Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 154

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 150 Archive 152 Archive 153 Archive 154 Archive 155 Archive 156 Archive 160

red links, disambiguation, stubs

Hi there - couple of questions about red links and disambiguation and stubs ... I had read somewhere that red links were due to deleted pages and getting rid of them was a way of cleaning up pages BUT i have just discovered there is another whole world to red links with WP:RED oooops! So, going back to try and fix my enthusiastic red link vendetta on Contact Improvisation - have discovered another problem/opportunity :-) One of my deleted red links restored OK and so now I am thinking I could create a stub and help WP to grow - just that I am nervous, can i just go ahead and do that?? will search for sources first to check notability, but also worried about the overall task - And the other one, Action Theatre is no longer a red link but links to another article which is not the Action Theatre meant in the dance context, so that seems even more daunting. Hints, advice, help? Thanks so much Depthdiver (talk) 00:58, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Depthdiver, to answer your first question, if you feel the sources are up to it, go ahead and create the article. Second, if the Wikilink to Action Theater doesn't fit the usage in the article, either remove the link or rename it if the same general concept is present in another article. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 04:50, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Howicus - soooo, problem is ... I can't rename the link Action Theatre on the page Contact Improvisation because it is a proper noun - in this case for an improvisation method (the potential new article) while the link takes you to an actually existing article, where it refers to an amusement park ride (- with, i realise, some notability issues itself - only two sources, at at least one is primary and clearly promotional ... but that's another issue entirely!) Hmmm - maybe I'm getting it - is the answer - remove the link until I or someone creates the improv page, and then create a disambiguation page to clarify between the two uses?? Depthdiver (talk) 01:03, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I'd say is best. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 02:32, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks and thanks for your patience with the learning curve! Depthdiver (talk) 19:03, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

new to wikipedia :)

Ok, I work for a company called Active Digital Signage. We are fairly young company ( just a couple years old) I wanted to write a page for wikipedia for our company but am not sure how to go about it! (talk) 23:53, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Before you write an article, make sure Active Digital Signage has sufficient notability for it. Please read WP:42 very carefully. If Active Digital Signage does not meet those criteria right now, thats OK. Just make the article once Active Digital Signage does meet the criteria. I hope this helps. Good luck! Ross Hill (talk) 00:13, 8 Nov 2013 (UTC) 00:13, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Also be sure to read WP:COI & WP:PSCOI. If you don't think you can write an unbiased article, please don't make it. Instead request an article. Ross Hill (talk) 00:17, 8 Nov 2013 (UTC) 00:17, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We're an odd community that's put together this encylopedia, and we're very happy you're keen to help us. The beginnings of being a 'Wikipedian' can be quite challenging, but you can always find someone to help. Unfortunately, the best thing I can say to help with this query is the following:
Do not try to create an article for the company you work for.
There are a few reasons for this:
  1. Wikipedia has developed guidelines about what we have articles on. We call this "notability". For example, there is an article on Barack Obama, but not one on me. Similarly, we have an article on Microsoft, but one created about your company will probably be considered "non-notable" and deleted. The specific guidelines can be found here, but in short, until a company is significant enough to have repeated coverage, in depth, in reliable sources which are independent from it, it should not have an article.
  2. Wikipedia tries to maintain a neutral-point-of-view on all subjects. It's one of our core principles. As an employee of your company, you are unlikely to be able to have a neutral perspective upon it. While your closeness to the subject may make you very informed about the company, it's this very closeness that means you shouldn't write the article.
  3. You will know a lot more things about the company you work for than the average person. In fact, you would probably be one of the world experts on your company. However, since it's very inception, Wikipedia hasn't been about collecting essays from experts and relying on their authority, but rather collecting information that has already been published in reliable sources and citing those. This is the essence of two of our other core principles, no original research and verifiability. It's also the main way Wikipedia keeps articles limited to important information, rather than just an unlimited list of facts about a subject. It takes a while to get used to writing like this, especially on a topic (such as your employer) you know a great many details about, and I would strongly advise against making your first foray into Wikipedia one where you maximise the chances of these problems.
Sorry if this is a bit much! I'm afraid that if you create an article for your company, your first experience of Wikipedia will likely be an unpleasant one, as the article will probably be deleted. We'd much prefer your beginnings as a Wikipedian to be much nicer than that.
Please be aware that writing new articles is not the only way of helping Wikipedia. All 4 million+ articles that currently exist could be improved in some way, and you can edit and improve all of them. A good place to learn how to edit Wikipedia constructively is the tutorial and here at the Teahouse you can always ask for help.
Have a great day, --LukeSurl t c 00:30, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
LukeSurl, how dare you call 208 odd! Uhhmmm... oh. You meant, uh, me. Well then, fair enough!  :-)   208, is ActiveDigitalSignage the one in Phoenix? Doing a quick web search, it looks like your industry is getting pretty hot, but I'm not finding many newspaper articles or teevee shows that feature your particular firm. If that's true, then wikipedia is not yet the venue for documenting your company history, and as folks above mention, wikipedia is never the venue for *promoting* your company, or your products. Wikipedia just *reflects* what is already hot, by mirroring what reliable sources say.
   If you concentrate on making your customers delighted, sooner or later the journalists and the trade-rags will notice you. Make sure to keep track of the mentions that ActiveDigitalSignage gets in the independent press. Even just a few sources, and you become WP:NOTEWORTHY of being mentioned in the digital signage article. To have a dedicated article about your company, you need to have several independent reliable sources that give your company (or your products or your founders) in-depth coverage. See WP:RS and WP:N for the gory details.
   Feel free to do some editing elsewhere in wikipedia in the meanwhile, to get the hang of the various guidelines and the editing-technology we have around here; there are articles on computers, sports teams, movies/music/books, the city you live in, and all sorts of stuff. Note that, if you are editing for work, in an article close to the business-model of ActiveDigitalSignage, you should *not* make changes directly to the article, but instead, put your change-requests on the article talkpage, for another editor to check over, making sure it has neutral tone, and so on. Good luck with your new business, and thanks for improving wikipedia. (talk) 21:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Help! Acceptable sources for a school

Please help! I'm a new, inexperienced wikipedia user and I'm trying to submit an article for MediaTech Institute, which is a technical school in Texas and Calif. Each time I revise and re-submit, my sources are a problem. I can find tons of articles on google and google news archives, but they have been rejected because they find them self promoting or not directly applicable to what I'm trying to enter as article. As I was searching for articles today, I noticed MediaTech Institute is found on corporation wiki and wikimapia. Suggestions? Thank you, kikiwikizozo Kikiwikizozo (talk) 23:04, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. If you are asking whether other wikis are acceptable as sources for a Wikipedia article, the answer is "No". If the subject has not received significant coverage in published reliable sources, then for the time being it doesn't get a Wikipedia article. - David Biddulph (talk) 23:14, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
David, I think they're just asking for help sorting the wheat from the chaff in their search-hits. Hello kikiwikizozo, the school seems to have some Noteworthy-ness, enough to get a mention at the film school article perhaps, but it is borderline for Notability-ness, which means significant coverage in Reliable Sources. You have to be careful with search engines, most of their results are not counted, see WP:GOOG for the details. Here are the results I found, some of which you can use, others which may lead you to additional results you can use.
   Short review, seems reliable.[1] Short review;[2] is source reliable?[3] Short blurb;[4] seems borderline-notable, according to the editorial-and-fact-checking librarians at the Irving Public Library anyhoo.[5] Notable charity event.[6] Some WP:NOTEWORTHY mentions in fact-checked publications.[7][8] This might be helpful, depending on whether the AES is important in the industry or not.[9][10][11]
   Accredited by ACCSC (Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges).[citation needed] Did this get covered in the news?[12] Seems like FOX would have mentioned this on teevee?[13] Not reliable, methinks, but specifies category.[14][15] Alleged[citation needed] graduate[16] is mentioned in wikipedia twice, List_of_Western_films_of_the_2000s and List_of_low-budget_zombie_films, but everything is redlinks, so prolly not useful. Prolly not noteworthy because self-published or promotional or otherwise not-fact-checked.[17] This *is* on the teevee... but it is *trivial* news and does not count.[18] This *is* from a newspaper... but it is *trivial* not-even-news and does not count.[19][20] Other links, might be reliable, might not.[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]
   Feel free to ask more questions here at the Teahouse, about getting your article in shape, or you can ask questions of the reviewers at Articles For Creation. There are probably some existing articles on film schools, try looking them over for ideas. Hope this helps, thanks for improving wikipedia. (talk) 20:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Confused about use of <ref name=>

Good morning dear Tea House host. Is there a way I can use '<ref name=' when the page number of the reference in the same work changes? Do I write a new reference instead? Many thanks once again, Myrtle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myrtlegroggins (talkcontribs) 22:59, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi and glad to see you are working hard on references. Yes, there are several ways to keep from repeating a reference while referring to different pages. See Help:References and page numbers for an explanation. Ask again here if you need more help. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:15, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thankyou so much, StarryGrandma! The rp with parentheses thingy is just the ticket for me! (I did look for this but my search terms were incorrect :-) Regards Myrtle, Myrtlegroggins (talk) 05:49, 8 November 2013 (UTC)


Hi, New user of wikipedia, but not new to the site itself.

I was wondering, what if I wanted to translate an english article to Danish, can I just "copy" the text to the new article in Danish? And what about references and such?RingsbyKiel (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The guidance you need is at WP:Translate us. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:15, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks RingsbyKiel (talk) 18:21, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

My question is how to translate an article in spanish wikipedia to english wikipedia. I'll do it recently but my new article in english was rejected. I don't know why. Because its a translation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Copiacertificada (talkcontribs) 16:47, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Copiacertificada and welcome to The Teahouse. Different languages have different standards. It may be that the Spanish article meets the standards and the one you wrote did not. The Spanish article might not meet the standards; see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:50, 8 November 2013 (UTC)


I know I bother too much with infobox things but, I am about to create the article for U2's new song "Ordinary Love", but I am not sure if it works as a single or as a song. In those infoboxes there are fileds like "album", "Previous Track", but "Ordinary Love" is a song only released as the song for a movie. I need help with that. Please. Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 17:03, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

You would want to use Template:Infobox single. If it wasn't released on an album, you should just leave that field blank. Ryan Vesey 17:42, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 17:52, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

changing the name of the article name

Hello. How do I change the name of an article I've authored? It's a biography and it contains a middle initial I want to remove.

Vinylhero (talk) 15:50, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Vinylhero. At the top of the page, next to the star that lets you add pages to your watchlist, is a small down arrow. Click on this, and it will give you the option to move the article to a new title. I'm happy to do this for you if you wish, just ask. Yunshui  15:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
That worked! Thank you so much!

And apologies for the redundancy of my question topic (changing the name of the name of the name....)

Vinylhero (talk) 16:02, 7 November 2013 (UTC)


Why can't I link page Vagharshapat with articles on other languages? --Joe Kaniini (talk) 15:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Joe. What are you trying to do? The "Languages" entry on the left-hand toolbar gives you an "Edit links" entry, which links to the relevant page in Wikidata. What did you want to do, and what error message did you get? - David Biddulph (talk) 3:54 pm, Today (UTC+0) —Preceding undated comment added 18:08, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

how can I search for deleted images (by keyword in the filename)?

There used to be some images in the Mark David Chapman article (the guy who killed musician John Lennon), which have been deleted in a wave of COPYVIO crackdowns and WP:TEMPLAR foolishness. But the latter is another story for another day.

When I click on search, and click on multimedia, and search for the keywords, I turn up the *current* photo in the article, which is a picture of Lennon signing a book with Chapman in the background. Browsing through the article's edit-history manually, I can see where previous pictures existed, and manually check their File: locations for the reason they were deleted, and who performed the deletion. But how can I speed this up? I don't want to browse thousands of unrelated edits to the article about Chapman, I want to search for multimedia -- deleted or as yet undeleted -- with 'chapman' in the name. How? Danke. (talk) 12:58, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, 74.192 and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, non-administrators cannot view deleted images. But if it really is a copyvio, couldn't you just go to the webpage the file was taken from? --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 13:03, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Actually, even admins can't view deleted images; only the file information (licensing, description and so forth). The actual picture isn't available at all once it's been deleted. Yunshui  13:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
PS. Is this search (all pages in the File namespace containing the word "chapman") any use to you? Yunshui  13:11, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the replies, Yunshui and Jakob. The search that Yunshui mentioned is the search I did (without the tildes). Searching for ~chapman ~MARK gives us 113 hits.[28] The second one in the list is used in the article at the moment, and thus is a bluelink. I'm trying to search for *redlinks* with ~chapman ~mark keywords. Here is one, which I manually extracted by manually going through the edit-history.[29] It has both keywords, right in the filename, but is not one of the 113 hits. p.s. This search is not for my personal use; I was talking with one of the COPYVIO patrollers over on her talkpage, and noticed somebody else asking about how they could find all the deleted images with chapman in the filename, and figured I'd save Diannaa 30 seconds... but then, when I tried the same search as Yunshui later suggested, got nowhere. But I know I'll need something like this, at some point. If there's no way to search-for-redlinks-too, is there a way to get all image-links that a specified particular article has historically contained, with some wiki-tool? We could use WikiBlame to search for .JPG or something, but that seems pretty kludgey. (talk) 16:49, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Painting removed

Why was my painting removed from the article on Kilmainham .... it was put up by a moderator and was there for several months ...... now it is gone Msriposte (talk) 12:48, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The editor who removed the link gave no explanation in an edit summary, so you can either ask him on his user talk page or revert his deletion and invite him to discuss. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. The image was removed by another editor who apparently deemed it unsuitable for the article. I would concur with that decision. Wikipedia's policy is that "Images on Wikipedia should be used in an encyclopedic manner. They should be relevant and increase readers' understanding of the subject matter." Images should also tend to be "the type of image that is used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works, and therefore what our readers will expect to see." I don't believe that this fulfills the criteria and I don't believe that it improves the article. (Also, Wikipedia doesn't have "moderators" and the image was "put up" by you.) Of course, others may disagree with me, in which case a discussion at Talk:Kilmainham would be the way forward. BlackberrySorbet 13:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Blackberry Sorbet ........... I modified the article on Kilmainham ....... and my edit was deleted. After much discussion with the moderators I was assisted in putting up an Article on Saint Maighneann The Painting of Cill Mhaighneann was added to the article on Kilmainham with the assistance of somebody in there who changed the caption which I wanted to use. I was having great difficulty in inserting the painting in the first place. The painting was illustrative of the ancient period of Kilmainham .... prior to the existing article. I agree that the painting is no longer relevant to the article on Kilmainham but I would be very grateful if you could assist me in inserting the painting (image) on the page entitled Wiki page entitled Saint_Maighneann ........ many thanks Michael Msriposte (talk) 13:45, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

@Msriposte: Hi Michael. The image was removed by @I JethroBT: here with the edit summary "Removing the image for now-- there are issues with it anyway (e.g. black border and artist signature are not really appropriate). Should consider using a non-free image." These are similar to the issues that I have raised in the discussion at Talk:Kilmainham. (Are you perhaps nearby to Kilmainham? Photographs of the area, and indeed of subject material related to Saint Maighneann, released under a suitable free license, would almost certainly be very welcome.) BlackberrySorbet 14:19, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Blackberry Sorbet ...... thank you for your reply ...... yes I live in Kilmainham .... there very many famous and imposing buildings in Kilmainham ....... but they are not relevant to the era of Saint Maighneann who lived betweem the years 606 and 700 AD. Obviously there are no photos from that era. If you read the article on Saint Maighneann you will see that the painting clearly illustrates the article in exactly the manner that Wikipedia requires. I would be very grateful if you could transpose the painting from the Kilmainham article and insert it in the saint Maighneann article......... many thanks Michael Msriposte (talk) 14:34, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Just to clarify, the image I removed from Saint Maighneann is different than the one removed from Kilmainham, though similar concerns apply here. I recall we had a discussion on why the image was not appropriate for the article here on my talk page, which included another opinion from Prime Hunter. I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Jet ..... thanks for your comment ........ I have dropped you a line......many thanks . Michael Msriposte (talk) 16:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Is www.PR.Com a verifiable source?

I am trying to write an article for a client and am having trouble coming up with verifiable sources. Many of the one I chose are "Black listed" on Wikipedia. Please advise.

Thank you! Susan Shuman (talk) 12:18, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Susan. Trying to write an article for a client is the start of your problem. An editor with a conflict of interest is unlikely to be able to write with a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and is not here for the promotion of your client's commercial interests; there are plenty of PR websites where they can put their press releases, but Wikipedia isn't one of them. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Susan, thanks for improving wikipedia. As you may have gathered by now, many wikipedians are *very* prickly about Spam! That does not mean, as David implies, that all is lost. But there are some specific rules you should be strongly aware of. First, although you cannot edit under a corporate-name per WP:CORPNAME, it might help you if you disclose your paid relationship right on your userpage. You don't have to, of course, but honesty is the best policy. Second, there is a thing called the Bright Line Rule, which says that you, as a paid professional, are *inherently* not able to *directly* edit the article of your employer-slash-client, and thus should only *suggest* edits and changes on the talkpage of the article. Even then, you should be careful to specifically use verifiable reliable sources. There are some (rare) cases where you can use the client's homepage for info, per WP:ABOUTSELF, but any kind of awards, deals, product info, et cetera simply Does Not Belong in wikipedia unless independent reliable third party sources have covered the award/deal/product/etc. That is how we WP:PROVEIT is in fact a Notable award/deal/product/etc. As to your specific questions: is no good, it is paid advertising, not a reliable journalistic/academic source. Which 'blacklist' are you referring to? If you are talking about xLinkBot, it is actually just a greylist, to *warn* that your link *might* not be suitable, but the language used by the xLinkBot messages is somewhat misleading at the moment. Anyhoo, welcome to wikipedia, sorry about all the rules, but they really are for a good reason: if your client *is* Notable enough to deserve their own wikipedia article, that's a gold star in their cap. If not, perhaps they are WP:NOTEWORTHY enough to deserve a mention (without violating WP:UNDUE) in some existing article. Hope this helps. (talk) 13:10, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Citing sources,

Below is an example of my citing a source on the entry for the book "A Million Little Pieces":

Drury was the big winner in this suit, "Although Random House set aside $2.35 million in a fund to cover costs related to the lawsuits, advertisements in 962 newspapers and elsewhere drew only the 1,729 claims for reimbursement by the deadline, costing just $27,348. Another $783,000 will be paid out in legal fees along with $432,000 in costs associated with publicizing and carrying out the settlement." [21]

As you can see I am quoting the source and citing it correctly.

When I used sources in the exact same manner on Jon Krakauer's page, I keep getting repeated warnings I am violating copywriting by citing one sentence, a direct quote from an AP story, the quote is the judge's decision. I do not feel contributors should paraphrase legal decisions.

So why is Jon Krakauer's page automatically monitored so? He has a reputation for filing lawsuits over copyright infringement of his own works, but he has zero copyright on anything anyone says about him. Why does it appear that Wikipedia has double standards in the citation department?

Mr. Krakauer does not want the world to know his allegations against Greg Mortenson have been found "flimsy at best" and "untrue." These are the judge's exact words, and again, should not be paraphrased.

Please advise, I am on "final warning" but only with anything to do with Krakuer. I updated other pages, no problem except for bracket mistakes.Kathryn O'Hehir (talk) 02:47, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello Kathryn O'Hehir and welcome to the Teahouse. You added a section that consisted of cutting and pasting lengthy text, not just a sentence, from an AP article into Jon Krakauer. That is a clearcut violation of AP's copyright, and simply isn't allowed on Wikipedia. You also seem determined to add negative material to this biography. Please be aware that you must be very careful to edit biographies of living people in a neutral, even-handed fashion. This is policy, and is not negotiable. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Article rejected don't know where to begin

My article was rejected, and I don't know how to fix it

I followed the model of other similar companies wiki pages, but I did something wrong. Please help. (talk) 21:46, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

This happened because someone changed the article. Do it again, and you will surely have your information on the article. Mine did get rejected today anyways.22:39, 6 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolineabbot (talkcontribs)
Hi, 98 and welcome to The Teahouse. One improvement would be to follow the format for references used below (or above when this gets archived) under the heading "Editing references". If you just use the URL, that could go away. Providing full details makes it easier to find the information if that happens. Also, there are some references independent of the company, but at this stage there are too many references to the company's own web site. And there is quite a bit of "marketing speak", like using the word "solutions". You need to clearly define "develops, adapts and imagines methodologies and capabilities".
Explaining what the company does should be part of the article, but it still seems like promotion at this point. Some company history might be useful.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:47, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I think maybe "reads more like a solicitation" might have been a better way to put it. Putting the issue of the promotional tone aside for a second, your article does not meet the basic requirement of inclusion for Wikipedia, that being notability. The specific requirement for a company can be found at WP:NCORP. Wikipedia only publishes articles on subjects which independent, reliable, seconday sources are discussing in detail (or making "note" of). You have no sourcing on your article to show notability. Without that, it will never get approved. John from Idegon (talk) 23:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

How to find people working in certain topics ?

Hi, I am interested to work on pages related to certain topics, which I hope I would be more useful. For example - topics about my geographic region, local language, my educational specialization. How can I find open topics that need improvement in these fields ? Also how can I contact others working on pages related to these areas ?

GreenOrca (talk) 20:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello Rakeshwarier (GreenOrca), and welcome to the Teahouse. One good way is through WikiProjects, which are groups of editors who collaborate on related articles. Read WP:WIKIPROJECT for more information on that, plus a link to a directory.
You can also look at any article's edit history, and look for the most active editors adding new content. Those would be good people to contact about that topic area. There are many other ways but that should get you started. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:19, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
thanks ..

GreenOrca (talk) 22:29, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Editing References

Hello, I used the cite web template to create the References list on this page: Originally, I believe I inserted both an access date and a publication date into the template, but on the page, I'm seeing only the access, or retrieved, date in the References list.

I'd like to go back in and figure out how to re-enter the publication date and make it appear in the References list (along with the retrieved date). But I'm not sure how to edit citations that have already been created and how to make this info appear. Any help is greatly appreciated! Lauren1970 (talk) 20:34, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Lauren and welcome to The Teahouse. For any references in which you used an access date, just insert "|date=Date of publication", replacing "Date of publication" with the date you want. For example, <ref name="DOA interview">{{cite web|last=Marsh|first=Jeff|title=Interview with Adam Klein|url=|work=DOA|accessdate=23 September 2013}}</ref> becomes <ref name="DOA interview">{{cite web|last=Marsh|first=Jeff|title=Interview with Adam Klein|url=|work=DOA|date=Date of publication|accessdate=23 September 2013}}</ref> Most people do that immediately before the access date.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:20, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'll try it. Thank you! (talk) 22:36, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

How do I find articles that need editing in a category of interest?

Hi all - I'm trying to find articles that could do with a little "fixing up" e.g. copy editing and the like, but feel a little more comfortable functioning in my main area of expertise (science/nature) rather than just editing all the random articles that are selected. I've tried using the "incategory" search in the search bar, but this doesn't seem to be returning the results I would expect. Is there a way to search through subcategories using the search bar as well? I didn't have any luck getting CatScan to work with me... basically I want to find "all" the articles that need work in someway for all the pages found in a given category e.g. science. Apologies if this is a dumb question, but I've looked through most of the "search" pages and haven't found a solution... Alexalaxela (talk) 20:26, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I too would like to know answer of this question ..

GreenOrca (talk) 20:44, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

It's great that you want to clean up articles, especially in science. CatScan here can help you. Something that needs copy edit shows up in Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit, but that is not really a category. It just looks like one. As it says near the top of the page, "This category is for articles tagged with {{Copy edit}}." The pages have the Copy edit template at the top of them; they aren't in a real category. To search with CatScan, choose the "pages by template" option and put in the template name, in this case "Copy edit". Put the category you are interested in the "search in category" field. I suggest you pick a small subcategory for the search. As I found out, searching in a large category can take a looooong time. Happy searching. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks so much StarryGrandma - this looks like the silver bullet I was looking for! I'll make sure I'm patient with Catscan when doing these large searches instead of giving up thinking I've broken it! Alexalaxela (talk) 22:15, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Alexalaxela, one other way you can get suggestions for pages you might like to edit is to use User:SuggestBot SuggestBot is a program that looks at your edit history and then recommends new pages that need work based on your history. I find it quite good at finding pages that need work and that might match my interests. The more you use it the better it gets at predicting what might interest you. To invoke SuggestBot add the following code to your User page: {{User:SuggestBot/suggest}} If you do that in a few minutes SuggestBot will add a bunch of links to articles that need work (e.g., have tags that say they require better refs) and that are similar to the kinds of pages you have edited in the past. RedDog (talk) 14:32, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks RedDog - that sounds like a good solution too! (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Create Article

How do I begin creating a new Wikipedia article? ShelbyMenczer (talk) 15:31, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello! You could start a draft in a sandbox in your userspace; e.g. User:Miss Bono/My_New_Article, and work on it there until it is ready and you can move it to the main space. Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 15:36, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
The instructions at Wikipedia:Your first article will be useful to you. If you have further questions please do ask here.
The page I linked to there introduces the subject of notability which is important to know if you are planning on creating a new article.
Please note, creating new articles is not the only way to write Wikipedia. You can edit and improve any existing article, we have over 4 million of them now, all under constant development. This is also a good way to get started with the coding and other practices. I would recommend starting with this, as creating a new article is technically quite a challenging task. I have left a collection of links on your talk page to help you get started. --LukeSurl t c 15:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to The Teahouse, Shelby. The advice given by MissBono needs one small correction. If you choose to go ahead despite LukeSurl's advice, start with User:ShelbyMenczer/My_New_Article.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:24, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

How to rename an Article as 'A List of...'

I am developing presently named as: Khalifa of Ahmed Ullah Maizbhanderi. But I would like to rename it as a list. It can be entitled as: A list of Khalifa of Ghaus-e-Azam Ahmed Ullah Maizbhanderi or A list of Ahmed Ullah Maizbhanderi.

Please, let me know how to rename an article.

Thanks Sufidisciple (talk) 15:10, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the teahouse! To move (rename) an article, see the help at Wikipedia:MOVE.
Probably a better title for the list would be List of Khalifa of Ghaus-e-Azam Ahmed Ullah Maizbhanderi, assuming "Khalifa" is plural. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:44, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Arthur goes shopping, Thanks for your quick reply and the suggested name. Yes, your assumption is right, Khalifa is a plural word. Let me read the suggested article, if I have any more quarry, will be back here. Best wishes. Sufidisciple (talk) 17:03, 6 November 2013 (UTC) (Please, let me konw how can I indicate a user's ID as a hyper link to instantly notice to someone user)

The article as it stands is obviously much more than a list, so wouldn't be suitable for a simple move to a List ... title. What you may wish to do is to split the list part out into a separate article, with a {{main}} link from the original article. To answer your supplementary question, I guess that you're talking about {{ping}}? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! @David Biddulph and Arthur goes shopping:- I am thankful indeed to you 2 for ur fruitful quick response and following the suggested articles. Best regards. Sufidisciple (talk) 09:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! @David Biddulph and Arthur goes shopping:- Regarding the name of the article and your previous note, I would like to rename the article as: Khelafath & Khalifa of Ghaus-e-Azam Ahmed Ullah Maizbhanderi, in fact, there have a brief discussion about His Khelafath and Khalifa-s. Do you think, there will have any problem? - Sufidisciple (talk) 12:05, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Automatic update of a page

Dear Sir or Madam, I have created this page, Wikipedia:WikiProject Nepal/List of Nepalese Wikipedians by number of edits. Whenever I get free time, I update the contents of this page. But, actually what I wanted to ask is, Is there any type of bot that can automatically update the contents of this page. It is very difficult and time consuming to update manually as the list grows. So, please show me a way so that I can get it updated automatically. Thanks in advanceMkg just4u (talk) 00:18, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey Mkg just4u. Based on the name of the page you created, I am guessing you are already familiar with Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. That page is automatically updated by User:BernsteinBot, a bot account operated by User:MZMcBride (who will now be notified of this message). I have no idea if it bot could be repurposed to also update the list you created--I don't think it would be quite the same because I suppose it would have to first select for users in Category:User ne or some similar one, and then sort by their edit count. Anyway, you could always ask. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:26, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. It'd be pretty easy to write a script to keep Wikipedia:WikiProject Nepal/List of Nepalese Wikipedians by number of edits updated. Given the small number of users, you could even have more detailed and accurate statistics. This probably isn't a project I personally have any interest in working on, but if anyone is interested, it's probably only about an hour's worth of work. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:26, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Help a new member

Could someone go over to help User:Over the Orwell. He seems to want to make quite a few edits on the Ben Gummer page. This is his local MP and he feels that the page is not critical enough. This is fine, but current politician pages can be quite hard for new members - particularly if they want to be critical - as NPOV and BLP are very likely to be infringed. Could someone put a supportive arm around this guy to help him think through his edits rather than say the MP's closing the local hospital (only a slight exaggeration I'm afraid).

JASpencer (talk) 21:52, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Can I have some views feedback on my article?

I would love it if i could get some feedback, and have people check it out.Eye Love Wiki (talk) 20:46, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

It's in the queue for review so you will have to be patient. It may take a couple of weeks for it to be reviewed.--ukexpat (talk) 21:01, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
@Eye Love Wiki: Welcome to the teahouse. Your submission has been declined - there's already Spanish colonization of the Americas. But feel free to improve Spanish colonization of the Americas, as it's currently badly in need of citations and expansion. Happy editing. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 21:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

What name should we use in a BLP article?

We're having a discussion on the Talk Page about how to name this person: Kyary Pamyu Pamyu it is not her real name, it's her stage name. It sounds funny referring to her as Pamyu. Many mainstream articles refer to her as "Kyary." Raquel Baranow (talk) 14:31, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Raquel Baranow! Whichever is the most commonly used term in the published sources should be used as the article title, and then alternate names mentioned in the article. Remember that you can always make a redirect page with the other name, pointing to your article. —Anne Delong (talk) 15:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC) m
Thanks Anne, I'll copy what you said over to the Talk page. I think the article name should remain the same but any mention in the article should be "Kyary." I'm thinking maybe soon she will become another of those famous singers referred to with only one name, her first name. We could also mention in the article that mainstream journals refer to her as "Kyary".Raquel Baranow (talk) 15:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Raquel Baranow, the convention in Wikipedia is to use surnames to refer to the person after the first instance. This is so that the article will be formal, unlike a fan site. Of course, this only works if the person's name includes a surname. I am unfamiliar with the naming conventions here, but perhaps you will know if there is a sensible surname to use. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:28, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Raquel (and quick hi-ya-there to Anne), some articles exist that use the stage-name as the title, see for instance K.Michelle -- but the key is, as Anne said, that you should reflect the sources. How many sources refer to her as Kyary? How many refer to her by her legal-name? You don't have to count every single source, but you should do a statistical sample (by hand ... but see also WP:GOOG counts), and see what the most *reputable* sources use (high-brow newspaper journalists and serious television interviews and similar). Wikipedia should mirror the best-practices-convention found in the bulk of the serious sources, and document (but not mimic) the other naming-conventions used in reliable sources of all stripes.
  One last point, which is a corollary to the previous stuff, but is tricksy and deserves special mention: she *might* someday become famous enough to only need one name, like Cher, but wikipedia editors cannot predict the future, and must only mirror what sources *now* and in the past do. If you have a reliable source that predicts she will be famous, that is WP:NOTEWORTHY and should be a sentence in the article; there may even be a reliable source that discusses whether she is famous enough to only use a single name, and again, the article can cite that source. But that's different than *rewriting* the article to *assume* the prediction of future fame & future single-name-only-status will come true. See WP:CRYSTAL. In the meantime, mirror what the sources say. Thanks for improving wikipedia, we appreciate it. (talk) 10:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

African - American Rock Musicians

Hello there... I'd like to know why certain names were omitted/left off/edited out/etc. of the African-American Rock Musicians section, and others are printed..? Names such as: Norwood Fisher, Jesse Johnson, Garry Shider, Michael Hampton, Terrell Winn, Andre Fisher, to name a few artists left off, while NON-ROCKERS are included (and these artists may have 1 or 2 rock songs in their entire catalog): Pharrell Williams, Andre 3000, Chubby Checker(..really??!), Randy Jackson(Amer. Idol/Journey p/t bassist..??!)..??!! Wow, maybe someone should look into this ..?!2602:306:CDB6:E440:E99B:6DFB:5266:B99E (talk) 13:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. This is the Encyclopedia Anyone Can Edit, so it's a little tricky to tell you why certain artists are not on the list while others are. We'd have to contact all the people who edited the list in the past in order to find that out Face-wink.svg. Having said that, this does mean that you are just as free to add (or remove) artists as well, providing you follow Wikipedia's guidelines. The notability guideline for musicians comes to mind, for a start. Also, it's usually a good idea to discuss major changes to an article or list on the associated Talk page first. Cheers, Yintan  14:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm having trouble finding this list. Can someone add a link to it? Or is it the category that's being discussed? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

There is one list that includes Dre and Chubby, here -- List_of_stage_names -- since they both used stage names. But yes, the one which includes all three is Category:African-American_rock_musicians. Which lists every single one of the African-American rock musicians, of all time. Every single one. All 109 of them! No less! No more! .... Uhmm, yeah. Seriously, sorry to be the bearer of bad news, 2602, but your intuition that the folks selected/unselected for the section (which is officially a "Category" in wikiJargon) are totally nuts... is 100% totally correct.
   So, although I don't want to discourage you from helping improve wikipedia, I do want to be up front with you: partly for social reasons, but most especially for technical bugs having to do with the difficulty of searching for and maintaining and organizing group-slash-demographic-data, the way wikipedia handles intersecting-datasets is Very Damn Broken at the moment, and fixing that will not be easy and simple. There *is* a technology upgrade in the works, called WikiData, which will allow wikipedia to *finally* have a decent shot at creating intersecting-categories. That started rolling out last year, and during 2014 you should start seeing big improvements, and maybe the the end of 2014 the musical-genre and cultural-slash-national-identication features of WikiData will be visibly helping fix this group-stuff.
   In the meantime, I frankly suggest you ignore categories, and ignore lists, unless you have a lot of patience for very-politely arguing about music, and a lot of time. Instead, I suggest you concentrate on improving particular articles, about particular musicians. Shider could always use some love, and of course, Fischer & Fisher need some wikiLove, bad. If you really want to start getting a *good* dataset together, which lists all the Top 1000 Notable African-American Rock Musicians, then your best bet -- it saddens me to say since I love wikipedia -- is to sign up for Weebly or or Blogspot or something freemium like that, and start maintaining your own list-of-links, which although they are off-wiki can of course point right back into the individual wikipedia articles about the bands/artists/performers/etc. Next year, when WikiData is more fully deployed, with luck you can import your offWiki list back to wikipedia. Hope this helps, sorry about the verbosity, and thanks again for improving wikipedia. (talk) 12:03, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

named references

Hi there - my question is about the referencing templates and using named references - i love this feature, but I can't figure out how to use it AND add additional specific page references when I use it subsequently. Is that possible? Am I missing something? I'm resorting to manually entering the reference and using 'op cit' instead but I wonder if there is a better way. Thanks! Depthdiver (talk) 07:09, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello yourself, Depthdiver. One way to add page numbers of sources used frequently in an article is to use the template {{rp}}. Note, however, the "Warning" section at the bottom of the template's documentation; if a source is used only a couple of times in an article, it may be preferable to just repeat the ref (with different page numbers, of course) rather than to use a named reference. Deor (talk) 08:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Caution, Depthdiver! It's often unwise to use ibid or op cit or such non-specific pointers in Wikipedia articles, because another editor will inevitably come along and add more intervening citations, or refer to another work by the same author, leaving yours referring to the wrong document. This doesn't happen with a printed article, but Wikipedia articles are subject to frequent change. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I should have mentioned that, Anne. If you have a reference that reads, for instance, "Clown, Bozo the, All About Seltzer. ... p. 46" and you want to refer to a different page of that source in a later ref, it's better to use "Clown, All About Seltzer, p. 151" (omitting the publication details) than to use "Ibid" or "Op. cit.", since the later ref will still be clear if someone adds an intervening one. Still another alternative is to use a "References" or "Works cited" section to give the complete details of all the works cited in the article and just use author-page—or author-work-page if there's more than one work by an author listed—references (such as "Clown, p. 3") in the body of the article, placing the {{reflist}} or <references /> tag in a section headed "Notes". All this and much more is discussed or linked at Wikipedia:Citing sources. Deor (talk) 14:59, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks so much Deor and Anne Delong - that clarifies and helps and makes total sense! good thing, I always hated op cit :-) Depthdiver (talk) 17:45, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you guys check out my article?

Hi, I'm hoping to get some opinions on my new article, "Queer migration." I'd really appreciate any comments whatsoever. Also, how do I found out how many views the article has received? Thanks. (Cebrown721 (talk) 06:39, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Cebrown721. I think that the topic of your article is very notable, and I commend you for starting this article. Please take my praise for the overall effort as my most important point, and my criticisms and suggestions for improvement as secondary to that. I am not sure that "Queer" is the best term for the title. I know that this word, once an insult, has been transformed into a term of pride by many LGTB activists, but Wikipedia strives for the neutral point of view. Is this the term most commonly used by reliable sources discussing this topic? Is it the generally accepted English language term worldwide for the phenomenon? Another point is that much of the material seems to be about discrimination against LGBT people, rather than the migration that results. I noticed that your description of the Middle East does not mention migration of LGBT people to Israel, a well documented phenomenon. In conclusion, I recommend tightening the focus of the article to migration itself rather than the discrimination that causes the migration. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to add my support for Cullen's suggestion. With all due respect, but both "Global stance" sections have got nothing to do with migration. They make up the bulk of the article but they just list discrimination against gay people across the world, a subject already extensively coverd in the "LGBT rights in [fill in the country]" articles. Kind regards, Yintan  14:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
To get the page view stats, you can go to the "History" tab at the top of the article and click the "Page view statistics" link. Here is the link to the stats for this article: πr2 (tc) 16:53, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I chose the title "Queer migration" because it was used by Lionel Cantu in his book "Queer Migrations: Sexuality, U.S. Citizenship, and Border Crossings." His work has been part of the curriculum in two of my LGBT and Women and Gender classes at Rice University. I personally consider his work a respectable source. Perhaps this is arguable. As for the suggestion on tightening the focus of the article, I agree. This will take me some time, but I will work on it. Thanks for the input and your in-depth critiques! (Cebrown721 (talk) 01:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC))

subject, the existence of 'nothing' in my article 'absolute nothing'

I need help in creating an article on a definition of a subject; 'absolute nothing' in which I explain that 'nothing does exist' which would contradict already present comments in the Wikipedia article on 'nothing'. All references to nothing (videos, articles, comments) I have found so far define 'nothing' as non existent, yet It is obvious to me that nothing does exist. As you may know, the meaning of 'nothing' has not yet been accurately defined, and the subject has been rarely debated over the centuries. English as my third language, and my lack of schooling limits me from presenting a Wikipedia quality article. I do not want credit, only that the truth be known, for it will have a substantial impact on how we view and understand the universe.

If someone would look at my article, and just help me out what to do, and time to time give me suggestions and I will search it out and do all the work.

Like, can I post articles that say something very different than my understanding of this subject? For instance from a world famous philosopher saying 'nothing doesn't exist', yet I see that he is trying to describe nothing from within nothing, as nonexistence, and not looking at it from the outside. This erroneous view makes his comments nonsensical. There must be a way, has to be a way to present this article for it effects the definition of many other words, like 'everything' for instance. Or how we understand quantum mechanics/physics and its theory.

Thank you so much Odon Sabo (talk) 04:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Odon Sabo. Your article Absolute nothing is entirely unreferenced, and seems to reflect your own thoughts and observations on the topic. Wikipedia articles must summarize what the full range of reliable sources say about a topic, and must not express the personal opinions, observations or theories of the Wikipedia editor who writes them. We call that original research, and it is not permitted on Wikipedia. So, I am sorry to say that it is almost certain that your article will be deleted. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:28, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Besides that, we already have an article Nothing. Since the word nothing is already an absolute (in the same way as "perfection" or "infinity"), adding the word "absolute" to it is redundant. However, if you find published sources in which an established expert (either a philosopher or a physicist) hs written about nothingness, and they are not already mentioned in the article "Nothing", you could add a short summary and a reference to that article. If other editors who watch that article don't think it's relevant or notable, someone may remove or change it, and then you can discuss it on the article's talk page. I seem to remember that John Lennon once weighed in on this subject... —Anne Delong (talk) 13:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you all for your kind and helpful responses. I will do as you suggest. Yikes! I didn't think my article would actually be a legitimate article on Wikipedia, I was just experimenting. I will definitely be more careful next time, because I value Wikipedia tremendously and use it a lot. The last thing I would want is a half-baked article in there with my name on it. I am beginning to understand how to actually make a working article, what to add (references, photo's, facts not my own opinions, etc.) There is plenty of help here to get a good article out, and I will take my time learning it all.

Thank you Cullen, Anne and the rest, really appreciate your suggestions. Yes Anne you are correct that there already exists an article on 'Nothing', but either it is said not to exist, or referred to as 'non-existence', .. kind of like 'before the universe came into being', or described as 'space' which we now know is not made up of nothing. I understand 'nothing' as surely as I do a lemon, or anything else in existence, I would love to describe 'nothing' as it really is, in its absolute form, not saying things like "nothing is not nothing anymore, .. or that it doesn't exist". Nothing is nothing and I can contain it and define it, and hopefully some day an established philosopher or a well known physicist will take note of it, understand so someone could reference him. I really do appreciate all your help. (talk) 17:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)