Wikipedia talk:Starting an article
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Starting an article page.|
|This is the talk page for the article Wikipedia:Starting an article. It is not a place to write articles, or experiment. For information on creating & writing articles, see Wikipedia:Starting an article. For experimenting, use the Wikipedia:Sandbox.|
|Questions about editing or using Wikipedia? You may get a faster response at Wikipedia:Help desk.|
|the Wikipedia Help Project|
- 1 Edit notice
- 2 Creating a page in Vector
- 3 Iron Maiden Greatest Hits
- 4 Help with starting a new wikipedia article
- 5 Create an article redirects here
- 6 Edit request on 20 March 2013
- 7 Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Four Award
- 8 WP:FOUR RFC
- 9 Pages on relatives
- 10 Naeem Liles
- 11 Chennadukkam
- 12 Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2014
- 13 Dr.V. Gengusamy Naidu
I've created an edit notice for this page, which is at Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Starting an article. If there should be no consensus for it, I'll G8 it. But it seems like it might help not only prevent off-topic edits, but also give those who are about to make them an idea where they might go instead. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:24, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Creating a page in Vector
The current instructions on how to create a page are:
In the search box near the top right of a page, type the title of the new article, then click Go. If the Search page reports "You may create the page" followed by the article name in red, then you can click the red article name to start editing the article.
This is no longer true. Since the switch to Vector, (1) there is no "Go", only a magnifying glass icon, and (2) there is no "You may create the page" or article name in red on the search results page. How should we instruct people to create a page now? Make a redlink and follow it? -kotra (talk) 17:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Iron Maiden Greatest Hits
For some reason, when I search for the article I want to create (which doesn't exist already), it doesn't come up with a red link to start the page. Why is this? Mollymoon 22:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alphius (talk • contribs)
Whatever is stopping you from creating such an article is what I would call a blessing in disguise as there has been no confirmation for such an album and it would save me the trouble of having to have the article deleted--Nerdtrap (talk) 11:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Help with starting a new wikipedia article
I was hoping that an experienced editor could help me with getting my first wikipedia article started off correctly - I have done the research and work to get content and citations to support to where it is now although I know that it still needs ongoing work to get it assessed as a good article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dsouthwe/Sandbox
one thing that concerns me is that Paul Thomas is a common name and I would like that when people search the name in wikipedia it comes up Paul Thomas (Founding Vice-Chancellor of University of the Sunshine Coast) and not Paul Thomas (pornographic actor) (born 1947), American pornographic actor and director.
Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.
Create an article redirects here
I am one of those anti-cross-namespace redirect Wikipedians and this is a sure sign of a cross namespace redirect. All I want to do is represent what one Wikipedian named Cyde once said:
- This seems like a solution that there's more trouble than just not doing the bad thing in the first place. Namespaces were created for a reason, so that the
uencyclopedic content would be separate. Changing the search makes the search results different, but the content is not fundamentally separate as it is in namespaces. Also I seriously question whether it is a good idea for each page in a Wikipedia: have a corresponding redirect in article space (but without the "Wikipedia:"). It seems really silly to me. I've deleted cross namespace redirects to various WikiProjects, personal essays, and other stuff. If you're going to say that is all fine because we could theoretically ask the developers to move cross-namespace redirects from the search results...what's to stop a really notable user to have a redirect in the article space? I'm a lot more notable than some random Wikipedia essay! Why can't I have Cyde redirect to User:Cyde? And ditto for lots of other users? I just don't think we should go down the road of letting thousands of cross-namespace redirects for every little Wikipedia: page and possibly lots of other stuff. The namespaces exist, use them. If something is namespace zero then it should be encyclopedic content, period.
- Also, cross namespace redirects tend to squat on pages and prevent valid encyclopedic content from being written. Until very recently Watchlist was a cross-namespace redirect because no one thought they could overwrite a cross-namespace redirect with valid encyclopedic content. A cross namespace redirect to Wikipedia policy just looks too "official" and most users arriving there accidentally expecting an article aren't gonna realize they could write that article. I have a feeling that if our policy on cross namespace redirects had been a lot stricter get-go, Watchlist would've been created as an article a long time ago and would be much better article by now. That's just one example, but I've ran across a few other examples of cross-namespace redirects squatting on encyclopedic article names. The risk of losing material valuable to the encyclopedia is not worth the dubious editor benefit it provides.
--Cyde, a well-established Wikipedian.
Now, reading over that quote, there are a few things I want to say. First up, I can never locate my own Watchlist so I can link to it, but I might've saw where you were going with the whole "squatting on encyclopedic content" thing. Next, that's what Wikipedia's all about! It's about contributing to what other people write, not having a person make a well-established article in a few days! So I also want to say, thank you, Cyde. I would've never been great enough to say something like that. So you really help me with this comment, and you should be thanked that I used yours.
Edit request on 20 March 2013
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Four Award
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Pages on relatives
I've seen pages added about a brother, that may have been a notable academic (both). Does that fall under friends? Might not. Might still be notable, should relatives/(siblings only?) be mentioned under things to avoid, just in case? Or is it allowed (how distant?)? comp.arch (talk) 12:25, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Naeem Liles is one of the youngest inventors known to man. He hasn't put his products in stores because he is still working on a line of products. He is working on a water maker, walk on water shoes, and an underwater phone. He got the idea of the underwater phone because when he was four years old and dropped his sister's toy phone in a puddle of water when it was raining. He thought that since phones were expensive, then why should they deserve not to be treated like they were expensive. His products are still in the works and is taking his time to make the products perfect. As a young child, Naeem wanted to be an engineer because he had an interest in designing and making cities. He hated traffic and thought that if he could make the highways bigger with more lanes then that would reduce traffic. He had another interest in trains and always would watch New York City trains on the computer just for fun. He even drew a route for a Bee Line bus in westchester and got a call back weeks later. Naeem is currently in high school and is working on inventing the very first water maker. He said "Since water is just hydrogen, and hydrogen is molecules, then I might be able to figure out a way to capture the molecules and make water, but that doesn't sound realistic". He kept the idea for three years and finally decided to work on it in 2013. He still hasn't invented it, but it is in the works. He wanted to make a water maker because he didn't want the world to run out of water since that is one of the elements that is keeping us alive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Templeguy99 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2014
|This edit request has been answered. Set the