Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 419

Archive 415

←

Archive 417

Archive 418

Archive 419

Archive 420

Archive 421

→

Archive 425

How to declare a COI (for dummies)

Hi Please could someone give me (or direct me to) precise instructions re how to declare my COI on an article's talk page? I have never edited a wiki article before and am a bit confused by the COI stuff on the Help pages. (Is the COI Template something I click onto and fill, in or just type? If so, where do I type it?). Many thanks *ptrs4all *ptrs4all* (talk) 12:51, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, *ptrs4all*, and welcome to the Teahouse. When you are looking at the article in question, click on the "Talk" tab near the top left of the page; this will take you to the Talk page associated with that article. Then you can click "Edit" near top right, to edit that Talk page. To declare yourself as a "connected contributor", add the following text: {{Connected contributor|User1=*ptrs4all*|U1-EH=yes}}. (In this example, the "EH" stands for "edited here", i.e. you edited this article.) It is also a good idea to put some information on your User page explaining what your connection is. I hope that makes sense; please feel free to ask again if you need help or clarification.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:31, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks for the information Gronk Oz. *ptrs4all* (talk) 20:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Simple Articles I could start with to edit, add citations and hopefully make it better?

As the title says, I'd like some simple articles I could start off contributing for. Also, I am a person that likes games such as DotA 2, the Counter Strike series and sports, so I have fine knowledge in them. Dat GuyWiki (talk) 19:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Dat GuyWiki: and welcome to the Teahouse!

Some things that come to mind are the sister project Simple English Wikipedia which has articles where the language is designed to be at a simpler level than the adult level language of this project. If that is not what you meant, there is the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games . Their User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Video game page shows many articles related to video games and if you click onto the links, particularly of the Start and Stub class, I am sure there are many that could use grammar and spelling and other minor clean up. Another option is Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors , or for more basic levels of editing clean up, the pages here Category:All articles needing copy edit have been tagged as needing clean up.

thanks for your interest, and happy editing!-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC) resigning to active the ping-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:18, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser use

I have been granted permission to use AWB and have downloaded it on my Kindle fire. I have been told the download is complete, but the AWB file is not visible anywhere. Thanks, Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 15:50, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

According to WP:AWB, that tool is "for Windows operating system version Windows Vista and newer. AWB also functions reasonably well under Wine on Linux and Mac but is not officially supported." So the Kindle Fire, which runs the Android operating system, won't run AWB.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:03, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Thanks! I'll us it on my computer instead. Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 16:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

You'll love it. It took me a little while to get used to the two-stage process (build a list, process that list) and trusting the option to "Apply general fixes". But once I got used to it, it really is a wonderful tool.--Gronk Oz (talk) 22:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

"Ray Bradbury Short Story Collection" addition

Hello,

I signed up to Wikipedia ten minutes ago.

I am trying to add something to the article in this link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray_Bradbury_%28short_story_collection%29&veaction=edit&vesection=1

I thought that i could write that this book contains a famous short story known as "The Sound of Thunder", but I have to cite a source afterwards.

Is there anyway where I could use the citation for hits? NovemberSky15 (talk) 22:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

NovemberSky15, the article Ray Bradbury (short story collection) already lists "A Sound of Thunder", in the contents and links to the article A Sound of Thunder. The book serves as its own source for its contents, but if an additional sources is wanted, the ISFDB entry at http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?27435 has been confirmed against multiple reliable sources. If that isn't the information you wanted, please clarify what you are asking for. DES ^(talk) 04:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

confirmation of copyright holder's permission

Hi. An article I submitted was recently deleted for copyright reasons. If I have direct permission from the copyright holder, how do I prove it and who do I prove it to? Liveorganic1 (talk) 10:47, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Liveorganic1, Please understand that the permission we need is not to give you permission to use their material here, nor for them to give Wikipedia permission to use their non-free copyrighted material (a "one-time license"). Rather the permission we would need is an irrevocable and permanent release of the copyright to the world under a compatible free copyright license or into the public domain.

The process is described at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. In short, they (the copyright holder directly, not you) would have to provide that release in a verifiable manner that demonstrated they were the copyright holder and the release would have to be specific, such as a change of the copyright notice at the website where the material is hosted, if applicable, or an email (with their domain name included in it showing some authority e.g, if this is about Fifty Wonders of Korea, then probably kscpp.net) containing a release not unlike that found at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@Liveorganic1: another thing to consider is that as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia's purpose is different than most other writing in the world, and most other writing in the world, EVEN IF released appropriately under the proper copyright license (for everyone to use forever for whatever purpose they want for free) the text would almost never be anything like the appropriate text for an encyclopedia article and require major re-writing from top to bottom. So you can probably save yourself and the copyright holder time and effort by just paraphrasing and re-writing in your own words from the beginning. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:47, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so very much for your responses. They were very helpful. The copyright holder seems to agree that re-writing might be a better idea, so I believe that's what i'll do.

Thank you~ Liveorganic1 (talk) 07:07, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Uploading pictures that are on other Wikipedia languages

Hello dear Teahouse hosts, :-)

Even though I have quite an edit count I never really properly learned how to upload pictures, as I never really went after it. There are several pictures on another Wikipedia (Azerbaijani) which are crucial for several articles of mine here, but I have absolutely no idea how to (re-?)-upload them so that I can use them here on the English wiki!

Could anyone help me with this procedure, aka uploading them from that Wiki on the English wiki? This is one of the pictures I'm referring to. If someone could help me with this, I'm sure I can do it myself in the future afterwards.

Yours sincerely - LouisAragon (talk) 00:32, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, LouisAragon. Uploading images is quite complicated, unless you own the copyright and are willing to freely license the image. If the image is no longer copyrighted, it should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. In this case, relying on the not-always-accurate Google Translate, it looks like the photo is claimed to be free of copyright because it was published before 1923. If that is accurate, then the photo can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons for free use by anyone for any purpose. The year 1923 is kind of a "magic date" in copyright rules, as copyright has completely expired for anything published before then. To me, it looks highly likely that the photo was taken before 1923, but what is the evidence that it was published before 1923? Family photos in an album or hanging on the wall are unpublished, and copyright starts when they are first published. So that needs to be verified.

If you intend to use the photo in a biography of the person in the photo, and if the person is dead, then another option is to upload it here on English Wikipedia for use only in that biography, as fair use of a non-free image. Please read WP:NFCI #10 for details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:47, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I think that 1923 is a magic date only in the US (and on English Wikipedia because its server is in the US). But for a file to be regarded as PD on Commons, it must be PD in both the US and in the country of first publication; so 1923 is a magic date on Commons only for works first published in the US. —teb728 t c 11:06, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

User.css and User.js

Hi Teahouse, I am a very new editor on wikipedia and I want to know how to create a User subpage with the user.css and/or user.js tag.Zyc1174 (talk) 13:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Zyc1174. If you click on any of the following you will be transported to the relevant pages: Special:Mypage/common.css, Special:Mypage/common.js, Special:Mypage/skin.css and Special:Mypage/skin.js. The first two will be where any code/script added will apply to any skin you have set, even if you switch between them. The second two will take you to your CSS and JS pages for the particular skin you have set currently, but will not apply unless using that skin. If you wanted to go to these pages without the special pages, alias "trick" I used, you would just need to recognize that a subpage is any page where some title is added after a forward slash. For the user: namespace, that will always be User:Zyc1174/SOMETHING Then you would just learn the normal name form of these special types of subpages and then create them. For example, by saving or previewing a red link to User:Zyc1174/vector.js (if you use Vector). See Wikipedia:How to create a page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:07, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

How does one insert a superscript number, say "1" at the end of a sentence and then provide the reference data, in this case a PNAS paper form 1979?

In attempting to create a biographical page, Michael R. Lerner, I've run afoul of various wiki rules. For starters, references are needed. How does one add a superscript number at the end of a sentence, or even better, at the end of a specific word within a sentence? Next, how does one create a reference list and add references? By way of a specific example, there is a wiki article titled "snRNP". In it there is the name "Michael R. Lerner". If the name is clicked it takes you to the page I'm attempting to construct. Within it, there is the word "snRNP". That has now been linked back to the snRNP page. However, I also want to add a reference to snRNPs as superscript [1} with the references being: [1] Lerner MR, Steitz JA (November 1979). "Antibodies to small nuclear RNAs complexed with proteins are produced by patients with systemic lupus erythematosus". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 76 (11): 5495–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.76.11.5495. PMC 411675. PMID 316537.

Thank, Mike Lerner BurOak496 (talk) 16:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi BurOak496, and welcome to the Teahouse. The procedure for adding references is described at Help:Referencing for beginners. However, I would warn you that creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged, per Wikipedia:Autobiography. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, BurOak496, and welcome to the Teahouse. I recommend you read User:Yunshui/References for beginners.

You can also, while editing the page, put your cursor where you want the ^[#] to appear, then click "Cite" in the blue bar at the top of the editing window, then click "Templates" in the second blue bar that opens. Choose from Cite book, Cite journal, Cite news or Cite web based on whther you're citing a book, academic journal, newspaper/magazine, or a website that's not any of those. This opens up a handy fill-in0the-blanks form that will format the citation for you. Note that in the edit window, it won't look like ^[#]; it will look like

<ref>{{cite something|author=Somebody|title=Something|url=http://example.com|date=sometime|page=#}}</ref>

Good luck, and don't hesitate to return to the Teahouse with any further questions. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 16:42, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

small edit to page name

Hello,

I'm editing a page, and I would like to add a dash to the page name. It's currently "coregualtion" and I would like it to be "co-regulation." Is this possible? I tried {{DISPLAYTITLE:Co-Regulation}}, to no effect. Thank you!

Amanda.norona (talk) 22:34, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi again Amanda.norona, you will have to do a move. Simply click the more button on the upper right corner of your screen and then click on the move tab which will drop down. You then type the correct title, an explanation of why the page needed the move, and click 'move page'. That's all! White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 22:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

White Arabian Filly is correct, Amanda.norona, but you can only move a page once your account has been autoconfirmed, which requires you to have been registered for four days and to have made ten edits. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:38, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, thanks for pointing that out. It appears that Amanda.norona was already autoconfirmed and did the move. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 23:44, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Amanda.norona is not autoconfirmed yet, but Theroadislong moved it. Keep making good edits and you will soon gain this right, Amanda.norona. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

What makes you say that Amanda.norona is not autoconfirmed yet, @Cordless Larry:? It looks to me as if she would have been autoconfirmed before she asked the question here. If you were expecting to see the autoconfirmed right in the user list to which you linked, I think you'll find it wouldn't be listed there (see, for example, your own user account). - David Biddulph (talk) 08:11, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

A late night confusion of the words autoconfirmed and autopatrolled, David Biddulph! Apologies for the confusion, all. I did think that it looked like Amanda.norona had met the criteria, so wondered why "autoconfirmed" wasn't showing up in their user rights when it appeared to do so in mine. I must have just been reading "autopatrolled" as "autoconfirmed" with my tired eyes. Apologies again. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:17, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the help, everyone!

Amanda.norona (talk) 17:29, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Information to include (or not) in an article to comply with WP:BLP

Hello, Teahouse colleagues. I was going to post a longer explanation of this situation here, but my question got "eaten" (did not post) so I'll be brief. This article, which Checkingfax, long-time IP user 71.41.210.146 and I (among others) have been working on, includes some information I'm concerned may not properly belong in the article, based on WP:BLP, particularly the sections on Presumption in favor of privacy and People who are relatively unknown.

One piece of information regards an indictment against one of the suspects, years before the shooting and unrelated to the shooting, which did not lead to a conviction; the other is an allegation that the surviving victim threatened one of the suspects prior to the day of the shooting, but there is only one witness claiming the threat was made (though multiple media outlets have reported this claim) and the victim has not been charged with making any threats.

Short answers here are welcome; more involved analysis might more properly belong at Talk:Shooting of Jeremy Mardis#Allegations about living people: How careful does WP:BLP require us to be? (or be included both places). Thanks in advance to all who help sort this situation out. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 17:38, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Autism Parents Association of Trinidad and Tobago

I declined Draft:Autism Parents Association of Trinidad and Tobago, citing inadequate references and so failure to demonstrate corporate notability. I was asked on my talk page by its author, User: Bordeglobal, why I had declined it, with the following note: “I am confused why this has been rejected. You have a similar organization listed in the SAME format and yet is listed: here I put the government act it was approved by as well as the news article telling about the organization and its notable inclusion (see External links) perhaps you missed that? I will please need a specific reason rather than general. APATT has a general News page to show their impact here but I do not know if you accept that.”

I ask for the comments of other experienced editors, but I don’t see any independent coverage of its notability. It also appears that the reference to Autistic Society of Trinidad and Tobago has two problems. First, it is just WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, and because one article is in article space does not mean that the first article or a second article should be in article space. Second, the cited article has been tagged for seven years as unsourced. I will be tagging that article for Articles for Deletion. Comments?

I will also note that the article that I declined had been in article space, was then tagged for speedy deletion and was then speedy-deleted, so that my assessment in draft space is consistent with the assessment in article space (not ready for article space).

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:31, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

User: Bordeglobal, you need to provide references that demonstrate significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. In the meantime, I'll take a look at Autistic Society of Trinidad and Tobago, if that's the other article that you are referring too. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:38, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I have done a quick rewrite of Autistic Society of Trinidad and Tobago, based on reliable sources. You'll see that the society has been covered in third-party sources including a book, User: Bordeglobal. That's what you need to demonstrate for the Autism Parents Association of Trinidad and Tobago if that topic is to be judged notable according to Wikipedia's criteria. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I think there's supposed to be a source noted at the end on every part of the content on wikipedia but quite often I ran into paragraphs that are not necessary correct and without any source marked.

Please advise if I got it wrong. For example, on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina , there's no source cited at the end of the first paragraph. Is that allowed? Thanks for your time in advance! Rounder (talk) 17:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Rounder and welcome to the Teahouse. You are right in that generally speaking every information that is likely to be challenged should contain proper sources (usually at the end of the paragraph). The one exception however are the very first paragraphs before the first section (so, the text before the section "Origin of the expression" in your example). The very first paragraphs of an articles are called the "lead" of the article and they intend to summarize the main points of the article, that are already made in the body of the article with proper sources. Every point in the lead should thus be found somewhere below along with the source for that information. Sometimes, some information in the lead is not repeated later in the article (typically technical details that are not discussed in detail, such as the proper pronunciations in Deus ex machina), and in that case the source should be present in the lead. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 17:13, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome Rounder. There is no requirement to cite sources for any content on Wikipedia (subject to the quote below), although preemptive citing may be advisable to avoid reversions or heavy editing. Early articles on Wikipedia had no references period.

Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations, anywhere in article space

‍—‌Citing sources

If you know something is wrong, fix it. If your fix is likely to be contentious, cite it. Talk about your concerns on the Talk page of the article before or after your fixes. If the content is unfixable and damaging to the encyclopedia, remove it. Otherwise tag it for somebody else to fix if you cannot fix it. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:50, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

matchpoint nyc

i wrote an article about a local sports facility that I use after noticing it does not have a wikipedia description but it was flagged for speedy deletion, although i did not advertise any sales just a quick description of the place . what needs to be corrected in order for the page to remain active? Stanislavzarubin (talk) 23:01, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Stanislavzarubin, you will have to provide a couple of reliable sources, like articles in newspapers or magazines about that facility, to be able to keep the article. See WP:SOURCE. Also, you can read some other resources like WP:Your first article to get an idea of what you need. From my scan of the article, I can see that it doesn't have sources and may not meet notability. If it's a popular facility in New York City, however, it probably meets notability and what you really need are sources and a more formal tone in the article (also see WP:Tone). White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 23:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Stanislavzarubin. Please understand that on Wikipedia, "promotional" does not mean just commercial advertising (although it surely includes that) but also any text intended to talk up or push or advocate for an entity, product, cause or concept. Also, You must not simply copy content from other sites unless explicit permission under a free license has been given, and even then it is usually a bad idea. DES ^(talk) 00:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Creating a new article

Hello fellow wikipedians! I'm a newbie here and I created a new article called "Portuguese Romanesque Architecture". I wanted to make it as reliable as possible by adding citations and truthful sources. That article was marked for speedy deletion and I wanted to know what I can do to avoid that. Thank you for your help PedroLopFonMarAlves (talk) 16:24, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@PedroLopFonMarAlves: the speedy deletion issue appears to be taken care of. however, the issue of Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia still needs to be addressed, and verifying claims by providing citations to reliably published sources . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:54, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm taking care of that now, if there's any other issue please inform me, as it seems I need to comply to a series of requirements that might escape me. Regards (PedroLopFonMarAlves (talk) 16:56, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey PedroLopFonMarAlves. I don't see a fix of the copyright issue (though a few hours have passed). Have you read the page TRPoD linked – and especially the section at the shortcut WP:PATT? In short, you will need to fix this with one or more dummy edits, providing copyright attribution in your edit summary, which links to the source of the copying and states that you coped material from there. You can emulate something like this. If more than one existing Wikipedia article was copied from, you can note each source of copying in a separate dummy edit (as to do a full job, you would not have room in the edit summary for more than one). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:54, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I do see this edit and appreciate that this appears to be an attempt to address the issue. However, the edit summary must link (a link is provided by placing a titles in doubled brackets like so: [[Architecture of Portugal]]). The issue is that the source of copying – where the list of authors is accessible from the page history, i.e., where those who own the copyright to the content you've copied – must be very directly made accessible in order to comply with the free copyright licenses [most of] the content here is co-licensed under.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:00, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

I did it again, with the double brackets, but I don't know if I'm doing it right, nothing changed. It does appear in between "" but not a link. PedroLopFonMarAlves (talk) 20:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit, hi! I thought I had done it already, I did just like the tutorial: On the edit summary I stated the wikipedia page from where I copied the text. I will check that again. Thanks for the tip! PedroLopFonMarAlves (talk) 20:01, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

the above comment had inadvertently gotten placed in the wrong section, moved to the ongoing conversation about the subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey again PedroLopFonMarAlves. You did a good job. Thank you. Your new edit summary does indeed link to the source article. I'm not sure why you might have thought it did not but that diff comes from the page history where you can see all other edits and each edit summary used. Thanks again--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:32, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

I can see it as well now too. Something related to page reloading. Thanks again for your help, if you check something out of order feel free to warn me. Cheers! PedroLopFonMarAlves (talk) 20:41, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Greetings PedroLopFonMarAlves, I believe the article title should be downcased like this: Portuguese romanesque architecture or maybe like this: Portuguese Romanesque architecture. Per: Wikipedia:Article titles. You can do a page "Move" to change it if needed. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Checkingfax! I already did it, I downcased it like this: Portuguese Romanesque architecture", thanks for warning nevertheless. (PedroLopFonMarAlves (talk) 02:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Change in format and content to pages like /wiki/November_2015.

Pages like /wiki/November_2015 used to give a detailed description of each day in the month. It is now being redirected to a section within the year.

Considerably less info.

Where can I find the "old" page. Hard to believe it has been dropped...

TIA

ZermattMan (talk) 02:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey ZermattMan. For a discussion of this issue, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Using archives of Portal:Current events for month articles. If you want to check whether there used to be an article for any particular month, e.g., January 2013, when you navigate there and are redirected to 2013, you will see at the top of the page, just below the page's title, "(Redirected from January 2013)" Click on that linked (blue) text to access the redirect. Once there, access its page history and click on the revision before it was redirected. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Article title incorrect

How do I change an article title? My article about SAP S/4HANA recently went live but with an incorrect title of "4HANA". So the “S/” is missing from the title, the "S/" is important because it signifies that it is a “suite” of software. Some where along the editing, someone removed the "S/". The page should be called "SAP S/4HANA" (you will see the rest of the info in the text refers to it as SAP S/4HANA too). I contacted the editor (SwisterTwister) last week but still no response/edit, can you help make change it from 4HANA to SAP S/4HANA? Many thanks! Olivia0452 (talk) 17:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)Olivia0452

You will have to move it, Olivia0452. (Click here for more information) Frank (User Page) (talk) 17:28, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

But she won't be able to move it yet, as she needs more edits to become autoconfirmed. Note also that with a slash in the article name there might be slight confusion in regard to the talk page, see WP:NC-SLASH (in that Talk:SAP S/4HANA, if it existed, would presumably have a link to the non-existent page Talk:SAP S). David Biddulph (talk) 18:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I suggest that we instead move it ot the "full" name of "SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA" which avoids the issues with a name containing a slash, and is less cryptic as well. Olivia0452, would you object to this? If not, I will do the move. DES ^(talk) 23:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Imfrankliu, David Biddulph, and DESiegel: What if we try to cover all bases and do the following as the title: SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA (SAP S/4HANA) . Would that work too? Olivia0452 (talk) 09:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Olivia0452

The key question is what is its WP:COMMONNAME? That's what should be used as the article's title per guidelines.--ukexpat (talk) 13:58, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@Olivia0452: That would have the same problem of containing a slash. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Interestingly, I see that the article has been moved and Talk:SAP S/4HANA does now exist, but it doesn't have the spurious link to Talk:SAP S which WP:NC-SLASH suggests it would have. Does anyone understand why? - David Biddulph (talk) 14:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

WP:NC-SLASH says that "if an article has a forward slash in its name, its corresponding talk page may display a redundant subpage level-up link at the top". I'm not sure why it's may and what that depends on, but it seems that it's not the case here. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@David Biddulph:, so now that Talk:SAP S/4HANA exists the page has been corrected to have the correct SAP S/4HANA title? Am I understanding that correctly? Otherwise, I guess the name "SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA" would also be OK as a page title (although "SAP S/4HANA" is more commonly used but if it causes problems... then "SAP Business Suite 4 SAP HANA" is fine). Thanks for all the help trying to sort this out, appreciate it. Olivia0452 (talk) 06:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Olivia0452

The article has been moved to SAP S/4HANA as you originally requested, and there don't appear to be any consequential problems, so there is no need to look for any less commonly used name. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

should i create this article ?

Xiamen university Xiang'an campus .It is second campus of xiamen university.Its quiet big and there is no information about it on wikipedia.Dr. Pankaj Sharma (talk) 12:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Dr. Pankaj Sharma, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and consider, has this campus been written about in several published independent reliable sources that are not merely local, with significant coverage, say at least several paragraphs, in each? This means not blogs, not publications of the university itself, not directory entries, and not purely local newspapers. It means publications with editorial control and a reputation for accuracy. In other words, is this topic notable? If and only if the answer is "yes" should you consider an article. In which case please also read Your First Article and Referencing for Beginners. Alternatively, the campus could be included in the existing article about the university. DES ^(talk) 12:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Tag

My first submission was tagged - Speedy Deletion. No understanding of why. Not sure it was submitted correctly in total or whether references were adequate or correctly inserted.

Subject matter Chadwick Mobile Digital Mall explains new patented mobile digital technology. Can someone help with 2nd attempt? Robertson Drew (talk) 10:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Robertson Drew, I'm not sure that you have correctly understood what a reference is in this context. The references section of Chadwick Mobile Digital Mall contains a list of e-mail addresses. References should list the details of sources for the material in the article, such as newspaper articles, books, etc. While the article you created has not yet been deleted, I would suggest having a read of Wikipedia:Your first article and perhaps following the procesdure for creating an article that is outlined there. That will take you via the drafts process, where you can get feedback on your proposed article and not have to worry about speedy deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Regarding this question, Robertson Drew, to remove the e-mail references, you just need to edit the article and delete that content from the edit window. Instructions on how to insert proper references are given at Help:Referencing for beginners. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

That said, a Google search returns no results for "Chadwick Mobile Digital Mall", apart from pages related to the Wikipedia article. That doesn't bode well for the availability of references, Robertson Drew, unless a different name is being used? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry, Robertson Drew, but I have deleted this as being excessively promotional. It also violated WP:CRYSTAL in that it was about a product not yet released, without any evidence of significant outside discussion on the planned release. In fact, it read like a press release. If you want to try again, I urge you to first read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article, then if you think the article can establish notability of its topic, assemble a list of independent reliable sources that have covered the topic in some detail. Then and only then, use the article wizard to create a draft under the Articles for Creation project. This allows the draft to be improved without being subject to all the deletion criteria until it is reviewed and accepted by an experienced editor. DES ^(talk) 12:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Making an article live in search engines.

Dear Representatives, I'm Trying to write a information flowing article of my Idol (Local Actor/director) from Nepal. And i guess, i made it up with good contents too, but when i search it in search engines like Google or Yahoo i couldn't find the listing of the particular article. Hope you will guide me in a ease way, Wikipedia Article name : Arpan Thapa Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpan_Thapa

regards, Nikhil AkhilThakuri (talk) 07:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, AkhilThakuri. Wikipedia has no direct influence on how Google or Yahoo will display search results. They determine that with their own algorithms. In my experience, a Wikipedia article will usually display high in an online search. The most likely way to make a specific Wikipedia article display higher in search engine results is to improve and expand the article.

I live in California, and when I search Google for "Arpan Thapa", the Wikipedia article about him is #7 on the search list. That isn't bad. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The way to link to a Wikipedia page is to provide a wikilink; [[Arpan Thapa]] renders as Arpan Thapa. Your question about Google and Yahoo needs to be addressed to Google and to Yahoo, not to Wikipedia, but you may find that it will take a little while for their databases to be updated. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi AkhilThakuri, when I search with Google for Arpan Thapa from Sweden the article is right there on the first page. As Cullen328 points out, the time it takes before the servers in a country pick up on a new article varies. I'm sure it will pop up in Nepal soon. Also, when David Biddulph wrote about a Wikilink, that link has nothing to do with Google or Yahoo. It should not be in the article itself (I have removed it now) it is the way other articles in the Wikipedia links to the article. w.carter-Talk 10:10, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi AkhilThakuri, when I want to find something quick on Wikipedia I go to Google or Bing and type in:

Arpan Thapa Wikipedia, or if I'm feeling lazy I type in: arpan thapa wiki

Your actor shows up #2 on Google this way. Arpan Thapa is indexed. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Wikipedians for all the suggestion and effort that you have made to lead my article with a proper guidelines.

Hope for future talks, regards, AkhilThakuri (talk) 05:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

But let's not forget that we don't really care about search engine rankings. We are here to build an encyclopedia.--ukexpat (talk) 14:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Colourful names

Some editors have colourful names in Talk Pages. Eden's Apple (talk) 14:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Eden's Apple, you can get a colorful name yourself by going to Special:Preferences and changing your signature there. Be sure to check the box that says "treat the above as Wikimarkup", or it won't work. For a full description of what's allowed and disallowed in signatures, see WP:SIG--some colors, particularly very light ones, are not allowed because they are too hard for others to read. Hope that helped you. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 14:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Eden's Apple and welcome to the Teahouse. For customizing your signature you will find information at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing your signature, there is also this page: Wikipedia:Smurrayinchester's signature tutorial on how it's done and where you can find examples of signatures. When you have entered the new signature at "Preferences → User profile", the four tildes will automatically create the signature when you type them and click on save. w.carter-Talk 14:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Is there a place for help on leads?

Hey guys! Name's DannyMusicEditor. I mostly edit articles strictly related to music, mostly rock and metal at that, but there are exceptions. Recently, I have been wanting to help Thirty Seconds to Mars' third album, This Is War, become a GA article. However, it has a very poor lead, and I would like to know how to get some help to fix that (I'm just as poor at writing them). dannymusiceditor ^{~talk to me!~} 19:34, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: welcome to the teahouse!

The guidance for lead sections is at WP:LEAD. Essentially the first sentence should provide the Who/what/Where/When essentials about the subject of the article (not necessarily the Why because that can get too complicated to work into a simple sentence), and then the rest of the lead should summarize the rest of the article (The Why can be detailed here). Often times the content we have for singles and albums does not necessitate anything other than a "lead" - artificially creating a "body" that merely is section bloat. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:10, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome indeed, DannyMusicEditor. There is a good summary essay on creating leads here: WP:CREATELEAD initially created by a Wikipedia editor BullRangifer to help other editors cut through the more official MOSLEAD guidelines. It has a handy table for creating a lead too. A lead is supposed to include elements of each section of an article in summary form. Encyclopedia sentences are easy to write: e.g.- John Smith drove his car to the store. No need to get flowerly. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:30, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Checkingfax for the WP:CREATELEAD mention above. I updated the Wikipedia:Tip of the day/November 24 tip accordingly. Cheers! JoeHebda (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

What is "hasten the day" in Wikiculture?

I have heard this phrase a few times "hasten the day" most recently in that one candidate for Arbitrator was called a "hasten the day" candidate. What is the meaning of this phrase? SageRad (talk) 13:11, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi SageRad, welcome to the Teahouse. "hasten the day" is an English expression and doesn't have a more specific meaning in wikiculture. wiktionary:hasten#Verb means to make something happen quicker, and "hasten the day" means to make it happen on an earlier day. I think it's usually used by people who consider the anticipated event to be revolutionary, whether in a good or bad way. At Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/Candidates/Gamaliel/Questions#Question from DoggySoup, the poster indicated what they meant in the next sentence. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer, but i guess i don't understand your answer because i don't see the explanation of what was meant there in the poster's question. Hmm... i have surely heard this term around within Wikipedia recently, a couple times. Thanks for the try. SageRad (talk) 14:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

SageRad, as I've seen it used, it's a philosophy that the arbitration committee needs to come to an end--perhaps to be replaced by something else, perhaps not--and so their preferred candidates are the ones they believe would be most disruptive to the committee either because they are viewed as opinionated, intransigent or because they wouldn't work well with other members of the committee. It's an approach you can see in the essay WP:DYNAMITE. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

@SageRad: I saw the talkback on your talk page, and came here from that. Actually, the answer is a little different from what other editors here have said. There is a very specific meaning that has arisen in Wiki-culture, but it mostly arose at other websites, not here. (Poor me, I've been on Wikipedia so long that I know about this.) It is primarily a slogan that used to be used on forum board discussions at Wikipedia Review and continues to be used at Wikipediocracy. It is used there, often by people who have become very alienated from past experiences as Wikipedia editors, to denote "the day" when the English Wikipedia and all the Wikimedia projects (and not just ArbCom) go out of business, when the websites go dark. It is used pejoratively with respect to Wikipedia. One typical usage would be that when someone trolls on Wikipedia, they are doing something good, because by harming Wikipedia, they are "hastening the day". Another would be, that if so-and-so gets elected to ArbCom or becomes an administrator, or if some particularly odious decision is made by ArbCom, that it will contribute to the downfall of the project, proving that the critics of Wikipedia were right all along. If you look closely at the GMO PD talk page, you will see that one editor made a post, lambasting the PD, and referring to "hasten the day" in the sense that the editor thinks a bad decision will hasten the downfall of the project. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Want to Create a personal-info page

I am an actor and I likely to create one here on Wiki like other actors do. Plz help me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Upasanamohanty/sandbox Upasanamohanty 18:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Upasanamohanty (talk • contribs)

Hello Upasanamohanty, Wikipedia doesn't have "personal-info pages". It has articles, about notable subjects, that include information derived from reliable sources. It strongly discourages autobiography and other articles where the contributor has a conflict of interest. If you have been covered at some length in newspapers, magazines, or comparable web publications, then an article could be written, but User:Upasanamohanty/sandbox isn't even a good start for such an article, I'm afraid. For one thing, an actual article about an actor would give the actor's real name, or stage name, or most likely both. What you have linked might be appropriate for a facebook page, or some other personal site, but not, I'm afraid, for Wikipedia. See WP:NOTWEBHOST. DES ^(talk) 18:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. You have obviously misunderstood what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not here as a website which you can use for advertising and promotion. Please read the advice, and various links, on your user talk page. I see that you have told another editor that you want to advertise yourself as an actor. You therefore need to read Wikipedia's views of autobiography and of conflict of interest. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

world's richest country in 1900

Why Has the British empire depleted it's monetary to become one of the poorest country's in the list of richest today as they were in the 1900 2.24.72.227 (talk) 20:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is a place to learn and ask questions about editing Wikipedia. Could you please explain the issue you have in a bit more detail, such as whether your comment relates to a specific article? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

If you have a general question like that which is not about editing articles, you should ask it at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities and they will try to answer it for you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Creating an article

I wish to create an article on the physicist René Wurmser. However, I do not know whether this article is needed or not. Is there a place where I can discuss this with other Wikipedians? The Pokémon Fan (talk) 14:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

You could ask at WP:WikiProject Physics. However, in searching Wikipedia, I see that several articles refer to him. If you have reliable sources to construct a biography, please create it via Articles for Creation and, if it is good, it will probably be approved. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, The Pokémon Fan, and welcome to the Teahouse. Whether René Wurmser is an appropriate candidate for a Wikipedia article depends on whether he met Wikipedia's Golden Rule — that is, whether articles and/or books by reliable publishers have discussed him and his work in some detail. A quick look in Google showed several possible sources, but most of them are in French, which I can't read. The good news is that references cited on English Wikipedia can be in any language so long as they are both relevant and reliable sources.

If M. Wurmer was indeed notable enough (as Wikipedia defines notability), then you can create an article so long as you cite sources which demonstrate his notability. I see that the French Wikipedia already has an article on René Wurmser; if you understand French well enough, you're welcome to translate some or all of the content of that article for an article here at English Wikipedia, though you would have to attribute translated content properly. Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Translating from other language Wikimedia projects explains how to do this. There are only two sources cited in the French article, which is generally not enough at English Wikipedia unless one of the sources is a book entirely devoted to the subject of the article. But those sources may be useful, if you can access them (there are no links to them at French Wikipedia, so they may not be available online; offline sources are also allowed, though online sources and sources in English are preferred). Thank you for your interest in improving Wikipedia, and feel free to return with any futher questions you have. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 15:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The Pokémon Fan, A quick books.google.com search [1] suggests a definite likelihood that there are enough sources even in English that discuss him to merit an article and if one has access to French sources, too ... well! In addition to the Articles for Creation mentioned earlier, see also Wikipedia:Your first article -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

from what I see in the previews, it looks like he might be more of a physiologist than a physicist so you might want to try at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biology as well. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

correction to an article

> The table of winners in the article: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporting_News_Executive_of_the_Year_Award shows 1962 > winner Fred Haney as representing the Los Angeles Dodgers of the National League > when, in fact, it was the Los Angels of the American League. > Per your article about Haney: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Haney "Then, the following year, the American > League granted an expansion team to Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Angels, and its owner, Gene Autry, chose Haney to operate the team and its organization for him. While the Angels usually struggled on the playing field during Haney's tenure as GM from 1961 to 1968, they did finish a surprising third in 1962, and contended for the 1967 pennant as well."79.176.148.187 (talk) 00:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The two articles disagree, but neither article has any references supporting this information. Any baseball fans out there know of a suitable reference that can resolve this?--Gronk Oz (talk) 03:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done - Found it in the "Baseball Almanac", in External links of Sporting_News_Executive_of_the_Year_Award. LA Angels it is - I have made that change to the article. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, anonymous IP editor. --Gronk Oz (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)