Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 388

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 385Archive 386Archive 387Archive 388Archive 389Archive 390→Archive 395

Re.: reliable sources

Dear Editors,

Since I joined the brotherhood of Wikipedians (not so long ago), I spend the good portion of time, learning the rules of this unique educational institution, but in spite of the growing confidence, I feel that without friendly advice I can't go forward, and now I need your help in regards of the following: recently I had achieved (as I have a keen interest in Ancient civilizations and archaeology) my long-time dream to visit the site of archaeological excavations in Ancient Corinth (Peloponnese, Greece) ; I made plenty of photos and now thinking to build on the base of this photo material a new article, using as the academic source the book ‘Corinth-Mycenae’ by Elisavet Spathari - brilliant Greek archaeologist, Director Emeritus of Ministry of Culture. This lady is the author of several books on history and art of Ancient Greece, but only one of them is translated from Greek to English, and it is possible to buy this book only locally - in the museum, located at archaeological site of Ancient Corinth. So, can I refer to this book and use it as a reliable source of information? Will it be good enough to refer to only one source?

Regards, Chris.Chris Oxford (talk) 15:34, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Chris Oxford, and welcome to the Teahouse. We already have an article Ancient Corinth, is there any reason not to add to and improve this article? We generally don't want to have two different articles on the same topic, unless they are on different aspects of the topic, and there is enough information to make a combined article awkward. Sources need not be in English, but when using a non-english source, it is very helpful to include a translation of the key passage, this can be done with the quote= parameter if using citation templates. If, however there are other sources of equal quality in English, those are usually preferred, because more readers of the English-language version of Wikipedia will be able to use them. An article should not normally be based on a single source. On this subject, there are many high-quality sources available, I am confident. DES (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
The clearest statement is at WP:Offline sources, but yes, a hard-to-find book is just fine; it's the quality of the book and author that's important, not its availability. What would be lovely is if there was an article about the author, too, if she's such a noted archaeologist. Searching Greek wikipedia turns up a couple of citations to her, but nothing written about her. One thing I tend to do when citing something hard to find is use the |quote= feature of the citation templates to show what I'm paraphrasing. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 16:05, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
I quite agree that if Elisavet Spathari is a notable academic, a new article about her would be good, with perhaps suitable citations/mentions in Ancient Corinth or another appropriate article or articles. Remember the WP:Golden rule that notability must be clearly established for each article topic. DES (talk) 16:12, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

On a only partially related note, you may find Wikipedia:Mentorship, or Wikipedia:Co-op or Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area as a place to find an "adviser" . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:18, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Summary Table

Hello, I'm in the process of creating a page for an author I represent and I was just wondering how do you move the summary table with D.O.B, Occupation, Awards won etc, to the left of the page? Also, do I have to wait until my account has been 'autoconfirmed' before I can upload a photo of said author?

Many thanks,

CSLiteraryAgency (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello CSLiteraryAgency. The "Summary table" should be a proper infobox, with is normally on the right. Only autoconfirmed users may upload images or other files to en.Wikipedia -- anyone may upload free images to Commons. Note that non-free (fair use) images of living people will normally not qualify for use in Wikipedia articles, unless the specific image is itself of historic significance or is discussed in the article. Note also that your user name is improper, as Wikipedia accounts must be for individuals, not businesses or groups of any sort, and that since you "represent" this author, you have a financial Conflict of interest and should not be editing the article at all without declaring your conflict -- doing so violates our Terms of Use. See WP:PAID. DES (talk) 15:11, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
I blocked User:CSLiteraryAgency for violation of the username policy while making promotional COI edits. I also changed the article Wendy Meddour to use {{Infobox writer}} and made a few other changes. It could use more work. DES (talk) 16:30, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Content issue with article Ariel Fernandez

I have a content-related question regarding the Wikipedia Biography article Ariel Fernandez. There is a line constantly edited and updated by Bueller007, where this person includes work by the subject that has been questioned by the journals. This, in my opinion, is not adding meaningful content to Wikipedia. The papers have not been retracted and no definite action has been taken. By the same token, we could include the papers that have been published and have not even been questioned (some 350 of them). I believe the sentence "Four of Fernandez's scientific papers..." should be removed. Am I right?

Ariel Fernandez201.219.85.151 (talk) 15:08, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Seems relevant to me. Most papers are not retracted, the unusualness of having 4 retracted papers is noteworthy as a rare event. --Jayron32 15:23, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
The article in question is Ariel Fernandez. Since the unregistered editor questioning the mention of the challenged papers appears to be the subject of the biography of a living person, I would suggest that he take his concern about whether this mention is appropriate to the biographies of living persons noticeboard. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:52, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Having trouble submitting article

I am trying to submit my first article to Wikipedia. After entering the captcha password, what do I do next> I've tried 'enter', and it just gives me another password to type in. Jeffers19 (talk) 00:29, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jeffers19. I looked at your draft in your sandbox, and it is nowhere near ready to be submitted. You have no references showing that the band is notable. You have lots of uncited quotations. Every quote must be cited. Please read Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:09, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Assalam-o-Alaikum

Plz, how to change text colour on wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imjandarwal (talk • contribs) 07:49, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Imjandarwal, and welcome to the Teahouse. You could use a span tag with inline CSS. <span style="color:red">Red text here</span> will render as: Red text here.
However there are fairly few places where text color should be changed on Wikipedia. Why do you want to do this? And where? DES (talk) 11:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

DESiegel,THANKS ALOT,I HAVE NO MEED YET OF THIS, BUT MIGHT IN FUTURE IT SHALL BE.

Hello Imjandarwal, I am glad to have helped. In future, please do not post in ALL CAPS, it is considered the online equivalent of shouting. Using {{U}} to notify a person only works if it is part of a signed post. See WP:Notifications for details. In this case it doesn't matter, as I have this page on my watchlist, but it might in future. In any case, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). DES (talk) 15:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Rather than using raw HTML, you can use {{Red}} and similar pre-existing templates. E.g. {{Lime|lime green}} produces "lime green". 71.41.210.146 (talk) 06:24, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
I think ,@Imjandarwal: , you should write the sections name realated to the Questions not 'Hello'-- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 08:42, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Just to note that Imjandarwal has been indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:55, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
@Cordless Larry: what is sockpuppet Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 07:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Sock puppetry, Aryan hindustan. It's basically when a user registers multiple accounts and uses them to mislead other users and distort consensus by creating the impression that the accounts are being operated by different people. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

sockpuppet

what is sockpuppet Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 07:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@Aryan hindustan: Look at WP:SOCKPUPPET for more info. Cheers, Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

My article keeps getting deleted

Hi there, I am trying to write a piece for the company CommuterClub and my article keeps getting deleted. Everything I have written is referenced and factual. I was wondering if you could advise me on what I may be doing wrong Rhiannon24215 (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Rhiannon24215:
The requirements for a stand alone article are that reliably published, third parties not related to the subject, have found the subject worthy of significant discussion/commentary. Merely existing is not the criteria. Have your sources demonstrated that? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:21, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
If you want to get your article accepted into Wikipedia article space, my advice would be to use the Articles for Creation process by creating the article in draft space, and then submitting it for review. That way, if the reviewers don't think that it meets Wikipedia's criteria, you will still have the article in draft space to improve, as well as their comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
See CommuterClub (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views).--ukexpat (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

How can I get more secondary sources?

I have tried and added secondary sources, the question still persists. I need guidance. Draft:Affle India Pvt. Ltd.#Affle India Pvt. Ltd - Kanika007 (talk) 11:01, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Kanika007, it seems you do have a number of reliable sources among your references (I would think refs 8,9,10{?},12, and 16 qualify), although still mixed with plenty of primary and advertorial links. The primary source for naming the board of directors is fine. However, I really couldn't say whether these sources successfully establish notability, as admittedly marketing speak always looks like hogwash to me, and this is all marketing speak. If the reviewers' concern is that notability has not been established, and if these are all the available good sources, well... -- Elmidae (talk) 13:11, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Title heading for "Naming"

I am wondering what the wikipedia standard is for the title of how a subject came to be named... is it 'naming', 'name' or 'etymology'?

thanks Grapeman4 (talk) 10:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello Grapeman4, and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you speaking about the principles and customs we use here at Wikipedia to determine what the anme of an article should be? You will find those at Wikipedia:Article titles. If you are looking for how a given topic came to be known by a particular name, you could try Etymology. That is "...the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time." It has much on general principles, but will not have specific histories of most particular terms. Many articles have an Etymology section, on how that topic came to have the particular nae(s) it does. In many cases there is a redirect leading to such a section. For example Etymology of Canada points to a section in the Canada article. If none of those is what you are looking for, then you will need to be more specific. DES (talk) 17:34, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I think Grapeman4 is asking what to call an article section that deals with the etymology of the topic's name. I've seen both "Etymology" (as in the Canada article) and "Name" (as in Ely, Cambridgeshire) used for such a section. Americas even has "Etymology and naming". I'd suggest using whatever seems best to you in the context of the article; as far as I know, there's no Wikipedia-wide guideline on this. Deor (talk) 18:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't know of a Wikipedia-wide guideline either, but it's possible that there's a relevant WikiProject with guidelines on article structure, depending on the topic Grapeman4 has in mind. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:23, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what else to do to make my article "verifiable"

Hello!

I am trying to make an article for someone I think is "notable" -- Dan Scanlan, aka Cool Hand Uke.

I believe I changed the sources appropriately -- found references to him on a new website, as well as multiple ukulele player's blogs/ a review of one of his CDs (which is important, historically). I also included links from ukulele festivals where he is a teacher or an MC.

The ukulele world is not that big, and for one man to be as involved as Dan is, it means he is rather "notable" among the ukuleleians!

Any advice on how to imporve? The only other sources I have are a personal interview, which I can not verify, as well as interviews with other people, which again I can not verify, and bio stuff from his website.

Thanks!!!

This is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dan_Scanlan

Leonadance (talk) 18:01, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Leonadance. Unfortunately, "notable" in Wikipedia jargon does not mean the same as in the world at large: it doesn't mean "important", or "famous", or "significant", or "popular" or "influential". It means one thing only: that people unconnected with the subject have thought it worth publishing substantial material about the subject, and had them published in reliable places. Looking at what you've said above:
  • "a new website" might be reliable, if it has been set up by a publisher that has a reputation for fact-checking; but probably it has yet to earn that reputation. In any case, "references to him" are probably not enough to establish notability - you need substantial writing about him.
  • Blogs are almost never acceptable as references
  • A review of his CD is potentially one of the best sources, as long as it is substantial, and published in reliable place (not, for example, self-published). However, unless it talks about him as well as about the CD, its use for an article about him will be limited.
  • Links to festivals where he appears are of little value for establishing notability, because usually they don't say much about him, and if they do it probably derives from him. Again an independent review of a festival which says something substantial about him would be a good source.
  • An interview with him is not independent, and so does not contribute to notability.
  • I'm not sure quite what you mean by "interviews with other people". If both the interviewer and the interviewee are unconnected with him, but the interview has some substantial material about him, and is published in a reliable place, then it would contribute.
  • Bio stuff from his website can go into an article, but does not contribute to notability.
So my advice is "find reliable published places where people who are not in any way connected to him have published substantial material about him." If you cannot find any, then give up, at least for the present. --ColinFine (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

This page I wrote is being investigated for copyright violation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masimba_Hwati , however am working with the express permission of the copyright holder who sent an email confirming this which I put on the discussion page. I also wrote completely a fresh article in the subpage as requested and placed a note confirming that on the talkpage but haven't heard back. How can the resolution of this be expedited? How long does this normally take to resolve? InfinityBeau (talk) 19:33, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@InfinityBeau: I've looked up the email sent via OTRS and removed the template from the article page. I have to say that I'm unsure of the relationship between the source and the subject and I do have a concern that the article isn't neutral. Although text can be re-used as it has here, in general it is better if it is written in the editor's own words and relies on a wider variety of sources. Nthep (talk) 20:46, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, InfinityBeau, and welcome to the teahouse. Unfotunately, the article Masimba Hwati has now been listed for deletion as promotional. All wikipedia articels must be neutral, and may not be used to promote or advertise any person, organization, product, or cause. (Nor to disparage either, but promotion is the much more common issue.) This sort of thing often happens when directly using text from an outside website -- content that is perfectly appropriate on a person or organization's own site is considered far too promotional for an article here. The current text of the articel needs to be edited to remove the promotional content if it is not to be deleted. DES (talk) 21:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
InfinityBeau, I have made some edits and added some additional citations, but the article as it stands is still a bit marginal, I think. Additional independent sources would help. DES (talk) 22:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Cant save edits to Spike Island Cork message parsidserver HPPT 400 shows

I Cannot save edits to Spike Island Cork page message parsidserver HPPT 400 shows am I dooing something rong or is this a server problemOyster27 (talk) 23:13, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Oyster27. I am quite incompetent to answer this question at least from a technical standpoint, but I think I have an answer nevertheless based on evidence. Did your edit include being asked to enter a CAPTCHA – some letters or numbers from an image shown to you in order to proceed? Last week there was a post at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 140#CAPTCHA Broken (where the developers and tech gurus hang out), mentioning an "HTTP 400" error, and I doubt it's a coincidence because it appears that specific error has only been talked about at that technical page once before in all of its history. That also strongly indicates to me it is a problem on Wikipedia's end and not on your end.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:26, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Very new at this and helping a notable Recording Artist with ALS - Can anyone help me build this correctly?

Dear Wiki Peers,

Regarding a pending Wiki Page named "Sean Damon", I have never written an article for Wiki before or anything like it, and very confused. But I want to contribute legitimate information about the Recording Artist in a timely manner and started it without any of Wiki's special Characters. before he appears on the Ellen show and releases his new single. His verified FB page is www.facebook.com/SeanDamon and his website is www.seandamon.com. All of the info I provided by his own website, like Bio, published works, pictures in which he owns the copyrights to as he approves sitting in the same room.. I am a caretaker. Anyone who has spare time could please format the Article correctly it would be very much appreciated JimMosely (talk) 22:33, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi JimMosely, welcome to Wikipedia. If you want to try to write about Damon, I'd suggest using the article wizard to create a draft, so you can work on the page and then submit it for review when you're done. Wikipedia articles need to be based off of reliable, independent sources such as newspapers or magazines; what others have written about Damon, not what Damon writes about himself. So, don't use his Facebook or his official site. This page explains what makes a good source. In addition, most Wikipedia content, including all text and photographs of living people, needs to be under a free license so that anyone can reuse it for any purpose. If there's a photograph of Damon that you want to use in the article, the copyright holder would have to send an email licensing the photo to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. I'm afraid, since this is a policy with legal implications, we can't just take your word for it. More details about where to send the email and a standard form are here. Hope this helps! Howicus (Did I mess up?) 22:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
One more point, JimMosely. In Wikipedia, there is no deadline! Your desire to get an article up before he appears on some show ma be very kind (or, being more cynical, it may be very commercial), but is of no relevance to Wikipedia. Wikipedia will not drop its standards to let you publish something quickly - especially if you appear to be doing so in order to promote something. Promotion of any kind (commercial or not) is forbidden on Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 23:48, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Should reference sources in citations use Ibid. when they repeat sequentially?

I have just submitted an article for review. Some of my sources repeat sequentially in my References list. Should I list each one as "Authors (year), p x" (e.g. several footnotes in a row), or reference the first occurrence in the list as such, then use "Ibid., p x"? Thank you for your help. FurbierulesFurbierules (talk) 19:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@Furbierules: the use of ibid is dis-encouraged for the simple reason that as articles develop there is a significant chance that someone will introduce another reference into the sequence from the same source and the whole things starts to become unintelligible. If you are going to use the same text quite a lot in an article consider Parenthetical referencing. Nthep (talk) 20:26, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, @Furbierules:. Assuming you are talking about the article Draft:Memory Reconsolidation and Psychotherapy: Therapeutic Reconsolidation Process, the way you have done it at the moment is quite acceptable - it is referred to as "shortened references" at WP:SFN. I would just note that the order of Notes and References is swapped from your article. Another approach that I often use is to use Template:Rp. This allows you to define the source once, then each time you refer to it you provide the relevant page number(s). But I don't see any reason to change what you have done.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:03, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Remove a photo from an Article

The article "Speedo" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedo ) has a photo of Jon Henricks, Olympic champion, wearing a swimsuit made by Jantzen, the American competitor to the Australian Speedo in those days.

Can someone remove the photo from the article? AusOp (talk) 08:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@AusOp: Do you have any sources that the swimsuit wasn't by Speedo? Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
)

Lmitc119 (talk) 01:36, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok, i removed the photo, but I am not experienced enough to remove it entirely, so I just replaced it with an x and said that it could not be displayed.

If someone could remove it entirely, that would be great!

Regards, Lmitc119 (talk) 01:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

HELP! (how to publish a draft)

I made a draft, how do I publish it now? Lmitc119 (talk) 01:41, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

  • Hi Lmitc119, welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, because your draft appeared to have taken content directly from external sources, I have declined it and requested that it be deleted. Please know that this does not mean your contributions are not appreciated; however, Wikipedia takes copyrights very seriously, and we can't accept content that appears to be taken directly from a website without ensuring first that it is freely usable—see our copyrights policy and copyright violations policy for more information.
Also, for the future, make sure that when you submit your draft, it features multiple references to reliable sources that are independent of the subject—news websites, periodicals, and books that discuss the subject matter in detail tend to be very helpful. We need these kinds of references to show notability, which is a test we use to determine whether a topic should have an article on Wikipedia. Generally, if a subject matter does not have significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, we probably shouldn't have an article about that subject—see WP:42 for a summary of this. If you find yourself stuck or confused by our rules, I do apologize, and please feel free to ask here again at the Teahouse for clarification. Best, Mz7 (talk) 02:31, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia Editing and user page poetry

How can I become a better wiki editor? Also, would I be allowed to post my poetry to my user page? (Life Of A Wiki Amatuer (talk) 01:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes ,if it is your own -- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 04:25, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Strictly speaking, your user page should be about you as a Wikipedian. Biographical elements on a user page are ideally relevant to that user's work on Wikipedia, such as stating their interest in a particular topic that they edit articles about. But a short poem or two would probably be fine, so long as the content of the poetry is appropriate. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 04:44, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Can't "stay log in" in my primary language wikipedia!

Hey guys, i can't stay log in, in Persian Wikipedia...! Pleas help me! >>> If anyone can modify our scriptbox please delete my own, all, I beg him/her! 😩😩😩 <<< i can not do anything! PLEEEEEEEEEASE! :/

♥Appreciate you, all... :* kisses Amir R. Pourkashef User:Amir_R._Pourkashef 14:22, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Have you tried the Help Pages at Persian Wikipedia - we really can't help you here.--ukexpat (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Amir R. Pourkashef, welcome to the Teahouse. fa:User:Amir R. Pourkashef/vector.js can only be edited by yourself or an administrator at the Persian Wikipedia. English administrators cannot do it. To prevent the code from running while you edit it, try the mobile version [1] (click the pencil icon) or with MonoBook as skin [2]. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:41, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Ow thank you sir. it fixed! heck yeah!

I appreciate you so much! Ha 'en god dag...! ;) Amir R. PourkashefAmir R. Pourkashef 10:52, 18 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amir R. Pourkashef (talk • contribs)

Infobox templates

I recently created Top Marques Monaco, about an annual event in Monaco. I used Template:Infobox event, but I'm not sure that's the correct template for the type of event this is. (Also, other editors' contributions are very welcome, though it is still "under construction" as I find sources to fill in more of the article.) Is there a better template to use? —GrammarFascist contribstalk 03:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi GrammarFascist. Template:Infobox event#See also shows Template:Infobox recurring event which seems better here. Please replace User;GrammarFascist by User:GrammarFascist (colon instead of semicolon) in your signature. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:25, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Well, I don't know how I missed either of those. Possibly I should sleep more, edit less. Thanks, PrimeHunter. I fixed the sig, and am off to do the infobox. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 11:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi all. Can somebody add logo to the page of software I created, please?

|Commander OneDashaG11 (talk) 11:14, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

I would be happy to upload it and add it to the article, if you can point me to a copy of the logo image. The company / program's own website is blank, and none of the sites that host the software seem to have a copy of the logo on display... —GrammarFascist contribstalk 12:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Help!!

Hi there! I'm a beginner in the Wikipedia, and now I had a problem is that I can't refute a person, because I'm not familiar with the policies of the Wikipedia, and I'm not a native English user. The argument is in my talk page now, I could confirm what I want to edit is truth, but I could not find any policy or rules that could bring benefits for me to debate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wind-waves Wind-waves (talk) 12:59, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, it doesn't matter what a person knows or believes. All that matters is what a reliable source says about a topic. If I had a reliable source that said "The sky is green," then I could put that in a Wikipedia article, and it wouldn't matter that anyone could look out the window and see it's blue.
It's also important NOT to delete information from an article that has reliable sources to back it up, even if you disagree with what those sources say. That is against Wikipedia policies. If you keep doing it, an administrator might ban you.
I hope this has made it easier to understand. I'm afraid I don't speak Mandarin (I'm guessing that's your native language based on the sources you referenced) but I know someone on Wikipedia who does and might be willing to try to translate for you. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 13:38, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, I got it.Wind-waves (talk) 14:13, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Actually, if a source said "The sky is green", it would not be reliable so you couldn't use it. When the Wikipedia concept "Verifiability not Truth" is alluded to, what is meant by that is that Truth alone is not sufficient. Verifiable means "able to be proven true", and thus truth is still required. Something must first be true in order to be verifiable (the "veri... part of that word comes from the word "truth"). So, we don't write statements we know to be false merely because someone wrote it down somewhere. Indeed, if a source regularly publishes false statements and claims them to be true, that source is no longer a reliable, and thus cannot be used to cite something at Wikipedia. --Jayron32 14:57, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Change redirect to disambiguation page

I would like to write an article about a Canadian art and art criticism periodical called C Magazine. I noticed that C magazine already exists and redirects to Cardinal Courier Media.

I could make a page called C Magazine, but then we might end up with two pages where the only difference in the title is the capitalization of the second word.

Would it be better to make C magazine a disambiguation page, and create a new page C Magazine (art magazine) or can I write the article in C Magazine and add a hatnotes to other pages where confusion might arise? What is your recommendation?

Mduvekot (talk) 16:09, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Mduvekot, and welcome to the Teahouse. Usually a disambiguation page with only two entries is discouraged, see WP:TWODABS. But two articles with names different only in capitalization is also not ideal, and it seems that the proper name of the Cardinal Courier Media publication is "C Magazine" and not "C magazine" in any case. I suggest that you create C Magazine (art magazine) and use the existing C (disambiguation) to point to it, and also add a hatnote. There is also C California Style Magazine as a possible additional hatnote entry. Other solutions are possible, and any can be altered later if editors should form a different consensus, so don't worry too much. DES (talk) 16:30, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Submission declined

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_A._Jones_(attorney)

I appreciate the review and would like to make the changes necessary for publication. I am not sure which of the references that remain are objectionable. I have read the guidelines a few times and thus removed wiki as a reference. I have numerous newspaper articles, a supreme court ruling, a link to this person's television program, and court cases he won that are quite notable in the state of Texas regarding LGBT rights and deplorable prison conditions.

The commentary is as follows: 'References are entirely on the primary link". Could you unpack that for me and help me understand what it means so that I can move forward with edits.

With gratitude, sallyzen170.57.5.115 (talk) 15:38, 18 September 2015 (UTC)170.57.5.115 (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Sallyzen: on a side note, you appear to have logged out of your account. You can follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Oversight if you have a concern that your edits while logged out may inappropriately be giving information that you would rather not have made public. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:49, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Sallyzen. I'll give it a go.
  • Unreliable sources, including most wikis, blogs, forums, and social media, as well as self-published website, are almost never acceptable as sources, and should not be cited.
  • Primary sources, such as court records, may be cited, but in a very limited way. They do not contribute to the subject's notability, and if the only source for a particular topic (eg a court case) is the official record, then that topic is not notable (nobody has noted it in print) and probably should not feature in an article. So if there were a secondary source available about a case, an account could be written based on that secondary source, and uncontroversial factual details might be filled in from primary sources.
  • Similarly, non-independent sources, such as the subject's website, their publications, interviews with them, or articles based on press releases from them, can be cited in the same limited way, and do not contribute to notability in Wikipedia's sense.
Does this help? --ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you both for the suggestions. I'll work on the areas you have cited and resubmit. I appreciate your time,Sallyzen (talk) 16:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

How do I add pics to a Wiki Page?

I want to add a couple JPGs, but when I use this...

File:C:\Documents and Settings\HP Owner\Desktop\OPT\Images\path.jpg

...the preview doesn't show the pic. How do I add pics to my wiki page?

Thanks!

Ann

Annofbigbeach (talk) 18:16, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Standard reply:
  • If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
  • If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.--ukexpat (talk) 18:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello @Annofbigbeach: Please be aware that most images on the Web are NOT licensed appropriately for use in Wikipedia. If you did not click the shutter to take the picture, it is probably not one that Wikipedia can use. Wikipedia takes WP:COPYRIGHT issues very seriously. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:36, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Based upon your edits, I am going to bet that you want to upload a logo for a company. If that is the case you will want to make yourself familiar with how Wikipedia deals with "fair use" claims. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

How to use image from non-English Wikipedia in English Wikipedia?

I have uploaded my photo to Finnish Wikipedia. Unfortunately it can not be uploaded to Commons because Finland lacks Freedom of Panorama (Detals can be found here Is it possible to use image from other Wikipedia (in my case Finnish Wikipeida) in the article placed in English Wikipedia? Or should I upload this image to English Wikipedia also in order to be able to use it from there? Vitaly repin (talk) 21:37, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Vitaly repin. I'm afraid the answer is no: it is not possible to use an image from another Wikipedia. You would need to upload it separately to English Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 21:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry Vitaly but I do not believe that image can be uploaded here in compliance with the English Wikipedia's requirements for a valid claim of fair use. Specifically, I do not believe that image would meet the contextual significance standard of the fair use criteria. If we had an article about the statue (not that I'm suggesting we should!), then the image would be really important for context and understanding of that topic. But I do not think it's omission from Tapio Rautavaara is detrimental to the understanding of that topic. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:17, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
What aboutVitaly repin and Fuhghettaboutit:'wikivoyage' Italic text? -- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 04:29, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
I understand your point but how does it correlate with Wiki Loves Monuments (http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org/) initiative? It looks like Wiki loves only copyright-free monuments.Vitaly Repin (talk) 13:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Vitaly repin, there is a related Wikimedia campaign pertaining to images of copyrighted works of public art and architecture: Freedom of Panorama in Europe in 2015. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 23:37, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Transferring from my Sandpit

Hi all. Yes, I am completely new to this, and enjoying practising my editing on a draft of an article I would like to produce on 'Emotional Chaos Theory'. But how far should I go in my sandpit? Can I copy paste it into a draft main page, or should I re-start somewhere else? I have looked at the wizard, but practically speaking, what is the best way to get feedback at an early stage on what I am writing?TrevorGriffiths (talk) 09:59, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, TrevorGriffiths. You can continue working on the article in your sandbox for as long as you like. Copying what you have into a draft page is another option; to do that, enter the title you think the article should have into the search box at the top of any Wikipedia page, and click the red 'You may create the page "[your article title]", but consider checking the search result below to see whether the topic is already covered.' link. Other editors will be able to view and edit the draft. When you (or they) feel it's ready to be added to Wikipedia, the "Submit" button at the top of the draft will add it to the Articles for Creation queue, or any registered user can just move it from draft to article status. (AfC is mostly for people without Wikipedia accounts — or who try to jump right into creating their first article without reading important policies like WP:COI, WP:N, WP:NOT and WP:RS — and there's currently a backlog, so it's best not to use it if you don't need it.) —GrammarFascist contribstalk 12:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
One thing to keep in mind is Wikipedia's rules about attribution - which can be lost in a copy-paste action. Before doing any copy and pasting, please be sure you are following the appropriate processes outlined at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. It is often more appropriate to move the page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Ooh, good point, TRPoD. I wasn't thinking of anyone else having edited the draft in TrevorGriffiths's sandbox, but yes, if someone else had contributed to it in the sandbox, it should be moved rather than copy-pasted. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 00:07, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
GrammarFascist, Even if no one else contributed, so there is no attribution issue, a copy&paste leaves two versions of the text in two different pages, which can be confusing later, and a move documents what was done better. There is really no good reason that I can see to do a C&P even when there is only one editor involved. @TrevorGriffiths: DES (talk) 01:07, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks guys. This is really helpful.92.29.147.203 (talk) 11:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Ed Stafford

Was he the yongest SAS recruit at 7 years old? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.176.139 (talk) 19:28, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

I guess that you are pointing out what is clearly an inconsistency in Ed Stafford. Thank you, but it would be more helpful if you actually indicated what the problem was and in which article, rather than leaving us to guess whether you are pointing out an error or asking for information. --ColinFine (talk) 20:23, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
I've removed the mention of being in the SAS, as it is not in the main text and is unreferenced, as well as having impossible dates. --ColinFine (talk) 20:28, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Looking at the history of that article, it first said that Stafford had been a captin in the British Army, then this was changed from Army Captain to "SAS Operative", and some edits later the impossible dates were added. None of these ever had an inline cite, but it is possible that one of the sources cited elsewhere mentions his having been in the army or the SAS. DES (talk) 16:19, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Please check my article

Could somebody please check my page - Commander One. How can I improve it?DashaG11 (talk) 09:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC) [One] — Preceding unsigned comment added by DashaG11 (talk • contribs) 10:23, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

DashaG11, see WP:RS, WP:INCITE, and WP:REF. Also, you don't need HTML tags, so for li just use *, for ul, just omit it, and for p omit it and just hit your enter key. Tone down the hype. Add some small words to create complete sentences. Add more inline citations. Put the whole thing in your own words. Good luck. Take care. Checkingfax (talk) 11:34, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi DashaG11
I fixed it up a bit, so it doesn't show the picture ::anymore
BUT.. I couldn't get rid of it so can someone please ::try and get rid of it :)
Lmitc119 ([[User ::talk:Lmitc119|talk]]) 11:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't see any explanation for not showing the picture, so I've restored it - and replacing it with a black cross is never the right thing to do anyway. 82.35.107.31 (talk) 11:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Right now I think the best way you could improve this would be to write a more generic, summarized lead, and put all of the referenced details about the features of the two versions in the following sections in prose format.
I also think that it could benefit from a "Reviews" section. I don't know if that is standard for software pages but it would be nice to see some commentary/criticism about the program's functionality by experts who have used it (if such commentary exists). 2macia22 (talk) 16:51, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Need help preventing article deletion

The Allentown NJ library is of historic significance and the content of the page is much more than most every other library entry. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Library) There is almost NO content on the Monmouth County library wiki...so merging (or redirecting) into that site only takes away from Wikipedia.

I also tried to add references...but another contributor deleted them. Can someone help with adding these:

Ruddiman, Joan (6 August 2015). "ALLENTOWN: The library rises again" (Centraljersey.com) Retrieved 4 September 2015 Mancuso, Michael (8 March 2015). "Allentown library celebrates the 50th anniversary of the incorporation of the library association" (NJ.com) Retrieved 4 September 2015 Johnson, Elizabeth (31 December 2014). "ALLENTOWN: Library Association sets 50th year celebrations" (Centraljersey.com) Retrieved 4 September 2015 Ruddiman, Joan (11 February 2015). "ALLENTOWN: We have a library, 1870s-style" (Centraljersey.com) Retrieved 4 September 2015

I am a volunteer at the library and could use a little help, as I am new to Wikipedia and this is my first article. I also could not figure out how to add a comment to the deletion discussion page Njjimf (talk) 20:18, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Njjimf:. We only utilize sources with a reputation for fact checking and editorial oversight. books.google.com and news.google.com do a pretty good job at bringing in mostly sources that would satisfy the WP:RS requirement. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:24, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi,

Centraljersey.com is a published newspaper (Packet Media group), and NJ.com is the website for the NJ Star Ledger and The Trenton Times newspapers. Njjimf (talk) 20:56, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I also see you deleted much of the content from the site, is this supposed to be helping? Njjimf (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes. We are writing an encyclopedia and so removal of content that is non encyclopedic is helping. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:47, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
TheRedPenOfDoom, as a former long-time NJ resident, I can tell you that NJ.com and Centraljersey.com archive content for several regional and local newpapers, and are as reliable as such papers normally are, the Star Ledger perhaps rather more so, roughly comparable with the Regional reporting of the NY Times -- I have added them to Wikipedia articles on many occasions. I haven't yet looked at what particular content was being sourced to those sites. IMO news.google.com doesn't do nearly as good a job as it did some years ago, it now fails to return many, perhaps most, stories with dates more than 30 days old. DES (talk) 23:18, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Njjimf, I have added in most of the references and the related info (unfortunately the one from NJ was just pictures, no citeable information). It may still not be notable enough to be a page on its own, but ideally a merge will preserve the same information, placing it on the Monmouth County Library page. 2macia22 (talk) 17:52, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Re.: New articles

Dear Editors,

I thank all, who responded to my letter Reliable Sources.

To UTC I would like to say special Thanks for detailed, clear explanation of how to proceed on the article Ancient Corinth. Yes, I can add some details to existing article, using citations from Elisavet Spathari's book, and also upload several photos, which I made on the archaeological site. Regarding the advice, kindly given me by UTC, to write the article about Elisavet Spathari, I have to admit, that I thought about it myself, but I (as well) could not find even a short article, written about her. Of course, her books are the complete proof, that she is an expert in this field, but there is no information about the author even in her book 'Corinth-Mycenae', which I bought in Corinth. Anyway, for the start, I'd like to look at the new articles, proposed by other editors for discussion, to see how these articles look like in their “unpolished” form, but the new problem suddenly occurred: I simply can’t to find the tool to display them. Can someone tell me how to find a list of the most recent articles for editing?

Regards, Chris. Chris Oxford (talk) 15:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't know a tool to find recently created articles (maybe another editor can suggest something) but I have another option for you. You see, many "unpolished" articles may have serious problems and don't conform to Wikipedia policies, and are deleted mere days after publication because of it. Rather than looking at these, I think you may find it more productive to look at examples of high-quality articles so that you have an idea what is expected (based on your letter, I think you might find the content at Wikipedia:WikiProject Archaeology useful).
Remember, there's no such thing as a "finished" article on Wikipedia. Every article, no matter how well written, is a work in progress. Start with any reliable sources you have, and from there you and other interested editors can work together to keep improving the article's quality. 2macia22 (talk) 19:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Chris Oxford, I just thought I'd point out that "UTC" is part of the time stamp in editors' signatures, not an editor's username! If you're looking for very new articles, you could take a look at Special:NewPages. You might also be interested in this list of drafts that are being worked on put haven't been published as articles yet. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:35, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Wanting to edit Harry Errington entry

Not house in Rathbone Street but garage. Erengott is old name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Man Edel 2829 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Man Edel 2829. If you have improvements to suggest to an article, the best place to suggest them is on the article's talk page (here, Talk:Harry Errington), preferably with a published source for the information you want to add. I notice that the article does say it was a garage that was demolished, but that this was attached to a house - the Telegraph obituary just mentions the garage (and doesn't give the street at all). As to the name, the Telegraph says "Ehregott", our article currently says "Ehrengott". I don't know if there is more detail in the Terry Hissey book, as I haven't got it. --ColinFine (talk) 23:06, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
I removed some cite errors originally and added the telegraph reference at the same time as the original was a dead link. I have now updated the text using another reference, no mention of the house. CV9933 (talk) 10:03, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Want to ensure that only 'garage' is mentioned in this article, as it was not a house. My Father was in the next block of flats next door, and his car was parked in that garage! Unfortunately I cannot get my head around how to alter anything properly in this set-up, only being used to dealing with graphics and manuswcriots. Can someone please help? 21:49, 19 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.24.204 (talk)

Help with the image submission process?

I'm overwhelmed by the process for submitting images for pages and wondered if anyone would be willing to help walk me through a few different examples. I've read a few (too many) pages about the rules so I'd ask not to be pointed to WP:DOTHISIDIOT with a good luck. I have three pages I've worked on that all need photos and should help me understand the parameters around how this works:

  • Bede Jarrett. Dead person, no way to get an uncopyrighted photo. Not really sure how I can tell who owns which images that are floating around online.
  • Rodger Dudding. Alive person. Tried contacting his company without response. What's the next option?
  • Carolina Foods. Company, needs logo. This seems like it should be easiest since logos are an exception to the normal rules, but are there other caveats I should be aware of?

Thank you! Alaynestone (talk) 15:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Alaynestone. For Bede Jarrett, I think this book cover at Amazon would be a good choice for illustrating his article, as it contains a photo of him, and the publisher info is right there on the Amazon page. Note that the fact that this biography of him exists would have to be added to Bede Jarrett in order for a Fair Use claim to be appropriate for the image's use in this article. There is also [this image of a younger Jarrett which, with a date of 1903, i believe should be in the public domain in the US due to its copyright having expired.
For alive people, if you can't get an image released by the person or find a CC-licensed photo of them someplace like Flickr, the article may have to go without an image.
The rules for logos are that the image has to be small and low-res, and be used only at the top of the company or organization's article to identify them. Would you like a step-by-step walkthrough of the process for uploading a logo file and adding it to the article? I've done a few logos just lately, so I could write that up for you, though I find the process fairly self-explanatory. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 16:00, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
On a side note, asking for simple Copyright answers is like asking for predictable weather. Copyright is extremely complex and context dependent and so there are not going to be any simple answers.
Of your questions, even the one that should be most straightforward -the corporate logo- is not. Carolina Foods does not seem to have a corporate logo, it appears they just use the brand logo for their Duchess line, which is not what our guidelines are set up for. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:42, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
In that regard – the complexity noted above – unless we know more about that 1908 image, we cannot upload it as in the public domain. When was it first published and who is the author, and if you want to say "unknown" is it truly or just because the book is not "free preview" on Google books and so on. All not easy to know. Even if it's a U.S. image it would only be out of copyright if it was published before 1923, and if not, then if published before January 1, 1964, but only if it was not renewed within twenty-eight years, but if published between 1964 and 1977 without a copyright notice ... and ... more. But it's more likely it's a UK image I would think, which probably mean it's subject to "life of the author plus 70 years", but maybe not, because it's also dependent on a number of factors such as if the author's unknown, then its 70 years after first publication, if published within 70 years of creation (also "and more"), which would need to be known to determine which apply. (See here.) I deal with copyright a lot, which doesn't mean it isn't still confusing, often inexplicable and frustrating as hell. The unfortunate rule to live by is if you can't find the specifics, so that which exact rules apply are known, take your lumps and don't upload.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:51, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Alaynestone. The previous answers have properly emphasized the complexity of determining copyright status. Sometimes, though, there is clarity to be found in the midst of confusion. Let me clarify with regards to Bede Jarrett. This person lived from 1881 to 1934, and wrote seven books published before 1923. The year 1923 is the "magic year" in copyright law. Wikipedia is headquartered in San Francisco so U.S. copyright law is the overriding legal basis for our decisions although we must also consider the laws of other countries in more recent cases. But according to WP:Public domain, "In summary, the rules in the U.S. for works published abroad are as follows: If the work was published before 1923, it is in the public domain in the U.S." Accordingly, any book by Jarrett first published before 1923 is in the public domain under U.S. law and entirely lacking copyright protection under U.S. law. The same applies to any book or magazine or newspaper article about Jarrett published before 1923. And this also applies to any photo, drawing or painting of Jarrett included in any such publication dated before 1923. So any image of Jarrett published before 1923 can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons for use anywhere. It is your obligation to verify the publication date.
In the case of people active after 1923 who are now dead, our Policy on use of non-free images allows use of a low resolution version of a copyrighted image of a person who is dead, only in the single article about that person, uploaded here to English Wikipedia, not to Wikimedia Commons.
With regards to Rodger Dudding, your most promising option, if you live anywhere near him, would be to attend a public event where he is present, and take a photo of him yourself. You would be the copyright holder of any such photo, and can freely license the photo and upload it to Wikimedia Commons. I have done this myself several times with very good results. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:45, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

How do i place an image in a new page?

If i wanted to put an image of say an album art for a page about it, how do i do it? Stryperfan (talk) 04:15, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Stryperfan. A well written article about a notable album will include critical commentary about that album. In that case, our Policy on the use of non-free images #1 allows use of a low resolution version of the cover art. The image should be uploaded here on English Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons) for use only in that one article about that album. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:32, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
How do i upload it? Stryperfan (talk) 04:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
There is an Upload file link on the left sidebar, under the heading 'Tools'. That will give you a mask to fill in.-- Elmidae (talk) 10:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_388&oldid=1095295363"