according to whether you're citing a journal, a book, a newspaper or a website. There's also a Preview button to let you see what your details will look like when inserted into the page. Meanwhile, when you click 'Cite' button in the Visual Editor it starts by offering to let you paste a url or ISBN number and attempts to automatically look up the reference details for you. Neither work perfectly, so manually checking and tweaking to get the best reference is always advisable. But being aware that you can add reference details from within either editing tool is something that's not really that obvious in the Help page. Let us know how you get on. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:06, 22 June 2019 (UTC)  
Nick Moyes, I'm also guilty of linking to that help page on many occasions and I partially share your reaction. I'm not quite ready to call it the worst help page we have — that's a high bar — but it needs an overhaul. I'm also guilty of a common shortcoming; I'm happy to identify a problem but not so quick to fix it.
In my opinion the problem arises from the obvious fact that the help page was originally written long before visual editor ever existed. Once visual editor was created and had the ability to handle references, that was added to the page but it's practically an afterthought. Experience editors have done enough referencing that using the source editor is relatively easy, but for a very new editor creating a reference using the source editor is much more difficult than using the visual editor. I know some many longtime editors like to complain about visual editor and it's not free of faults, but for a brand-new editor, creating references and visual editor is fairly easy.
My proposed overhaul would be to rewrite with an explanation of visual editor being front and center, and the source editor mentioned but not emphasized, maybe even covered in a separate page that is simply linked in the main help page.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:10, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
@Sphilbrick: I did tidy up the lead paragraph of WP:REFBEGIN the other day to make it a bit clearer, but a full reworking is definitely needed. (I'd like to know what beginner pages you actually think are worse than that one for new editors! DYK guidance, maybe?) Were you aware that User:Pine is currently working on a video tutorial about referencing in Visual Editor? See here and here. It seems worth waiting until this project is completed before attempting a revamp of WP:REFBEGIN - and maybe a few help desk volunteers need to come together to agree what's needed. Meanwhile, based on my earlier reply today, I've started to put together a few notes of my own that I might use here in future. I will add that when I first started editing I wasn't aware that there was any tool to help me add references, and simply copied/pasted existing references and edited each to suit my new sources. Total nightmare! Thanks for your response on this. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:39, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Nick Moyes, Pine's work rings a bell, but it had slipped my mind. Thanks for the reminder.S Philbrick(Talk) 16:23, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes and Sphilbrick: thank you for thinking of me. I think that waiting for the videos is not necessary if someone wants to update WP:REFBEGIN, but when the videos are available then I think the videos could be good resources to link from that location. --Pine (✉) 01:06, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Tutorial/Citing sources may be helpful. It gives video guidence on how to create references. (talk) 15:48, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Need experienced editor to compose a Wiki entry[edit]

Hello fellow editors

I have a friend who would like to have a Wiki entry made about his life in the music industry. He is also the former Director of the Commercial Music Program at Long Beach City College. He has produced many noted jazz and smooth jazz albums, I believe. He will pay someone for this service. I simply do not have time to do this right now, but this person is anxious to have someone get started ASAP. Is anyone out there interested in taking this on? Knowledge of jazz or music would be a bonus but is not required.

Thanks BahnJour9120 (talk) 16:51, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Paid editing is not allowed at Wikipedia while editing with conflict of interest is strongly discouraged unless you disclose your employer's identity on your user page or user talk page in accordance with WikiMedia Foundations' policy. If you believe the subject meets our general notability guideline and notability guidelines on biographies, take a moment to request an article at requested articles. Hope this helps. Masum Reza📞 17:08, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Actually, paid editing is allowed, but such editors must disclose the articles in question. Conflict of interest editing also allowed, again disclosure. In theory, Requested articles could work, but it is sort of a lost cause. Within the world of music, Wikipedia has a special set of guidelines Wikipedia:Notability (music). David notMD (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah but the subject also seems to a producer. So I linked that page. Masum Reza📞 18:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Apologies. I was EBC (editing before coffee). David notMD (talk) 19:22, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks David notMD and Masum Reza. Very helpful. BahnJour9120 (talk) 03:26, 23 June 2019 (UTC) Hello, BahnJour9120. I'm afraid that you and your friend have a fundamental misunderstanding about Wikipedia. Like many people you appear to think that Wikipedia is in some way related to your friend's online presence or self-promotion: it is not. If at some point we have an encyclopaedia article about your friend, it will not belong to him, he and his associates will have no control over its content, and it should almost 100% based on what people unconnected to him have chosen to publish about him. Please ask him to use another medium to promote himself. --ColinFine (talk) 22:53, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

ColinFine: I'm afraid you've grossly misunderstood and misread the subtext of my question. I'm well aware of the parameters of Wikipedia, and in no way mean that this entry would be for promotional purposes. I do not need a ruler slap on the wrist from the likes of you. What I need is a Wiki editor who knows the ropes because I want this person to be in good hands. Fortunately, the responses previous to yours, from David notMD and Mazumreza, were much more helpful and solution-oriented than yours. BahnJour9120 (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Creative commons file attribution[edit]

Hi, I'm working on Volgograd Tractor Plant and have just uploaded a Wikimedia Commons image which states under Licensing that you are free to copy the work if you provide file attribution. How do I do that? Do I have to put a credit line somewhere? Also, how do I get my article to show up under "File usage on other wikis" in the image details? I thought uploading it into my article would do that automatically but it hasn't. Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:15, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Rodney Baggins: You're good to go on Volgograd Tractor Plant, no further action is required. Since clicking on the image in the article opens up the file's description (which includes the author and the license information) you don't have to add any attribution information to the article itself. Outside of Wikipedia, the general practice is to add the attribution information and a link to the license as a caption to the image, or in a designated "credits" section.
The "File usage on other wikis" section is indeed automatically updated, and I see Volgograd Tractor Plant listed there. You may need to purge the cache, which you can do by adding ?action=purge to the end of the URL. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:50, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, I can see it in the list now. Thanks for your help. Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:54, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Great. No problem! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:55, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Raj dasireddy[edit]

Pls create my page , google me raj dasireddy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sri raj dasireddy (talkcontribs) 21:04, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Click on your username and when it takes you to the page that does not exist add some content. Click on the "Publish" button and you will have created the page. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
I think he is talking about his biography in the mainspace. This editor had tried to do so but it was moved to draftspace. I have tagged the draft for speedy deletion as it appears to be promotional and the subject doesn't meet notabilty criteria(WP:GNG and WP:ENT). Masum Reza📞 21:25, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh I see, I thought he just meant his userspace page. I'll leave you to issue the necessary cautions. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:35, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello Sri raj dasireddy and welcome to Wikipedia. Please don't create your own article as an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing and it violates our conflict of interests policy. If you think you meet our notabilty criterias (WP:GNG and WP:ENT) then feel free to request your article at requested articles. Masum Reza📞 23:59, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Sri raj dasireddy, you have one thing right- you should not typically create your own article, per WP:AUTO and WP:COI. However, you seem to be operating under a few mistaken assumptions- namely, that Wikipedia is for anyone who wants to be notable. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not for people who want to be notable, but rather for those who are already notable. If you can provide several reliable sources describing you in depth, you may have a chance. I see you have an article in the Telugu Wikipedia; unfortunately, they have different notability standards, and an article there is no guarantee of one here. With regards, --A lainsane (Channel 2) 00:11, 23 June 2019 (UTC)


Hi! I'd love to resubmit a picture to Featured Picture Candidates which for one vote didn't get the quorum of support. When I try to resubmit it, it tells me that such a nomination already exists, though it has expired. Is it possible to resubmit to see if contributors are more willing to whether oppose or support the picture, which is profusely respectable? Kind regards. --LLcentury (talk) 21:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

@LLcentury: Have you tried using a different title in the box under "Step 2: Create a subpage"? Maybe "Byun Yo-han (second nomination)"? Of course, if you succeed at creating a new nomination, be sure to reference/link the old nomination. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:25, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Decline in news sources and the proliferation of paywalls[edit]

Hi fellow editors,

I'm a relatively new editor and something has been bothering me about the difficulty in accessing good secondary sources, especially about subjects that are mainly reported in news media (people and places). Many local and even major papers have closed or greatly reduced their budgets and reporting staff. Several of the better major newspapers require a subscription. I can't afford to take out subscriptions to these papers and, even if I could, using them for a reference might add that as a barrier to any reader who wanted to check the reference.

A couple of years ago I was working on a page about a local politician and discovered that the local paper's archive did not go back far enough. It appeared that if you want to access archives from a really long time ago - pre-1920 or so - those might be available. Sometimes articles are accessible if they were written after the advent of the internet, although some papers don't maintain their archives or have gone out of business altogether. I've started using the WayBack Machine for articles I think I may want to use but that doesn't help for earlier articles. Another example of what I learned was that if I wanted to have access to the archive of a San Francisco paper, I would have to go there in person and apply. This would take an entire day for me (and would be out of the question if it was for a paper even further away).

Another issue I just learned about is that due to our historically favoring certain people and news in general, some things were just not reported on as thoroughly as others, though they were no less important. One example of this would be women's contributions to medicine and science.

The reason for this comment is that I'm wondering if others at Wikipedia, either editors or the powers that be, have given this any thought and if any solutions have been proposed. If the average reader loses access to reliable information, either due to the disappearance and/or expense of regular news sources or because Wikipedia is hampered by that same decline, it would defeat the purpose of the encyclopedia. Thank you! 1stCoastal (talk) 23:17, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 1stCoastal. I recommend that you check out The Wikipedia Library. Two major newspaper archives are available to editors and many other useful research archives. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:28, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, Cullen328. I will check it out. 1stCoastal (talk) 04:50, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
1stCoastal, I will echo the advice of Cullen328. For several years I have had a subscription to via access provided by The Wikipedia Library. I use it more than any other source as I create articles and edit existing articles. The free account not only provides access to archives of many newspapers, but it allows you to create "clippings" of articles that are available to any readers of articles in which they are used. Eddie Blick (talk) 19:49, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, Eddie Blick. I took a look at and I may apply. I don't have a lot of time to edit :-) so my history is a bit sporadic. I do see that it would be useful (wish I knew about it a couple of years ago!).1stCoastal (talk) 23:47, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
I also had a quick look at the Wikipedia Library and noted that: "Special requirements for applicants: requires that you sign up for an account before applying for access". However if you go to the only options cost $90 or $150 a year. Does anyone know the correct procedure please? Thanks, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Martin of Sheffield: Click "Sign-in" and then "Register" to register an account without a plan. Regards SoWhy 09:33, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm now waiting for approval. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

unable to make changes[edit]

Citations were requested on my page and I went in to change and add info. I published changes and in 2 seconds it was "reverted to revision 901862795 by unhelpful (TW)

what do I need to do to revert to my changes to publish?

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solowalk (talkcontribs) 00:09, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Solowalk: Hello and welcome to the teahouse. I would suggest talking to Poydoo, who made the reversion in question, and/or opening a thread on the talk page (Talk:Claude Ferguson) to see what others think. Thanks for your contributions, --DannyS712 (talk) 00:11, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
@Solowalk: Your edit did not add citations to the article Claude Ferguson; only more unsourced content. General Ization Talk 00:13, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
I corrected education...and add info to ddt spraying and added dr. names and quotes and wrote all in civil service file housed at IU lilly library... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solowalk (talkcontribs) 00:21, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
@Poydoo: Could you explain why this revision is unhelpful? Masum Reza📞 00:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
how do I talk to poydoo? thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solowalk (talkcontribs) 00:35, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
how do I talk to poydoo? I am just learning..thank you Solowalk (talk) 00:47, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Solowalk, you added unreferenced content which was challenged and reverted. Your next step is to provide references to reliable sources that verify the content that you want to add. See Referencing for beginners for instructions. In particular, you added two unreferenced quotations, which is contrary to policy. All direct quotations must be referenced and properly attributed. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Try User talk:Poydoo but please be aware that there was nothing wrong with their reversion. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:54, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
This is so over my head and I am out of my element, I'm not sure where to begin. All of the DDT Aerial spraying info and quotes are documented in his Civil Service personnel file that is at IU Lilly Library A. Claude Ferguson collection Alan Claude Ferguson MSS Public Service Department, Lilly Library, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405... and I just now noticed that I have a misspelled word ...where I list the preceding under external links...How can I get to it to revise it? thanks to any that are willing to helpSolowalk (talk) 01:08, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
I got in and corrected spelling...please don't judge me. If someone could tell me how to reference all the DDT part to his Civil Service Personnel file, I would greatly appreciate it. I have copy...Do i take pictures of it? I would appreciate any help. Thank youSolowalk (talk) 02:10, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Solowalk, Wikipedia summarizes what reliable published sources say about a topic. A civil service personnel file is not a published source and is not acceptable as a source on Wikipedia. Anything that you discover by reading that file is original research and not permitted on Wikipedia. If a historian studied the file and wrote an article based on that study, then you could cite that article. The Wikipedia article must summarize published sources and nothing more. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:19, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hi Solowalk. Just a few things.
First, pretty much all of edits so far on Wikipedia are related to this particular article; in fact, creating a draft for this article looks like it was one of the first things you did on Wikipedia. There's nothing wrong with this per se, but when a new account is created and it immediately begins to focus on a single subject in can seem that there might be some kind of connection between the account and the subject matter that goes beyond just a casual interest. If you are connected to Ferguson in some way or anyone associated with him, please take a careful look at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Wikipedia doesn't expressly prohibit conflict of interest editing, but it does highly discourage it; so, if you have such a conflict, it would be good for you to know what types of edits you the Wikipedia community considers OK for you to make.
You may have created the article, but it's not "your" article. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project, which means any article can be edited by anyone at anytime. Neither the subjects or creators of article get any special editorial control over article content per Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Edits are going to assessed by how well they comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, not on whether they are someone's preferred version. Disagreements over content should be resolved through article talk page discussion per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
There's quite a lot of unsourced content in the article. Pretty much all content (except the completely obvious) is required to be cited by a citation to a reliable source (as defined by Wikipedia) for verification purposes, and that what isn't can be removed at anytime per WP:BURDEN. Any content about living persons (Ferguson may be deceased, but others mentioned by name in the article may not), in particular, needs to be rigorously sourced or else it can and most likely will be removed per WP:BLPSOURCES. So, instead of adding more unsourced content, it might be best to try and find sources for already existing content. There are various ways to add citations to an article (see Help:Referencing for beginners), but please don't add things like "check the IU library" or "see so and so collection" since those are pretty much no help at all: try to cite the actual source as specifically as possible as explained in WP:CITEHOW. There might be lots of things you personally know about Ferguson and they all may be true, but unless they will be considered original research unless they can be verified through citations to reliable sources.-- Marchjuly (talk) 02:27, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for helping me, Yes, this was my first article and yes, it is my father. I was unaware that I should not write his story. So many others have and still contact me today...I have listed their writings in external links. Hopefully one problem will be solved and I will learn how to link the off road vehicles and the lawsuit sections to an external link I do have listed : when a career public servant sues the agency he loves, Rosemary Oleary...she wrote about all of this in her book.
I have alot to learn. I will read the articles you listed and try to improve. To be clear, I am not able to cite his US Civil Service Personnel Record that houses all his awards, work assigments and locations, education and his DDT Aerial Spraying info? Nor cite the Congressional Record December 14, 1982 H9792 that talks about his life, etc..?.thank you for your help and not judging meSolowalk (talk) 03:09, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
The Book ..The silent spring by Rachel Carson talks about the DDT sprayingSolowalk (talk) 03:27, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello again, Solowalk. The Congressional Record is a published source although not always reliable. You can use it as a reference for basic uncontroversial biographical details. Any words of praise by a member of Congress should be attributed to that politician, not stated as fact. As for Rachel Carson, you can cite her only if she discussed your father. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi again Solowalk. Since the article is about your father, you'd definitely be considered to have a conflict of interest with anything written about him on Wikipedia. I'm going to add a template to your user talk that contains links to various Wikipedia pages related to conflict-of-interest editing. I'm just doing this for your general reference, not because you've done anything wrong. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello and Thank you Cullen Cullen328 User talk:Cullen328 and Marchjuly Marchjuly Marchjuly. I located a 1977 newspaper article in a box that I had cut out that reports exactly what I wrote under his ddt aerial Spraying portion..and his lawsuit etc. “Ferguson still battling bureaucracy but tired of waiting” by David Hulen IDS staff writer.. (Indiana Daily Student Bloomington, IN) . It talks about his faulty diagnosis, his medicine and hospitalization with drs names. I have emailed IDS to see if they can point me to it online but if it’s not how do I cite it. I have it in my hand. It states exactly what I wrote in the ddt section. It looks like someone else has shorten my ddt aerial portion again. I had used published articles and not just his personnel file but failed to do proper citations, I had included these in my reference section. The other complete publication is a 2009 “Administrative Profile: Claude Ferguson Rosemary O'Leary Syracuse University...her book :: “The Ethics of Dissent” includes an entire chapter “ When a career public servant sues the agency he loves: Claude Ferguson, and off-road vehicles in the Hoosier National Forest”. Please bear with me and I do appreciate any help. Thank you!Solowalk (talk) 15:54, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
{{cite news | last = Hulen | first = David | title = Ferguson still battling bureaucracy but tired of waiting | newspaper = Indiana Daily Student | publication-place = Bloomington, Indiana, US}} => Hulen, David. "Ferguson still battling bureaucracy but tired of waiting". Indiana Daily Student. Bloomington, Indiana, US. Add the page number if you know it. Remember that sources do NOT need to be online, merely published and available to anyone prepared to travel or pay. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:05, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
@Solowalk: I've posted more detail about this on your user talk page, but basically you can propose any changes you think should be made by starting a discussion about them on at Talk:Claude Ferguson. There are other editors unconnected with the subject matter currently working on improving the article and bringing it more inline with relevant Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. This means that it's probably better for you to use the article's talk page to discuss things instead of directly adding content to the article yourself; these editors will try and help you and figure out what can be added and how to add it. Stuff which has been removed during the cleanup can always be re-added if the consensus is to do so. Be patient and give some others a chance to clean things up a bit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────────────@Marchjuly:Hi, I am learning from you and thank you again. Ok, I did a post on talk Claude Ferguson...not sure what I need to say. I will be patient and let others do the work, I was just so proud of myself when I was able to bring my fathers story to life on Wikipedia and trying to learn this format at my age. I want his story to be accurate and truthful and not one sided as suggested earlier. Thanks Again!!Solowalk (talk) 23:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC

Solowalk (talk) 12:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)Hi, Cite for lawsuit and off road vehicle articles are in publication and online at: Rosemary O’Leary Syracuse University [1]. and the book, [2]. In addition: DDT Aerial Spraying faulty original diagnosis, cortisone use and problems arising from it, DRs and hospital names are cite. in published 1977 newspaper article...[3] Indiana Daily Student, Bloomington, IN. This exists, I have the article. I need for someone to cite these for article since I cannot due to COI. Thanks so Solowalk (talk) 12:36, 24 June 2019 (UTC)much! Solowalk (talk) 12:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ When a Career Public Servant Sues the Agency He Loves: Claude Ferguson, the Forest Service Off-Road Vehicles in the Hoosier National Forest
  2. ^ The Ethics of Dissent
  3. ^ "Ferguson still battling Bureaucracy but tired of waiting" by David Hulen IDS Staff Writer

False accusation of vandalism[edit]


  I am a user that once was 'signed in', then I lost my password, recently got signed in again. I made some edits tonight. I admit I am very stupid about some of it, and would save, then realise I made a mistake, save again, etc.

I am not yet familiar with the sandbox. After first being welcomed for an edit, I am now suddenly attacked for I guess not knowing what doing. There is not one single this I've done that is malicious.

Let me also point out that I have an old computer at home, and it sometimes can be very slow, which may have led me to hit the posting button too many times.

Here is what I got...

"This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to The Low Spark of High Heeled Boys has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

   ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
   For help, take a look at the introduction.
   The following is the log entry regarding this message: The Low Spark of High Heeled Boys was changed by DDB9000 (u) (t) ANN scored at 1 on 2019-06-23T02:09:32+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 02:09, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Low Spark of High Heeled Boys. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. (talk) 02:13, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Shoot Out at the Fantasy Factory, you may be blocked from editing. Butter72 (talk) 02:17, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at When the Eagle Flies. Butter72 (talk) 02:17, 23 June 2019 (UTC)"

I read very carefully the page on vandalism and I have done nothing of the sort whatsoever.

All I've ever done here, whether signed in or not has always had to do with improving pages and providing good and helpful info .Now, suddenly that I'm I'm being accused of vandalism(!) for just not knowing exactly the way to do it right. I just want people to have the best facts at hand and use my knowledge to help. Isn't that the idea of Wikipedia?

Is there a human who can understand what is going on and help me?

David DDB9000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDB9000 (talkcontribs) 04:02, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @DDB9000: Welcome to the teahouse! There are a lot of humans here (of which I am one). Give me a minute to see what's happened. Orville1974talk 04:23, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi again @DDB9000: We're all human (well, there are a couple bots, too), and we all make mistakes (in this case thinking your edits constituted vandalism). We really appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, but the reason your edits keep getting reverted (and sometimes tagged as vandalism) is because you have not cited reliable sources to support the changes you've made. Everything on Wikipedia should be verifiable to third-party sources. This guide will help explain how to include sources with your changes: Help:Referencing for beginners. Thank you! Orville1974talk 04:34, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello, DDB9000. Our automated vandalism detection bot called Clue Bot NG is highly effective but it does make some errors. This was a software error. You added unreferenced information about the cover of a Traffic album, stating that it is "die cut". Those two specific words are highly associated with vandalism. What you need to do is provide a reference to a reliable source verifying this configuration of the cover. For example, the unusual cover shape is mentioned in the notes of the Discog listing for the album. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:42, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello, DDB9000. Let me take Jim's explanation a bit farther. There isn't anything inherently vandalistic about diecutting. Bots work on a matrix. The use of the word "cut and the word "die", both terms commonly used in threats, coupled with the lack of sources (and I suspect also the newness of your account), triggered the bot. There are some really demented people who vandalize Wikipedia. Again, my apologies for our automated ally, and a reaffirmation that adding sources will prevent that (and make for a more helpful edit). John from Idegon (talk) 06:16, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
DDB9000: your habit of marking all your edits as "minor", even when you have added whole paragraphs to an article as here, does look suspicious. I've no idea whether this has influenced Clue Bot. Maproom (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2019 (UTC)


Why was python invented? What are the advantages and disadvantages other then the coding language? Who invented it? When was it invented? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:24, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse. Unfortunately, it is not set up to answer questions like yours. Please feel free to ask it again at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. MarnetteD|Talk 04:30, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, did you try to read our article on Python (programming language)...? --CiaPan (talk) 08:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

How do I publish a biography of a Group CEO of a company[edit]

Please assist on how do I publish a biography of my Group CEO on Wikipedia. Also wanted to check if this biography would be editable by me in due course? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aliyadias (talkcontribs) 07:33, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Aliyadias Welcome to Teahouse. First of all the subject needs to be notable and we need multiple independent, reliable published sources to support the content claimed. Please read WP:Your First Article for further info and follow the instruction on how to create an article in Wikipedia. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:54, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Aliyadias. With a few exceptions, all Wikipedia articles are editable by anybody in the world at any time. But since you are associated with the CEO, you are regarded as having a conflict of interest, and you are discouraged from creating or directly editing an article about them, though if an article exists you are welcome to suggest edits on its talk page. Note that if at some time we have an article about your CEO, it will not belong to them or to the group, and they will have no control over its contents. If your purpose is to tell the world about your Group or your CEO, please choose another route. --ColinFine (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
If you persist with Draft:Tariq Chauhan you must declare a paid relationship on your user page. See WP:PAID. Also, as written, with no references and a promotional point of view, certain to be declined. David notMD (talk) 16:43, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
@Aliyadias: May I also point you to some guidance of words to avoid (whose shortcut is labelled WP:PEACOCK)...mainly because, as yet, we don't have any guidance with the shortcut WP:SYCOPHANTIC - but this draft of yours absolutely reads as something designed wholly to impress the boss and massage their ego. It needs to be neutral and factual - not sycophantic - in tone. I do hope you get your promotion - irrespective of whether the draft gets to be promoted into this encyclopaedia! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:07, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Quite apart from Wikipedia's policies — any impartial person reading the first paragraph of Draft:Tariq Chauhan in its current state is likely to think "What a load of bullshit. This guy must be a right prat." Maproom (talk) 20:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Maproom: please keep in mind Wikipedia's policy "Don't bit the newbies." Aliyadias is very new to this, and needs guidance, not insults. David notMD (talk) 01:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

How to verify contributed information/get pictures submitted to page[edit]


I created an account to work on an assignment in my Civil Rights course at college. I contributed to the existing 'Dion Diamond' page by adding events, locations, created links to people, places. As well as including a reference for a specific event/person. My question is this: I went to see the work I contributed and was unable to see only one addition, yet, when I took a before/after screenshot of the page, it is evident that more than just one addition was made. Is there a way to find the specific contributions added? I don't know if because I 'edited' his page on the screen itself instead of another location if maybe that was the issue? Lastly, I searched for pictures that were not held by any copyright and was positive that the two pictures I submitted were able to be freely distributed. Are you able to give me a more in-depth explanation as to why it was not approved?

URL: I need help relating specifically to working with the 'Visual Editor'

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msennpcollege2019 (talkcontribs) 18:12, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Msennpcollege2019. You can look at all the edits made to an article by picking "History" from the top. You made one large edit to Dion Diamond, and apart from a bot removing the pictures and one editor correcting the formatting of headers, your edits are still there in the article. (For covenience, I advise making multiple small edits in future, as 1) it is easier to see what is happening in the history, and 2) if there is a problem with some of the edits, it is easier to revert only the ones that are problematic).
The edit summary from the bot says that the images you uploaded to Commons were deleted by commons:User:Túrelio because they had "Non-free Flickr license disallowing commercial use and/or derivative works)". Commons requires that material uploaded to it be available for reuse by anybody for any purpose, including commercially. --ColinFine (talk) 18:26, 23 June 2019 (UTC)


how do you become a member on wiki of for example wrestling? Kazy gain (talk) 21:57, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Kazy gain: You can find out a lot more about the WikiProject on professional wrestling here: WP:WikiProject Professional wrestling. If you'd like to join, just add this userbox: {{User WP PW}} (edit in source mode, and when asked, paste as plain text) to your userpage. Orville1974talk 22:02, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
I think one generally also adds one's name to the members list. Eman235/talk 00:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

J.-J.'s just trying to add a Photo, without additional editing[edit]

I have what seems like a wonderful specimen of a Baculite--attributed to the Pierre Shale deposit by a field expert at U.C. Berkeley's Museum of Paleontology. It seems as though it's addition would be valuable because the mother-of-pearl-like surface seems far more intact, especially in terms it's multi-colored aspect.

I might have already posted this question in the wrong venue; but, because it seems like a photo that can add to the understanding of what Baculites looked like, I'd appreciate any directions to posting the photo--so I can get things righter than wronger. Thanks. Best of luck and skill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HBD Bear Area (talkcontribs) 23:52, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @HBD Bear Area: You can find FlightTime's response to your question posted at the help desk here: WP:HD. Just scroll to the very bottom of the screen. Orville1974talk 23:55, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Irish Election Results[edit]

Hi Guys, I've been editing wiki for a while, primarily Irish election results. I'm looking to find agreement on how to present non registered political parties and groupings on local council election pages, primarily the 'Independent Alliance', 'Independent Left' and to a lesser extent the 'Rural Alliance'. In the case of the 'IA' they are represented in dail related pages even though this brand does not appear on ballot papers. Also the fact that some of my previous edits have been undone in relation to small parties is something i would like to be explained to me. I am by no means a Wikipedia expert but I am an election expert and if deletions are made in future I want to be told exactly why these occur? Not only is the Irish political system unique but Ireland also has an electoral system used by just one other country in the world. I just find it inconvenient that some moderators have the audacity to think they know how Irish Politics should be represented simply because they have experience on page editing as opposed to politics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ElectionHack2019 (talkcontribs) 23:58, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@ElectionHack2019: I don't think any of us here at this helpdesk have the subject-matter expertise to answer this question. I'd recommend contacting User:Teddy455 as he appears to be one person who has removed this information when it has been added by you.[1] You may also want to post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums. I think someone at one of those places would be able to better assist. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:06, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ElectionHack2019: User:Spleodrach and User:BrownHairedGirl seem very invovled in Irish politics. In addition to the Wikiprojects mentioned above, I recommend you reach out to them. I'm sure they'd appreciate the collaboration, and may already know if a consensus on how to present non-registered political parties and groupings has been reached. You can leave messages for them on their respective talk pages: User talk:Spleodrach and User talk:BrownHairedGirl. Orville1974talk 00:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ElectionHack2019
I suggest that you post about this on the talk page of WikiProject Ireland, i.e. WT:IE. That would be the best place for this discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Why is my page still in drafts?[edit]

How can I get my draft page published?

It's been classified as a draft for 25 days, but I'd like it to be live... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Elevate (talkcontribs) 00:18, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Mark Elevate: Just a couple minutes ago it was flagged for deletion. Please read the pink box at the top of your draft article for the rationale for recommended deletion, and actions you can take. Orville1974talk 00:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Mark Elevate: I cannot view the draft in question, as it has been deleted and I am not an administator. However, I can point you to our policy on a neutral point of view, which could be useful- best of luck! With regards, -A lainsane (Channel 2) 02:02, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

More rights?[edit]

Not that I've run out of things to do on Wikipedia, but I keep hearing about backlogs. So, I was wondering if I qualify for any additional permissions that I currently don't have that would allow me to help wherever help is most needed right now. I have read the relevant documents and know that, technically, I can request some of them. Just want to know if I would actually get any of them and if any of those tasks actually need a helping hand right now. If not really needed, I'd much rather continue doing what I'm doing instead of going trophy-hunting which would, I worry, take my time away unnecessarily. Thanks! Usedtobecool ✉️  06:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikipage translation (India and related) from English to Telugu[edit]


I am Sudha Rani, from Southern part of India and I would like to translate the Wikipage: "India" and related pages to my native language, in Telugu, and make all the content available in English, from partial content available, so that all Telugu people can access and benefit from the authenticated content and information available in English. I navigated through help and FAQS pages and I still need to get concrete information about how to place a completely translated content into partially translated page in my language and how do I know and follow related protocols, rules of Wikipedia.

I request you to provide the necessary information that I need to know at this initial stage of content translation.

Thanks & Regards Sudha — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:6412:D33A:9C62:6AD6:167D:5342 (talk) 06:17, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi IP 2405:204:6412:D33A:9C62:6AD6:167D:5342|2405:204:6412:D33A:9C62:6AD6:167D:5342. If you'd like to take content found on English Wikipedia and translate it for use in another language Wikipedia please take a look at Wikipedia:Translate us. If you want to take content found on Wikipedia, translate it and then use it on a different website (not another language Wikipedia), please take a look at Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:25, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Help with two infoboxes on one wiki page[edit]

Hi all, I appreciate your help on this. I've never seen a wiki page that has two separate infoboxes like this one for Dennis Zine and I'd like to streamline it into one infobox. I assume it's more appropriate for there to be just one infobox, no? Can someone advise me about how to do that? Thanks! Beachlifedreamin (talk) 07:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if piling on is allowed, but I'd never seen an article on a police officer or city council member with no other claim to notability before. Are we sure this person is notable? Also, I'm thinking the non-redundant content in the second infobox is not properly sourced/verified. May be, it could be deleted? Usedtobecool ✉️  07:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Usedtobecool, I'm nearly certain this guy's notable. Being a city councilman for the second largest city (Los Angeles) in the country (US) is almost guaranteed to pass WP:NPOL. Beachlifedreamin, if it were me I'd just BOLDly remove the police infobox. If that gets reverted, go to the talk page and continue to follow WP:BRD. John from Idegon (talk) 07:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
John from Idegon, it says holding local office is not enough to pass notability. But needs additional coverage. So far, I'm not seeing it. But I'll leave it to editors more closely involved to decide. Thank you for taking the time. Usedtobecool ✉️  08:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
I hear your suggestion @John from Idegon: and appreciate your input. I just wondered if there is a way to incorporate one into the other because it is nice to see the rank he had as a police officer and the award he won - but there isn't anywhere within the officeholder template to include that. I will take the second one out if no one else suggests something else...Beachlifedreamin (talk) 08:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Beachlifedreamin: You can call one infobox from within another with the module= parameter. See Ronald dela Rosa for an example where this is used with officeholder and police officer infoboxes. Regards SoWhy 08:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
This was so helpful @SoWhy: except that I really followed the code and I obviously did something not quite right...we are getting there but it's not right yet if anyone else wants to help me with Dennis Zine! I can't figure out what I did wrong in teh code but I'm sure one of you will. Beachlifedreamin (talk) 08:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
*Fixed. Not your fault. That template needs a disambiguation comment, LOL! Usedtobecool ✉️  09:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
It was missing in the documentation. I have added it.[2] PrimeHunter (talk) 09:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, I just added that part to the documentation and forgot the child-part. Thanks PrimeHunter for fixing it. Regards SoWhy 09:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah! I feel so much better that it wasn't my fault. I could not figure out what to do! Thanks everyone for teaching me about this feature and being so helpful. Beachlifedreamin (talk) 06:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Pandita Ramabai Mukit Mission[edit]

Link: Draft:Pandita Ramabai Mukti Mission. --CiaPan (talk) 10:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi I want to know why my draft was declined — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revival1991 (talkcontribs) 09:57, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Revival1991: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The reason for the decline is given at the top of the draft. If you have further questions about it, you may ask the person who declined it directly on their user talk page. I can say that the main reason is that there are no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support its content(or any sources at all). Successfully writing a new article is the most difficult task on Wikipedia, so don't be too discouraged. You may find it helpful to use the new user tutorial and read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@331dot: Can you please help me with what wikipedia means when they say "significant coverage to support its content"? What is considered as significant coverage ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revival1991 (talkcontribs) 10:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Commonly at least three reliable independent sources. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:21, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Just as a tip, pings only work if you sign your post with ~~~~(without the nowiki tags seen in the edit window). All your talk page and forum posts should be signed so we know you wrote them. Regarding your question, if you review the links I indicated above, they will help you to understand what is being looked for in new articles. "Significant coverage" simply means coverage that goes beyond brief mentions. 331dot (talk) 10:22, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Draft in question is currently 60 words long, plus an info box, no references. There is an article about the founder Pandita Ramabai. Perhaps more information about the Mission can be added to that. OR, there may be content and references there that could be copied into an article about the mission. Re-using content should have an Edit summary comment on where the content was taken from. David notMD (talk) 10:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou @331dot: @Martin of Sheffield: @David notMD: Also one more query, there is one person who deletes the content I am updating to wikipedia, since yesterday he is visiting my history/contri and deletes my updates. what should be done. its annoying Revival1991 (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Need Editor Help : Claude Ferguson Article[edit]


I need for someone to cite these for the article since I cannot due to COI ( I just learned about this).

Cite for lawsuit and off road vehicle articles are in publication and online at: Rosemary O’Leary Syracuse University [1]. and the book, [2]. In addition: DDT Aerial Spraying faulty original diagnosis, cortisone use and problems arising from it, DRs and hospital names are cite. in published 1977 newspaper article...[3] Indiana Daily Student, Bloomington, IN. This exists, I have the article.. Thanks so much! There are also a ot of other article under the reference section. I am just learning so I appreciate not ne judged to harshly. I previously posted in teahouse a few days ago..unable to make changes. Thanks again! Carla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solowalk (talkcontribs) 12:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Solowalk:, did you try the talk page of the article? That is where a COI editor is supposed to suggest edits to the article in question. Usedtobecool ✉️  13:06, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict)
  1. You've been shown how to format the Hulen citation at #unable to make changes above.
  2. To make a reference you need <ref> and </ref>. The "/" is essential. I've added them for you above.
  3. The Ethics of Dissent does not have enough information to make a citation.
  4. Neither does When a Career Public Servant Sues the Agency He Loves: Claude Ferguson, the Forest Service Off-Road Vehicles in the Hoosier National Forest
  5. (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ When a Career Public Servant Sues the Agency He Loves: Claude Ferguson, the Forest Service Off-Road Vehicles in the Hoosier National Forest
  2. ^ The Ethics of Dissent
  3. ^ "Ferguson still battling Bureaucracy but tired of waiting" by David Hulen IDS Staff Writer

Shading in Contributions?[edit]

I thought I'd ask this here, since I'm not sure where to check on changes like this.

So, when I looked at my Contributions list, I noticed that many of the entries were shaded in yellow - not all, but maybe a little more than half. I can't figure out any sort of pattern to the colouring at a glance.

Was this a recent change? What does the shading indicate? Just wanted to know. Gimubrc (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Gimubrc, I just noticed that this morning too. In my list, it looks like the following are not highlighted: user, user talk, article talk, drafts, files. Articles and WP pages are highlighted. No idea what this is for. Schazjmd (Talk) 15:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Schazjmd, looks like it's been reverted. For future reference - is there some sort of changelog or something like that where interface updates and changes are discussed? Gimubrc (talk) 15:43, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Gimubrc, odd, somebody must have been testing something. Hopefully one of the more experienced editors can answer the changelog question. I don't know of one but I'm not familiar with the backend intricacies of wikipedia. Schazjmd (Talk) 15:57, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Gimubrc and @Schazjmd: I can't tell you exactly what the change was (maybe it was to be able to view the namespace percentages of someone at a glance?) but I think I know why it was reverted: there's a gadget that allows people to have possibly disruptive edits highlighted in deepening shades of yellow and orange (so maybe disruptive is yellow, probably disruptive is light orange, and HOLY COW THAT'S DISRUPTIVE is blood orange) and it sounds like the two may have interfered with each other. -A lainsane (Channel 2) 16:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
It was discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Weird highlighting of some of my contributions. There is no single place to track interface changes. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@Gimubrc: Please see this image. Is this what you're asking about?
User contributions list part en wiki.png
--CiaPan (talk) 08:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@CiaPan: Yes, that's what it looked like. Gimubrc (talk) 13:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@Gimubrc: As far as I can see, such edits are marked with r in the recent changes listing. This is explained in the frame: 'Edit flagged by ORES'. And the linked page ORES review tool describes the mark as 'This edits may be damaging and should be reviewed'. Which means some specific change (possibly some special words, or unusual pattern of insertions/deletions etc.) triggered the spam or vandalism filter. This does not mean the edit was bad, just it's somewhat similar to some suspicious pattern. The change will be patrolled and either reverted or marked as good (and then it will loose its alerting coloring). --CiaPan (talk) 14:29, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

KALERGI ---non-encyclopedic sources, and historical errors easy to find even on google images![edit]

The article is part (1) and not encyclopedic (2). There are historically demonstrable errors. (3)

(1) refers to 2 Italian newspapers that are not independent, at all. But they are politically deployed newspapers. "LINKIESTA" is an online newspaper, of very low circulation, and editing made by freelance journalists, from the extreme left. "Il Foglio" is a paper-based, newspaper of little circulation, and financed by Silvio Berlusconi's wife, and which has always favored pro-immigration policies. Therefore they are not independent newspapers. (!) They have never carried out an inquiry into the Kalergis but only brief dogmatic articles, (!) brief on Kalergi that have no encyclopedic value. (!)

(2) Political opinions (LINKIESTA ad IL FOGLIO) are not encyclopedic sources. (!)

(3) historically demonstrable ERRORS: you assert here that the theory would have been made by Gerd Honsik in 2004. But this is FALSE. The theory was absolutely not invented by Gerd Honsik. Is simple. Just put in google images: "Arthur Rogers Warbug Kalergi Plan" and many photos appear, of a work by Arthur Rogers of 1955 printed in London. Rogers was certainly not a Nazi. But not even Arthur Rogers is the first in 1955 to speak of PIANO KALERGI. The first was in 1927 in a book by Hans Friedrich Karl Günther "Der nordiche Gedanke" ... Then, a long journalistic article appeared in 1994, in the Germanic magazine U.N. specially dedicated to Kalergi article, from which Gerd Honsik was inspired. Therefore the theory that the KALERGI PLAN would have been invented by Gerd Honsik is a historical "fake" shown in the book by Micheli Luca.

Book of Micheli Luca, on Kalergi, 311 pages with almost 300 photos very many taken from the State Archives of Switzerland (Lausanne) and the Czech Republic (Plzen). On Amazon. Title: THE CASTEL RONSPERG MODEL THE PLAN KALERGI LABORATORY.(Italian title: IL MODELLO CASTEL RONSPERG IL LABORATORIO DEL PIANO KALERGI) Other books on Kalergi and Kalergi plan:

-Matteo Simonetti, (2015 edition) : "The truth about the Kalergi plan" First edition.(italian title. LA VERITA' SUL PIANO KALERGI) 130 pages

-Carlo Arrigo Pedretti (2018) title: The practical idealism of Richard N. Coudenhove-Kalergi. The ideological foundations of his plan: (Italian title: L'idealismo pratico di Richard Kalergi. Il fondamento ideologico del suo piano) 310 pages

-Luca Micheli (2019) : "THE MODEL CASTEL RONSPERG THE LABORATORY OF THE KALERGI PLAN." The most complete and with everything demonstrated with documents and photos. (Italian title: IL MODELLO CASTEL RONSPERG IL LABORATORIO DEL PIANO KALERGI) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:24, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I see you've already added this to the article's talk page. That is the best place to discuss content related to a particular article. Orville1974talk 16:48, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Looking for advice as to what else to add to an article and what needs referencing, etc.[edit]

Hi. I'm not a "new" editor, as such, but I don't do very much writing for the main English Wikipedia as my first language isn't English. I've recently prepared the base of an article about an Australian radio station, Kinderling Kids Radio. The thing is, this article at the moment is the very bare bones of what I believe it should be, but since I don't edit much, I am unsure as to what else to add, what needs references and citations, and so on. Any help with this or ideas as to what I can do would be appreciated. Thanks. Dane|Geld 15:50, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @DaneGeld: The article on verifiability helps to explain what needs a reference. The one on reliable sources explains how you should weigh the credibility of those references. Finally, this article on referencing shows you how to go about citing your sources. Orville1974talk 16:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks @Orville1974:. I'll get to reading those now and see if I can figure out what else I need to do! Dane|Geld 16:35, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Added a link that worked but wasn't highlighted in blue[edit]

I just joined and did my first piece of editing. I added a link to another Wikipedia article by putting double square brackets around the word like this [[ ]]. The link works, but the word in the original article is not blue, as the existing links in the article are. Any suggestions? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountaindeathcamas (talkcontribs) 16:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mountaindeathcamas: Hello and welcome. It sometimes takes time for the links to appear blue. 331dot (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Mountaindeathcamas: It's blue now. Happy editing! -A lainsane (Channel 2) 16:52, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Typo in article "Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution"[edit]

"Lucretia Mott spend the summer of 1948 Should be ...summer of 1848 to be consistent with article

 Done (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: ~~~~.) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Thanks to WorldBruce for clarifying that I needed to issue a disclosure statement (and how to do it). JaneStroup (talk) 17:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)JaneStroup

@JaneStroup and Worldbruce: Thank you for adding the notice to your user page. Orville1974talk 18:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

submiting a notable person[edit]

i am trying to create a page for mathew mcintyre who acheived a world record for being the youngest person to ride a motorcycle across america coast to coast at the age of 14 192 i have 3 sources 2 are articles on the internet and the third i have a scan of a magazine arcticle i had tried to make the article on mathew mcintyre before but i did not write it correctly and it was deleted i was wondering if anyone could help me with this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Killgood (talkcontribs) 18:02, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Hi, I googled his name but couldn't find anything, I don't think he is notable enough; it seems that achieving that record was his only accomplishment. You can follow this link however if you think you can write a good-enough article about him. Cheers! NightBag10 (talk) 19:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
MM had a nice cross-country ride with his father and grandfather, but I doubt that makes him notable by Wikipedia criteria. David notMD (talk) 21:23, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Changing text color on Navbox?[edit]

Hello, so I'm currently building a new article in my sandbox and I was playing around with the Navbox, I changed the color with (|basestyle = background: #nnnnnn;). I want to use a dark color (dark green) but when I change it the black color of the text doesn't automatically change to white, I tried searching around on the template page but I couldn't find anything about coloring text. If anyone could help me out that'd be great! NightBag10 (talk) 19:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi NightBag10, welcome to the Teahouse. I see you have now made a navbox with white title at User:NightBag10/sandbox so I guess the issue is resolved. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:13, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

How do I align text in a table?[edit]


I'm trying to make a new table and I need the text to be in the center of the content cell. Right now it looks like this.

House of Wessex (Cerdicing Dynasty)
Name Portrait Birth Reign Death
Cerdic of Wessex Cerdic of Wessex.png Before 519 519-534 534

DolphinCat (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Is this what you want?
House of Wessex (Cerdicing Dynasty)
Name Portrait Birth Reign Death
Cerdic of Wessex Cerdic of Wessex.png Before 519 519-534

Usedtobecool ✉️  20:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

" plumb stems counter sterns" look to manx steamship lines for best eg of both[edit]

look to manx steamship lines for best examples of 'plumb-straight stems and counter sterns' <ref> manxman steamship histories — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:07, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Did you have a question or suggestion for one of Wikipedia articles? You can discuss it on that article's talk page, or go ahead and make the edits yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

American Farm Bureau Page[edit]

Hey all,

I haven't really done much wikipedia editing before, maybe a sentence here or there. However, this is so outrageous that I feel like i have to do something.

It seems like the page for the American Farm Bureau was changed in 2007 to be propaganda for the organization. This is pretty well-documented on the discussion page for the article, with someone saying that the entire article "consist[s] of text from the organization's official site." Furthermore, it seems like the changes were made by an employee of the organization, who later attempted to blank the talk page, which documented the article's incorrect statements.

Can the page be restored to its pre-propaganda state? Is that something that I can/should do? If I do that, will I be flagged for vandalism? Or should I report this somehow?

Thanks for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:55, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I'm removing the copied content now. We would definitely appreciate your help in editing the remaining contents. Orville1974talk 01:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Article Declined[edit]

My first article was declined stating topic not suitable for wikipedia. To tell about the page 'GlobalLinker',it networking SME networking platform operating in different countries. It has tie ups with countries top trade bodies and national government to promote SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises)business growth.

Additionally the references and citations are from leading newspapers of respective countries. With all these it was declined saying these are not reliable sources.

Can I challenge this deletion ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aksndls (talkcontribs) 05:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Aksndls. Nothing has been deleted. Your draft has been declined but you are welcome to improve it and resubmit it, if the improvements are substantial. Your references are of poor quality and seem to be based on press releases issued by the company. To show that this company is notable, we need references to significant coverage in fully independent, reliable sources, and you have not yet provided that. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Aksndls I see that you have declared your conflict of interest. Just a suggestion, directly copy and paste this code {{UserboxCOI|1=GlobalLinker}} to your user page using source editor as the userbox box seems to be placed incorrectly. Masum Reza📞 06:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Featured Articles[edit]

Hello, who chooses the featured article for the day? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AgnesNeale (talkcontribs) 06:24, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @AgnesNeale:, it's not that simple. I think you will find your answers here. Usedtobecool ✉️  07:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Need Experience Editors to compose an Unique Wiki entry about a first Digital Color solution company[edit]

Hello fellow editors,

I am a freelance content writer & blogger with few of edits on wikipedia. Few months back, I got an opportunity to work with Florida based company 'zenColor', similar like 'Pantone', 'Adobe', 'X-Rite' based on Color communication, Color model, and ColorChecker. The special thing about this company, It's first ever company in this entire universe, providing Digital Color solutions using a proper Color space, especially for RGB color model, CMYK color model. Company asked me to create a Wikipedia page for them and provided their description to me. As they are providing something unique or useful for all the wikipedia readers, so I didn't refuse. I tried it first with my Sandbox for the testing purpose. After the complete editings, I submitted it for a review from the experienced editors. But, my draft got rejected due to ton of weasel words and self promotional activity.

As, I have no previous experience in creating any of the wikipedia page. Please help me to edit or, create or, approve this wiki entry! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivekjain9024 (talkcontribs) 06:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Vivekjain9024:, weasel words are a problem but not a fatal one. The fatal problem is the not meeting WP:NCORP part. You should click that link and read the page carefully. Is the company covered by city/state/country/world level newspapers/magazines/news websites? Have they been mentioned by scientific papers for their "groundbreaking" technology/patents/services? Have they been reviewed by trusted magazines/websites that cover emerging technologies/companies? If you can't dig up 4/5 such sources from among what I've mentioned, it's probably too soon for them to have an article. If you find such sources, add them there and cite them properly, then you can ping me to edit it to make its language neutral. I don't think anyone else can do more than I have promised. Hope this helps! Usedtobecool ✉️  07:42, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello @Usedtobecool:, thank you so much for your quick help. I will surely get back to you soon with the following mentioned things/sources. Thank you so much for your kind help.Vivekjain9024 (talk) 08:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
You should probably take a very close look at this page before you put too much time/effort into that article. Good luck!Usedtobecool ✉️  08:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

for EUROSTATTER 11:09, 24 June 2019‎ Eurostatter →‎Origins and development: Kalergi plan[edit]

Hi Eurostatter,
I read your contribution written on: White_genocide_conspiracy_theory, from yesterday. "11:09, 24 June 2019‎ Eurostatter →‎Origins and development: Kalergi plan"


1970s propaganda by Austrian neo-nazi Gerd Honsik, which distorted the writings of Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, was used over the course of decades to begin a myth called the Kalergi plan. A 1925 book by Coudenhove-Kalergi entitled Praktischer Idealismus (practical idealism) has been widely cited by proponents of the Kalergi plan conspiracy theory and wider white genocide narrative throughout the 20th century.[39]

i have read you [39]


The document (.pdf) you mention [39] does not contain the word "Gerd Honsik" and not even the 70s. I checked it all 5 minutes ago. So find a valid encyclopedic document. (!) No propaganda. There are also 2 errors, both an error in attribution to the person, and of dates. In the new book on Kalergi (-2019 Luca Micheli- THE CASTEL RONSPERG MODEL THE PIANO KALERGI LABORATORY, 311 pages, with more than 200 photos and documents - on Amazon-) is all demonstrated with documents, photos, dates and names. The "Kalergi Plan" is attributed to Gerd Honsik, but he is not the first. Both the 70s date is false! Honsik wrote the book on Kalergi Plan, in 2004 not in the 70s. Then he is not the first to write on "Kalergi Plan" using the word "PLAN". Any boy can find images in google: photos of a text written in 1955 by Arthur Rogers in London. It's called "Warburg and the Kalergi Plan", so it's not Honsik. (!) But Arthur Rogers is not the first to write about Kalergi Plan. In the book it is shown, that the first to write about Piano Kalergi was already in 1927, in the book "Der nordiche Gedanke" by Hans Friedriche, Karl Gunther, Germanic doctor and university professor. Then before Gerd Honsik wrote of "Piano Kalergi" in 1984 Wolfgang Seeger. And many others before Honsik. Honsik arrives very very late, perhaps the 7th in order of dates.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, This is a place to ask experienced editors for advice. I don't think that's what you had in mind. I think what you were looking for was the talk page of the article or more likely User talk page of one specific editor.Usedtobecool ✉️  07:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@Eurostatter:, may be, you are the one who could possibly have something to say here. Usedtobecool ✉️  07:47, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

New page for "Fairbnb"[edit]

Greetings y'all

I am new around here and was trying to create a page for a new vacation rental platform called Fairbnb that I recently stumbled across, but my submission was declined. The reason noted is that the sources I added don't reveal "significant" coverage of the topic.

Would appreciate some guidance on how many sources need to directly address the subject. I believe two of the sources I listed took on the topic directly, not just in passing.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vagabond09 (talkcontribs) 07:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Vagabond09. I haven't looked at all the references in Draft:Fairbnb, but the two I looked at, while substantial, are clearly based on interviews. Basically, in an article about Fairbnb, Wikipedia is not interested in what Fairbnb say (or want to say), whether on their own materials, or quoted from an interview or press release. Wikpiedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with them have chosen to publish about them, in reliable places, and any article should be close to 100% based on such independent sources. For a new business, it is likely that such sources do not yet exist (see WP:TOOSOON) and that it is currently impossible to write an acceptable article on it. Another way of saying this is that the subject is not yet notable.
One more point: I see that one of your references is to Wikipedia. This is not permitted, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source (see CIRCULAR) - since you have already Wikilinked Airbnb, this achieves nothing (except making it look as if your draft has one more reference than it has). --ColinFine (talk) 09:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@Vagabond09: another attempt to start an article on Fairbnb was heading for deletion some months ago, with a rationale of WP:TOOSOON. Sources are about the company's launch, and there is not enough significant coverage about the company's merits to warrant a page. The stub was eventually moved into user space: it's here. Your sources seem to be an improvement on what is present in that draft, but you might want to take this into consideration. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Notability, how many sources are needed[edit]

Hey guys! Can anyone give me some more guidelines regarding how many sources are required to submit an article? I read the notability page, and know it has to be multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources. But how many are we actually talking? Is there a baseline? Also, are industry relevant magazines good enough? Like Nimdzi, Multilingual Magazine, CSA Research, or GALA Global? My article has been deleted before and I'm trying to make sure I have enough quality sources before submitting again. Thanks in advance!TMFalkner (talk) 08:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi, TMFalkner. Like many questions on Wikipedia, this does not have a fixed answer. It depends partly on the depth and quality of the sources; but two will not usually be enough. Industry relevant magazines are usually good, but it is important to be clear that the coverage is truly independent, and not based on an interview or rehashed from a press release. Wikipedia is just not interested in what a subject says about themselves: it wants to know what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about it. --ColinFine (talk) 09:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

is it possible that people forget to review an article?[edit]

Hi, dear people, my newest article is online since 06/22 - and i haven't received an info yet that it has been reviewed. Normally it gets reviewed within two days or so, so i wonder... Please, excuse me if I'm just too impatient. --Gyanda (talk) 10:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Gyanda: There are many articles awaiting review, and more are added each day. As long as your submission template is on the draft, an editor will eventually review it. It may take a month, or maybe even longer, as we're all volunteers. We appreciate your patience. Orville1974talk 11:44, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@Orville1974: The OP may be talking not about AFC review of a draft but about NPP patrol of a newly created article which was created outside the AFC process. Special:NewPagesFeed shows that there are over 7300 articles awaiting patrol, many of which have been waiting more than 3 months. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh my god, i didn't knew that so many article are waiting. Please excuse my question! I'm really sorry. --Gyanda (talk) 13:59, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Is there any certain reason you want it reviewed quickly? 331dot (talk) 14:27, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
I think it is pretty natural for people to feel ambitious about their new article. I guess the user was just making sure there was nothing wrong. William2001(talk) 16:36, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Newpaper/Magazine Article Question RE Copyright vs Free[edit]

Hello, I'm new to wikipedia editting and trying to understand copyright vs free content as it relates to newspaper and magazine articles. I see many wiki article references are press articles - newpapers, magazines, etc. However, most press companies typically have a general copyright policy for their content. Are the rules for press publications different than other publications, like books? When can press (magazine/newspaper) content be referenced, and when can't it? Thanks very much for any clarification! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmarchitect1902 (talkcontribs) 16:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

You can reference it, and summarize/paraphrase it in your own words either way. Copyrighted content cannot be copied and/or uploaded to Wikipedia. Orville1974talk 16:34, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Page too promotional[edit]

I recently posted a new page about the Association of Master Trainers. I am a member of the Association. It was immediately removed by someone as written in a promotional style. Can you please provide some examples of pages for member driven organization that our within Wikipedia guidelines. I want to make the wiki world aware of the organization, but certainly within the guidelines.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patonge1963 (talkcontribs) 16:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Hiya! Wikipedia probably fits the description. Usedtobecool ✉️  16:23, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@Patonge1963: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You state that you "want to make the wiki world aware of the organization". That is a promotional purpose and reflects a misunderstanding as to the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a forum to merely tell the world about something. This is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Wikipedia has no interest in what the subject wants to say about yourself. In your now-deleted draft, (which I can view as an admin) you engaged in blatant promotion, telling the benefits of the subject as if it were an advertisement. That is not appropriate Wikipedia content. Unless this is discussed in independent sources like the news, the subject unfortunately would not merit an article at this time.
You also have what we call a conflict of interest about that subject, which means that you should avoid directly editing about it here. You will need to review that policy and make the appropriate declarations. 331dot (talk) 16:24, 25 June 2019 (UTC)