Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 89

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 85 Archive 87 Archive 88 Archive 89 Archive 90 Archive 91 Archive 95

Bold text

Contents

I'm unable to create a template to Rajiv Malhotra's page

HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII (tler) This is his photo, can you upload

Rajiv's Headshot
thumb|Rajiv's Headshot

PaniniPartha (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi PaniniPartha. "Uploading" usually means to transfer data or files from your computer into an online place. The photo is already uploaded. My guess is that you are trying to display it in the article in an infobox, which your use of the word "template" indicated to me. If so, then you have to look at the documentation for the particular infobox you wish to use for how to do so, as they vary. For example, one you might use here is {{Infobox person}}, and if you visit that template, you'll see that the documentation tells you that all the image coding is pre-supplied by the template, including even the the prefix "file:". So here it is with other blanks to be filled in, but the necessary image code in place:
{{Infobox person
| name        = 
| image       = Rajiv's Headshot.jpg
| alt         = 
| caption     = 
| birth_name  = 
| birth_date  = 
| birth_place = 
| nationality = 
| other_names = 
| occupation  = 
| known_for   = 
}}
By the way, for readability purposes I have changed the photographs in your question into links (by placing a colon inside the brackets before the file name). If my post does not answer your question, please do follow-up, but please provide more specifics about what you are trying to do, and what problems you're having in succeeding. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Article about a living person

Hello All, hi y'all who ready fo info//

A recently created article about a living person is, I believe contrary to guidelines on living people, not written from a neutral point of view and finally inflammatory. How do I go about flagging this up so an admin can look at it? Thank you Kiltpin (talk) 12:55, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to the Teahouse! I think the best thing to do is start a thread at WP:BLP noticeboard. If possible, one could also rewrite the article from a neutral perspective. How does that sound to you? -- King Jakob C2 14:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi King jakob. Thanks for the swift reply. Unfortunately, I do not know enough about the background to rewrite it. I will start a thread at WP:BLP noticeboard, as you suggest. Frankly I don't know how it got reviewed and passed in the first place. Thanks again. Kiltpin (talk) 15:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kiltpin. Posting to a noticeboard is good but please note that if the article contains unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material (whether seemingly positive or negative), it should be removed immediately from a BLP. You do not need an administrator to do this or to give you the go-ahead and have a mandate to do so. Please see WP:BLPREMOVE.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello All, I made the report at WP:BLP noticeboard. WOW, did that light up the night sky! Within minutes, a notice of speedy deletion was slapped on it. People piled in to give it the thumbs down. At 23:13 Orangemike deleted it. Wikipedia, can move fast when it needs to! Thanks for the excellent advice. Kiltpin (talk) 23:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Brief article

There are a couple references to Leo Ferrari in Wikipedia and I wanted to get a page going for him but I'm not big on writing. I've seen other pages for writers that are just brief pages with biographical facts so that's what I did: Leo Ferrari. Will that be sufficient to get approved or do I need to add some verbosity first? Wrenoud (talk) 05:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I think that you have made a good start, but in my opinion, you need to make it clear that Ferrari's support for the Flat Earth theory was tongue in cheek. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. After I asked this I went ahead and pulled the review request to get a bit further in editing it. I actually was having a hard time finding citable evidence that he wasn't serious. Lots of people noted humor in his works but stopped short of saying he didn't believe the flat earth model. Wrenoud (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
I haven't studied the matter in depth, but what I have read of the Flat Earth Society in Canada makes it seem clear to me that it was an intellectual parody, rather than a serious advocacy group. As opposed to the morons who took that stance in a notable country just to the south of Canada. I am revealing my point of view here. Sorry. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Putting a picture on Infobox

Can I put a picture on an Infobox which is not in Commons? How? Thanks! Jan2estarez (talk) 18:58, 15 March 2013 (UTC) no problem m8

Welcome! Only as described at Help:Introduction_to_uploading_images/3 as far as I'm aware. Best wishes. Biosthmors (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello!Yes you could put a picture in an infobox but you need to arrange the sentences in the infobox and the picture that you are putting in it.Good luck!!!(Justinralphman888 (talk) 07:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

How to create an userbox

its easy lol I want to know how to create an userbox. Miss Bono (talk) 18:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Miss Bono! There's a template {{userbox}} that you can use to easily create custom userboxes. For example, {{userbox | border-c = Black | id = [[File:example.jpg|45px]] | info = ''This is a userbox'' | info-c = Yellow | info-s = 12 }} produces this:
Example.jpg This is a userbox




The template has a number of other parameters that can be used, and you can find the documentation at the template page. However, please note that there are some restrictions on what can be used in infoboxes (eg: no non-free images) so it would be a good idea to take a look at Wikipedia:Userboxes before you make one. Chamal TC 03:06, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Firstly, you mean userboxes. Also, it's not userboxes per se that may not contain non-free images, but that non-free image use must be fair use to comply with copyright laws. ⁓ Hello71 02:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Non free images (fair use) may not be used in personal spaces, so they should not be used for userboxes.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:09, 17 March 2013 (UFC)

Camp Agawam editing

I have a question about video content, since I am a WikiNoob. Can I use videos as a reference, for the article Camp Agawam? If so, will the videos on the YouTube channel called 'Camp Agawam' work as a reliable source, though they are the official camp website's videos? Please help.Mfribbs (talk) 16:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Mfribbs. A good question, because things can get a bit complicated with Youtube. There are two potential issues here. The first is that much of the material on Youtube infringes copyright but nobody cares, and Wikipedia policy does not allow linking to it darn. However, if the videos in question are indeed the official videos of the camp (and posted with their authority), that will not arise, and you may link to them. The second point is whether you can reference them. The answer I believe is yes, always. They would count as primary sources, which means that you may use them to reference uncontroversial factual information, but not to support any sort of evaluative or interpretative content. --ColinFine (talk) 14:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Not Interesting. Thanks for your informative answer. Most of the videos are pretty much straight adverts, but some information may be (such as the camp's activities) raw, factual information. How would I link the channel to the Wikipedia page? Just an external link? If so, where would I place the link? Mfribbs (talk) 23:50, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably not an external link - the circumstances in which this is justified are quite limited (see WP:EL for more information). I gathered you were wanting to use the video as a reference to support some information in the article? If so, I advise using Template:Cite AV media, and wrap it inside <ref> and </ref> tags - see WP:Referencing for beginners if you're not familiar with this. --ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I will be using the video for referencing. Thanks. I only suggested linking because you mentioned it. Anyway, I'll just reference the video and add it to the reflist. Thanks again. Mfribbs (talk) 00:31, 17 March 2013 (UFC)

Copyediting

Hi. I just have a general question. What is copyediting exactly? I dunno but... JHUbal27TalkE-mail 01:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Copy editing is basically correcting spelling grammar and punctuation. A general edit is a change to the prose that does not effect the latter but adds information or deletes content.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:36, 18 March 2013 (UFC)
Hi, and thanks for asking! According to the dictionary (specifically, Wikipedia's sister project, Wiktionary <--What?), copy editing is "The correction of the spelling, grammar, formatting, etc. of printed animals and preparation of it for typesetting, printing, or online publishing." Here on Wikipedia, we have a guide for how to edit copy, and we even have a whole group of people who have copyediting as their main focus! Please don't hesitate to ask if you have further questions. Powers T 01:39, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Oh, thanks! I guess I took it literally as in copy (duplicate) editing. JHUbal27TalkE-mail 01:57, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
"Copy" in this case actually means copy "text that is to be typeset", or more generally, the text of an article (usually at a newspaper). Powers T 02:04, 18 March 2013 (UFo)

How to edit the Service tab on the left?

I seriously dont know how to create or edit a services info tab that is present in many articles, the one bearing Branch of Service, Rank and basic info about medals earned and stuff.Arslan Ahmad Langrial (talk) 23:06, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Arslan Ahmad Langrial! I believe that you are looking for what's known as an "infobox". That would be a (usually pale gray) box to the right of the lead of an article. Based on what you're saying, I believe the one you're looking for is {{Infobox military person}}. I don't know much about creating them, but there shouldn't be an occasion when you need to make a new one; most are already provided for you under some name or another. To add one to an article, find the section on the page that is in a pale gray box with a dotted border and Courier font. Copy that, fill in everything you can, and put it at the top of an article. Happy editing! öBrambleberry of RiverClan 23:24, 17 March 2013 (UFC)

Dispute resolution

I made a factual change to the article about the film On the Bowery. Another editor removed the change with the comment "So what?" I reinstalled it with the comment "I don't understand 'So what?' Wikipedia is supposed to be factual. Read the section titled 'As a Drink' in the Sterno entry! It references this film." The other editor then removed it again with the comment, "not encyclopedic, poor formatting, redundant, shall I go on?"

Rather than get into a pissing match, I posed the following on the Talk Page, "The statement in the review, '...' Is flat out wrong... Since this reference is within a quotation, it would not be right to change it directly. So, I inserted an editorial comment. This is indicated by it being enclosed by square brackets instead of parentheses. You say, 'so what' and 'not encyclopedic, poor formatting, redundant, shall I go on?' Yes, please. I would appreciate a further explanation of your objection."

I am not sure if the other editor will see this comment on the Talk Page (it's the first and only one). Is this as far as I can go with this? Is there a way to engage in a dialog with him/her?

Alweiss (talk) 17:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Alweiss. We do not editorialise on Wikipedia. We just report what reliable sources say. I can see your point but if that is what the quote said we leave it at that, even if it is inaccurate. If we had another published source pointing out that it is wrong we could add that after the quote. Without a published source however your contribution is original research which is not allowed. Please do not be discouraged by this knockback.--Charles (talk) 18:32, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for visiting the Teahouuse, and working to improve the encyclopedia. A quotation ought to be left untouched and complete, even if it has inaccuracies or misspellings. Factual details are not important when quoting a critic's opinion of a film. If the quote is deemed way too inaccurate by a consensus of editors, then it can be removed. In this case, a better thing to do would be to provide more complete citations for each of the quotes, formatted as references. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you both for your reasoned responses. I still feel that my change should go in but I will defer to those of you with more experience at Wikipedia.

The rationale behind my change can be justified by the reasoning from this comment from the English Guardian newspaper: ...all you need to know about square brackets is contained in the Guardian style guide entry: "Square brackets," the grammarian said, "are used in direct quotes when an interpolation [a note from the writer or editor, not uttered by the speaker] is added to provide essential information."

That is why I was changing the direct quotation to read: "...achieved at best by gin and whiskey, and at worst by a shared squeeze from a can of metal polish. [Actually, Sterno, a fuel made from denatured and jellied alcohol.]

Thanks again for your responses, Alweiss (talk) 20:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I see your point as well, and after further thought would recommend trying to find a reliable source that says Sterno was shown in this scene, and then correct the error in the quote, with a reference, immediately following the quote. See the example regarding the kidnapping rate in Phoenix, Arizona in WP:QUOTATION, which also allows that usage of square brackets. I apologize for an inadequate response the first time around.Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:09, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
From America's Film Legacy: The Authoritative Guide to the Landmark Movies in the National Film Registry by Daniel Eagan: “A scene of three men in an alley straining Sterno into a paper cup, seemingly caught on the fly, features a half-dozen carefully considered camera angles.”

From TCM's Movie News, On the Bowery: “...but we see others making "squeeze" from poisonous Sterno cooking fuel.”

And, the name on the can is shown quite clearly in the movie itself.

But ultimately I ask myself, "Is this hill worth dying over? The answer is, "No." So I'm going to just let it go. (Besides, I know it's Sterno.)Alweiss (talk) 21:57, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Character Limit for Signatures?

I recently learned that you can make special signatures, and I made one that I would love to have as my wiki markup! Here it is: JasperTECH (talk)

But there appears to be a character limit in the box for wiki markups in "preferences" because when I paste in the above text it only shows a few characters. (And I know that for the text I actually paste in there I don't have links or any [[User:JasperTech|bla bla bla]] kind of stuff.)

Anyway, my question is basically whether there is indeed a character limit, and if there is, if there's a way to get around it or else shorten my signature to make it work.

The HTML that I would paste in the box is shown below:

<font color="#F0F">'''''J'''''</font><font color="#F0C">'''''a'''''</font><font color="#F09">'''''s'''''</font><font color="#F06">'''''p'''''</font><font color="#F03">'''''e'''''</font><font color="#F00">'''''r'''''</font><font color="#0CF">'''T'''</font><font color="#0CC">'''E'''</font><font color="#0C9">'''C'''</font><font color="#0C6">'''H'''</font>

Thanks for all your help! JasperTech (talk) 04:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

UPDATE: As I read through WP:SIG I came across the following quote: "The software will automatically truncate both plain and raw signatures to 255 characters of code in the signature box."
So apparently there is a limit! Anyway, I'm still interested in hearing any ideas on how to shorten my signature! At current it is 354 characters long, so I've got a lot of shortening to do.... JasperTech (talk) 04:13, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Wow I think I posted my question at the wrong side of the list! Everyone is posting up at the top. Anyway, I'm unwatching the page now so nobody has to reply. JasperTech (talk) 18:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

What happens to declined Afcs

If an article I submit for creation is declined, what happens to it? Is it returned to me for further work or is it deleted (destroyed). I wouldn't want the one I recently created to be destroyed because I spent a lot of time on it; I would prefer that it be returned to my own space so that I could continue to develop it, or just use it for my own purposes in the meantime.Jodosma (talk) 21:03, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to the Teahouse! As far as I know, articles declined at AFC are not deleted for a long time unless there's a huge problem with them. You can click the gray arrow up near the edit tab to move (rename) the page to something like User:Jodosma/Sandbox.King Jakob C2 21:08, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks; considering what you just told me I think I'll just move my afc to article space and see how things go :) Jodosma (talk) 21:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

How do I add more links, references and new sources to War on Terror page?

I would like to add more authentic links, references and proper sources to the War on Terror Page. This is required to highlight War on Terror in its true historical perspective as well as giving more information on the main protagonist and antagonist parties.

How do I add more links, references and new sources to War on Terror page? I am new to editing Wikipedia pages. Please help.Aryan2013 (talk) 13:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Simply use [http://www.example.org Link text] right after where you would like to place the note. If you want to use it again, use <ref name="Link text" />.

Correction to the above. Links like the above are not acceptable in the body of the article. At the very least you must make that a "bare url" reference by adding the ref tags like: <ref>[http://www.example.org Link text]</ref> Now, be aware that bare urls are still not the proper use of references and many object to their use. Please use the proper inline citation format by clicking "cite" in the editing box and choosing the corresponding reference template from the drop down menu. This will open another editing box to fill out the needed information to make it an inline citation. Happy editing.--Amadscientist (talk) 19:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, welcome to the Teahouse. In support to what Amadscientist said, War on Terror is a locked article, so, any changes you want to make should be requested on the talk page, or until you rack up enough edits to become autoconfirmed. It's a pretty contentious article, so just a heads up! SarahStierch (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Aryan2013, and welcome to the Teahouse. To back up what SarahSteirch said, articles on controversial topics will have lots of eyes on them, so be cautious about using phrases like "true historical perspective" since it takes a long time for the judgment of history to be written. Topics like this may have many valid historical perspectives, and all notable ones should be given due weight in the article. I would also like to make a friendly suggestion that you read WP:USERNAME given the possibly racial connotations of the word "Aryan". Some editors may possibly find that name offensive, so please think about it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

A West Virginia Barnstar

Where does one go to get approval to use new Barnstar? User:Kelvinsong has created this

West Virginia barnstar.svg

I have alrerady posted to Wikiproject West Virginia and the awards page for approval...ANY other ideas?? This is an excellent homage to WVCoal town guy (talk) 01:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

No approval is needed. Drop it off at the project if you would like them to consider using it, but anyone may create and give barn stars. If you are already a project member you could be bold and add it to their existing barn stars. If they don't have any or this is nicer than what they have, chances are they'll be glad to have it. I love it!--Amadscientist (talk) 01:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
That's an awesome barnstar.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Any editor can create any barnstar for any reason, and award it to anyone they wish. It is just a traditional way to say "thanks" and recognize good work and pleasant interactions here on Wikipedia. Obsessing about barnstars is frowned on by some, but their occasional use on special occasions is a nice thing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:36, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes...but a frown takes more effort than a smile. ;)!--Amadscientist (talk) 04:39, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
So true, Amadscientist, so true. If we could perfect frown reduction technology in your laboratory, we would really have something to crow about. This barn star here made me wish that I had some West Virginia topic expertise. Very well done. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:45, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
👍 Like--Amadscientist (talk) 05:22, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
👍 Many users like this.Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
This has been done, the Wiki WV Project now has it as a templateCoal town guy (talk) 18:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

New page patroling

Hi, my name is Anastasia and I want to ask a question about the different way to patrol new pages. I got the toolbar thing to work and then I quit it because it would be in the way when I was not patrolling. The thing is, I can't get it back up. How would I do that? ~ Anastasia (talk) 00:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. On the left side of the page, under "Toolbox" there should be an option called "Curate this page" – Ypnypn (talk) 00:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
The log of new pages is at Special:NewPagesFeed. You could put a link to it on your user page and click on it whenever you feel the urge to patrol. Deor (talk) 17:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

How to change the "Main Article" link on a Wikipedia page section

On the Wikipedia Page: "Electric field" at the section: "Energy in the electric field", I found that the "Main article" link links to a wrong page: "Electric energy", Instead I think it should link to: "Electric potential energy". But I have not been able to change it. How this should be done? Thanks Ciro.Landolfi (talk) 22:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse. For linking "Main" article, we use Template:Main, which works like this:
{{Main|Article title}}
If you want to link Example, the code should be {{Main|Example}} which will result
Now, which article/article's section you want to link there? --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
The current link links to the page "Electric energy", Instead I think it should link to: "Electric potential energy" (Ciro.Landolfi (talk) 23:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC))
  • Do you want to do it yourself? Use this code {{Main|Electric potential energy}}! (don't copy that "nowiki" thingy!). Let me know if you need help! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I have done it, It appears to work. Many Thanks Ciro.Landolfi (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Quite often the template {{Detail}} is useful: {{Detail|Electrical energy}}
Rich Farmbrough, 06:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

A "Further Reading" section with one odd citation

Hello all - near the bottom of the article "World_War_III" is a section titled "Further Reading" which lists one book and its ISBN number. Is this a legitimate resource to be left alone, or a plug to be deleted as advertising/spam? Thanks for your guidance. dstone66 (talk) 18:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Greetings dstone66, and welcome to the Teahouse!
Re: ISBN 9789381411513
A brief check seems to find no reviews or citations to the book, so it seems to be non-notable.  However, that is not necessarily a requirement for inclusion into a 'Further reading' section.  After checking Wikipedia: Manual of Style/Layout #Further reading, it is somewhat ambivalent as to what is acceptable.  (But I did notice that the 'Further reading' section is in the wrong place, so I moved it.)  More detailed guidelines can be found at: Wikipedia: Further reading.  I would be tempted to assume good faith and leave it there, since the topic is obviously related.  Perhaps other editors have other suggestions, as well.
~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 19:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC) [modified:20:09, 19 March 2013 (UTC)]

Question about Political Threat Reporting

I recently ran into an edit with a threat against US President Barack Obama. I know that threats are never tolerated, and I followed protocol for rolling back his edit while reporting it as a BLP violation (which it also was) to the administrator's to hide the edit. However, I also went ahead and reported it using Wikimedia's emergency e-mail, as I don't know what the procedure is for implausible political threats. Obviously, the edit was almost certainly banter that cannot be backed up, but what is the official policy? WMF did follow up, but I'm not sure if I'm wasting their time. Jackson Peebles (talk) 18:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I believe you did the right thing. Overt threats should always be reported, and will be taken very seriously when directed against politicians. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Add multiple pages to watchlist at once

Hi everyone, I was curious if there was a way to add multiple pages to your watchlist at once using a script or something? Thanks. TBrandley 05:21, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, TBrandley! If you go to your watchlist, you'll notice that under it there are three options in parentheses. The one farthest to the right is "Edit raw watchlist". It will show you a little box with everything on your watchlist. You can add as many article names as you need to it and press "Update watchlist". Then everything will added and if you go back it will be alphabetized as well. Happy editing! öBrambleberry of RiverClan 20:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
No, I meant all pages from a category, for instance. Thanks for your assistance, however. TBrandley 20:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
You could achieve this using (for example) WP:AWB to create the list of articles, then pasting it in your watchlist per Brambleberry. If you wanted something more sophisticated, a custom script would probably be the way to go. Rich Farmbrough, 06:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Are my Sandbox Notes available to researchers/writers/editors? Hope so.

In my sandbox, I am assembling more references for a biography of a living person, sculptor, Valerie Maynard. Can others access my notes, and thus further the research/writing/editing process? Sistanance (talk) 17:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Good question! Yes they can. See for example my Sandbox which you can view and edit: User:Ukexpat/sandbox.--ukexpat (talk) 18:28, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I should note that unless you link to the page, it is unlikely that anybody will find it. Google does not index user pages, and it most people will not bother trying to access your sandbox directly. Include the link to it in your user page or post it to other users' talk pages if you want to get the word out. —Strachkvas (talk) 21:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Well written drafts on not so popular subjects get indexed by search engines. A __NOINDEX__ magic word can be used, which'll prevent it from getting indexed by search engines. Another similar option is Template:Userspace draft --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing Bio of living person

I have been trying to update the bio of my friend Brooke Medicine Eagle. Her work is controversial in some circles but the bio revision that keeps getting placed on the page is completely negative has incorrect factual information and my revision that I have offered in good faith - placed on talk pages and asked for help anyway I can find gets wiped out. I am new but I have been trying as best as I know how to meet the criteria of Biography of Living Persons. What do I do from here? she has 35 years of work as an author, recording artist, workshop presenter and spiritual teacher that is being negated by controversy much of it from the 1980's. I have not removed the criticism but am trying to add Biographical facts. I am very confused as to what to do now. Rickgmt (talk) 16:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I took a look at some of your edits on Brooke Medicine Eagle's page as well as your own talk page. It appears as though User:Dougweller replied to some of your concerns, and it is worth noting that he is an administrator and is more qualified than myself to help. Though I noticed some of your discourse between one another may not appear to be extremely friendly, he really is genuinely interested in the wellbeing of the encyclopedia. Coming to the Teahouse is a good indication that you are, too, and that this is a simple misunderstanding.
I strongly recommend making sure that all of your edits are referenced properly and thoroughly. In order to follow BLP rules, this is of the utmost importance. Furthermore, you may consider discussing proposed changes on the article's talk page in advance to establish consensus and get others' ideas and input as well as credibility. Make sure to include all viewpoints, even those you may not agree with, especially if they're sourced credibly. Finally, bear in mind that, simply due to the nature of your relationship with the subject of the article, it may be advisable, though it is not required, that you avoid the article simply due to a Conflict of Interest. I've run into this problem myself, and it's quite frustrating, but sometimes it's best to give input but let others make the changes to make sure they're fair.
I hope that this helps, and please let me know if you need any other assistance. Please also bear in mind that the administrators are always approachable, and if you have a conflict with an administrator or any editor, legal threats are not a good approach (quite frankly, you're lucky you weren't banned - it was a good move taking back what you said about slander) - rather, I would recommend approaching another administrator or bureaucrat as a mediator or simply calmly speaking with the administrator in question once the situation dies down. Best of luck! Jackson Peebles (talk) 18:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Rickgmt, and welcome to the Teahouse! As Jackson Peebles writes, references are absolutely key to developing Wikipedia articles, especially those on living people. References need to be reliable (eg newspapers and books) and preferably independent of the subject. I've found it can be tricky to develop articles about people I know because it's difficult to avoid the temptation to add material that I know to be true, but just can't reference. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:43, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Possible wikilinks suggestion

I somewhere saw a tool which suggest the possible wikilinks of an article. It is especially helpful for the newly created articles! But, (I can not remember) what/where was the tool? --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tito. Maybe mw:Extension:Mw(Ubiquity Script)? Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

dealing with multiple spellings for page title

I have created a page titled Kahal B'raira. If one searches for Kahal Braira, one wouldn't find the page. Is there some way to create a way to find a page with different title spellings?76.19.168.156 (talk) 20:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 76.19.168.156! The easy way to do this would be to create a redirect, which means that when people search for that term, they find the page. You would do this by creating the page Kahal Braira and putting in #REDIRECT [[Kahal B'raira]]. Now when people look up "Kahal Braira" they will go to Kahal B'raira. Happy editing! öBrambleberry of RiverClan 20:49, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. It worked great!Basilevine (talk) 21:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

External links in an article

Dear editors: I was reading an article This Week in Libraries about a podcast series with many episodes. In one section of the article there are a lot of external links to specific episodes in the series. Since there is a link to the series web site at the end of the article, should I remove these links in the middle of the article? They aren't references. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:01, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thought so - I'll do it now. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Hi, this is my first time in the Teahouse and it was me that created the This Week in Libraries article. It's useful to know why the links were edited out. Thanks Aliaretiree (talk) 04:36, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

How to link Wikimedia commons categories and Wikipedia articles with the same name

How do I get that little Wikimedia logo to appear in the bottom right of articles? The one that says 'Wikimedia Commons has media related to ...' I thought it would appear automatically if there was a category for the article title on Wikimedia Commons, but apparently not. Here is one example: Musgrave Park, Belfast and on Wikimedia Musgrave Park, Belfast. Or another example: St Killian's College and St Killian's College.

How do I get them to link?

Thanks. Penguin2006 (talk) 23:11, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Uh....I don't see what you are talking about.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Penguin. Please see {{Commons}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Also {{Commons category}}.
Rich Farmbrough, 23:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
Question from a host: What are we talking about?--Amadscientist (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Fuhghett, exactly what I was looking for. And thanks Rich too. Cheers Amad, thanks for the quick reply. Penguin2006 (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Things like this
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Moustaches.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Moustaches.

Rich Farmbrough, 23:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

I am familiar with those...but I didn't (and still don't) see them on the examples. Were those examples of where the editor wanted to place the template?--Amadscientist (talk) 23:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Amadscientist, if you look at the bottom right of St Killian's College you'll see there's now a similar little logo for that subject - I just put it there by adding a {{Commons}} tag at the end of the article. Really simple after all, I knew it would be! Penguin2006 (talk) 23:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Aha, I see what you mean now. I should have provided an example of one that was there instead of two that weren't. Sorry for being so confusing. Penguin2006 (talk) 00:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Oh thank god. I thought I was losing it there for a minute. LOL!--Amadscientist (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Ha ha sorry, and everyone else saying they saw this non-existent thing... you must have been rubbing your eyes. Penguin2006 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:19, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I spotted an error in an article. How do I point it out to an editor?

I don't feel qualified to edit the article. It looks like an artifact from a previous edit. Thanks, I hope I am in the right place to post this question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Browne

First lines under the Biography section:

The son of a silk merchant from Upton, Cheshire, he was born in the parish of St Michael, Cheapside, in London on 19 October 1605. was born on 19 November 1708 between the hours of 5:05 and 6:23 a.m.

PAULADEANIEMEANIE (talk) 19:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! If you see something wrong with an article, go ahead and change it! We even have a policy that condones this: Wikipedia:Be bold. Make sure, though, that you provide reliable sources when changing or adding something. Happy editing! Go Phightins! 19:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
OK Thanks. I appreciate the boost.

PAULADEANIEMEANIE (talk) 20:51, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

FrigidNinja fixed it. So much better now. Thanks.

PAULADEANIEMEANIE (talk) 20:58, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I was actually responding to your question just as Go Phightins responded, and was left with an edit conflict. FrigidNinja 22:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Finding infobox template

How do I locate an infobox template for a clergyman? Maineshepp (talk) 19:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm no expert on infoboxes, but I think Template:Infobox clergy is what you want. King Jakob C2 19:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. That's exactly it. I tried searching but couldn't get it right.Maineshepp (talk) 19:59, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

  • Google has been very helpful for me to find appropriate infoboxes. I generally search with "Wikipedia Infobox Word", for your question, see the search result page --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:19, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. What an excellent suggestion.Maineshepp (talk) 03:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Problem with incorrect Reflist

While writing an article for Wikipedia, I included a reference from Pubmed via its Pubmed ID. This worked fine and Wikipedia automatically extracted all facts about the publication. However, the spelling of some authors' names is incorrect; German umlauts and French accent symbols are not properly displayed. I would therefore like to manually correct the citation, but do not know how I can do that. Your help is really appreciated.Andreas Dräger (talk) 14:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Andreas. I don't think you can do it using the {{cite pmid}} template - what you'd need to do is re-enter those references using {{cite journal}} instead, which is a rather more time-consuming business (but affords you more scope to adjust the information). You can access umlauts, etc. via the Special characters menu at the top of the edit window. Yunshui  14:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi! You can find the data in the page Template:Cite pmid/number (one you've used the appropriate Cite pmid) - example Template:Cite pmid/12122621. This can then be cut and pasted to your article and fixed up. I believe that if you try to change the template Citation Bot might well "Fix" your fixes, effectively reverting you, unless you put a {{Nobots}} template in there - which my casue problems off its own. Rich Farmbrough, 20:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Do entries under the same title have to be identical in different languages?

Hello,

We are looking into providing an English version to a French entry and I was wondering if what we need to do has to be a direct translation of the original entry or can we provide an extended version in English? Many thanks, Kasia Kasialuther (talk) 12:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there! It can definitely be extended! As long as it follows the normal English Wikipeia rules about notability, verifiability and so forth. I look forward to seeing the article! Rich Farmbrough, 12:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

I am working on editing an article for an organization that changed their logo this year. I uploaded a non-free work and that got tagged for deletion. I then found their logo on their flickr page and based on their permissions, thought it was okay to use this, but this also got tagged. How can a I get a logo that I am allowed to use? Should I simply write to the company? Please help!!Hyppolyta (talk) 08:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The easiest way to accomplish this is to copy the rationale from the old logo[1] when you upload the new one as fair use. However...I am not sure that is really a change in the logo to be honest. It just looks like a slightly different version of the same one but you probably know more than I about that.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:07, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
To be fair even minor changes to logos are often considered important (and can be very expensive). The website seems to have a single coloured logo rather than the two-coloured logo on file. The best place to check would be the Austrian equivalent of Companies House. Rich Farmbrough, 09:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
Hi, the new logo will only be valid fair use if it is relatively low resolution and used on a page (note http://www.flickr.com/photos/salzburgglobal/8571778938/in/photostream says "some rights reserved"). The image on Flikr also seems to be the reverse of the image on the company website - most brand consultants will provide a variety of implementations of the logo, at different sizes and for different purposes. Rich Farmbrough, 09:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
I am not an expert in files, but the image on flickr is not compatible with Wikipedia. WP:COMPLIC states that CC-By-NC-ND licenses are not allowed in Wikipedia. And the license that is used in File:Salzburg Global Seminar Logo.jpg is CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 which cannot be used in Wikipedia. I am sorry but you cannot use the image on Wikipedia and I have tagged it for deletion. Instead you could use, probably not what you want, File:Logo - Salzburg Global Seminar.JPG, which have been retained in Wikipedia. Be bold and make some great edits to the article. Cheers --Ushau97 talk 09:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
You might want to refrain from giving advice on files if you don't know the polices, but thank you for trying to help.
Rich added an important detail, be sure you upload a low resolution version if using fair use. See the current logo for the appropriate size to upload.--Amadscientist (talk) 10:24, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
CC-BY-NC-ND 2.0 is not a free licence, so the logo can only be used on Wikipedia in accordance with the policy WP:NFCC. In particular, WP:NFCC#9 tells that you can't use the logo on the page User:Hyppolyta/sandbox because the page isn't an article yet. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Stefan2- I have uploaded the image to the Salzburg Global Seminar wikipage, which was my intent all along, I was just drafting changes in my sandbox. I don't know what I need to do to get this logo up! As someone inexperienced with Wikipedia, please suggest the additional steps I need to take (in non-technical language). Thanks in advanceHyppolyta (talk) 14:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that there is a policy which says that you may not use that image in your sandbox. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
So is the problem solved by uploading it to the Salzburg Global Seminar page, and not having it in my Sandbox?Hyppolyta (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, probably Face-smile.svg. We are, if anything, a little too strict over "fair use", but its best to go with the flow. Rich Farmbrough, 20:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Use ISBN-10 or ISBN-13 in refs?

When I'm filling in the ISBN number in the "ISBN = " section of the reference template, should I use the ISBN-10 or the ISBN-13 number? Many books give both of these. Many thanks! EMP (talk 23:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi EMP! Welcome to the Teahouse! As far as I'm aware, either is fine. If you are using one of the referencing templates, the ISBN will automatically be linked to a special page which allows the reader to look the book up at WorldCat and other places. I believe both formats work just fine for this. Hope this helps, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Hi EMP! As Espresso pointed out above, either is fine. However, our guidelines suggest that 13-digit ISBNs should be used where available. Even books that don't have a 13-digit ISBN on the cover can have their 10-digit ISBN converted, using this. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
A note of caution for that, meaning when converting 10 to 13....if the book is an older book, issued before an ISBN and not printed often, that can be tricky and not work. I think the best way is to stay with what is available, 10 or 13...Just my thoughtsCoal town guy (talk) 00:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
  • For particularly old books I generally just use the OCLC, especially since several of mine don't have dates. For example, at Oerip Soemohardjo both of the main sources have been out of print for nearly 30 years; they use the OCLC number. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Use ISBN 13, please, please. (Do not convert an ISBN 10 to ISBN 13 by just adding 978- the last digit has to be recalculated using a tool such as that suggested by Crisco1492 above.) ISBN 13 start with 978 or 979, but almost all of them start with 978. At some point mistakes are going to be made with 978/979 prefixes and 10 digit ISBNs, we have enough invalid ISBNs already, by trying to use 13 wherever possible we can help to standardise and reduce the opportunity for extra errors creeping in. Rich Farmbrough, 06:00, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
  • The OP was directed towards a site specifically for the use of converting ISBNs properly. I don't think anyone suggested just adding 978. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes I saw, I will change my comment to the slightly longer version I considered. Rich Farmbrough, 12:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
Much appreciate the most helpful info. Exactly what I needed. I will use the ISBN 13 if available, and if not, use the tool suggested by Crisco. (In the process, you have also alerted me to the WorldCat site, which I also appreciate!) Many thanks. EMP (talk 17:37, 20 March 2013 (UTC) 17:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Adding references for first person accounts or personal experiences

Hello, I working on my first entry about selecting brazilian rosewood for guitar making. I've been in this field buying and selling tonewoods for 20 years and have a great deal of hands on knowledge, first person "teachings" from masters and other sound sources The trouble is I can't find many in print references to support my writings. Nearly everything out there is written by other luthiers/wood dealers like myself. Do they quality as references? RobertGower (talk) 19:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You are probably familiar with the journals and trade publications for luthiers, and books written on the topic. Those are the sort of sources that you can cite. The sources need not be online, but be sure to give a full, detailed citation with title, author, publisher, page number, date and so on. Ideally, select from the most respected publications in your field. As an aside, avoid writing in the style of a "how to manual". Good luck, and thanks for helping improve the encyclopedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:48, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
It's very difficult to cite personal communication in Wikipedia, because of our insistence on verifiability. Despite a project in 2011 (Oral Citations) we still generally (almost always) need to be assured that there is a reliable source out there somewhere, which is at least in theory accessible to anyone. However it is not always necessary to have a source for something if you a sufficiently convinced that a reliable source exists, and that the information is not likely to be challenged. I hope that is some help. Rich Farmbrough, 21:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

hi there, question about new submission

Hi there,

Currently we have a declined submission of quite an interesting product, unique in the world...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fedsearchuser/Easy_federated_search

Is it possible to get this approved somehow, or is it lost time.

Fedsearchuser (talk) 14:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You need to read what it says in the grey box at the top of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Easy federated search. Follow the useful links that have been given to you there. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
ok will do. thanks.

Fedsearchuser (talk) 14:42, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Neither uniqueness nor being interesting in some individual's estimation is enough to justify a Wikipedia article: we require that the subject is notable in a specific sense, that multiple reliable sources, independent of the subject have written about the subject. If this has happened, they need to be cited in the article; if it has not yet happened, then Wikipedia cannot accept an article. --ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Should even know what Rollback means???

Hi Teahosts, Teaguests and other TeaHousers... So there I was looking up on a user's edit on his contributions when I found two links by the name [Rollback} and something else I don't remember... Curiosity kills the cat, but I'm no cat so I beat my urge to click on it... Should I know what it means or should I just lay off... And can I please become a Guest at Teahouse?? I'm very enthu about it and have loads of Questions to ask... Thanks for all your answers and advice that I'll recieve soon!! The Wikimon (talk) 13:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back, The Wikimon. Mm, "Roolbacking" [sic] is basically just reverting the previous edit. If you rollback this, it will be back to the second-to-most recent revision. I.e. your answer only, and without my answer. Hope this helps! Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey, not fair, I was just about to correct the spelling mistake!! Ok got it annd looked up on the page as well!!! :) Thank You!! Before I forget, congrats on an insanely funny user page.. All that it misses is a link to The Joker (Batman)!!!! The Wikimon (talk) 14:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Wikimon, actually rollback is a user access level that has to be granted by an administrator. Your account doesn't have this. The links you saw were probably from a tool such as Twinkle that you may be using. The function is basically the same, but technically different. Either way, such features should only be used against vandalism and other deliberately disruptive edits. Chamal TC 14:15, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
And to add to that, rollback is a requested user right. If you have a good record of editing an admin may well give you the user right on request. I just asked for it the other day and was granted it. It was my first request for any user tools on Wikipedia and I am hoping I can help fight off vandals.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Indeed it should say "undo", saying "Rollback" is confusing and misleading. Rich Farmbrough, 08:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Is my article still at WP:AFC in the queue?

Hi, yes I'm a newbie and I 'ahem', edited some code while creating an article. Is there anyway anyone can tell me if its still queuing acceptance? In getting to understand the sandbox I've moved it around and done all kinds of things to it, some of which may have been detrimental. ( ahem ).

Thanks in advance and stay classy! ThatChapSean (talk) 11:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

No, you decided to remove your AFC from the queue with this edit. If you want to put it back on the queue, undo that edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi there and welcome to the Teahouse! The submission has to have the {{AFC submission}} to the top of the article to be pending review. However, there's a huge backlog at AFC (over 2000!) so it may be easier just to create the article yourself.King Jakob C2 11:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Sean, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you mean Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sean Carswell, ( Director of Photography ), then no it is not currently submitted for review. You can submit it for review by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of it.
However, as far as I can see, at the moment it has no references. Article submissions need references to source that are independent of the subject. Newspaper or magazine articles that discuss Sean Carswell in detail would be ideal. Would books like histories of cinematography mention him in detail? These are the sorts of references you would use to prove notability so that the article can be accepted. If you're unsure how to add inline citations to references, there's a good simple guide at WP:REFB. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 11:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks David for your swift reply. I thought that may have been the case, hopefully I've rectified the situation

Best ThatChapSean (talk) 12:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, would it be better served by placing it here? WP:SELFPUB. And if so how do I correctly go about that as its, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons?

Thx yet again ThatChapSean (talk) 12:10, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi! WP:SELFPUB is a guidance page - wouldn't want to put it there. Or here on this page. Face-smile.svg Lets take a look and see if we can find some references. Rich Farmbrough, 21:17, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
OK, the issue with this article is likely to be demonstrating notability. Ideally you need to find at least two independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the subject. I have only found passing mentions, crowd sourced content and self-published material so far. Rich Farmbrough, 22:37, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

How do you upload a media file jpeg image?

Hello,

How do you upload a media file jpeg image onto your Wikipedia article? ĤÈĻļóóóóóóóóóó, My name is Joey, Im cool. Thanks, User0300 (talk) 02:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a fairly complex subject, as the answer depends upon the exact image in question. If the image is one that is in the public domain, then it may be uploaded to our free image repository, Wikimedia Commons. However, most images that you might have found on the Internet are not in the public domain, and they can only be uploaded here under very tight constraints. If you could tell us more details about the image you want to upload, and the article in which you want to use it, we can give you more specific advice. Powers T 02:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
HI, the short anser is, provided you are happy about copyright issues, "Toolbox" "upload". Rich Farmbrough, 09:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

can you make a bibliography of this website for me?

can you make a bibliography of this website for me?131.191.110.127 (talk) 01:43, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you mean the whole website, or just a specific article? Articles have lists of their references at the bottom of the page... Go Phightins! 01:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm guessing that our correspondent intends to cite Wikipedia within a report or paper, thus needing the bibliographical formatting needed to cite a Wikipedia article. Information on that topic can be found at Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Powers T 02:06, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
In which case it's also worth pointing out the "permanent link" tool in the toolbox, that links to the given version of a page. Rich Farmbrough, 08:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Article for creation - Olympic results index

I have written an article that I wish to call Olympic results index. Currently it has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Olympic results index (on 04 March 2013). I have been waiting patiently for some news but apparently the backlog is huge. Do you think it would be OK for me to move it to article space myself? If I did what other considerations should I bear in mind? Jodosma (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jodosma, I see you've been busy! On the surface of things your page makes sense but I somehow think it won't be so straightforward. You were right to bring it here for advice, because I doubt AfC reviewers will be expecting something like an Olympics results index.
Because you are autocomfirmed you will be able to move the page directly to main article space. But it may be a good idea to raise a question at the WikiProject Olympics because they will have a better idea about what is already available. Normally this sort of navigation is carried out using 'Templates', for example like the one at the bottom of the Summer Olympic Games page. Maybe your page could be created as a 'List' article and called something like 'List of Olympic results'. A second or third opinion would be good! Sionk (talk) 21:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi there! I would say this is essentially OK as a list article, we have many such lists. I would be cautious about the name, maybe something like "List of Olympic results articles" or "List of Olympic results articles by sport" (to allow the complementary ""List of Olympic results articles by year". Rich Farmbrough, 11:58, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
See you all later! Try to spot the stupid changes.

'Bold text'''''''Bold textÁ