Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 609

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 605 ← Archive 607 Archive 608 Archive 609 Archive 610 Archive 611 → Archive 615

New Entry

How do I add a new entry for example for a news personality in a tv channel that does have its own article but the people from it don't.M1363b (talk) 22:37, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello M1363b and welcome to the Teahouse.
One approach would be to add material about the news personality to the existing article about the TV station. At the point where there appears to be sufficient well-sourced material to substantiate the person's notability, it could then be moved out into an article about the specific person. Trying to create the article without sufficient support for notability will usually result in the article being deleted, which is frustrating to both the editor creating the article and the other editors who must delete it in order to follow Wikipedia policies. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Did I properly link other pages to my article to 'un-orphan' it?

Good day my fellow editors!

I tried linking 3 different wikipedia pages to my only published wikipedia article but the site still says it is an orphan. Am I linking them the wrong way?

This sure is a learning curve...

Thank you all,

MarthaDaisy MarthaDaisy (talk) 23:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi MarthaDaisy and welcome to the Teahouse. The orphan tags are added/removed manually by editors. Once it no longer applies, any editor can remove it- I have done so. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:41, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

I work for Berry Global and I am wanting to update our Wikipedia page. The two main things I need to accomplish are to update the "Berry Plastics" to "Berry Global, Inc." on the top of the page. There is also an image of our old logo to the right of the page. I need to have that updated to reflect our new logo as well. 40.136.42.66 (talk) 13:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hello, IP editor. First of all, since you work for Berry Global, you must familiarize yourself with the mandatory disclosure described in that link. In particular, if you have edited the page or connected articles before, you need to disclose it in the manner prescribed. You are also extremely strongly encouraged to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before making future edits.
Also, although the changes you suggest look fairly non-controversial, I must warn you: Berry Plastics is not "your" page and you do not "need" to do anything. If other editors disagree with your proposed changes with arguments founded in Wikipedia policy, they won't happen, no matter what your employer required from you. You have no more control over content about you that Joe from London does, except for very few specific cases (e.g. copyright violations) which do not apply here.
I performed the edits you requested, both of which require the autoconfirmed access level:
  1. The change of page title is called "moving" a page, I did it here. Notice that I did not do so just because you requested, but because the specialized press has picked up the new name.
  2. The logo in the page is included by the {{Infobox company|...}} code in the page, which contains logo = [[File:Berryplastics.png]] , meaning the image located at File:Berryplastics.png is used. I uploaded the new version, in a low-resolution version per this guidance on copyrighted content. TigraanClick here to contact me 14:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Is there a way to update the logo to the new and current logo? Also is there a way to update the headquarters picture? The headquarters of Berry has changed. I can provide images if need be. KaSandraMilitello (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
While I might be wrong on this, it appears s/he did change the logo, though it was a lower resolution for the reasons stated above. I do not believe there is a way to use a higher resolution version without making it open source (which is a bad idea for most corporations). The same goes for the picture of your headquarters, though making that open source is likely harmless. Creeper Ninja (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

P.S. It would still be advisable to handle any WP:COI issues by stating your affiliation on your user page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creeper Ninja (talk • contribs) 20:10, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

I've just copyedited the article, fairly extensively. The paragraph about the purchase of Rexam was a close paraphrase of the source. I did a fair bit of copyediting to make it less close and to tighten up prose. Also, the source says "In millions of dollars, except as otherwise x", so I changed "$351 ($340, net of cash acquired)" from dollars to megabucks. Aren't you glad we have a culture of checking and correcting?) See Talk:Berry Global, Inc. (but it's almost the same as this note). --Thnidu (talk) 23:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

What is the reason for not having WikiProject related to field hockey,only ice hockey is available?

I try to create articles related to hockey teams such as Namibia,UAE,Uganda etc.I would like to share something relating to hockey through WikiProjectAbishe (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Abishe. WikiProjects can be started by anyone. Right now, there hasn't been interest among editors to start a WikiProject about field hockey. If you'd like to start one, please read Wikipedia:WikiProject#Creating_and_maintaining_a_project for some good tips. --NeilN talk to me 16:19, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
@ User:NeilN,thanks for your advices.But I will look for some time if I get the idea of creating WikiProject Hockey.Thank You.Abishe (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Copy and pasting paragraphs from one article to another.

Hi there teahouse I am just wondering whether you accept editors copy and pasting paragraphs from one Wikipedia article to another without changes? The 'Cartwheels in a sari' article has 3 paragraphs copy and pasted directly from the 'Sri Chinmoy' article. Seems a bit odd? Maryanne881 (talk) 05:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Maryanne881. It is acceptable to do that (providing that it makes sense for the material to be added to the article concerned, of course), but the material should be attributed with a link to the original article in the edit summary. This is covered by Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. If you know or suspect that this attribution did not take place, then there are instructions for dealing with this at WP:RIA. The revision history search tool, which you can access easily via any article's history page, can come in handy for trying to work out who did the copying and when. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
I've taken a closer look, and the material was added by Softlavender with this edit, and the edit summary gave proper attribution ("added info from Sri Chinmoy article"), so that's all good. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:25, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

How to respond when my Talk page comment is edited by another?

Forgive me, this is the first time I've asked a question here.

What is the accepted response when one's comment on a Talk page has been edited by another person?

Am I wrong to believe that this sort of thing is frowned upon? When I discovered this had happened, I pressed the Talk history page's "undo" button for the session that had edited my comment - something I've never done before. I was incensed that the other editor had done this.

Then, I got nervous and worried that I'd erased some useful work (this is a Talk page) that had been added since my comment was vandalized, so I "undid" my own "undo". What a goof! Actually, I think that no damage was done.

What should I do? I've been an occasional editor for more than ten years but I've never had someone vandalize one of my comments before. The page in question is Talk:Jed_York. Rt3368 (talk) 10:43, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Indeed it is wrong Rt3368, user warned, no need to be nervous. Lil Johnny (talk) (contribs) 11:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


(EC) @Rt3368: Your comment at Talk:Jed_York#Okay, it's not an article on quantum field theory, but... has a timestamp of 15:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC). At that moment the sentence in the article you were refering at the Talk page, was:
It has been reported that York and Harbaugh had a clash in the personality department.
(Revision from 30 November/1 December night of 2015, the date depends on the timezone you are in)
just as you wrote it. And it looks exactly the same today, in revision from 20 April 2017. So you're absolutely right to restore your comment to the original form.
If the sentence had been changed in the meantime, the other editor might want to fit the comment to the current article contents. But even then I think the direct replacing your comment would be inappropriate and I'd strongly recommend to add a new version instead, with a clear reference to a specific revision of the article, either by the revision id. or date (or with a link, as I did above). --CiaPan (talk) 11:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Rt3368. As explained in WP:TPO, there are certain specific cases where it may be acceptable to edit another editor's talk page post, but these primarily have to do with fixing formatting errors, accidental damage, removing prohibited content, etc. An editor should never refactor another editor's in any manner which might change its meaning. Even simple corrections such as fixing a typo or adding a period should be avoided even in the spirit of just trying to be helpful. If this happens again, just remember to assume good faith and post a reminder to the other editor that this kind of thing is not considered acceptable; linking to WP:TPO may even be a good idea. As to your own posts, you can change them if you like, but you should keep in mind WP:REDACT and be careful when changing a post which has already been responded to. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

All, thanks very much for this attention and for the good advice. Rt3368 (talk) 06:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

improving entry

hello, I got some feedback on my first entry "MAG Interactive". How can I improve it?

[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. (April 2017) This article needs more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia. (April 2017) This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. (April 2017)

Erinfears (talk) 07:39, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

In the notices to which you refer, in the box at the top of MAG Interactive, the words in blue are wikilinks to pages which will give you further advice on each of the problems. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

I have made fixes to the article , but do not feel comfortable to remove the maintenance template myself. Can someone review that the issues seem fixed and remove the maintenance template?Erinfears (talk) 08:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Article Rejected - Non-English sources ok?

My article on a new-founded company with 11,000 employees was rejected as not being notable and possibly being marketing. I feel that a company of that size is notable. Anyway, the rejecters asked me to add better sources, which I understand. Problem is that the really good sources, which there are some of, are in German. Is this a problem? Is it advisable to add them anyways?BraasMonier (talk) 16:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@BraasMonier: English sources are preferred, but non-English sources are allowed. RudolfRed (talk) 16:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello, BraasMonier. As RudolfRed says, you may use non-English source if there are not good-quality English ones. But note that they must have significant coverage of the subject, and be independent of it. That's what notability means in Wikipedia-land, not your (or my) feeling that a company is notable. If it is a newly founded company, it is unlikely (though not impossible) that it is yet notable. --ColinFine (talk) 09:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Where can I find deleted Page?

I had created a page of an actress which got deleted. Where can I find that page ?Indira1993 (talk) 06:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Indira1993. You can't: that's what "deleted" means. However, if you go to Special:Log/delete you can type in the name of the article, and it will give you the log of the deletion. Depending on the reason for deletion, that may point you to a discussion which resulted in its deletion; or if it was deleted according to one of the short-cut deletion processes, it will have a link to the explanation of the reason. In any case, it will tell you who was the admin that actually performed the deletion, and you can ask them for more information on their user talk page. In some circumstances, the admin may agree to restore the content in a user page, so that you can work on it. --ColinFine (talk) 09:16, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
So only admins can see the deleted content? Or is there a secret trick for normal users, too? Thank you --boarders paradise (talk) 13:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Only admins can see deleted content. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:56, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! --boarders paradise (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Is it ok to make interwiki links to an article multiple times on the same article?

What is the best practice for making multiple interwiki links to a single article? I've seen that it's usually the case that you put an interwiki link on the first mention of a topic on an article, but I've also seen the case that an article gets multiple links within a single article. Obviously, putting too many links is not a good idea, but sometimes it's helpful, like with people's names. What is the best thing to do in these cases? 203.190.218.33 (talk) 08:34, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello anonymous editor and welcome to the Teahouse.
The best practice is to use good judgment: usually the first link is the only link and that's considered sufficient, but there are some exceptions, such as lists or infoboxes, where the consideration "for the convenience of the reader" allows for additional links. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 09:25, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Usually a link in the lede (if appropriate) and one in the body of the text is sufficient. Exceptions are lists and very long articles. Mjroots (talk) 14:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Football players vs Youtubers

A little hypocrisy I noticed that really disturbs me.

A large number of pages about "professional" football players being created every single day. Low quality references being used to backup information on those pages, in most cases - spammy sport directories. It seems like as long as page is about football player, and as long as it has at least one reference - it's sufficient to pass all criteria.

As opposite to the "football" pages, Youtubers are seen as a spam and promotion, despite the fact that some of them have millions of subscribers to their channels and their videos has been seen more times than average TV show on BBC.

Can someone please clarify why football/soccer players are so worshipped on Wikipedia and their notability is not even questioned? Jone Rohne Nester (talk) 14:49, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Jone Rohne Nester. Exactly who do you believe is being hypocritical? Wikipedia is created and maintained by thousands and thousands of volunteers, each with their own interests and prejudices. If you see articles on subjects that you think are not notable, then please help us to improve the project by challenging them: at least tag them with {{Notability}}; and if you have time, do a bit of research to see if they do seem to be notable, and if not, nominate them for deletion. You may feel that it's not your job to do this: but it's nobody else's, or it's everybody's. --ColinFine (talk) 15:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi@ColinFine:Thanks for your answer. To be more precise, I am referring to notability guidelines of footballers. LadyofShalott once said on my talk page our notability guidelines of sportspeople are far too lax. I believe I'm not the only person who is aware of this issue, so perhaps you could point me to the right direction; maybe Teahouse is a wrong place to start this discussion and there are some other, on-going discussions somewhere else (related to this topic)? Thanks Jone Rohne Nester (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
As luck would have it, Jone Rohne Nester, such a discussion is currently underway at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#The criteria of WP:NSPORT here are too inclusive. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:54, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Ohhh, you're a star, @Cordless Larry:! Thank you so much! That's exactly what I was looking for! Jone Rohne Nester (talk) 16:15, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Page Creation

Was told the page i created out of a nowiki link was prone to be an Advert wat should i do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanshelkaunda (talk • contribs) 07:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Hanshelkaunda. Welcome to the Teahouse. I don't understand your question. You yourself edited the only article you've created, El Kopala Derby, with the edit summary "Deleted Terms that were deemed to be promotional characters", and the article has since been edited further. The main problem I see with the article now is that it's not clear what it's about; the lead sentence makes little sense. You also created your user page, which looks a bit like a résumé or CV. RivertorchFIREWATER 16:17, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Editing a navbar

I just updated a navbar. How do I get it to update on all the pages it appears on? RM2KX (talk) 15:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

You could purge each page, or otherwise wait a while and they will eventually be updated. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:31, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

I was reading some general manuals of style the other day and had a question. If I know for a fact that a page was created and mostly only revised by the person who that page is about, what should I do? That is against Wikipedia rules isn't it?JinkiesShaggy (talk) 17:37, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, JinkiesShaggy, and welcome to the Teahouse. To answer your question, it depends on the context. Sometimes, it could sound promotional or the person isn't notable in Wikipedia's sense of the word, and that would make it eligible for deletion. Other times, the page could've been neutrally written and the person may be notable, so that wouldn't necessarily violate Wikipedia's policies to my knowledge. Even though it is strongly discouraged that they write about themselves, it's not necessarily forbidden. Are you talking about a specific page? If so, can you please link it? — Gestrid (talk) 17:45, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
If it was written in an overly promotional or similar way (see WP:PUFFERY and WP:COI), you can file a report as detailed at how to handle conflicts of interest. Creeper Ninja (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

how do i get badges?

i cannot figure out how to earn badges? pls, i really need your help, thanks. Comicbookaddict (talk) 16:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Comicbookaddict: We have lots of different kinds of badges. Do you mean barnstars? If you do, those are usually given to people who others think deserve them. They are given out by clicking the little heart icon you will see on a user's userpage and following the directions. There are many different kinds of barnstars and many different ways to get them. The only way to be sure you'll get them is to keep editing and to get involved in other Wikipedia processes when you feel you have enough experience. They aren't given out at every turn, so be patient. — Gestrid (talk) 17:43, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
There are also WP:Service awards that you award to yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 18:03, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

creating a tournament bracket template

Hello! I need to create a nice looking template similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:6TeamBracket, but with an fourth round between two participants. Help from anyone familiar with the necessary scripting would be much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovedelicc (talk • contribs) 01:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Lovedelicc. Welcome to the Teahouse. Does this {{6TeamBracket-Cust}} help?--S Philbrick(Talk) 01:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
In addtions to that, I am following the nuteral precpective and point of view. If I am missing anything, could you please inform me? And I will fix it as soon as posible. PrinzTyronix (talk) 19:35, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Reflective Solar Tracker

I was recently declined and told someone in this space might help me with my problem. I tried to publish or create a page for something Called the Reflective Solar Tracker. I do not know what went wrong whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noelsegui (talk • contribs) 11:01, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Noelsegui: the decline notice at the top of Draft:Reflective Solar Tracker explains one reason why it was declined: it "appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia". I can see two other reasons why it would also be declined: it's not clear whether it's about a device or the company that makes that device; and it cites no sources. To be accepted, an article must establish that its subject is notable, by citing several reliable independent published source with in-depth discussion of the subject. Maproom (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
In the spirit of nothing is simple I'll add that articles can also be 'marked for deletion' by WP:PROD which is used to propose uncontroversial deletions (which are almost never uncontroversial to the creating editor) and WP:SPEEDY which can remove articles quickly without waiting or discussion. Gab4gab (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

regarding my account and first article

Dear Sirs I have my first article, BIO of H.R.H Mubarak Abdullah Al Mubarak Al Sabah is deleted for no reason, it is not promotional or advert. I have provided with all the references including related of existing Wikipedia pages. I kindly request that my account and first article to be re activated.

Kind help me. Mohammed AL NOOR Alnoori22 (talk) 11:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Alnoori22. As far as I can tell, you have never created an article. What you do seem to have done is to add article content to User:Alnoori22, which is supposed to be a page about you as a user, not an article. If you want to have another go at creating an article, I suggest doing so via Wikipedia:Your first article. Note that although your user page was deleted, your account is not deactivated. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:14, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps an old account was blocked because of the article's content? Creeper Ninja (talk) 21:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Movies - notability guidelines and CSD movies

What is the correct CSD tag for movies ? WP A7 covers only: people, animals, organizations, web content, events. I'm familiar with WP:NFILM , but this tag/policy could be used only for PROD, not CSD. Do we have any on-going discussions on this topic? Please help @Cordless Larry: or anyone? Thank you Jone Rohne Nester (talk) 22:29, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse Jone Rohne Nester. There is no CSD criteria for articles on films that don't contain a credible claim of significance (which is close, but not identical to notability). The options here are PROD and AFD. Indeed, not all situations have CSD criteria because CSD is the exception and not the rule when it comes to the deletion process. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:37, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi @Finnusertop: , thank you for your answer! I believe we have a huge problem here. In the last two months I noticed a large number of pages on "notable" movies. As we know, IMDB is a leading source for movies database(paid version - and people are turning back to Wikipedia in order to avoid paid IMDB pages), but what I have noticed that Wikipedia does not have a decent movies policy control. Can you please guide me to our notability policy/guidelines for movies? As I mentioned before, A7 is ineffective in this case, and we don't have anything for CSD related to movies.Please help @Masum Ibn Musa: Thank you, Jone Rohne Nester (talk) 23:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
@Jone Rohne Nester: it appears that the standard is set in WP:NFILM and that says that for films Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline (GNG) applies and there are no exceptions. Now then, GNG is a bit subjective, so your milage may vary. But whenever there is doubt that a particular films meets GNG, the article should be taken to AFD.
I don't see a "huge" issue here. It's more likely that the sources about these movies exist (in print media, newspapers, magazines etc.) but they aren't actually cited in the articles. This is just bad article writing and does not warrant deletion. For some, very obscure films with small distribution, or upcoming/very recent films, such coverage may not exist and the films may not meet GNG. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:17, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello Jone Rohne Nester. I think that Wikipedia:Notability (films) (aka WP:NFILM) is the page you are looking for. It outlines what makes a film/movie notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Note that it is a guideline, not an inflexible rule. Ultimately community consensus and basic policy such as WP:NOT are used to make the decisions on any and every article. The notability guidelines are often useful rules of thumb, to which there will be exceptions. DES (talk) 23:20, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Also note that particularly for older films, contemporary sources may exist, but may not be online. DES (talk) 23:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
You are correct that there is no specific CSD criterion that covers films. Of course a completely false article could be speedy deleted as a wp:HOAX. The CSD criteria are all relativly narrow, and there has been considerable debate each time someone wants to add a category to A7, or add a new criterion. This is because once a speedy criterion has been accepted, only one or two people (one of them an admin) are needed to delete a page. This can be very frustrating to new users trying to create new articles about legit subjects, who do not understand how to create a fully developed and referenced Wikipedia article. It also leads to our losing valid starting stubs. So there must be agreement that there is a significant problem to solve, and that a narrow, bright-line criterion can be created that will solve it. Read some discussions of modifing the existing criteria at WT:CSD if you are interested further. DES (talk) 23:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

What's Updog?

It's occurred to me that the childish prank updog does not have a wikipedia article. Would it be appropriate to add it? 

ThatEeveeKid (talk) 23:33, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
ThatEeveeKid, can you find reliable published sources that discuss it in some detail? If not it clearly does not belong on Wikipedia. If you can, then perhaps it does. DES (talk) 00:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Guidelines

I created a page about myself that took 5 hours to make. I have now been told that it doesn't follow certain guidelines. So could you please tell me what I am missingPrinzTyronix (talk) 04:39, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi PrinzTyronix. Wikipedia is not a social network site, it is an encyclopedia. The page you created has no place here because of what this site is. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)
@PrinzTyronix: Probably you're missing the first of the Five pillars of Wikipedia:
  • Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
which means among others Wikipedia is not a blog or a social networking service nor means of promotion (see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not; WP:NOTBLOG; and WP:NOTPROMO).
Additionally you miss several Wikipedia Principles and Key policies and guidelines, among them the neutral point of view and independent, reliable sources, which make the contents verifiable (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Verifiability). --CiaPan (talk) 06:13, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
I am sorry Mr. Fuhghettaboutit, however Prinz Tyronix is a famous person in certain countries. If YouTubers can geet a page in Wikipedia, why can't a singer and Youtuber get a page for himself???
Hope that you will respond
regards
Prinz Tyronix ::PrinzTyronix (talk) 19:33, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
@PrinzTyronix: There are several basic principles of Wikipedia involved here which you apparently do not understand and don't want to bother understanding:
  1. You can't write an article about yourself, even if you think you're famous enough to refer to yourself in the third person. See Wikipedia: conflict of interest.
  2. It isn't enough to just say that someone is "famous in certain countries". I'm not going to explain here what is required in order for an article to be allowable; see Wikipedia: Notability.
  3. It doesn't matter how long it took you to make a page. If you violated the basic rules, it doesn't belong here. Would you contest a parking ticket on the grounds that it took you five hours to manipulate your big car into that small space directly in front of the fire hydrant? The judge would throw your case out of court. Same here.
  4. A web search for "Prinz Tyronix" finds no news articles, journal articles, or other significant content (note: "significant" doesn't mean "entertaining"), but lots of pages on sites like Instagram and Facebook, where anyone can post anything about themselves. Apparently you have said "Hey guys I am Subhu, although I like to be refereed as Tyronix or Prinz Tyronix" on Facebook, Twitter, poup.org, garow.me, deskgram.com, brandfuge.io, abphy.com, socialmediafeed.me, InstAnonymous.me, imgrab.com, and a whole lot of other vanity sites. Those don't count here. No matter how much you like to talk about yourself, no matter how many followers you have on how many different social media sites, none of that makes you WP: NOTABLE. You're barking up the wrong tree here. As you've already been told up above, RTFM.
  5. I won't reiterate any more of what Fuhghettaboutit and CiaPan have said above. Just go read their answers and read what they've told you to read.
--Thnidu (talk) 09:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

quoting Wikipedia

I thought I saw a policy about when and how to quote from Wikipedia, but I can't find it. Help, please. --Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 05:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Michael David Coogan, A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament: The Hebrew Bible in Its Context, Oxford, 2008, p. 116
  2. ^ Public Domain Levias, Caspar (1905). "Numbers and numerals". In Singer, Isidore; et al. (eds.). The Jewish Encyclopedia. Vol. 9. New York: Funk & Wagnalls. p. 349. Retrieved 2017-04-27. [plus a long quote outside the template, which doesn't support quotations; the Jewish Encyclopedia is public domain]
  • (And can anyone explain where that long narrow dashed box came from?)
    Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 23:12, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
@Thnidu: The {{reflist-talk}} template does not like to be indented, as you did here. There's a mention of the phenomenon you just observed on the doc page for it. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 07:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
@Jmcgnh: Whoops. Thanks.--Thnidu (talk) 09:40, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

How can I keep a neutral tone when talking about accomplishments of a public figure?

Hey! I am new here :) So I've been creating a Wikipedia page based on multiple chinese pages on a Martial arts master. After getting it reviewed I was asked to change my tone because I seem to be praising the subject. Does that mean that I should cut down on the accomplishments? Or should I just list them more dryly? I am a little confused. Thank you for your time and patience. :) Wdsfp (talk) 09:08, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wdsfp, start by removing all the adjectives, except for sourced direct quotes. Describe it in a dry "just the facts" style: "In 2014 he won the grand national championship.(reference)"
An accomplishment is only really worth mentioning if an independent source mentions it - this prevents cruft such as trivial "employee of the month" type of awards getting included. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:18, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you :) I will do that.

Wdsfp (talk) 10:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

i got an speedy deletion message

i want to know why it has been given for speedy deletionShravanrajubonagani (talk) 08:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Looking at the deletion log, the reason given indicates that the user page content was not in keeping with the userpage guidelines(which you can review by clicking that link). Since the page was deleted I can't say exactly what the issue was, but content on your userpage must be in the context of your Wikipedia editing; it is not social media or free web space for you to use as you wish. If you have further questions, you can ask the administrator that deleted the page(which seems to be Anthony Appleyard, who will know I have written their username here and may reply. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I'd like to leave my rejected, article "Draft" in my Sandbox to attract comments....is that possible?

My article draft (about a method I devised to estimate the Pythagorean Theorem) was rejected for lack of references but, since it's brand new, it hasn't had time to garner any notoriety of its own. Can I leave it "up" as a draft in the hopes that it will be seen by people interested in Pythagorean-related articles and, hopefully, gain attention that way?

I'm new to this whole experience and just curious as to the best way to approach getting some exposure.

Thanks, in advance, for any advice you might offer ... tom

Thomasjjsullivan (talk) 19:37, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Thomasjjsullivan, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sandboxes and Draft: pages are intended for things being worked on, although sometimes the work may be quite slow (I have at least one draft in progress that is over a year old). But even if you leave this draft in place in a sandbox, it will probably not have the effect you have in mind. Both sandboxes and draft pages have codes in place to prevent google and other search engines from indexing them, so no one will ever find such a page via a web search. Unless a draft has been submitted for review, few people here are likely to look at it and make comments. Neither sort of page should be in any article categories, so it won't be noticed that way.
Furthermore, your plan comes into conflict with two Wikipedia policies. Wikipedia is not a free web host says that Wikipedia pages are only for use in furthering the building of the encyclopedia, not as personal web pages nor as part of some other project. No Original Research says that "Original Research" should not be included in Wikipedia articles. If this page is about a method that YOU devised, and that there are no published sources for, it does not currently belong on Wikipedia.
In my view, your best approach would be to get a description of your message published somewhere that does wqelcome original research. If it becomes accepted and other people write about it, it might eventuyally become eligable for a Wikipedia article, preferably written by someone other than the method's inventor. Good luck. DES (talk) 20:39, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
DES....thank you for your speedy response. It's good news - I can leave up and continue to develop my article, while I - Bad News - look for someone to publish my article's content to begin its exposure to its future, interested audience.

Sincerely......tom

2601:186:4580:6210:4887:F97E:FB6B:9C25 (talk) 14:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Can I link my article (in english) to a french version of it ?

Hello,

I recently created the article "Je Sers" about the chapel boat. It's actually an english translation from an article that already exists in French. I wanted to knwo how it possible for me link both articles. Or, do I have to recreate the article as a translation from the french one? I hope I was clear with my issue.

Y1207E Y1207E (talk) 15:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hello Y1207E. (Traduction française disponible sur demande)
For other editors, and for copyright compliance, you should use the template {{Translated page}} on the talk page. For readers, that is where interlanguage links come in handy, but apparently it is already present. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:26, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
I have added the English page to the relevant Wikidata page. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:28, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello Tigraan,

Thank you so much for your help.

best regards, Y1207E (talk) 20:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Copy without copyvio

Much of the Barrayaran Imperial Auditor article is identical with Imperial Auditor on the Vorkosigan wiki at wikia.com. I haven't checked the histories, but the wikia page was almost certainly the source:

  1. It's got plenty of refs and our page has none.
  2. At a quick look-thru, the wikia page seems to have significantly more content than ours.

Wikia.com uses CC-BY-SA licensing. (http://www.wikia.com/Licensing) Suggested actions? Please {{Ping}} me to discuss.

Mobile edit

Incidentally, I am posting this via my mobile phone. I tapped Ask a question and inserted .m into the address to get to the mobile editor. When I saved the entry, it appeared at the top of the page.

I remember that that used to be standard for this page, contrary to (AFAIK) every other page; and I remember the proposal to make insertion match the standard, and the decision to do so, and the implementation. So why is the mobile editor for this page stuck in the Dark Ages? I had to edit the section again, get into the mobile editor, cut it blank, edit the then-bottom section, and paste mine at the bottom of it.

--Thnidu (talk) 01:50, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@Thnidu: Do you have the gadget enabled? In other words, when you attempted to reply, did you see the standard code editor or a popup? – Train2104 (t • c) 02:08, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@Train2104: What "gadget"? And I wasn't replying to anything. If you're asking what happened when I tapped Ask a question, I got the desktop view of the TH question editor, much too tiny to use on my circa 2"x4" screen.
In order to answer your question accurately, I just repeated the process. I copied the top of the first page that came up, and this is what I saw. The parts that weren't text copied as their names:
Editing Wikipedia:Teahouse (new section)
Page notice
WP teahouse logo.png
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse edit window!
To add a question please use the "Ask a Question" button on the Teahouse Q&A Board.
If you choose to manually add your question,
Please place it below the last question asked, so that it will appear at the bottom of the page!
Doing so will attract the attention of a host much quicker!
Thank you and happy editing!
Is that what you wanted to know?
--Thnidu (talk) 08:05, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Thnidu. Getting back to the original question, I deal with a lot of copyright problems so I've come upon this a few times. Note that this is a copyright violation, but just not of the sort we usually delete, as opposed to fixing. I think the easiest way to is to point you to one I did, rather than describing the parts of the fix. So, please see the attribution edit summaries I left at BoBoiBoy (character) (this is a redirect now, so make sure you navigate to the redirect if you click on that).

That is, I left these two back to back copyright attribution edit summaries, each while making dummy edits to the article. Note that the first addresses credit to the authors, as required under the copyright license, and the second addresses licensing. Then in this edit, I added a filled out {{wikia content}} template to the references section. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: Whew, that's a lot. It'll have to wait for some hours: not something to tackle on a phone! Thanks.
As for the "gadget" and the apparent problem with the mobile editor, I'll take that to the technical page, also later. Otra vez, gracias. --Thnidu (talk) 21:13, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion

Hello,

When a page is nominated for deletion, who gets to "be the judge." Can anyone not involved with the page decide? CRAuser (talk) 20:47, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, CRAuser. Only an administrator can delete an article so administrators close debates where consensus is to delete. Any uninvolved editor can close such a debate if the consensus is clearly in favor of keeping the article. This is referred to as a "non-administrator close". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
In addition to Cullen328's answer, at an AfD, editors discuss whether or not to delete the article before the admin performs the close. Anybody can comment there, page creator included. White Arabian Filly Neigh 22:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
See also the responses to your questions above, at #Experienced editors, CRAuser, if you haven't seen them all. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:10, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. How does one become an administrator? Is it reserved for those that have edited articles for a number of years? CRAuser (talk) 18:55, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
@CRAuser: This Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates may help. (The shorter answer is yes).--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Template for Wikipedia articles in other languages

I'm writing an English language article on a subject for which a Wikipedia article already exists in another language. I seem to remember that there is a template to use to refer to the article in the other language. But I can't find the template in the "Help" section of the Wikipedia. Can someone direct me to the proper way of handling this? Thank you.Nolabob (talk) 11:27, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Nolabob: Welcome to the Teahouse. I think you are looking for {{Translated page}} but Wikipedia:Translation maybe the place to check.--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:09, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, @Sphilbrick:. I'm thinking that Expand language|subject|date=April 2017 might be the best choice. But other suggestions are most welcome. Nolabob (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

what is the teahouse

I am very busy, why did you interrupt me? :(Monkey88888888 (talk) 22:52, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Monkey88888888, since you asked, the Teahouse is a place where editors, particularly relatively new editors, can ask questions about how Wikipedia works and how to edit it, and get answers. The intent is that these will be relatively friendly and helpful answers. A number of experienced editors check the page and try to provide these answers. Of course, you don't ever have to read or edit this page if you don't want to. DES (talk) 01:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Associated acts

Hi fellow Wikipedians! For example, if a lyricist whom the musician has worked with for several albums, songs, and years, could that lyricist be put in the musician's associated acts? Sorry for my bad English tho. ~PogingJuan 14:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

PogingJuan: Macmillan online defines "act" in this sense as "a singer, band, or other person or group who performs on stage". Lyricists, composers, and arrangers, as such, aren't performers, so they aren't acts. So in my opinion the answer to your question is No. --Thnidu (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, that's not quite right. If a lyricist or songwriter is very strongly associated with a particular performer, we consider it appropriate to list them as an "associated act" (consider the relationships between Bernie Taupin, Elton John and Alice Cooper, or between Burt Bacharach and Dionne Warwick), but the bar is much higher than just "A wrote some songs for B"—the relationship itself has to be significant. ‑ Iridescent 15:45, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Worth noting is that both Taupin and Bacharach are also performers, although they are best known as songwriters. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:16, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Personally, I think we are trying to cram far too much detail into infoboxes. I feel that this kind of thing is better left to prose in the article body, where the precise nature of the relationship can be spelled out. Not all editors agree with this view. DES (talk) 02:00, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

No userbox for important thing

Why isn't there a userbox for "This user was born in Washington State" or "This user lives in Washington State"? PLEASE?!?! PLEASE PLEASE PLEEEEEASE add one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GermanGamer77 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you would like to add a userbox like that, check out Wikipedia:Userboxes/Location#Creating_a_location_userbox. RudolfRed (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Did you look in Category:Washington user templates? I see at least six templates that convey "This user is from Washington" or "This user lives in Washington." — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

! Oh sorry... I added some, but I am a bit freaked out due to the way you said that. I'm sorry to tell you this, but I thought it was worth saying. GermanGamer77 (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@GermanGamer77: See also Wikipedia:Userboxes/Location/U.S. states 2#Washington. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:13, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks a lot for your help, PrimeHunter! I already heard of it and immediately added 5-6 new Washington user templates. Sorry I saw Malik Shabazz's comment first, that's when I did, but thanks anyway! =D But how can I make a giant animated waving Germany flag like on some Swedish guy's page with a giant Sweden flag? GermanGamer77 (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@GermanGamer77: commons:Category:Animated flags of Germany includes File:Animated-Flag-Germany.gif. You can add [[File:Animated-Flag-Germany.gif|300px]] or another size than 300px. Is that OK? I don't know the Swedish guy's page you refer to. Name him if you want similar code. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I fail when trying to link 2 wiki pages. Please help.

Hi. I want to link https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iskander to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iskandar (in the language section). But the instructions given are not very clear (there is talk about "ID", "site ID", "sitelink" ... but it is never specified whether they mean source or target ID, source or target site ID, source or target sitelink). I tried, but I always get an error message saying: "The link enwiki:Iskandar is already used by item Iskandar (Q437299). You may remove it from Iskandar (Q437299) if it does not belong there or merge the items if they are about the exact same topic." Can somebody please give me dummy-foolproof step-by-step instructions (1,2,3,...) for how to link these 2 wikipedia articles? Please don't do it yourself, I would like to try myself with your instructions. Thank you. --boarders paradise (talk) 13:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Boardersparadise. Wow, this was a tricky one (but I think I've fixed it). Interlanguage links now usually go through Wikidata; but there is a firm restriction in Wikidata that a Wikidata lemma may only be attached to one article in any given Wikipedia. This means that when there are articles with different scope in different Wikipedias, there may be no good solution.
The issue here, is that in enwiki, there are effectively two different disambiguation pages for Iskandar (though only one of them is called a DAB page). Iskandar is a diambiguation page for people with the name Iskandar, whereas Iskandar (disambiguation) is broader in scope, covering places and other uses. The Wikidata lemma d:Q437299 was connected to broader DAB pages in several other languages, but to the "people only" page in English. I tried to edit the Wikidata link to point to Iskandar (disambiguation), to be told that I couldn't because that was already connected to the Wikidata lemma d:Q27788130. Looking at that, I found that it was connected only to enwiki (Iskandar (disambiguation)). So I moved that link to point to Q437299 (that was the point at which I had to give an ID: 437299). This links that English DAB page (correctly, I think) to half a dozen others; and leaves the enwiki page Iskandar unlinked - again correct, I think, because the other languages don't seem to have a page which is only people named Iskandar. It also leaves Q27788130 without any Wikipedia links, so I will probably nominate it for deletion.
I then tried to add de:Iskander to the original lemma (Q437299) and it said I couldn't because that was already linked to a third lemma d:Q16069990. This turned out to link to three DAB pages in different Wikipedias called "Iskander" rather than "Iskandar". Since I believe this is just a variant spelling, I used the "Merge" command in Wikidata to merge Q437299 with Q16069990. The result is a Wikidata lemma which links to DAB pages in 11 different Wikipedias, some called "Iskandar" and some called "Iskander". Whew. --ColinFine (talk) 14:51, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, but I asked for step-by-step instructions and emphasized: "Please don't do it yourself, I would like to try myself with your instructions. Thank you.". Now you did the exact opposite ... :( I wanted to learn how to do it *myself* --boarders paradise (talk) 15:37, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, Boardersparadise, I missed that bit of your request. But I could not have complied. I could have told you what I thought was needed, but as my description above shows, it wasn't until I tried each step that I discovered the next thing that was needed. --ColinFine (talk) 15:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
"I missed that bit" ... you mean, you didn't fully read my request :P … what a pity, but ok ... could you then please give me general step-by-step instructions for a generic case (with particular focus on the shortcomings I described in my OP), so that I would know how to do it in the future ? thank you --boarders paradise (talk) 16:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid I didn't, Boardersparadise. I read what the problem was, but didn't read to the end of your request. I don't think I can give you step by step instructions, because I didn't know what I was going to do until I got there and found the situation; and it involved going and looking at articles in several languages to see what I though the correct correspondence should be. --ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

MOS

Which is correct. 5-inch or 5 inch. Thanks TVGarfield (talk) 16:48, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi TVGarfield. There's is some information at MOS:HYPHEN, though I don't think it's all that helpful in its shortness of explanation. I wish a had a way of describing this that was a bit less technical. But some usage examples might help. To the best of my understanding, when measurements are in the form of compound adjectives—modifying a noun they are in front of—they take a hyphen. When they are not, they don't. I guess a rule of thumb is if the noun precedes the measurement: usually un-hyphenated, and if after: hyphenated. According to the MOS page, an exception is when the unit of measurement is abbreviated – "9-millimetre gap", but "9 mm gap". (I'm not sure I wouldn't ignore that style exception as it just looks wrong to me.) Anyway (nouns being modified italicized):
  • Your essay must be typewritten, and have two-inch margins.
  • Use a twelve-inch ruler.
  • Ten-foot girders were used for the exterior framing.
but
  • Strangely, the essay was written with margins measuring two inches.
  • The ruler was twelve inches long.
  • Girders measuring ten feet in length were used for the exterior framing.
By the way, be aware of MOS:CONVERSIONS. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:27, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
I believe that the convention not to use a hyphen when using abbreviated units comes from the SI guidance, Fuhghettaboutit (i.e. 5.3.3 here: "Even when the value of a quantity is used as an adjective, a space is left between the numerical value and the unit symbol. Only when the name of the unit is spelled out would the ordinary rules of grammar apply, so that in English a hyphen would be used to separate the number from the unit"). Cordless Larry (talk) 18:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
I think I might now understand. I was reading MOS and I wasn't sure if I got it or not. TVGarfield (talk) 18:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Larry. I see, from page 133. But I think questioning why and whether we should is always on the table (and a good general practice in general; certainly it is a bent I have; I'm always trying to finding the underlying logic and fount). They say this but presented as a "should" bald assertion, with no rationale I can see addressing the "why". The Chicago Manual of Style apparently provides a categorical agreement on the rule, though I was only able to see a quotation of it here, and not the CMOS page where more might be provided on a rationale. There's a discussion here with some disagreement on the issue (the non-working link on that page can be viewed at this Wayback Machine archived page [I've posted to that discussion adding that link]), which gives an interesting rationale for the variance of the hyphen issue when abbreviating, but I'm not sure the logic follows – I don't see why anyone would confuse it or interpret it as a minus sign when used for an abbreviated unit of measurement, where they wouldn't when the unit word is spelled out. I didn't find much more in my search since I'm not making a true project out of this particular issue but I am not yet convinced this is not just a style that some follow and others do not, and that it is the right choice.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:08, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, Fuhghettaboutit - I was just trying to work out what the basis for this was, rather than making an argument in favour of it. I would have to look at some of my own writing to see what I tend to do, but it wouldn't surprise me if I've used hyphens with abbreviated units in the past. I guess if we're going to base our practice on a third-party style, though, the SI is the best place to go. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Can't remember a template's name

Hello, I was trying to recall the name of a template which is used to illustrate the use of a second template, that is, it generates text like { { Diff } } when you transcluse this template with the name Diff. Could someone please help? Airbornemihir (talk) 18:37, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

This is template {{tl}} —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
@Airbornemihir: FYI, the verb is transclude, not transcluse. It's just the same as include : inclusion. --Thnidu (talk) 21:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
@TheDJ and Thnidu: Thank you! Airbornemihir (talk) 19:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_609&oldid=1118054745"