Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 920

Archive 915

←

Archive 918

Archive 919

Archive 920

Archive 921

Archive 922

→

Archive 925

Edit-a-thon attendee question

Hi - I am part of a group hosting an edit-a-thon tomorrow, and one of the attendees who has signed up online is using an IP address associated with possible vandalism and edit warring. I'm not sure who this person is, and whether they are the person who has made these questionable edits (or whether they just happen to share the IP address with another person making the edits). Do you have any advice for how to handle this situation, especially if the person comes to our event and engages in unproductive editing? extabulis (talk) 19:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Extabulis, Is this your event? https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Corning_Museum_of_Glass/Corning_ArtAndFeminism_2019 I would assume good faith and not worry too much about vandalism from an IP. The event (if it is what I think it is, and you use the dashboard) requires that all participants create an account anyway. Good luck tomorrow, Vexations (talk) 20:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Vexations - Yes, that's the event. Sorry, I should have linked to it! Okay, I figured most people attending an edit-a-thon would be coming to make useful contributions. (I've never had someone sign the meetup attendees list with an IP before, which was the only reason I looked into them in the first place.) Thanks very much for the advice! extabulis (talk) 20:29, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

American football infobox text size inconsistency

Hi there, I've not been into the Teahouse for ages, but I wanted an opinion on a trivial matter and hope it won't take up too much of your time. The text in Template:Infobox person (e.g. Freddie Mercury) uses a slightly smaller font size than the body text, presumably to make it neater, less intrusive? Lots of other infobox templates are based on it, so I would expect them to follow the same format, but I've noticed that the infoboxes for American football players are inconsistent. Template:Infobox NFL biography (e.g. Tom Brady, Peyton Manning) appears to use the same font size as the body text (or very close to it), so it looks out of place because it doesn't match what I'm used to seeing in infoboxes in general. Template:Infobox NFL player (e.g. Bob Williams (quarterback)) also uses the larger font size – in fact I think it's just a redirect to Template:Infobox NFL biography so they use the same code anyway. However, Template:Infobox gridiron football person (e.g. Robert Williams (quarterback)) appears to be OK, i.e. it uses the smaller font size like in the generic Template:Infobox person. Can you throw any light on the discrepancies, and do you think it might need clearing up? Thanks, Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rodney Baggins, well spotted. Most infoboxes like Template:Infobox gridiron football person don't specify font-size so they get the default for the infobox class. This is given by font-size: 88%; in MediaWiki:Common.css. The code of Template:Infobox NFL biography overrides the default with font-size: 90%, font-size: 95%, font-size: 100% in different places. An archive search at Template talk:Infobox NFL biography finds some discussions. It may be a factor that the infobox wants a smaller size for some of the content but doesn't want the smallest to be too small so it starts at 100%. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia

Hi! I am very new to Wikipedia an am overwhelmed with how to submit. I tried submitting an article that only included one sentence (thinking that it would be easier to get it up and running). It was rejected and now I am not sure what the best next step is to resubmit. Do I edit the source? Or try again with more text/sourcing? Also, what exactly is the 'visual editor? Any advice/help is appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applegatem3 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@Applegatem3: The VisualEditor is a tool that you can use when editing Wikipedia without having to learn wiki markup. Please read WP:VE for more info. I will let someone else answer your other questions. Mstrojny (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Applegatem3, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. In the early days, that was how some people started articles, but we have come a long way since then, and become more careful. Writing a new article is one of the hardest things to do, and I usually advise new users to spend a few weeks or months working on existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before they try it. (As well as having a less frustrating time themselves, I believe that they will often add more value to the encyclopaedia that way than by adding a new article: we have a lot of articles that need some TLC!) But when you do want to have a go, we have a number of ways to help you, of which one of the most important is Draft space, and the articles for creation process. Have a look at your first article to see how that works, and come back here if you have specific questions. --ColinFine (talk) 21:13, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Are there rules about cultural influence on the wikipedia content

For exemple on the en wikipedia, the baby boomers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomers article contains 3 photos of american presidents.

Maybe this is a bad exemple for historical reasons etc., but do you get my question ? Should the encyclopedia be generalist and talk of every country or should the english version talks more of english countries even in non-country related articles ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.205.225.119 (talk) 22:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

The picture is illustrative of how much influence that generation has on American politics -- three presidents born the first year of the Baby Boomer generation.

The article goes on to list dozens of boomers from around the world.

The English version of Wikipedia will cover any topic there are reliable sources for, not just those limited to the Anglosphere. There is the slight problem that because most of the users primarily speak English and often only have access to English-language sources, we're less likely to cover topics that have not been written about in English, but that's considered something to push against. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:14, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Is Customer Service Article Completed ?

Respected Host, I am Knowiunderstandit (talk) 17:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC) interested in Customer Service article in Wikipedia, I apologize but unfortunately it is not fulfilling all important contents which a reader must need to know about customer service in a good article. For examples, a proper definition of customer service is absent. Types of Customer Services are absent; Philosophy of customer, Origin and history of customer service is absent. Methods of customer service are also missing. Worldwide trend of customer service, General Principles of Customer Service and also Relationship/ Conflict between Customer Service and Culture are not mentioned. How we can make it a complete and perfect article ? Thanks Knowiunderstandit (talk) 17:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

One potential issue you need to look out for is that some of your sources (like the American Express and Crewapp ones) are commercial sources. You should really stick to academic literature. You also need to make sure that your references rather explicitly support your point. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Knowiunderstandit. On a general level, you probably can't make the article "complete", because all articles are works in progress. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a work in progress on this. Of course, some articles are better than others, and we should aim to cover all major aspects of a topic in its article. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

References

"Good Article" has a specific definition for Wikipedia. Customer service is currently rated Start-class (a long way off from achieving GA) even though it has been an article since 2004. David notMD (talk) 22:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Etiquette question: Should I tell them I meant no offense, or must I continue not commenting on the person?

Hello, friendly editors. 🙂 I was wondering if I could have the opinion of an experienced editor regarding etiquette.

Here is the situation: I was in a talk page and addressed another editor directly regarding their edit, via ping. A third editor entered the discussion. We exchanged one messages each. Next thing, in their second message, this third editor wrote "The revised phrasing is a huge improvement. Period. Secondly, WP:CIVIL." Okay, neither of us said anything even remotely uncivil. We were addressing the subject so far. If anything, I think saying "period" is uncivil; it is a rather blunt demonstration of being adamant and closed-minded. But unless I am much mistaken, "Secondly, WP:CIVIL" translates into "Secondly, stop being rude."

Now, the question is, what should I do now? Should I continue to address the subject matter only, refraining from commenting on the person? Or should I start to explain that I never intended any offense?

Also, must I ping the involved editor and invite them here? Extremecia (talk) 07:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Extremecia: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Since you don't mention the other editor specifically and are asking about your own behavior you don't need (IMO) to ping them here. In looking at the discussion I'm not sure why the other user saw it as uncivil; maybe the questions seemed aggressive to them, but I don't see them that way. If you are concerned about it, you could simply say "Thanks for your reply, I did not mean to give offense and I apologize". Other than that, I think I would just let it go. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

White space

The conversation at Talk:Broadway#White space would benefit from advice from an expert on why white space occurs in one browser but not another after the use of {{tocright}}. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

For info: This post has also been repeated at WP:HD and at Template talk:Clear. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

I want to create a page for my company and myself

I have achieved something notable and wanted to create a page about my company and also myself. I am the founder and President of FSD Pharma Inc. My company went from a valuation of 15 Million $ to over 1.2 Billion $ in less then six months My company broke all trading records in the history of the Canadian Stock Exchange ( CSE ) where it is listed All evidences and proofs of the things that I am talking about can be provided and is in the public domain anyways as my company is public The company's website is www.fsdpharma.com Please guide me on how to create a page for my company and if possible also myself

Thank you and best regards

Zeeshan Saeed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeeshan1970 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Zeeshan1970: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for asking. What you want to do would be highly discouraged by Wikipedia. You have what Wikipedia calls a conflict of interest(please click that link to review). Writing autobiographies is also highly discouraged by policy. Since you get income from your company you are also a paid editor(compliance with that policy is mandatory per Wikipedia's Terms of Use) These policies mean that you should avoid directly editing about your company as it will be difficult for you to edit with a neutral point of view, as people naturally write favorably about themselves and their work. Please understand that as an encyclopedia Wikipedia is not interested in what an article subject wants to say about itself, only in what independent sources state.

If your company has done as you claim, it will not be long before independent editors notice your company in independent reliable sources and write about it. You can make a request at Requested Articles but that process is severely backlogged. As for yourself, if the only thing you are notable for is your company, you probably would not merit a standalone article about yourself, you could only be mentioned in the article about your company. Please read the notability guidelines for people (WP:BIO) and for companies(WP:ORG).

I would also note that an article about yourself or your company is not necessarily desirable; please see this page. Any information about you or your company, be it good or bad, can be in an article about you or your company as long as it appears in an independent reliable source. See Robert Kraft, an article about a businessman who recently had a scandal and was charged with a crime. He probably does not want it discussed in the article about him, but it is because the information appears in independent sources. 331dot (talk) 08:13, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

It is possible that the Canadian, indoor, cannabis-growing company you founded will become noteworthy by Wikipedia standards, with a mention of you within the article as founder, but without there being sufficient coverage of you as a person to warrant a separate article about you. David notMD (talk) 10:02, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

List of notable awards

Hi, do we have a list of awards that are considered notable, enough to fulfill WP:ANYBIO. Because most new bio articles are based around the fact that the person has won some award. Daiyusha (talk) 03:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Daiyusha: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I am not aware of a specific list of awards that are considered notable, that would probably be hard to compile given the large number of awards around the world of varying notability. Some are obvious like a Grammy Award or an Academy Award; others would depend on how well the award or its ceremonies are covered in independent reliable sources. If an award has a lot of coverage in independent sources, especially outside of the award's local area, that would be an indication that it is well-known. Something like the "Anytown, USA Best Actor Award" that gets little coverage would not be notable. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

As a rule of thumb, if the award has a wp-article (or at least a re-direct to the org that gives it or something), or if a reliable independent source bothers to write something about that the person got the award, it's probably notable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Daiyusha, we do have List of awards, no idea how complete it is! valereee (talk) 10:12, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Easy Question - How does a page move from Draft?

I've looked and have not been able to figure out the process yet. Thankful for Wikipedia though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Council.exchange (talk • contribs) 11:44, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Council.exchange: Wikipedia doesn't allow shared accounts, articles are not directory entries for companies to promote themselves or their owners on. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:10, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Italicise

I am creating a new article, but I don't know how to italicise its title. Can anybody please tell me how? Catinthedogs (talk) 11:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Catinthedogs. MOS:ITALICTITLE tells you exactly when and how to italicize an article's title. Cheers. Extremecia (talk) 12:26, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I need some help creating my account page.

I've seen things like

This user wants to save the whales.

on different accounts but I'm sure which ones I would like to add to my account. Does anyone have a list of the codes or help about this topic? Thanks, Sloth

SlothGamer (talk) 13:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

SlothGamer those are called userboxes; you can find info at Wikipedia:Userboxes --valereee (talk) 13:58, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

And, hm, looks like your user page is in violation of policy. You'll want to read the information at WP:User pages valereee (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

valereee hello and thank you, I have also taken the bits off my account that violate the terms, and once again, thanks. SlothGamer (talk) 16:23, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Is there a way to tag drafts that have been submitted for consideration?

I'm curious why some of my drafts have been reviewed/approved within days and others are sitting many weeks. Are there reviewers for specific areas of interest and if so, is there a way to designate that in the article? I know I can't add categories yet. Or is it just luck of the draw? Thanks. Actaudio (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Actaudio, welcome to the Teahouse! Drafts in the Articles for Creation process are generally reviewed in a random order. While others have made similar suggestions for subject-matter based reviewers, none have been implemented as far as I know. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:14, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Actaudio. Each reviewer voluntarily chooses which draft to review and which to pass by. In my experience, drafts that are lean and concise, and lack any promotional content, and are referenced to indisputably reliable sources that clearly show the notability of the topic, will usually be reviewed promptly. Bloated promotional drafts loaded up with poor quality refererences that are ambiguous about notability are often passed by. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

deleting a copyrighted image

I uploaded an image not knowing the copyright. I would like to delete it. The page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Begeman_profile.png

How do I delete it. It is a plot in a scientific journal which I have used in one of my own papers. However, it originated in an earlier paper referenced here: Begeman, K. G. 1989,A\&A,223,47

This is part of my first article which I have just started working on after a hiatus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbrout (talk • contribs) 03:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bbrout. I have deleted the file as you requested. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

First publication was on 15th april or 9th april of Fagun newspaper

Hello !!

I have been around this article for some time about a newspaper article Fagun, but the sources are different, which source should be preferred.

• In this article the date of publication of newspaper is given as 15th april 2008 but their is no mention in the reference listed here:- as given in this article as its source|Allindiaaseca.
• I have found a source which has mentioned The first publication of Fagun as April 9, 2008 source:-| Orissa post

But its not sufficient to prove that on which particular date it is published. what to do next ? --Rocky 734 (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Rocky 734. If you think that one of the sources is reliable and the other not, just ignore the second one. (If you think people are likely to come and change it, because the less reliable source is popular, you could discuss it on the Talk page, or put a comment in the source, or both). If both sources seem to be generally reliable, just quote both dates, citing each one, but you should not attempt to resolve the disagreement in the text. If you think neither is reliable, don't put the data in. --ColinFine (talk) 10:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Rocky 734. Another alternative is to state that the newspaper was founded in April, 2008, and omit the specific date. For the reader, that avoids a confusing presentation about a very minor point. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:49, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Need help with requested articles with existing images

I put Wikipedia:Requested articles/Images together ages ago and maintained it for years. I haven't got the time these days.

Is anyone interesting in repopulating it with good items? It gets a solid 60 page views a day, so could mean plenty of new articles over time. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:55, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I'm brand new to the editing side of Wikipedia. I might be interested in this if you could explain to me how it's done. I'm looking for a regular maintenance project to take on. Oetc (talk) 06:24, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome, Oetc. That sounds good. However, let's wait until you have at least a few hundred edits. Right now, you have 10 edits. Having a little more experience with markup would be good. Plus, before I teach you how to maintain the page, I'd like to know you will actually stick around. Please let me know at my talk page if/when you are ready. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft

Should I get a draft approved before I get started on writing or does an approval process occur after it is written up? I have been doing a lot of research on upcoming music platforms for artists and am thinking of writing about either Create Music Group (articles in Forbes, Billboard, Fast Company, Variety) or Stem (articles in NY Times, TechCrunch, Hypebot). The companies are similar to Steve Stoute's company UnitedMasters which only has a couple references and gave me the idea. Any help would be much appreciated! I took a look at GNG after I was told here and thought these might be good topics to propose. Sorry for the long message. Thanks again all for your patience and help with a noob! Grimothy29 (talk) 05:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Grimothy29. Drafts are reviewed once they are submitted, but I can imagine that it would be frustrating to spend time writing and submitting a draft, only to be told that the subject does not meet the notability criteria, so it might be worth asking for advice on that here once you have decided on your topic. I wouldn't use UnitedMasters as a template - just because one article exists with only a couple of sources, doesn't mean that others will be accepted on that basis. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Grimothy29, for Create: the Forbes article is a full article on a single subject and a completely reliable source. Ditto the Billboard article. Fast Company is just a short blurb, but doesn't hurt. Variety is a shortish article, but it's completely on Create and the source is reliable. I think you're good to go for an article on them. valereee (talk) 10:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee and Cordless Larry: Thanks for the direction. I will go through the Article wizard to see if I can figure this out! Grimothy29 (talk) 20:03, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Publishing my wikipedia page - Akeem Griffiths

Good afternoon,

I was wondering if you could help me. I have recently published a wikipedia page for myself which i can visibly see. How do i publish it so when people type in my name on google my name appears ?

Many thanks,

Akeem — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkeemGriffiths (talk • contribs) 17:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@AkeemGriffiths: You created a user page, which is not for promoting oneself.

Because you are Akeem Griffiths, read WP:COI and WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY to understand why we strongly discourage writing about yourself or even editing an article about you.

If, after reading those, you insist on trying to write about yourself anyway, follow the instructions on this page. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Oh, and another thing @AkeemGriffiths: Also read WP:OWN. Basically, it's not "your" Wikipedia page. It is our page about you (if we don't delete it). Ian.thomson (talk) 17:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Publishing our wikipedia page - Akeem Griffiths

Hi Ian,

Many thanks for the quick reply.

I really appreciate your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkeemGriffiths (talk • contribs) 17:42, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Akeem Griffiths - Our Wikipedia page

Hi Teahouse,

I have now created my profile. I know i am asking several questions so apologies but is it the case of just waiting for our page 'Akeem Griffiths' to be published ?

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkeemGriffiths (talk • contribs) 18:20, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, AkeemGriffiths. Did you read any of the information which you thanked ian.thomson for providing?

• Wikipedia does not contain profiles. Not one.
• You may not use your User page to create something that looks like a Wikipedia article: it is a place where you may if you choose some information about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. You can add a small amount of more general information about yourself there, but the purpose of the page is to make yourself known to the Wikipedia community as a Wikipedia editor, nothing else.
• You are strongly discouraged from writing or editing an article about yourself.
• You may not use Wikipedia for promotion of anything or anybody, commercial or not. Period.

Please read the links ian gave you, and come back if you have any further questions. --ColinFine (talk) 18:33, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@AkeemGriffiths: As Ian and Colin pointed out, Wikipedia is not for you to promote yourself or your achievements. If you are truly notable (by our standards), someone will create an article about you sooner or later. That said, I moved your attempt of a draft in your user space to the draft space and entered it into the articles for creation system. You can now find it at Draft:Akeem Griffiths. You can edit that page and if an experienced editor finds the draft sufficiently establishing notability, they will move it to the main space. Regards SoWhy 20:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Colin,

I have read the content that was previously provided and the information was very useful. I completely understand that this is not a place to write an autobiography and it strongly advises that i should not publish an article about myself which i fully understand.

I don't know what the process is and my knowledge is currently lacking from a wikipedia perspective but i will do the relevant research as what i want if possible is an article written about me so when people type in my name in the google search engine a wikipedia page displays with information about me so basically wikipedia identifying who i am.

The reason for this is wikipedia is a great encyclopedia tool and i want the world to know what i have achieved so far.

Unfortunately i am not a wikipedia editor.

I hope this makes sense and apologies for the constant questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkeemGriffiths (talk • contribs) 19:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@AkeemGriffiths: please don't start a new section when you want to reply to somebody else - just edit the existing section instead. As for what you want to do: if and when you become notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability, somebody who is not connected to you in any way will probably create an article about you. It is not something you can have any influence over, however. Wikipedia only documents what has already been written about a topic in reliable independent sources, it is not a place to spread the word about topics that have not been written about. --bonadea contributions talk 20:01, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@AkeemGriffiths: If you just want to tell the world about yourself on your own terms, you should use a personal website that you own, or social media. 331dot (talk) 20:09, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Colin did you the favor of moving what you created to Draft:Akeem Griffiths. This is a public place, in that other edits can add or subtract to it, but it is not in Wikipedia "Main Space" and thus does not turn up via Google searches. It has been submitted. I expect it to be declined. In addition to not creating proper references, I doubt you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Lastly, as noted above, People are STRONGLY advised not to try to create articles about themselves WP:Autobiography. David notMD (talk) 20:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you all i really appreciate the information that you havbe provided. I have a lot to learn about wikipedia. 21:15pm

Many thanks.

New article

How can I create a article on Wikipedia?

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to contribute. You can read about the new article process here: WP:YFA. This is not something easy to do for a new editor. The usual advice to is start by working to improve existing articles instead. You can also learn more at the WP:TUTORIAL or the learning game WP:ADVENTURE. RudolfRed (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@MacDanson: Also, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts by typing four tildes (like this ~~~~). Mstrojny (talk) 20:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Host

How or when does one become an experienced editor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MacDanson (talk • contribs) 20:21, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@MacDanson: Becoming an experienced editor takes time, we were all newbies at one point. Keep using Wikipedia and overtime, you get more experience about how Wikipedia functions. Mstrojny (talk) 20:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, MacDanson, welcome to the Teahouse. Mstrojny has answered succinctly; I will do the reverse. I could reply by asking you how long is a piece of string? I genuinely don't know how to answer your question about experience. It almost depends who's asking! Even after six or seven years here, with some 30,000+ edits, and after a year of helping others at the Teahouse, I still feel I have much to learn about how Wikipedia works. Am I experienced? Personally, I've tried to gain experience of many different areas, and now I think I know the basics that keeps this amazing, wonderful encyclopaedia working, and I understand how I can best interact with, or maybe guide and support other editors. Perhaps I am experienced enough to know that I am not yet that experienced!

But almost every day I learn something new about how things work here, and I can look back to when I'd made just my first few, and then my first few hundred edits and can see how inexperienced I then was. But every one of us starts from that point, just as you are right now, and we welcome you. We need new editors like you to stick around, to learn and to do their best and to become the experienced editors of tomorrow. Take small steps at a time; don't rush. What brings experience is not time; it's not repeating the same old things; it's doing new things and learning from your mistakes, or from others who interact with you along the way, gradually realising that you can answer more questions than you find yourself asking. I can honestly say that watching, learning and occasionally helping others here at the Teahouse has taught me so much. It's been an honour to be able to help out. When I first started I didn't know there was The Wikipedia Adventure; nobody pointed me towards Referencing for Beginners or Your First Article, or even Articles for Creation or this Teahouse. (I wish they had!)

Of course, there are certain more stats-based indicators of 'experience' used as a base measure in determining whether an editor should be given certain roles and responsibilities such as WP:NPP, WP:ROLLBACK, or being a Teahouse host. But, maybe it'll come down to you being able to decide for yourself when and whether you feel you've become an experienced editor, and also how others come to judge the quality of your contributions and interactions. Listen and act on what others tell you. There'll come a time when you think you are there, and then along comes something that makes you realise there's still so much more to learn. If others here at the Teahouse can help you in that journey to becoming an experienced editor, we've done our bit to help Wikipedia, too. Oh, and next time, could you sign your talk page posts by typing four keyboard tilde characters right at the end (like this: ~~~~) - it helps others know who posted what, and in what order. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:21, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Marked for deletion ... how to respond?

My article is marked for deletion. Where do I enter a response? Do I edit the marked for deletion notice or do I respond directly to the editor? Is the notice the talk page itself? Article is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roxy%27s_Ruler — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbrout (talk • contribs) 20:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Bbrout: There is a link in the notice at the top of the article: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Roxy's_Ruler. That is where you can respond and discuss the proposed deletion. RudolfRed (talk) 20:59, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Thank you. The only link I can find is this: "Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page." I assume I go there and edit the entry in order to respond? I am an absolute beginner to this. Bbrout(talk)

@Bbrout: That is correct. Read WP:YFA to learn what is needed for an article. It is not easy for a new editor, working on existing article's is a good way to get Wikipedia experience. You can also check out WP:TUTORIAL and the learning game WP:ADVENTURE RudolfRed (talk) 21:43, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Thank you. I am now responding back and forth in what is becoming a very interesting discussion. Luckily I have a friend nearby who does a lot of editing on Wikipedia. Bbrout(talk) 21:53, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

RationalWiki

Is the website RationalWiki related/connected to Wikipedia because the layout of the website looks identical. Same with Uncylopedia?

Stephengonzalez100 (talk) 01:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Stephengonzalez100, welcome to the Teahouse. Nope, no connection at all, apart from that it appears to use the same freely available mediawiki engine (see here), and thus has similar layout. We do have a neutrally-writtten article about it here on Wikipedia, if you're interested. See RationalWiki. I like the suggestion that, unlike us, it takes a SPOV ('snarky point of view'!), Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Welcome to the Teahouse, Stephengonzalez100. Neither of those websites has any direct organizational connection with Wikipedia or its parent organization, the Wikimedia Foundation. However, they share the same freely licensed software platform called MediaWiki, which is used by thousands of websites. That accounts at least in part for the overall similarity in appearance among those websites. Developers of smaller wikis may also believe that resembling Wikipedia in appearance adds to their credibility. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:22, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

We also have an article about Uncyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Why is not my artist profile published?

Hey,

I did our artist profile about 2 months ago and published it. But why is it not published yet? How long does it take?

Pleeeease help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobandJack (talk • contribs) 22:16, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Ummm, you mean User:RobandJack? I also see this from 2017.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 22:21, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@RobandJack: I would add that usernames that suggest more than one person uses the account, or that are a group, are not permitted; you will need to visit WP:CHU for instructions on how to change your username. 331dot (talk) 22:30, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

This account wrote a highly promotional pseudo-article about a musical duet called "Rob & Jack", which was first deleted in 2017, and then again today. Please be aware that Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promotion, and does not publish "profiles". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Unable to log in with username

Hi I have been inactive as a contributor for awhile now, but I would like to participate again. The problem is I have found my. username which is User:Mayalekhni. but forgotten the password. Unfortunately the system won;t allow me to reset the password as it says my. UN does not have an associated email address. Can you please help me with recovering my account? My email add is [REDACTED-THEGOODUSER]

thanks!

121.45.92.68 (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately unless you added your email address to your account, (which it seems you did not) there is not much that can be done. You will probably need to create a new account and identify it as a successor to your old one. 331dot (talk) 00:13, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I have created a. new account. (this time WITH an email add lol). Can you pls guide me to how I can link the two accounts? LekhniMaya (talk) 00:32, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

LekhniMaya You can't --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:49, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

LekhniMaya, I am sorry but Thegooduser is incorrect. You can edit your old userpage, adding a note stating that the account is inactive due to password loss, and providing a link to your new userpage. Similarly, you can add a note on your new userpage explaining that you formerly edited under the old account, and linking to the old userpage. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Cullen328 I thought they meant, that they wanted to add their new account to their old account, [ie log in to their old account with their new account.] --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Username vs User Page

I requested to change my user name but only wanted to change the title of my page because it had my username as the title. I still want my username to be what I log into my account with but my page name to be my real name since I am a notable recording artist. I researched how to rename it and I did do it. Did I do it correctly?— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎7light7 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 7light7. I have moved your old userpage to Draft:Kristle Murden. You are attempting to write an autobiography, which is both strongly discouraged and very, very difficult. In most cases, I would advise you to drop the effort. You may well be a rare exception to that general rule, because you were one of the lead vocalists on Can You Feel the Love Tonight in the 1994 film The Lion King, and that is a strong claim of notability. That song won an Academy Award for Best Original Song, and you are the only one of the vocalists who does not have a Wikipedia biography. Please begin by reading Your first article and you may want to complete the interactive training called The Wikipedia Adventure. Please be aware that any Wikipedia article about you will not be your page that you control. It will be a neutral, well-referenced article that will summarize what reliable, independent sources say about you. All major assertions will need to be properly referenced to reliable sources. Please feel free to ask additional questions here at the Teahouse, or contact me on my talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:30, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Your draft has way too much information in the Early life section. In general, the article needs to be modeled on articles about other successful vocalists. With all the references and discography that involves. I also believe your career meets Wikipedia's definition of notability, but the draft needs help. David notMD (talk) 09:18, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Can you help me to validate my own page in the sand box. See the link above

Dear all, I try to create my own page in the Sandbox and I got an error message. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ukunsumo#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation%3A_sandbox_%28March_11%29 Hi all, I am a freelance web developer based in Japan. I wanted to create my own page in the sandbox as shown on YouTube. I received an error message: "Submission declined on 11 March 2019 by PrussianOwl (talk). This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

Can you give me some advices on how to resolve this issue. Cheers, Remi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukunsumo (talk • contribs) 05:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Remi. It's not clear what you're trying to do with your sandbox. Are you trying to create a user page or a Wikipedia article? There's a big difference between the two and they are each subject to separate policies and guidelines. If you can clarify which of the two you're trying to create, it will be much easier for someone to help you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

First, please do not ask same questions at Teahouse and at Help desk. Your User page (see the link MarchJuly provided) is for a short description of your intentions as a Wikipedia editor. It is not supposed to be about you/your career. Wikipedia is not social media. There is no such thing as "my own page." On the very, very small chance you are famous/notable enough to be worthy of an article, Wikipedia strongly advises against trying to write about yourself. See WP:Autobiography. And sign your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 09:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Coding on table

I just did the 2019 lineup table on BBC Radio 1's Big Weekend and for some reason, it looks all messed up. Does anyone know how to fix it? It’d be a great help, thank you! – DarkGlow (talk) 12:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@DarkGlow: Hi, possibly you just need to add some spaces between internal links? Something like this:

[[Stormzy]] [[Mumford & Sons]] [[Bring Me the Horizon]]

Or, even better, add explicit line breaks:

[[Stormzy]] <br/> [[Mumford & Sons]] <br/> [[Bring Me the Horizon]]

CiaPan (talk) 12:36, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Waiting since months...

Dear helpers, I have posted and, after rejection, substantially updated two articles. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Complexity_Science_Hub_Vienna&action=history https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Stefan_Thurner&action=history

I am convinced they fulfil the Wikipedia criteria (especially when compared to other similar pages). I totally understand (and do not mind) some weeks of waiting; but meanwhile it is months, for one of the articles even half a year since I wrote it... Is that normal? What should I do to advance the process? (This is a rather frustrating experience, to be honest...). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avecaesaria (talk • contribs) 13:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Avecaesaria it appears that you submitted Draft:Complexity Science Hub Vienna for review on February 15, 2019 but it hasn't been reviewed yet. The AfC submission template states, "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take more than two months, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2382 pending submissions waiting for review." So, it can take a couple of months before an AfC reviewer gets to it. Try and remember that every editor (including AfC reviewers) is a WP:VOLUNTEER and sometimes editors get WP:BUSY with other things.

Draft:Stefan Thurner, on the other hand, does not seem to have been submitted for review since it was last declined in November 2018. Drafts are not automatically reviewed by AfC reviewers to check for improvements after they've been declined; they need to be actually submitted by their creators for another review.

There's no real way to speed up the AfC process, but you can ask for feedback at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Perhaps one of the editors helping out on that page can offer some more specific advice about the drafts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Avecaesaria: In the case of Draft:Stefan Thurner, you have not resubmitted it for review. Still, I would not do so yet. While you do cite independent sources ([1], [2], [3], [4]), they are not specifically or primarily about Thurner, just one thing he happened to be connected with (see WP:BLP1E). The rest of the sources are affiliated or connected with him in some way.

In the case of Draft:Complexity Science Hub Vienna, many of the sources you added either only mention the subject in passing (the primary subject of this source is Facebook, not CSH Vienna) or don't mention the subject at all (such as [5], [6]). The latter kind of reference is just a waste of everyone's time and bandwidth.

All you need to do is find a least three professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically and primarily about the subject but not affiliated with, nor connected with, nor dependent upon the subject, and summarize those. You can find more detailed instructions here. If there are not at least three totally independent sources specifically and primarily about the subject, then the subject is not notable. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Infobox Song problem

When I use {{Infobox song}}, and use the "tracks" parameter, the "prev_title" and "next_title" don't show. I don't know why this is. Catinthedogs (talk) 13:44, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Catinthedogs. Have you tried checking the template's documentation at Template:Infobox song#Track listing examples? There seems to be some discussion there on the use of the "tracks" parameter. Moreover, if This Is Lit is the article your trying to use this template in, then I'd be more concerned as whether the album meets WP:NALBUM instead of the the formatting of the infobox template because the article is likely going to end up nominated, tagged or proposed for deletion if you're unable to more clearly establish the album's Wikipedia notability. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:03, 11 March 2019 (UT

Need navigational template help

Please look at Template:Michael Jackson and see why group21 at the bottom doesn't display. I can't figure it out. Thanks. deisenbe (talk) 14:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: Probably it's because {{Navbox musical artist}} handles groups up to number 20. --CiaPan (talk) 14:21, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: How about this approach? I grouped four groups into a nested navbox: Template:Michael Jackson/sandbox. Some styling still needed. --CiaPan (talk) 15:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Help with Philosophy's definition

How can I request someone(s) look at the Talk page for Philosophy? There's an argument about the page's first sentence; Philosophy's definition. It's not easy thing to define. Some more opinions maybe useful.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Liberty5651 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

They may indeed be useful, provided they have been published in WP:Reliable sources.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Templates meaning

Can someone tell me of the template below?

Brohoof!

Thanks. --TheWinRatHere! 16:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Thewinrat. I'm pretty sure {{brohoof}} is something to do with Bronies. It has plenty of uses on User and talk pages: if you pick "What links here" you can look at some of them and see how it is used.--ColinFine (talk) 17:15, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

How to create new articles and protect them from new editors

How to protect your new articles from new editors so that it’s safe the way you create it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Citylightson (talk • contribs) 21:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, @Citylightson: that wouldn't be Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia Anyone Can Edit. There are probably other Websites that make you the sole, uneditable author of an article. Not Wikipedia, however. Jim.henderson (talk) 22:13, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Editing articles

When editing articles, I know "Publish changes" means to save the edits, but what's the difference between "Show preview" and "Show changes"?

97.90.47.253 (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi IP 97.90.47.253. "Show preview" shows you the entire article or section you've edited as it would appear to the reader after you click "Publish changes", while "Show changes" shows you a side-by-side before and after comparison of just those things you've changed with your edit. If you try it out on any page, even the Teahouse or your user sandbox, you should see the difference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Good answer. I rarely use "Show changes", except to help me describe my current edits in the 'Edit summary'. Sometimes I've spent so long that I've actually forgotten what changes I've just made! Seeing just those, as-yet-unpublished edits highlighted in bold can be really useful. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:14, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Quick question about Twinkle

I noticed that Twinkle doesn't have all of the warnings listed at Wikipedia:WARN. Why is that? Is it possible to configure Twinkle so that all of the warnings listed on the page are available for me to use? Also, does it matter whether I ask a question at the Teahouse or the help desk? Mstrojny (talk) 20:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Mstrojny. I'm guessing that Twinkle was set up just to offer the most frequently used notices. However at Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences#twinkle-config-section-11 you can custom edit additional warnings, and also custom welcomes. (I have one for Women In Red, for example that I use now and again, plus a couple of additional warnings I like to use.) It's fine to ask either here, or at The Help Desk, but we do frown on editors who ask the same question in two places at once. Give it six hours or more between asking elsewhere, so as not to waste volunteer effort in giving two identical replies. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I understood before you told me that asking the same question in two different places is not acceptable. I have seen editors asking the same question in two different places and they were told not to do that anymore. Mstrojny (talk) 21:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I think it would be a tedious process to add all of those warnings not listed in Twinkle. Is there an easier solution to this? Mstrojny (talk) 21:14, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Can we not have an option to specify a custom warning list, like we can article tags? Adam9007 (talk) 21:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you, Adam9007. I would recommend bringing that proposal up on Twinkle's talk page or Wikipedia:VPT. Mstrojny (talk) 21:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Adam9007: Sorry if my answer was unclear. What I was trying to say was that there already is an option, and that you can select and paste in the ones you feel you might want to use from other pre-existing templates in Twinkle's Preferences page, thus creating your own custom list of extras to pick from. You will find all the different types of templates at Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace, and more within that page's subpages. Or have I misunderstood what you are suggesting? @Mstrojny: you are right - it would be tedious to add them all to Twinkle. But do you really need them all? Bear in mind that there are also single issue notices, and single issue warnings and multi-level warnings for quite a range of common vandalism styles and other issues, I've never yet found myself wanting access to a massively long list of esoteric warnings which might even make the task of finding and selecting the commonly used ones much slower. I agree, that suggestions for making things even more effective should be raised at the Twinkle talk page. Finally, Mstrojny, I'm sorry if I misunderstood your question regarding WP:TH and WP:HD. In general, the Teahouse is probably better (and friendlier??) for newcomers to ask the simpler, less technical questions about editing on Wikipedia, whereas the Help Desk tends to get the slightly more difficult ones. After that, the really technical stuff can be asked at Village Pump (technical). And for those who can't be bothered to use Google of even Wikipedia to find stuff out for themselves, there's always a wide range of answers and opinions of varying quality on offer at the WP:REFDESK. Hoping this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I missed the option to add custom uw templates to Twinkle . I added some templates. Have I done it right? Is there a way to sort them? Adam9007 (talk) 22:20, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Adam9007: Stop putting me on the spot! I'm really not brilliant at interpreting the .js file. But here's a diff after I successfully managed to add a custom warning to my Twinkle settings recently - mainly as a test to help another user. They don't quite look the same, but I guess one could reorder them within the .js file - I'm honestly not sure as I've never tried. But feel free to test it out by leaving me any warning notices you want to on my user talk page over the next few hours - I won't take it personally, and far better than doing it to an unsuspecting user. Just remove them all after you've finished testing -perhaps with an edit summary such as "removing test warning templates per Teahouse discussion with user". I'd hate to wake up in the morning and find myself indefinitely blocked by half the admins here! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)