Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1045

Hello Teahouse,

I am currently working on a Wikipedia page of my favorite writer, Rose Tan. Link: Rose Tan. My goal is to keep the Philippine literary alive and updated and for people to be aware that such writer exists. In her Bibliography, I have added a list of her creations that I got from my own collection of books or from people in the Philippines that has the complete collections (Link of the list from fellow collector: ^[1]).

The following reasons for not having these lists available online: 1. As stated above, the said list is available from the people that bought the printed books from the 90's to present. 2. The Philippines is only recently emerging from paper-based. The publisher themselves does not provide these full details except for their site that sells these books. Link: ^[2]

These sources are being a problem and deleting the entry because: 1. These sources are discussing the resources in Facebook which would mean that Wikipedia would not consider it as a reliable source. 2. Wikipedia would consider a website that sells these books as an advertisement and not a reference.

My questions now are: 1. If I present the facebook group link as a reference, would it be counted as valid resource? 2. Are the blogs from the readers enough to suffice? Wordpress, forums, Tumblr, etc? 3. Is it enough that the editors (in this case me) have read all her works in printed? 4. Can you tell me (straight to the point) what else I can do for the article not to be deleted?

Straightforward responses would be highly appreciated. Thank you.

FeistyHonor (talk) 23:19, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi FeistyHonor. The article's primary shortcoming appears to be the absence of Tan's coverage in reliable published sources. If nobody has written about her, lists of her publications are moot, as no lasting article is possible on WP.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your response Quisqualis. With regards to "nobody has written about her", there are a lot of people that has made reviews for her works. Please see: Good Reads ^[1] and other blogs about her work: Wordpress ^[2] Can you let me know if these references are not enough?

According to: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources, reliable sources are as follows: The piece of work itself (the article, book) - her books are shown in both the publisher's shop page and on the wordpress blog I mentioned: https://therosetancollections.wordpress.com/. I would like to repeat that all her works are published in print since the 1990s. The creator of the work (the writer, journalist): I have added on the article the webpage of the publisher that features the said writer and her wattpad page The publisher of the work: the website of the publisher

Please let me know why these are not enough since she is a living person and her works are all printed. Thank you so much. FeistyHonor (talk) 10:28, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

The problem I see, FeistyHonor, is that the sources you cite are not independent of your article's subject, and one is a blog. Those features exclude them as reliable sources. Reviews in mainstream publications (in any country) would qualify as reliable sources, as would articles about the author herself or her works (but not interviews).--Quisqualis (talk) 16:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, FeistyHonor. Absolutely nothing written, published, or said, by the subject of an article contributes to their notability for Wikipedia's purposes. Nor does anything written, published, or said by their family, their associates, their publisher, or their agents; nor does anything from random people on the internet (which covers most material on social media, Goodreads, wikis, and other user generated sites.) What is needed is substantial material about the writer or her works, written by people wholly unconnected with her, and published by reputable publishers or organs unconnected with her. Book reviews in major newspapers would be good. The good news is that these sources do not have to be online (or in English). If you have some good quality reviews from pre-internet newspapers, that might be enough. Note that, even for sources which are available online, the important bit of a citation is the bibliographic information: author, title, date, where published: a URL is a convenience for the reader, not core of the citation. --ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ColinFine Thank you for your feedback. The case is not that there are no articles written about her. I have external and credible references regarding her work:

https://www.rappler.com/entertainment/34612-pulp-fiction-pop-lit https://entertainment.abs-cbn.com/tv/updates/18042218-throwback-precious-hearts-romances-presents-bud-brothers-2009 https://youngstar.ph/unmistakable-charm-of-precious-hearts-romances/ https://lifestyle.inquirer.net/186385/precious-pages-corp-launches-25-most-precious-coffee-table-book/ https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/lifestyle/content/448749/forever-yours-the-enduring-appeal-of-the-pinoy-romance-novel/story/

What is missing now for the source that Wikipedia is looking for are the reference on where I got the list of all her works. I have found them through forums on facebook that were uploaded by her readers. I'm not sure anymore how I could have the list of her works made available to the public.. Unless I will write about her, to which I am in no case a writer lol FeistyHonor (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, FeistyHonor. WP:MOS-BIBLIO says "Complete lists of works, appropriately sourced to reliable scholarship (WP:V), are encouraged, particularly when such lists are not already freely available on the internet" (my emphasis). If you cannot find a reliable source for a work, then I'm afraid it shouldn't appear in the article: period. Having said that, I think primary sources would do: if for example she had a website herself. But unreliable sources like Facebook (unless it is is an official page of the artist's), and purely commercial sites, won't do. --ColinFine (talk) 00:05, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

I’m new, I have some time to spare each week.

I can copyedit English articles, I have experience with databases, and I have subject matter knowledge in a few flavors. Where do I find out where I can be of use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.131.226.123 (talk) 21:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi 66.131.226.123, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you're interested in copyediting, you might want to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. I can offer some advice on the subject matter knowledge, but it would be helpful if you could be a bit more specific so I can think about what the best response should be. Clovermoss (talk) 21:43, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Whether you choose to create an account or remain an unregistered IP number, 'sign' you comments by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 23:19, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

In addition to Clovermoss's suggestion, you can also pop on over to the Task Center section of the community portal for a slightly more varied stream of tasks to be done. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:24, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Just a nudge toward WP:REGISTERing – it gives you the ability to configure your preferences, access to various gadgets, etc., all of which make life easier when working here. It also masks your IP address from view, which allows for improved security/anonymity. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:34, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Could someone please advise how I can make a complaint to an administrator about being targeted by another user who I feel has targeted me for reasons I don't understand and has been harassing me in various ways? Thank you!LorriBrown (talk) 21:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: the best place is WP:ANI. Be sure to read the advice at the top of the page first. In particular you must notify the user about the complaint, and you should keep your complaint as succinct as possible, backing up any allegation with links to specific diffs. And be prepared for your own conduct to be reviewed as well! Hug^syrup 22:04, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

​While it is possible to post at WP:ANI, it is a last resort for cases where all other options have been tried. If you don't want someone to contact you anymore on your talk page, you can just request "Please don't write to me again" which most editors try to respect. Some interactions on Wikipedia can feel a bit like targeting even if the other editor didn't mean for it. I don't see anything in the discussions you're referring to that would result in an administrative action. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi LorriBrown I was really concerned to read this post, as I did know you were having a bit of a tussle over edits to an article you created, and perhaps wanted it deleted, though I couldn't see anything obvious on your recent talk page posts. Hugsyrup is right, the correct place to raise concerns is at WP:ANI - Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. We do have a policy on Harassment (at WP:HARASS)), including a section called 'Dealing with Harassment' which contains important guidance if anything has happened on or off-wiki, or if you feel so concerned about your safety that you want to raise your concerns privately with the Arbitration Committee. I don't know whether from our previous contacts you and I have had that you feel you can trust me - I would like to think so. But you are very welcome to email me directly (link on left side of page) and explain the issue that are concerning you. If they are on-wiki I'd be happy to take a look and offer you some thoughts on how best to deal with it, especially if you do intend to go to ANI. I'm no expert, nor do I have any special powers, but this is just a genuine offer of support or a second opinion in case you think it might help. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:29, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, LorriBrown. I am an administrator, and I think we have had some slight contact in the past. I agree with what Þjarkur, and Nick Moyes, have said above. I will add that you are free to post on my talk page, or to send me email via the "email this user" feature, if you wish. I will see what I can do to help, within the limits of Wikipedia policy. Or you can go straight to ANI if you choose, but that is not always the most comfortable or wisest course. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:37, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi everyone!

I am organizing two Art+Feminism events this year here in San Diego, one in the Spring and one in the Fall in the lead up to the 2020 election. What is the best way for me to connect with WikiProject Women members who might be interested in 1) participating either in-person or online and/or 2) be willing to help as a trainer/instructor/helper during these events? Any guidance is appreciated!

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Praxis2020 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Praxis2020, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have just left a welcome message on your home page about the Women in Red WikiProject which you might find of interest. WP:WikiProject Women is a closely related project, and to reach the members of either project, you simply post your message on their respective talk pages. eg Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women. I'm assuming this is some sort of Editathon, and you might wish to advertise add your event on the editathon diary. The one at the bottom of Wikipedia:How to run an edit-a-thon seems no longer to be updated. I think there is one on a related website's dashboard, but I cannot think of the link offhand. Let us know if you'd like us to find it for you. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:39, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I'm a new editor on Wikipedia and I was trying to make a new article but I was having trouble uploading an image, if any of you could help I'd really appreciate it! Thank You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbaramansing (talk • contribs) 16:12, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Work on getting the draft accepted first. Right now, declined for lack of valid references. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be a WP:COI at this article: Hershey Felder. I've left a message on the Talk Page Talk:Hershey Felder and the editor's Talk Page User talk:OGT90201; however, I believe they are not a registered user so it may have gone unnoticed. I did an overhaul on this article some time ago due to the obvious WP:resume style by the original creating and continuously editing contributor. Of course it is never 100% that one can tell if the subject is contributing; but since the editor in question started the article and has only contributed to this single article (not to mention adding content that would imply a direct connection), it would seem the connection is clear. Any advice? Maineartists (talk) 01:01, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

They only have no user page, a not logged-in IPv4 user would look like this: 84.46.52.59 (talk) A strictly single purpose account since 2008, but rarely logging in. –84.46.52.59 (talk) 02:57, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

OGT has recently edited the article in question. I agree that minimally, should declare what is obviously a COI, and I suspect Paid. David notMD (talk) 08:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, David notMD. Agreed. Considering the article, I would imagine "OGT" to stand for "Our Great Tchaikovsky" with perhaps their zip code? Maineartists (talk) 12:34, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

OGT commented on my Talk page, denying COI or Paid. I advise OGT to make that statement on own Talk page. David notMD (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

An article about critic John Simon misquoted me. I am a playwright named Jonathan Leaf. I noted this in the article. Then I later changed the article. Wikipedia sent me a not telling me to use Teahouse to alert editors about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan I Leaf (talk • contribs) 16:56, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

​Hello Jonathan, yes the text you added here didn't belong in the article just because we don't include editorial notes. Your next edit is fine if the content is indeed not backed up by the cited source. If someone reverts you, you can discuss this on the article's talk page. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Þjarkur and Jonathan I Leaf: I haven't reverted it, but I've a question at Talk:John Simon (critic)#Quote from article by Jonathan Leaf. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, does anyone know how can I get my article approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily Wan Jo (talk • contribs) 20:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Lily Wan Jo, You can wait. You've submitted it to AfC, so it's just a matter of time and someone will review it. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 20:43, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: draft is Draft:Imam Shah. There are always 3,000 to 4,000 drafts at AfC. It's not a queue, reviewers select drafts they want to review. That said, most reviewed within two months, and almost all within four months. Asking here and asking at the Talk page of the draft will have no effect. While waiting, you could convert your url references into proper ref format. David notMD (talk) 20:52, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

What to be able to set aside time each day to edit and make Wikipedia better, what's the best way to do so? Also if I wanted to add more successful and accomplished women here, that have books, are speakers, etc. what's the best way to do so and what's the criteria for me to add a person page, I saw it before but I am unable to find the qualifications.

Also, is this where I am supposed to be posting this?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by LITBeL (talk • contribs) 22:26, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, LITBeL, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for wanting to help. For the specific task of adding information about notable women not currently listed on Wikipedia, you might want to read Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. The prime criterion is that such people must be notable, in the special sense in which Wikipedia uses that work (see link above). Note that creating new articles from a blank start is about the hardest task an inexperienced editor is likely to face on Wikipedia. (Taking an article to Featured status is IMO harder, but is usually attempted only by experienced editors.) Some other ways to help may be found at the Community portal, and you might be well advised to try some before tackling creating new articles. (Oh and yes, this is a fine place to have asked this question.)

LITBeL, There's a lot of great advice below, including the link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. I just wanted to second the advice to visit there. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:44, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

That said, here are some steps which, if followed carefully, often lead to success in article creation:

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

how to meet the musical nobility criteria ? what do i have to do so my page is listed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Studio43records (talk • contribs) 22:13, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Editor has been blocked for promotional edits. On the off chance that Studio43records returns, the rules can be found at Musical notability - most of them are reasonably clear, a page just needs to meet one of them (and be able to demonstrate it) to show notability. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:37, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kylie,

It would be Fantastic if you could, guessing your nifty skills, just create a quick and easy artist bio for my musical profile.

Kind Regards and sorry for my feeble attempts,

Jonny Abet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonny Abet (talk • contribs) 20:48, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Jonny Abet, No. We do not have profiles, we have articles. We are not your soapbox or platform of advertising, we will not help you build a brand. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 20:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Unless other people are publishing articles about you that could be used as references, you do not yet qualify for a Wikipedia article. It's all about independent notability. David notMD (talk) 21:01, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Errm, who the heck is Kylie? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, my guess is User:KylieTastic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen328: ah, of course. We've just been watching Kylie Minogue on TV, so I had her stuck in my mind. On another matter, I've a bone to pick with you. Might pop over to your user page later on and have it out with you! TTFN Nick Moyes (talk) 21:38, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Any time, Nick. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:44, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Yup was me :/ KylieTastic (talk) 00:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm a modeling and tattoo artist. I want to have a page on Wikipedia https://instagram.com/inkeboy/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeidshamloo inkeboy (talk • contribs) 00:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

​Hello Saeid, if you ever become notable enough, someone else will write an article about you. You should try not to worry about it, as Wikipedia is not a place to promote oneself. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Can we cite a thesis for an Article as a reference, if yes then how to do it. Rocky 734 (talk) 00:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

​You can, but they are often not the best sources. See WP:SCHOLARSHIP, doctoral theses are often reliable but others less so. You can cite them the same way you would cite any other source, you can also use the specific template {{cite thesis}}. – Thjarkur (talk) 01:03, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Thjarkur:. Rocky 734 (talk) 01:21, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello new to the Teahouse here, I had a problem with creating an article named Wulong bohaiensis. I created the draft at 00:58, 16 January 2020 but the submission did not accepted. An other user created the page at 02:27, 16 January 2020. I don't want to change the already existing page, however i want to take credit for creating the page. How can I resolve this issue? Historianengineer (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

See answer on your Talk page. Situation appears to be that you created a draft, but after that an editor directly created an article on the same topic, so that when your draft was considered the reply was there is an existing article. From looking at your draft it does not appear to me that the person who created the article had seen your draft, so likelt just coincidence. You should feel free to improve the article. (I see that you have more text than the article.) David notMD (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

(ec) The article doesn't use your Draft:Wulong bohaiensis, the credits are correct, and you will be a part of it when you copy parts of your draft to the article. Your draft has no inline references at all, you need reliable sources for copied statements. You have one reference in #references, that's not how it works, put the <ref>xyzzy</ref> after the period (or comma) of the relevant statement (or paragraph) for the xyzzy-source. The #references section will then be automagically populated. –84.46.53.255 (talk) 12:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

As context for other readers, the subject of the draft and article is a small and very interesting dinosaur whose formal discovery paper was published on 15 January 2020 (three days ago as I write) and has been widely publicised, so it is quite understandable that more than one editor began working on an article at the same time – I considered doing so myself. It's likely that this sort of 'clash' happens quite frequently, and merely demonstrates the enthusiasm of our editing community. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.208.126 (talk) 08:39, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

…and being part of the credits is one of the many things not logged-in contributors don't need to worry about. –84.46.53.192 (talk) 01:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Not sure if notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.37.249 (talk) 02:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm going to say that a search on "Razavieh Spinning Co." got to a yarn supplier in Iran. If that is what the question is - No. David notMD (talk) 02:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Can we use a Hindi reference in English Wikipedia.Rocky 734 (talk) 00:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

​Yes, they are allowed. If an equally good English language source exists, then it is preferable to use the English one. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:54, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Thjarkur:. Rocky 734 (talk) 01:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rocky 734. If you use a reference to a reliable source in a foreign language such as Hindi, I suggest that you translate the most relevant sentence or two, and embed that quote in the reference. Also, be sure to include complete bibliographic information about your reference. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

In any case, Rocky 734, if using a reference in any language other than English, please supply a translated version of the title, as well as the original. If you use templated citations (as I prefer when I create articles) |trans-title= is the place to put a translated title. To supply a translated quotation such as Cullen328 suggests, that can be inserted using |quote=. Happy editing. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I reviewed Draft:Martin Fayomi and declined it, and asked the author to indicate specifically which of the musical notability criteria the subject satisfies, or to indicate that the subject satisfies general notability. User:Goldie19 has replied and has asked me to re-review the draft, and has provided a dump of links on the talk page of the draft. Providing a dump of links is not as helpful as including the references in the draft, but this is a new editor. Goldie19 is asking that the draft be reviewed as to whether the subject satisfies general notability. I said that I would ask for the advice of other editors here. I suggest that Goldie19 specify three sources that establish general notability. What do other editors think of this draft? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Sounds like an interesting career, but the article's refs and what I could find online are either promotional or passing mentions. The fact is that if he and his company turned out to be a hoax, I would not be amazed. He is based in the US, yet not written about here, and barely in Nigeria. Not notable at this point.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Where to ask help for translating Articles in any foreign language. I want Raghunath Murmu article to be translated in as many foreign language. Rocky 734 (talk) 03:14, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

This article is a good place to start, Rocky 734--Quisqualis (talk) 04:35, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

(ec) Each Wikimedia project incl. Wikipedias has its own rules, and many are proud to be not enwiki for various not always obvious reasons. Let them just decide that as they see fit, unless it is a specific project you care about, then you can ask on their idea of a pump, help desk, teahouse or whatever.
To test the procedure here find a missing enwiki article available in another Wikipedia and ask here how that is done, there are different ways to get the credits for the original article as they should be. I'm aware of an info template on the talk page, but forgot its name, and tested a transwiki request for an enwiki template on dewiki, because I needed the "admin can overrule salted + deleted target" effect.
If you are generally interested in i18n ask on metawiki:Project:Babel, they'll have better general tips for you. –84.46.53.192 (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I am working on my first Wikipedia page for a military person and political candidate. I am having trouble getting the military badges to look right.   The ribbons need to be smaller, however when I reduce their size I am left with gaps. When I try to make the left most cell right align and the right most cell left align the center cell is slightly out of alignment vertically.

I will paste my code to show you what I have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FinallyGoodIT (talk • contribs)

More information Collapsed graphics - click to show, Right Breast ...

Collapsed graphics - click to show

Right Breast Left Breast Right Breast Left Breast Insignia 1st Battalion, 187th Infantry Regiment Distinctive Unit Insignia Badge Combat Infantryman Badge Badges Parachutist Badge Air Assault Badge 1st Row Army Commendation Medal w/ Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster Army Achievement Medal 2nd Row Army Good Conduct Medal National Defense Medal Afghanistan Campaign Medal 3rd Row Global War On Terrorism Expeditionary Medal Global War On Terrorism Service Medal Army Service Ribbon Badge 101st Airborne Division Combat Service Identification Badge (CSIB) Badge U.S. Army Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge w/ rifle Clasp

Close

This is about someone who is notable as a political candidate, having been a corporal in the US Army. Is all the military stuff relevant? Maproom (talk) 10:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, FinallyGoodIT. If this is what you can achieve with your second ever edit here, you've done surprisingly well. Remarkable, even. I assume you must have edited here before that? It does make me need to ask you formally whether you might have some connection with this ex-military man, now standing for election as a candidate for the Idaho State House of Representatives? If you do, you would have a clear Conflict of Interest which you should declare for openness, and, if you were in some way working on their behalf, you are obliged by our policies to make a formal declaration before you continue editing, per this obligatory policy and instructions: WP:PAID.

That all being said, those graphics are wholly unsuitable for an article on this person, so please remove them before you consider posting the page to Articles for Creation. Just cite what medals they've won - we don't need pictures.

Oh, and talking of pictures, judging from the photos you've uploaded of him to Commons, from his early days in the army, to him receiving a military award, to him standing as a candidate in middle age, you do seem to have followed Ehrlinger around rather closely. This also makes me wonder whether you actually own the copyright of those photos (as the photographer), or whether you might have made an error whilst attempting to upload them, or simply took them off the internet somewhere and didn't appreciate you aren't allowed to claim other people's work as your own. You might wish to check and clarify this too, or they are in danger of someone deleting them on copyright grounds. And if you really did follow him around that closely, you most certainly do have a WP:COI which you should declare. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:53, 18 January 2020 (UTC).

Oh, and I'm afraid your username is also unacceptable and is in breach of our username policy see here as being promotional in nature, as you've clearly revealed by this edit. You are very likely to be blocked from editing with that account quite soon, and would have to start afresh, using a non-promotional name. Sorry to be the bearer of not good news, but the need to acknowledge or refute COI/PAID declarations will still apply. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:03, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

A home run! Blocked for using a business name as your User name, suspected copyright infringement issues on the photos, undeclared COI or PAID, and lastly, proposing an article about a person who may not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (a candidate for state political office). Bonus for creating a table of every weapon he trained with, images of all of his medals, and chunks of text about his political intentions. No, no, no, no, no, no and no. David notMD (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

A home run? No. Just another sad day on the Wiki. I don't think I'm going to survive this election season. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Makes me wonder if WP:NOTLAB + WP:FACTIONS already cover WP:NOADVENTURE, or which would be the better {{R to section}} target for a 2nd or 8th redirect, cf. WT:RFD today. –84.46.53.192 (talk) 07:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians! My question is with respect to Template:Infobox_India_university_ranking. I want to add new parameters to the template. But it assigns values as label19,data19 etc to parameters. So how to change all the values below, if I add a parameter in between. I tried using User:Frietjes/infoboxgap.js in console, but it didn't help. Can suggest a way to auto increment the parameters. I also read somewhere that this template structure seems to be outdated, so can someone provide an infobox template as an example to which this template can be ported. Thanks for help.Sanyam.wikime (talk) 07:48, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

This is a frequently asked question, cf. archive 915 + 1039, if the manual is still unclear please ask on the template talk page, and if you are up to no good (spam for the 1001st irrelevant university) don't. –84.46.53.192 (talk) 08:09, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

can you please clarify the meaning of "and if you are up to no good (spam for the 1001st irrelevant university) don't" --Sanyam.wikime (talk) 08:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

It means that there were attempts to add spam to the template and that the template with lots of entries is ugly like hell. IIRC you asked a similar question here, check out the two archives wikilinked above to find the old answers. HTH+HAND, 84.46.53.192 (talk) 10:18, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to be able to edit over multiple days, but I don't see how I can keep a draft of an article around to publish later, and I don't want to keep a browser tab with unsaved stuff in it around. Is there any way to create and save a draft of an article to edit and publish later? Thanks! • in vivo veritas • 09:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

​You can keep drafts either in your userspace (User:In vivo veritas/Example article) or draftspace (Draft:Example article). If you want to work on an already existing article, you can copy the article's source over to your userspace or draftspace. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Clicking on "Publish changes" at the bottom means Save. So yes, you can have content in your Sandbox or a Draft that is saved for later. These drafts can be seen (and edited, and deleted if warranted) by other editors, because they are in a semi-public space - seen, but not found if someone searched on the term. For example, a search on Anton Hur does not find Draft:Anton Hur. David notMD (talk) 11:12, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi guys, thank you so much for replying. I'm not sure if I am messaging you at the right place or if you would read this, or how to reply you directly. As you can tell, I am new to Wikipedia, spent days watching tutorials and guidelines, which I still have lots more to learn. My question to David, you mentioned, "While waiting, you could convert your url references into proper ref format", how do I do that? Am I doing it wrong? Regarding the source, I spent a week searching for the all sources on the internet and I'm confident my sources are reliable as most references link to our local newspaper here in Singapore. However, there are some links provided from TV Shows Infos like this: https://tv.toggle.sg/en/tv/shows/s/s-o-s/info , and one source from a blog where the actor answered questions from the event blogger(10) at the beginning of his career. In person, I have met the actor, and he mentioned on stage of the things I wrote, or on video, but I couldn't find other written article. So how do I tell the person that review my article that it's legit and not a made up? Would appreciate if you could take a look and see if the source is consider reliable. Oh and last question (I'm really sorry), I would like to write an article about a TV star/ singer in Singapore/ Malaysia, her name is Hannah Delisha. She has a wiki in Malay language, but it's not updated: ms:Hannah_Delisha Can I write an article for her here, and if so, do I need any approval first?

Thank you again, I'm so sorry for the trouble. A reply would be greatly appreciated. Love from Sg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily Wan Jo (talk • contribs) 08:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to the mentioned David notMD MoonyTheDwarf . CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 08:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Lily Wan Jo: when you ask a question like the above, it really helps the people here if you let us know what article or draft you're asking about. I think it must be Draft:Imam Shah. As for your second question: you don't need any prior approval to create a draft; but it won't be accepted as an article unless it establishes that its subject is notable. So I would advise you to assemble some good independent references about Hannah Delisha before you start writing anything. Maproom (talk) 09:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Lily Wan Jo: On your Talk page I copied your first ref as you have it and then created same ref using the format for website content. David notMD (talk) 11:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

i want to create an article on an author — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faisalkhanblog (talk • contribs) 12:51, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Faisalkhanblog, and welcoem to the Teahouse. Is the author notable in the special sense in which Wikipedis uses that word? See notability policy, the General notability guideline, and our guideline for the notability of authors and other creative professionals. Wikipedia only has articles about notable topics. Also, creating an article from a blank start is about the hardest challenge a new editor faces on Wikipedia. It might be wise to make smaller edits to existing articles until you have a better feel for how things work. But if you want to go ahead, or when you feel ready, here are some steps which often lead to success in creating an article, if followed carefully. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:34, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:34, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I am trying to create a new article, which I titled "Big Brown." An editor changed the title from "Big Brown" to "William Clifford Brown" but this artist went by the name "Big Brown," was referred to by his contemporaries and by reporters as "Big Brown," and recorded an album under the name "Big Brown." Also, another Wikipedia page (Danny Fitzgerald's) refers to him as "Big Brown." Although there is a Wikipedia entry for "Big Brown," a racehorse, this could be disambiguated by changing the title of the artist's page to "Big Brown (poet)" and that of the horse to "Big Brown (horse)." As far as I can tell, the Wikipedia convention is to title articles by the recording artist's recording name (e.g. Beyoncé, Awkwafina, Snoop Dogg, etc.). I can't figure out how to "undo" the article title change or maybe it's that I am not authorized to do that? And should the actual title be "Big Brown (poet)"? Or would it be "Big Brown" and then there would be a separate disambiguation page? Thanks! I also posted this query on the page's talk page so maybe this will just automatically get checked/fixed? I'm not altogether sure of the protocol here but many thanks for your help!.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisythedog (talk • contribs) 17:10, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

​I've moved it to Draft:Big Brown (poet), when it is accepted it will be at Big Brown (poet). In three days you will be able to move pages yourself (although you would have been able to make this move as it is in draftspace, it's under "More → Move"). Queries you post on an article's talk page will only be noticed by the editors who have that page watchlisted, some articles here have no watchers. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!Daisythedog (talk) 15:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

See Talk:Þiðreks_saga Is User:Ermenrich right? --Tympanus (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC) Tympanus (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Added wikilinks to the above post. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tympanus: Could you re-phrase your question? The meaning is unclear (to me, at least). Is it a question about editing Wikipedia? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry – don't know why I couldn't parse it. Tympanus is asking for additional opinions regarding the reliability of a source being discussed with Ermenrich at Talk:Þiðreks saga#Badenhausen. I'd suggest posting an invitation for others to comment at the relevant WikiProjects shown on the article's talk page, like WT:WikiProject Norse history and culture, etc.. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 00:29, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, AlanM1. Sorry, I was obviously too short. The matter is as follows: I have mentioned the research position of Heinz Ritter-Schaumburg, a German PhD in literature, in the article Þiðreks saga because he is relevant to be mentioned according to WP:nor. Regarding a “prominent adherent” to be named in the article, so WP:nor, I have referenced an online-review on Ritter-Schaumburg's thesis and basic position by Rolf Badenhausen, a businessman, journalist and bookauthor on Ritter's research; see also talk:Þiðreks saga. But this linked article was rejected by user:Ermenrich as “unreliable “. I disagree because Badenhausen appears qualified enough as a prominent adherent in this case. --Tympanus (talk) 10:22, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Personal websites are not reliable sources, see WP:USERGENERATED. This is Rolf Badenhausen's personal website. He is not an authority on the subject, as your own description of his qualifications makes clear. When I want to find out about medieval legend, my first address is not a "businessman" with a degree in electrical engineering. Further, beyond Ritter-Schaumburg himself, I would submit that this particular theory is wp:fringe. It isn't mentioned in any of the major handbooks on Dietrich von Bern, only in some extremely negative reviews of Ritter-Schaumburg's book from the 80s/early 90s. The fact that there are groups that self-publish books in support of RS's theory attacking the academic consensus only makes it look more fringy, not less. This is not a "significant minority". There is no debate about it in academic scholarship, and we following academic sources, not just what Joe Schmoe might like to write about a figure from medieval legend.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:05, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

According to my uk- and us-browsers, Google displays Badenhausen only as an author, as being linked with his German wikipedia article. This form is absolutely actual (see his linked vita) because he is currently and prospectively working for the quarterly journal “Der Berner” [ISSN 1610-8191], founded by Reinhard Schmoeckel, formerly Head of the German Chancellery, then Director of the Bureau of the German President Karl Carstens, to thematise and discuss Ritter-Schaumburg's Thidreks saga research. The journal is available at library networks of German universities – if someone would claim the unreliability of this journal with regard to Ritter-Schaumburg, I would be ready to quote scholarly reliable authors appearing in this magazine. Badenhausen belongs to the scholastically selected authors whose books on Nibelungen and Thidreks saga research were reviewed by the Kommentierte Bibliographie 1945-2010: Nibelungenlied und Nibelungensage, De Gruyter Akademie Forschung, Berlin 2012. It is obvious that these reviews of Badenhausen do not contradict Ritter-Schaumburg. Thus, according to the most relevant policy WP:NOR in this matter, there is no doubt that Badenhausen is a qualified "prominent adherent" to be referenced in the article.--Tympanus (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

That journal is not referred to by any scholar studying the Thidrekssaga, and being the former head of the German chancery does not make you an expert on a medieval legend. Badenhausen is the equivalent of a 9-11 truther, not a scholar. EVERY book written on the Nibelungenlied is included in that bibliography (that's the definition of a bibliography).--Ermenrich (talk) 17:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

File:Segar Bastard.jpg is a wrongly attributed image because the man in the photo is C. B. Fry. I removed the image from Segar Bastard. I don't believe the image is free use because you can see it in the Getty site and they are not public domain. Evidently one of our people uploaded from a rogue site without knowing its history. How do I go about having the image deleted or renamed? Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 17:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, No Great Shaker. I see that you have nominated the image for deletion on Commons; but your nomination was faulty, as you have not given any reason. (If the image was indeed published before 1925 it is public domain whatever Getty may say). --ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Colin. Yes, I'm struggling a bit with this. What's the best thing to do here? No Great Shaker (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Well, it depends what you are trying to do here, No Great Shaker. If you genuinely think the image should be deleted, edit the page in Commons to include the reason. If you think it is mislabelled, you can ask for a c:commons:File renaming - it would be best if you cited some evidence that it was the wrong person. --ColinFine (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

hwo can i delete my account or if this is not can delete then how to change username — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulekh Site (talk • contribs) 09:07, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Sulekh Site: Accounts can't be deleted. For accounts with small number of edits, such as yours, just create a new account with the name you want and stop using this account. RudolfRed (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

However, do not create a new account before you successfully apply for an unblock on your current account. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:59, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I've been going through lists and noticed that not all generated Page Previews (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Previews) show images of the article, even if they are at the top of the article or included in the navbox. My question in how to force page preview to fetch the navbox image of the article as I would like this feature to work on the articles I create/edit? Zeeshka (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Zeeshka: Welcome to the Teahouse. I seem to remember this issue arising before, though right now I don't have an answer for you - though someone else might. But please would you be so kind as to supply some links to the articles that do not show a Page Preview? That would be very helpful to others who might be able to answer you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:38, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thanks for a quick reply. Here's a link to the lis tpage I was looking Works based on Faust#Film and television

The particular page I am concern about is The Last Faust and is at the bottom of the list. Zeeshka (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Zeeshka: I see the infobox image in Page Previews for The Last Faust. But in general you cannot force an image to be chosen if it isn't chosen automatically. See mw:Extension:PageImages#Image choice. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Zeeshka: Further to what Prime Hunter says, I am currently also seeing an image when I mouseover the article, either in the full link you provided, or in the short wikilink to The Last Faust. BUT, I am NOT using Page Preview; instead I find Navigation Popups much more useful to the kind of work I do. This can be enabled in Preferences>Gadgets. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, just after some guidance. I proposed a merge of Criticism of Second Life into the main Second Life article. Back in the heyday of Second Life, and when Wikipedia was younger too, several pages were created for this one topic. These days they are all looking a bit neglected, and I began tentatively updating them but came across the Criticism page, which has multiple issues, and really should be condensed down to a criticism section of the main article.

My problem - over a week later, no one has commented on the merge (although I only belatedly pinged some previous editors - nevertheless the article has very few if any other active editors so pinging them may not do much good). My question for the teahouse is: if I get no responses at all, would it be bad form just to go ahead and merge? At what point can I just bold merge the article? If I am the only vote, can I close the discussion at any point to say "consensus" is to merge?

Note that I fully intend to wait a few more days because of my tardy pinging, but just want to get a view on that point in case no one answers.

Thanks. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Just go ahead with it. See WP:MERGECLOSE and WP:SILENCE - X201 (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Ah, thanks :) I was reading that "no discussion" wrong. I thought it was just saying that discussion had stopped. Ok that makes sense then. Thanks again. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 23:06, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Over the last day or two, I have found when I click in the search box, a little menu drops down with the two items strikethrough and man-spreader. I have not previously searched for these items, and their appearance there is a mystery. Not causing any inconvenience, but it is a little disturbing. Koro Neil (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Koro Neil, I, actually, have the same question. In the drop down for me, `wife` shows up, when I have never searched that page.. I guess they might be automatic suggestions, but i'm leaning toward "a bug". MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 01:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Koro Neil: and MoonyTheDwarf: Thanks for coming to the Teahouse! I would wager it's a technical problem, if it is, you could consider asking the people here, at the technical noticeboard. Thanks again! Puddleglum ^2.0 05:49, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

​Most likely it's your browser's autocomplete, not Wikipedia. If you have ever searched "strikethrough" on another website it is stored as a possible autocomplete value for search boxes. Google Chrome has recently stopped obeying the autocomplete="off" attribute on text inputs. – Thjarkur (talk) 01:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello everyone.

I opened an account about two weeks ago with the sole purpose of creating a page, and apart from a few minor tweaks to other pages, was thinking that may be the entire of my Wikipedia experience. My page is awaiting review. But I popped in today to see if the review was moving along, not knowing if I would see any 'progress report'. It's still the same. So my eyes wandered over previous messages, and I saw, and clicked, on the Tea House link out of fascination really. I see Wiki is looking to build up the 'underrepresented groups' amongst editors. Women being one of them. That interested me. And well here I am. Are there any ongoing projects I can maybe get involved in and see if editing is something I'd like to get more involved in. As a hobby, I self-publish books on family research, and I love it! So you never know.... Cdefm (talk) 15:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC),

@Cdefm:: Hi, and welcome to the TeaHouse! If you are interested in creating articles and helping with underrepresented groups on Wikipedia, you could definitely consider joining WikiProject Women in Red, a project that aims to make articles for women. Your article is taking long to be noticed and reviewed because currently there are about 6,000 other drafts also waiting, and because every editor here is a volunteer, it's probably going to take up to 2-3 months. Hope this helped! Puddleglum ^2.0 15:47, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Articles about women. Not for women. --bonadea contributions talk 15:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

And my reply disappeared! So here goes again. Thanks for the help. I'll follow the link you shared for 'about women'. See what happens next. It's completely understandable why reviewing takes time. But the first one, well you know, it's your baby. I've refernced to Wikipedia a lot over the years. A hearty thanks to everyone who keeps Wikipedia going! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdefm (talk • contribs) 16:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC) Cdefm (talk) 16:02, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Assuming you meant N. H. Wilson, which is now accepted as an article. Congratulations. Given that you have a conflict of interest (ancestor), you should probably say as much on your User page, and also refrain from continuing to edit the article. David notMD (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Is a great-grandparent connection really a COI? To me that seems more like any major interest, sort of like living in a certain city gives you an interest in that city, or being a fan of a sports team gives you a rooting interest in it. If it were a parent, sure. Grandparent, yeah, maybe. Great-grandparent...meh. --valereee (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, makes sense. Edit away. Keep in mind however that you do not 'own' the article. Other editors can add as long as refs are good. David notMD (talk) 01:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

I'd like to add a museum to the page: List of Museums in Orange County, California. I don't know how to 'add a row' to the table, or to do whatever needs to be done to add an entry.

ThanksAvra111 (talk) 02:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Avra111. The first thing you might want to do is take a look at "Selection criteria" since this deals with the adding of individual entries to list articles or lists embedded into other articles. Looking at List of museums in Orange County, California and its corresponding talk page, there doesn't appear to be any clear-cut inclusion criteria established. Generally, the most basic common selection criteria for lists such as this is that all of the entries be Wikipedia notable in their own right (i.e. they have Wikipedia articles already written about them) or they are things in which a viable Wikipedia article is deemed possible (i.e. there's enough significant coverage that can be found about the subject to support someone writing a Wikipedia article about it someday); this, however, can be a bit too restrictive for subjects where the scope is fairly limited and there's really not a huge number of members of the group as a whole to begin with. Even in that case, however, some kind of WP:SECONDARY source should be cited which supports the mentioning of a particular entry in a list.

One thing to be careful of with list articles like this is that they are not intended to be an online directory that list all possible members of a particular group; I'm not sure how many museums there are in Orange Country, but this list article is not necessarily intended to list them all just because they do exist or did exist at one time. Since you haven't mentioned any specifics about the museum you would like to add, it's hard to really assess such a thing. Another thing about these lists is that over the years entries are often added which probably shouldn't have really been added to begin with. Since anyone can pretty much add content to a Wikipedia article at anytime, there's no real review process other than perhaps that made by editors who might be watching or trying to improve the article. So, just because there's lots of entries in a list article that doesn't mean there should be lots of entries or that more should be added. Technically, what you want to do is fairly simple, but whether it's something that should be done is another question altogether.

Anyway, it appears from this edit that you figured out how to add the entry; if, however, you want to figure out whether that museum (or any others in the article for that matter) should be mentioned, you might want to ask for opinions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Museums or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California. You might also want to look for a secondary reliable source (not any of the museum's official websites) which can be cited in support of adding the entry to the list because content which is not supported by a citation (even if the content is just one entry in list like this) can be removed at anytime per WP:UNSOURCED. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Avra111: I suggest that you read this help section; then if you don't understand it, come back here and tell us what it is that you don't understand. — Tonymec (talk) 04:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

P.S. I found it by clicking "Help" in the sidebar then following what seemed to be "interesting" links. — Tonymec (talk) 04:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

My father is not in the list. He spent six months in Mauthausen and was lucky to survive. 1,75 metres tall, he weighed 43 kilos when the camp was liberated in May 1945. He was in submarines in the Italian Navy and after the 1943 armistice he was recruited with others by OSS G1 (US Intelligence - became the CIA in 1956) to be sent behind German lines to spy. They were trained in Africa as parachutists and dropped behind German lines. My father was captured and sent to Mauthausen, entering in December 1944. We have his entry record from Mauthausen, but I do not know how to insert or append it.

I found his name on https://alchetron.com/List-of-Mauthausen-Gusen-inmates which refers to Wikipedia but did not find my father's name. I should try edit but may make a mess.

This all came to mind when I realised my father would have been 99 years old this year. Thank you,

Luigi Vatta — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.231.111 (talk) 01:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 79.52.231.111. You might want to try discussing this at Talk:List of Mauthausen-Gusen inmates and see what others may think. Generally, it's quite possible there have been some specific selection criteria established over the years to determine whether someone should be added to the list. From List of Mauthausen-Gusen inmates, it look like all of the entries except one are of people who have stand-alone Wikipedia articles written about them; in other words, they are people deemed to be Wikipedia notable. If that's the case for your father as well, then perhaps adding his name to the list wouldn't be challenged by other editors; if not, then maybe it might be harder convincing others to add him since lists like this are not necessarily intended to mention every possible person who might be a member of a particular group. Please try and understand that I mean no disrespect to either you or your father here; I'm just trying to sort of explain how deciding who to add and who not to add to a Wikipedia article like this is often determined. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Is it ever appropriate to create a wikipedia page about yourself? If so, what criteria are appropriate to justify a page about yourself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Volcanoman7 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Volcanoman7, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. A good question actually. We strongly discourage creating autobiographies, (see a full reasoning at WP:AUTOBIO). My personal advice: never make an autobiography. If you are a notable person, someone else will write an article about you in time. If you're not notable, but create an article, it will get deleted and you'll feel sad. Also, Wiki-reviewers are pretty good at spotting autobiographies and generally treat them with the utmost scrutiny. The only time I would suggest making an article about yourself is if you are certainly notable, have solid experience writing articles, know how to disclose a conflict of interest, and are willing to take copious criticism. Otherwise, it is a fools errand. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:40, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Volcanoman7 I would expand on the good comment above by saying that Wikipedia has articles not mere "pages". This is a subtle but important distinction. A person merits an article on Wikipedia if they meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. There are also more specific criteria for certain career fields, like politicians, athletes, musicians, and so forth. The person must have significant coverage in independent reliable sources, sources unaffiliated with the subject.

You do have a user page(in your case, User:Volcanoman7) that you can use to introduce yourself to the Wikipedia community in the context of your activities as a Wikipedia reader or editor. It is not a place for you to tell the world about yourself and your whole life, though. Please see WP:USERPAGE for information on what acceptable user page content is.

Also please understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. Anything about you, good or bad, can appear in an article about you as long as the information is found in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. You cannot lock an article about you to the text that you might prefer, or prevent others from editing it. Just some things to keep in mind. 331dot (talk) 21:22, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Volcanoman7. Let's assume for the sake of discussion that a highly experienced Wikipedia editor later competed in the Olympics or the highest level of professional sports, or was elected to Congress or a parliament, or won a Nobel Prize, or a Pulitzer Prize or an Academy Award. Or something comparable. Let's also assume that person had no Wikipedia biography. Then that person could begin the draft of an autobiography and submit it to the Articles for Creation process, for review by experienced uninvolved editors. I am sure that review would be prompt and positive. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi! I'm new to Wiki so I don't know how to add informations or upload images , I've noticed that on some articles which require further I can contribute by adding some verified images from books related to the topic.

For context it's about the wiki page of Afridis

Zaros Holstein (talk) 05:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Zaros Holstein

Hi Zaros Holstein. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files. Uploading an image file is technically fairly easy to do, but whether a file should be uploaded and how it can be used if it is often highly depends upon its copyright status. I'm not sure what you mean by "verified images", but Wikipedia generally only allows images which are 100% free as in "free from copyright protection" or "freely released by their copyright holders" to be uploaded and used. There are sometimes exceptions made for copyrighted content where copyright holder permission is not required, but these tend to be only for exceptional cases and there are lots of restrictions placed upon their use. Without knowing more about the specific images you want to upload and how you want to use them, it's kind of hard to give you anything but a general answer like you might find in Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts and c:Commons:Licensing. If you have a specific question about a specific image, you might want to try asking for help at Wikimedia:Media copyright questions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I made some changes to a page but when I've checked this morning the changes aren't there ? what did I do wrong? Also, how do I reference something (i.e. the changes I made referred to a physical document, how do I link the changes and the document?). Also, can I remove old inaccurate information? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nellie3008 (talk • contribs) 08:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Nellie3008 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. According to the edit history, the edits you made were removed as a copyright violation. For legal reasons, you cannot simply copy and post content from other websites to here. Content must be written in your own words, with the source cited. Please read WP:COPYVIO(about copyright violations) and WP:CITE(how to cite content.

Your edits did not make it clear that you were removing 'old inaccurate information'; with this edit it seems that you removed cited content that was critical of the prison or those operating it. When you make an edit, you should provide either an edit summary(the small box below the edit window when you edit) or comment on the article talk page as to the reason for your edit. Please note that Wikipedia summarizes what appears in independent reliable sources. This means that information should not be removed just because it is 'old'. If the information has changed since then, the article can be edited to reflect that the information changed in such a way that it does not remove the old information.

If you are associated with the prison in some way(such as being a staff member or corrections official), you should review conflict of interest and possibly paid editing. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

C._S._Gangadharan is tagged as orphan page. find link tool found relevant results 1977_Kerala_Legislative_Assembly_election and 1970_Kerala_Legislative_Assembly_election. should i just update code [[C._S._Gangadharan]] on above two pages.

what should i do more ? Leela52452 (talk) 09:06, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, Leela52452, and welcome to the Teahouse. Indeed, you can edit those pages to include the wikilink in that way, if it is the same person: if you use the page title with spaces [[C. S. Gangadharan]] it will look better. Once you've done so, you can also go to the original page and edit it to remove the {{orphan}} tag from the top. Make sure you give an edit summary explaining why you are removing something from it. Thank you for helping to improve Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 10:08, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Can anyone create a wikipedia article for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.91.254.0 (talk) 03:09, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi! What article are you looking to create? Have you tried making a draft article and submitting it to Wiki Project Articles For Creation? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 03:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. Usually when somebody asks for somebody to create an article "for me", they want an article about themselves, or something they are closely associated with (a company, or a band for example). If this is the case, I urge you to look carefully at whether the subject is notable in Wikipedia's special sense - roughly, that several people unconnected with the subject have chosen to write about it at some length and been published by a publisher with a reputation for editorial control. If your subject does not meet those criteria, then no article on it will be accepted, whoever writes it, and any effort that you or anybody else puts into it will be wasted.

If your subject does meet those criteria, then an article about it will be possible. Even then, though, I'm afraid that there is no reliable or easy way to get the article written. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and people work on what they want to work on. If you want somebody to write an article about your subject, you will need to find a way to make somebody want to invest that time. You can post a request at requested articles, but in all honesty, there is not a great take-up there. If there is a relevant WikiProject, you might ask there. Or, as Thegooduser suggests, you could try creating it yourself. But to be honest, creating an article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, and it is even harder if you have a conflict of interest, as I'm guessing you have - apologies if my assumption is wrong. Also note that if an article does get written about your subject, it will not be your article, and will not necessarily say what you want it to say.

All this adds up to - it is very hard for a new user to get an article written about a subject that they want covered. Most times when a new user wants an article on a particular subject, their purpose is to tell the world about it: this is called promotion in Wikipedia and is strictly forbidden.

All the blue words in my answer are links to pages where you can find more information. --ColinFine (talk) 10:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I'm having problems logging in in my account. Some days ago I logged off for the first time in many months and when trying to log in again it said that my username or password was wrong. I literally don't remember ever changing my password and I went on to see the saved passwords I had in Google Chrome for my Wikipedia accounts. There were three of them and all of them were the same as I remembered my password to be. After trying a few times with the same log in info, I gave up and tried the "I've forgotten my password" link which asked for my username and an email address, which I did gave. It then said an email would come with a new temporary password but it never came. I've been trying for some days the same thing and it never does. I've checked my spam messages but there's nothing in there. I'm actually one of the most active contributors in SqWiki and an admin (some admins from there can come and confirm my identity here as I've been talking with them on emails ever since this happened, actually those were the ones that told me to ask for help here) and I really don't wanna lose my account. Is there something I can do? This is my user page sq:Përdoruesi:Sadsadas. PS: I don't know if this is the right place to put this request as I haven't interacted with stewards before so if it is not, I'm sorry. Thank You - 185.212.191.85 (talk) 18:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Have any edits been made from your account since you logged out(which might indicate it was hacked)? 331dot (talk) 21:12, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: No sir, the last edit is done on 15 January 2020 the day i accidentaly logged out. My edits. Thank You - 185.212.191.85 (talk) 10:28, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Maybe others have better ideas than I, so don't consider me the final word on the subject, but the only thing I can think of is that your email address was not typed in correctly(either when you requested the email or initially when you added it to your account)- even being off by one character would mean the email address is different. If you are unable to recover your password you will need to create a new account, unfortunately. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I'm an admin and interface admin at SqWiki. One of the two admins Sadsadas was talking with on emails (he mentions me above). We're already discussing this issue on Meta on this link with some stewards. The problem is that he erroneously has removed his email from his preferences and he can't get the message with the temporary password now. If you're interested, for more information you can click on the above link. I think the discussion on Meta is the right place to have this kind of conversation and maybe you can go and close this discussion here, if you want. - Klein Muçi (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I’m trying to add a wiki link to my page in which i store a list of all the userboxes I’ve made into a userbox, but it comes up as a red link even though the destination is correct. Can anyone help? Littelcat456 (talk) 10:55, 20 January 2020 (UTC) Nvm fixed the link Littelcat456 (talk) 10:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I am a Nigerian technology entrepreneur and author. I have made appearances in many reputable African media platforms, some of which I'll be sharing the links below. I'll deeply appreciate it if someone here creates an article about me on Wikipedia. My name is Maximum Fredrick.

Below is the link to the news some media platforms made about me.

https://www.sunnewsonline.com/a-call-on-young-adult-africans/

https://thesourceng.com/a-call-on-young-adult-africans/amp/

https://www.modernghana.com/news/977788/a-call-on-young-adult-africans.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredrick Maximum (talk • contribs) 11:22, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Fredrick Maximum: I'm afraid your feeling is not enough. Let others decide if you are. Meanwhile please see the policy at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, esp. parts at WP:NOTSOCIALMEDIA and WP:NOTPROMOTION. --CiaPan (talk) 11:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:PROUD is also worth a read. - X201 (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Fredrick Maximum: all three of those links are to the same article, which is based on an interview with you. Please read notability: notability in Wikipedia's special sense depends on what other people, unconnected with you, have chosen to publish about you. However wonderful the things you have done, an interview with you does not contribute in any way to your notability in Wikipedia's sense: it would need several articles about you written independently of you. --ColinFine (talk) 12:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, This is Dheeraj Kolla(artist) and I'm creating a wiki page but it's going to U5 deletion. So is there anyone to help me to create my wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dheeraj Kolla (talk • contribs) 06:12, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dheeraj Kolla. What do you mean by "wiki page"? Do you want to create a Wikipedia user page or a Wikipedia article?

If you're trying to create a Wikipedia article about yourself, please take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Generally, only subjects considered to be Wikipedia notable are deemed OK to create articles about; so, establishing that you're Wikipedia notable enough for an article to be written about you is the first major hurdle your going to have get over because it's going make no difference who tries to create the article or how well it's written/formatted if you are unable to meet relevant Wikipedia notability guidelines. If you are, however, considered Wikipedia notable, then probably you yourself is not the best person to try and create the article. You're not expressly prohibited from doing so, but people who try and create articles about themselves often find it difficult to do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines as explained in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Why is conflict of interest a problem? and therefore are highly discouraged from trying to do so. In such a case, you might try asking for help at Wikipedia:Requested articles or try creating a draft first and then submitting it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review, but ideally someone other than yourself should assess/review what you're trying to create to (1) see if it's something that meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines and (2) ensure it's written as much as possible with relevant Wikipedia policy and guidelines for style, sourcing, tone, etc.

Now if you're simply trying to create a user page about yourself, then you don't really need to be Wikipedia notable do that. A user page is not, however, intended to be a quasi-Wikipedia article about you or used like a personal website/social media account as explained in Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site. Editors may post some personal information on their user pages, but only stuff that falls under Wikipedia:User pages#What may I have in my user pages?; anything else like the stuff mentioned here is generally going to be considered inappropriate and subject to deletion/removal. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Three times you have created an 'article' about yourself at your User page, and three times Speedy deleted. Wrong place, and perhaps wrong idea. If you truly believe your career as an artist meets Wikipedia's definition of notable, then create a draft and submit to Articles for creation (see above on how to). Attempts at autobiography are strongly discouraged, but not absolutely forbidden. David notMD (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

i have noticed category "Category:Articles using NRISref without a reference number" on Silas Ferrell House. however it contains NRHP reference # 87002146. i am noob. please verify. excuse if this is incorrect. Leela52452 (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

The template {{NRISref}} was called without using the refnum parameter in the template. Now fixed by this change. Thanks for pointing it out. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Am I allowed to (with definite permission from the author) cite information from Bachelor or Master Theses (Bachelorarbeit, Masterarbeit) if they can be accessed/read by everyone at a specific institute in a university? Cheers! --Hardtofindausername (talk) 13:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

​According to WP:SCHOLARSHIP and this discussion, bachelor and master theses aren't considered reliable sources, but doctoral dissertations are more often reliable. It's usually much better to check out the sources the thesis cites and to use those sources. To the other part of your question, it is fine to cite reliable sources that someone could theoretically find at some library to verify, even if the source is not easy to find. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, Hardtofindausername, permission from the author is not required to cite a published source. Even if a short quote from the source is used, no permission is required. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

On the French Wikipedia, when I hover the mouse over an image (except in an infobox) that image temporarily zooms in. I've tried to enable the same feature by going through my enwiki preferences, but I couldn't find it. Does it exist on this wiki, and if it does, where should I look? — Tonymec (talk) 06:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

If you don't believe you enabled the feature, it may be automatic with a fr.wiki account. I visited and it did not happen for me. Never heard of it at en.wiki.--Quisqualis (talk) 08:16, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tonymec and Quisqualis: I've also just nipped over to fr.wiki and had a play around. There is an option in Preference>Gadgets (link) called "ZoomOnThumb" which works quite well, but is not offered to us on en-wiki. However, if you are desperate, read the French documentation for this gadget (here) and you will see there are instructions for installing it on other wikis. I've just tried - and failed- to load it on my account (either in vector.js or common.js), but I'm rubbish at understanding scripts, so may well have done something wrong. Let us know if you get it working! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Quisqualis: Maybe I enabled it, maybe it's an fr.wiki default, but in any case I've had it over there for a long time and forgot how to do it.

@Nick Moyes: Thanks for this very enlightening answer. So to summarize: the corresponding gadget is not preinstalled at en.wiki, but fr.wiki has a tutorial at fr:Projet:Scripts et gadgets/Notices/ZoomOnThumb about installing it on one's own account on other wikis, however you tried and failed. At least I'm not left totally in the dark (especially considering that French is my mother language). Now I'm going to do some shopping, but when I come back I'll try to enable it on one or more of my en.wiki account, my nl.wiki account and my global account — unless I have something more pressing to do. Thanks again! :-) — Tonymec (talk) 11:09, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tonymec: Only one correction to what you said: You don't need to follow instructions to install or remove it on fr.wiki - only on other wikis (it's a simple tick bock in Preferences which isn't ticked by default on French Wikipedia.) One of these days the software developers will realise how sensible it would be to premark every Preference setting to show which is and which is not activated by default. The 'Restore all Settings' button is too blunt an instrument to be of much use.  Nick Moyes (talk) 11:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Whether a gadget (not other preferences) is enabled by default can be seen on Definitions or Descriptions at the top right of Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Yes, yes, the tutorial (or HowTo or whatever) is at fr.wiki, and to install that gadget here I follow what is said at "#Installation sur un autre wiki" of the above-mentioned fr.wiki notices page. But I guess vector.js is for the Vector skin and might not apply to my favourite CologneBlue skin (call me old-fashioned ;-) ) so I might try cologneblue.js or common.js or default.js or something.

@PrimeHunter: ah, thanks for the info. — Tonymec (talk) 13:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: that's news to me too, though my call would be for a clear and simple indication of all the defaults on the Preferences interface itself. Thanks for that. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:14, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: It worked at first try (I tested it by newly loading my user page — which has a photograph of me — from its user talk page). You can see the code (including the comments I added) at User:Tonymec/common.js — Tonymec (talk) 15:45, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: I think that it only works on newly-loaded (or reloaded) pages, and it might be inactive on images inside a <div>, e.g. inside an infobox. — Tonymec (talk) 15:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Arun Kumar "Avi" Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh 221505 India Education - BSc, deled, MSc Hight - 5.6" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arun Kumar Avi (talk • contribs) 17:43, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Arun Kumar Avi, Wikipedia is not a webhost or social media, but rather an encyclopedia which has articles on subjects that meet the notability guidelines. Please see WP:N. Using wikipedia for advertising or promotion is prohibited, but if you do meet the notability guidelines, you can submit a WP:DRAFT. Do note, however, that writing about yourself is highly discouraged. Finally, the Teahouse is a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. Did you have one? Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I am have requested the page protection on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achraf_Hakimi, however is being declined. Unregisted users are changing the name from "Achraf Hakimi Mouh" to "Achraf Kumar Hakimi". Can someone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HalfLifeKiss (talk • contribs) 17:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, HalfLifeKiss, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see Talk:Achraf Hakimi#Correct name, and if possible comment on sources in that section. Thank you for bringing this to wider attention. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Here are the sources: Transfer Market: https://www.transfermarkt.com/achraf-hakimi/profil/spieler/398073 Official Bundesliga Website: https://www.bundesliga.com/en/bundesliga/player/achraf-hakimi/profile HalfLifeKiss —Preceding undated comment added 19:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

The above article was created by me, but it has been nominated for deletion, how ever the article has no content on wikpipedia, and more over, the article hasn't got much external link that real talk about it. I creat it so others can work on it to make it better. I will be glad if any one can help work on this article. Thank you. amuzujoe (Talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:16, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Amuzujoe: I don't see that the draft is nominated for deletion, but it was declined to be moved to article space. You can continue to work on the draft and when it is ready, you can click the resubmit button for a new review. RudolfRed (talk) 19:37, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Centre for National Culture, Accra (Art Centre). Declined is less severe than rejected. Articles can be started as Stubs, i.e. short, but from the beginnings, there should be references that establish notability. You as creator are responsible. David notMD (talk) 19:56, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thank you, i get it now, i will do exactly that and resubmit amuzujoe (Talk) 8:47(GMT), 20 January 2020

I am a member of the West Newbury Historical Commission and in that role having been writing unattributed monthly 1-page stories about the town's history. I have also written (so far one) Wikipedia article Julian Steele on the same topic that later was posted as a town Historical Committee story.

I am concerned that I may be accused of plagiarizing myself because two extremely similar articles are floating around on the internet. (Note that I have not & would never cite myself in a Wikipedia article--it's the other way around with WP cited as hyperlink in the town article.)

I tried to explain this on the Julian Steele talk page. I suppose if desired the Historical Commission could formally vote some sort of waiver or release.

An additional question is whether timing matters. Unlike the Julian Steele situation (where the Wikipedia article preceded the town article), there may be characters in prior town stories who would be appropriate subjects for a new Wikipedia article. If timing matters, how should such a situation be dealt with?

Any advice would be appreciated--

Thank you West Newbury (talk) 13:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, West Newbury and welcome to the Teahouse. Probably the best way is for you to rewrite any such articles for Wikipedia so that they include the same facts, but in sufficiently different words that there would be no copyright issue, even if the Historical Society site were written by a stranger with no permisison granted. Then there is no problem no matter what. Besides, the tone and content of a historical society article might be different from what would be appropriate for Wikipedia.

It would be possible for the town site to release the content under a CC-BY-SA license, and include a statement to that effect on each page. But that would grant rights to anyone in the world to reuse for any purpose without any fee, subject only to a requirement to attribute, and to release under the same license. The town might not be willing to do that.

Order/timing does matter. Cases where a Wikipedia article is copied by another site (with or without proper attribution) are treated differently from cases where a Wikipedia editor has copied another site, even one created by that same editor. Absent a grant of permission, cases where Wikipedia is the more recent usually result in the article being deleted, or the copied content being removed. There is a template for noting cases where Wikipedia was first. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to grant permission.

Also, West Newbury, please change your user name. Your present name implies that you represent the town, and perhaps that the account is shared with other town officials. That violates our Username policy. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:08, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

(ec) Hello West Newbury, WP:C should have all the relevant info on your conundrum. Of course, following all the legalese there is a different beast altogether. I am not sure I get it completely, or even at all.

As I understand it, when the Wikipedia article comes first, there are minimal issues as far as Wikipedia is concerned. If the wikipedia article is a shared contribution, republishing it requires compliance with the licensing terms (linking it back to the article or mentioning the usernames of original authors and making it clear that it is free for re-use under the same terms). If you are the sole author, even that is not required, as you own the copyright of the text you contribute here, and you are the only one who can sue reproducers of wikipedia text contributed by you. You should consider leaving a message at the article's talk page clarifying that the article came first so that copyright violation matches from automated tools can be more easily disregarded.

In case the Wikipedia article comes later, we've got serious issues. You would have to produce evidence that reproducing the text in question doesn't constitute a copyright violation, and even then it is frowned upon. Editors prefer wikipedia articles to be original/unique when they are first produced. Without evidence that there is no copyright violation, it is subject to immediate deletion as a possible legal liability, and repeat offenders are blocked from wikipedia. Hope this helps!

By the way, please consider if you might have a WP:COI (that need to be formally disclosed) on any of your contributions here. Many editors make disclosures for even apparent conflicts of interest for the sake of transparency and to save on recurrent queries on that. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both, DESiegel and Usedtobecool. I have applied for a name change and your advice about how to manage the town story (which indeed is different in tone and focus, but may well include the same phrases) vs. Wikipedia article is very helpful, though I will need to study this a bit more.

I will provide a disclosure/conflict notice on such articles' talk pages--should it be more or different from what I tried to do on the Julian Steele talk page? And after learning more about this, I will make it clear on the town website pages when a town story is derived from research & writing of a WP article.

Again, thank you. West Newbury (talk) 20:05, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if someone would look at Pennsylvania Hall (Philadelphia)#Primary sources and tell me how to get rid of the error message. Thanks. deisenbe (talk) 20:12, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

This edit follows the advice given in the "help" link from the citation error message. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: The problem was that {{oclc}} produced output which was not allowed in the others parameter. Special:ExpandTemplates shows that {{oclc|27720902}} produces <templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css" />[[OCLC]] [https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/27720902 27720902]. You could have written your own others= without using the template. However, {{Cite news}} says the parameter is for other contributions to the work, not other publications of it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I recently started looking more into xtools for article stats and noticed that there was a 'Bugs' section 'Powered by Project Check Wikipedia' that listed one bug that has been fixed already a few edits ago. Is it possible to remove the bug from appearing in xtools report or is it there to stay forever? Article's report in discussion https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/The%20Last%20Faust Zeeshka (talk) 18:59, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Zeeshka: I actually don't think the specified bug was fixed, I just went ahead and fixed it in this edit. It will probably take a few minutes to reflect on xtools now. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 21:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @SuperHamster: another editor has made the same fix before but it must have been overridden in a process. I will let you know if the bug report is not going away after a few days. Big thanks!!! Zeeshka (talk) 22:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I've removed all the IMDb references. Added a few more reliable reputed online newspaper reports. I have removed most chatty sentences and made it more formal.Let me know the comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rickey.murrey (talk • contribs) 21:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Veena Nandakumar Nair DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rickey.murrey and welcome back. Please in future provide a wiki-link when you mention an article or draft for the first time in a thread here (or on a user talk page). Please in future sign posts to talk/discussion pages with four tildes (~~~~) or use the "signature icon on the editing toolbar. The wiki software will convert this to your signature (which normally includes a link to your user page) and a timestamp. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I think that Draft:Veena Nandakumar Nair has been significantly improved, but perhaps not enough. Thanks for getting rid of the IMDB cites and the blog. Current sources:

1. The malayalam.news18 source is not in English, and i cannot evaluate it.
2. The Times of India article from Dec 30, 2019, is an interview, and helps litlte with notability.
3. The Film Companion review praises Nandhakumar's performance, but only devoted a couple of sentences to it, concentrating on the male lead. Not really detailed coverage. Not much help with notability.
4. The Silverscreen India review also devoted only a couple of sentences to Nandhakumar, concentrating largely on the male lead. Therefore, not much help with notability.
5. The Times of India article from Sep 7, 2018 is all about the story of the film Thodraa, and devotes only one sentence to the performance by Nandhakumar, and that shared with the male lead. Proves that she appeared in this role, but no more than that.
6. The article from The Hindu has some value, although it is partly an interview.
7. The article from Newsbugz seems to have some value, but it is rather brief and superficial, not really in-depth coverage. I also do not know if this publication has a reputation for accuracy.
8. The article from New Indian Express says a greet deal about the move Kadam Kadha. But it only devotes one short sentence to Veena Nandakumar Nair, saying only that she had a role in this movie.
9. The article from Cinestan has a good deal to say about the writing and direction of Thodra, but only one sentence about Nair. This does nothing for notability.

In short there is still not multiple independent sources with significant coverage cited in the draft. Sorry, but this is still not up to standards, in my view, unless the malayalam.news18 source is much better than I expect, given the length of the text compared to the amount of photos. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

If there is enough independent content regarding a person (not me by the way), can you pay a professional to write the article? I would add the content myself but I am unsure on the different coding requirements and it would take forever for me to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmm00086 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Jmm00086: It is very much discouraged, but it is allowed. The person writing the article must abide by WP:PAID and the article must be neutral and not promotional. RudolfRed (talk) 21:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jmm00086. Are you connected to the subject? Why would you pay? If the article is not promotional, you could start a short, bare-bones article yourself through AFC, without Wiki markup, just listing your sources at the end of the article like a bibliography. Be sure that what your article says follows your sources and that they don't consist of blogs, social media or sources close to your subject. On the article's Talk page, explain your situation re editing knowledge so reviewing editors will understand.

Look at other articles on similar subjects to see what to say and how to say it. You could get at least a stub article that way, provided your subject is notable, and volunteer editors could then improve it for free. As I am prejudiced against "junk articles", you could put an outline of what you wish to do on my Talk page, or even (very concisely) right here in this discussion. Feedback gladly given. Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia only.--Quisqualis (talk) 23:16, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi! So the page I am currently working on has been declined, but have credible sources. These sources have been accepted in past articles for creation and I was wondering if there was anything else specific that was missing in order to get the draft accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Musicadjacent (talk • contribs) 19:38, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Musicadjacent Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Since you have not created any other drafts, I assume you are referring to other articles created by others. Please understand that Wikipedia is a volunteer project where people do what they can, when they can. As such, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. It is also possible for articles to be accepted in error. This is why it is unwise to cite precedent here- see other stuff exists. Each article or draft is judged on its own merits. If you would like to point out some articles with the sources deemed to be inappropriate in yours, I could give better advice- in the case of your draft, it does little more than say that the singer exists and has released music. The sources simply serve to confirm the existence of the music; what is required are independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this person in order for them to merit an article. Please review the notability criteria for musicians as well. 331dot (talk) 19:46, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

331dot Thank you for your response. I understand, but if I give example of this page, it appears to be doing the same thing, as in stating the musician's released music. Unless you would say the sources are a bit stronger? Beau Vallis (singer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Musicadjacent (talk • contribs)

I would say that article is equally as problematic as your draft. 331dot (talk) 20:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

331dot Ok, adding other sections like 'Early Life' and 'Career' to Draft:Baby Cate should help to make it less problematic, correct? If possible, could you tell me if the following sources/articles are appropriate:https://www.thehypemagazine.com/2017/08/baby-cate-word/ , https://www.pastemagazine.com/noisetrade/Music/babycate , https://www.discogs.com/release/13974975 , https://repertoire.bmi.com/Catalog.aspx?detail=artistid&page=1&fromrow=1&torow=25&keyid=6199372&subid=0 , https://musicbrainz.org/artist/a11a4565-2474-4544-9abd-49137c32593c , https://acidstag.com/2019/02/newcomers-baby-cate-the-swoons-low-island-night-lights/--Musicadjacent (talk) 22:05, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Every adult on Earth has an early life and a career, so no, that's not helpful. You need better sources. If that is the best you could find, then just wait for her career to mature. (She may choose another career in the meantine, though.)--Quisqualis (talk) 23:22, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Musicadjacent, "Early life" and "Career" are possibly helpful sections, but what is in them maters far more than the section titles. The sources listed above are mostly just track listings or release announcements. Those do nothing to establish notability. In-depth reviews (see WP:SIGCOV) from reliable sources, possibly in a "Critical response" section, are more likely to help. But remember no fan sites, no publisher sites, no blogs, no forum sites, nothing user-generated or crowd-sourced, and no press releases or interviews. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:03, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi! I'm looking into starting an article on a particular scientific collection, one maintained by a university on certain types of biological specimens. I like to use infoboxes in articles. What would be a suitable infobox to use for an article on a scientific collection? I can't seem to find a suitable one when scrolling through the List of Infoboxes. Thank you. Nolabob (talk) 00:16, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps {{Infobox collection}}? --David Biddulph (talk) 00:30, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nolabob. You could try looking for similar articles at WP:FA or WP:GA to see whether they are using an infobox. You could also look at article which would fall under the same category as the one you want to create to see if they are using infoboxes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am have been working on Tibet House US to remove a flag recently put on the article. I removed the non-neutral pov language the editor who flagged it had suggested in discussion. Would appreciate suggestions and have two questions.

1. Per discussion with the editor who did not reply to this part of our discussion, quoted here: "I made changes to the first section as you suggested. I do not see the quote "a group of Westerners sympathetic to the Tibetan cause" in the second sentence of the lead as non-neutral [and it is a direct quote from a newspaper article]. As to "best for articles about organizations to focus on their past accomplishments, rather than just on their current programs." I listed articles about past programs as footnotes to illustrate the programs that fulfill TH's mission. Would it be better to break it down further and list the past programs and citations in the history section instead?"

The non-neutral words, such as "unique" have been removed. I get that last point and will be adding more to the history section with text and footnotes illustrating past programs so it does not look like promotion. After that shall remove the flag. Is this adequate?

2. In the second paragraph I added a quote and broke it up for brevity. I looked for suggestions on this at Help:Footnotes, and on how to add a footnote or note with the full quote, thought I had seen this used in articles before as explanatory information, but could not find out how to do it. Would appreciate an editor's opinion on this and if the edited quote suffices.

The quote as it is now: "stipulates: "All ethnic groups in the People's Republic of China are equal. The state protects the lawful rights and interests of the ethnic minorities and upholds and develops a relationship of equality, unity and mutual assistance among all of China's ethnic groups. Discrimination against and oppression of any ethnic group are prohibited." ...and they have the freedom to preserve or change their own folkways and customs."[14]

Original quote in full: "stipulates: All ethnic groups in the People's Republic of China are equal. The state protects the lawful rights and interests of the ethnic minorities and upholds and develops a relationship of equality, unity and mutual assistance among all of China's ethnic groups. Discrimination against and oppression of any ethnic group are prohibited. Citizens of all ethnic groups in China enjoy all equal rights accorded to citizens by the Constitution and law. For instance, they have the rights to vote and stand for election, regardless of ethnic status, race and religious belief; their personal freedom and dignity are inviolable; they enjoy freedom of religious belief; they have the right to receive education; they have the right to use and develop their own spoken and written languages; they enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration; they have the right to engage in scientific research, literary and artistic creation and other cultural pursuits; they have the right to work and rest, and the right to material assistance from the state and society when they are disabled; they have the right to criticize and make suggestions regarding any state organ or functionary; and they have the freedom to preserve or change their own folkways and customs."

Thank you. Ogmany (talk) 00:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@Ogmany: Perhaps bring this up on the article's talk page? You might get better and more specialist advice there. I personally don't have an opinion, but you will probably get some advice and an answer on the talk page. Thanks! Puddleglum ^2.0 01:09, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

​You wouldn't get any input from the article's talk page since the article is new and has no watchers. The introduction sounded very much like a pamphlet, something that was selling the reader on the institution's purpose. We try to be very neutral (almost hyper-neutral) and encyclopedic, so I've simplified the introduction greatly. Understanding a culture endangered by assimilationist policies which are contrary to China's constitution is too argumentative for an introduction about a cultural institution (see also WP:COATRACK). Summarizing only what secondary sources say the institution has done (not what its mission is) is much preferred. The reason Rosguill didn't respond to your question last month was that the link to him didn't work, so he didn't get the ping. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:31, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I frequently encounter edits such as the infobox part of this edit, or even the seemingly manual reversal of an earlier such edit, in which a number of spaces are either added to or removed from the infobox in a distinct pattern. Can you tell me whether this is a case of the Infobox template being in need of adjustment? What, exactly, is being accomplished by such edits?--Quisqualis (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Quisqualis lining up the equals signs on the infobox parameters makes them appear neater when editing the wiki source, and may make it slightly easier to find a parameter value in the source. it has no effect at all on the displayed article, and is not really a good idea, although as long as it is not begin done by a bot, or in a bot-like repetitive way by a manual editor, it is rarely objected to. If done along with other changes that improve the article, no one objects that I know of. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:21, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Quisqualis, when that happens to pages I watch, it's editors updating the infobox using mobile editing. Or was it visual editing? Anyway, there is at least one automated process that automatically adds whitespaces to infoboxes that I've encountered. In this particular case, the block log of the editor in question might be of interest as well. Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm trying to change the title of the Wikipedia article called 'The Squiz' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Squiz) to 'The Squiz (TV series)' so I can make a new article called 'The Squiz'. I am unsure how to do this, as my account has not been autoconfirmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lara robertson (talk • contribs) 03:09, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Lara robertson. You'll find some more specific information about disambiguation in Wikipedia:Disambiguation, but generally what you're going to have to do is WP:MOVE the article The Squiz to The Squiz (TV series). Doing such a thing is technically not too difficult, but you do need to be WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. Whether the page should be move, however, is a different question as may depend on which of the to article subjects is considered to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. What you might want to do is propose that "The Squiz" be moved to an new title either at Talk:The Squiz or at Wikipedia:Requested moves and see what others think. You're going to probably need to establish why "The Squiz" article you want to create is not the one which should be disambiguated, i.e. that it's the PRIMARYTOPIC when it comes to things referred to as "The Squiz". -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:09, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

i am coming across 404 hyperlinks in references or external links section. is there any template or tool to fix without manual intervention. i dont have access to desktop or laptop, hence my query. Leela52452 (talk) 02:56, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Leela52452. There are bots (for example, User:InternetArchiveBot) that will go around looking for dead/problem links in both references and external links and try to repair them; however, Wikipedia doesn't automatically simply discard/remove dead links because they are dead for the reasons given in WP:DEADREF and WP:ELDEAD. If you don't have the time or ability to try and repair/sort out these links yourself, you can add a template like Template:Dead link or Template:Citations broken to the article; the former is added in line at for a specific citation while the latter is added to the top of the article and can cover multiple citations. For external links, you can add the "Dead link" template or Template:External links.

Adding maintenance templates like those referred to above is one way of letting other editors (or even WP:BOTs) know that there is a potential problem that might need to be reviewed/fixed. Articles tagged which such templates are usually added to a category page where articles with similar problems can be found, and there are editors who work off such pages trying to help clean things up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:20, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Team,

can you brief steps to create wiki page on Wikipedia. but not yet published the page.

kindly help us.

regards, sachin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachinharyan (talk • contribs) 05:44, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@Sachinharyan: Please take a minute to read the responses you got in your previous thread (the one you link to above) and on your user talk page. You cannot create the article about yourself, for the reasons already explained to you there. You said "we have tried multiple times" – who is "we"? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 06:48, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I'm new but have made more than 10 edits and uploaded new images to wiki commons.

I want to remove this old image - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Park,_San_Francisco#/media/File:South-Park-18aug2004.jpg

And upload these 2 images: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:South_Park_SF_January_2020.jpg

and this one https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:South_Park_SF_top_view_January_2020.jpg

Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Domperri (talk • contribs) 05:52, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Domperri. it's not clear what you're asking? Do you want to know whether it's OK for you to replace the current image in the article with the ones you uploaded or do you want to know how to do that? If you want to know whether it's OK to replace/add images, then the best place to probably discuss that would be at Talk:South Park, San Francisco. Generally, you it's OK to be WP:BOLD and make edits which you think improve an article, but sometimes it can be a good idea to be a bit WP:CAUTIOUS if it's a major change or change that might be a bit contentious. You can be BOLD and change the image in the infobox, but you should discuss things on the article's talk page per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution if anyone disagrees and reverts the change.

If you're not sure how to add an image to an infobox, try taking a look at Help:Pictures for some general information. Since all of the relevant files do appear to be freely licensed files, you don't really have to remove one to add another, and all three images could possibly be used: one in the infobox and two in the body of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:10, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

For instance, I have played Arkham Asylum, and added information from biographies in the game, which are verified. (Also, I’m also going to ask; Is it okay to add information that can’t be verified through WP but is verified in biographies in the game, and also verified in the comics?) Most of those edits have been reverted by some guy called DarkWarriorBlake, even though they are completely verified and visible in any video of the game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heroe Of Time (talk • contribs) 07:33, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Heroe Of Time, You generally do need some source, but, you can easily just list the source as the game itself, or related material, just remember to be precise, so if you say it's from the comic, preferably be able to say which book and which page so that hunting to verify it isn't as difficult. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 07:41, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

• Batman: Arkham Asylum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

There are some side-issues to this. First it's a featured article (WP:FA). So people get a bit protective about those, on the assumption that they're now completely perfect and no further changes are either necessary or acceptable. We ought to hold FAs to maintain the higher standard they've reached, but that's not the same as saying they're static.

They're also doing a lot of reverts on this, to many authors, so there might be a bit of WP:OWN going on. Which is a good thing up to a point, but it never means "Only I may edit this" or "I have some personal veto over everyone else".

There's also an issue with reverting like this, to remove what's effectively a list entry as "not notable". WP:NOTABILITY just doesn't apply here (that's for article topics), it's a question of WP:UNDUE instead, which is a different standard.

Would I support the removals here? yes, I probably would (but it's not my field, so I could easily be wrong). I note that another editor, Bonadea, has just done this. But I wouldn't support the way they were done. If you revert another editor, especially a WP:GF addition by someone you've not encountered before, then it's incumbent on the editor reverting to explain why. Even an edit summary would be a help. After that, you should try and discuss it with them (article talk page) and find out why. This is pretty much always a very good thing to do. If in doubt, talk about it. Also, if they're the one being uncooperative, then you're now the good guy for having at least tried.

As to why I'd revert (I can only give a personal viewpoint), that's because parenthetical additions are poor copywriting. They're easy to add, but hard to read. We would hope that the copy-editing has already been done on an FA, so breaking up the flow of the prose would be a loss. Either work these additions in in a fluid maner, or don't add them. I'm also unconvinced that they add much. The only one I might add would be the last one (which Bonadea was specifically against) where you note that there's a variety of opponents making that 'Fatal Attraction' grab for the floating box at the end (you noted that this varied, the embedded note says not to add a single name). Andy Dingley (talk) 08:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Heroe Of Time: Please note, however, that original research including synthesis of things sources say, is not allowed. Your edits added information in the middle of text that was already sourced to secondary sources, and since the info you added can not be found in those sources (according to what you say above), you can't simply add it to what is already there without providing your source. I am not sure what the principles for game plots are, if it is actually OK to use the game itself as a source, but I note that other sources in the plot section are secondary, that is, not the game but some independent source writing about it. One of the pieces of info you added also seemed to ignore a clear note that said not to add that to the article.

In general, when you add something to an article and it is removed, the best course of action is to bring it to the article talk page, just as you did, and not restore it again. If you should get a consensus in favour of adding the info, you can do so, but it is up to you to show why it is appropriate. What you can't do is tell other eitors they have to contact you before removing your additions – especially not the addition that is specifically disallowed (per the edit note in the article). Batman: Arkham Asylum is a featured article, and so the requirements for sourcing are pretty high. --bonadea contributions talk 08:33, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both. I do think that the last edit, as you both said, is included in sources and I did mention all the possibilities. Anyway, thanks for your help, you are great wikipedians, keep helping people. Heroe_Of_Time —Preceding undated comment added 08:58, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

the page on Burton Silverman fails when requested as a preview. There was no short description, so I added one (just "Burton Silverman is an American artist") but that did not fix the problem. Can anyone with an understanding of the preview system please advise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkohen (talk • contribs) 08:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Not sure why you say the preview failed, it seems to be working fine for me. As regards your edit though, the article already has a short description, you just added a line of text to the top of the article. Not sure why you aren't seeing the already present short description. - X201 (talk) 09:13, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Ah hang on. You mean there was no lead section. - X201 (talk) 09:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

It's working correctly. The lead section appears before the Table of Contents. The reason it looks odd is because it's so short. - X201 (talk) 09:17, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I would like to ask how to change the settings in the watchlist,to keep receiving the information about the changes even if I don't view them each time? It is a bit annoying to have to open the watchlist every time in order to remain informed about any further changes. If there is no such option, could you please propose it to be implemented? Regards Simpleuseredit (talk) 21:55, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Simpleuseredit Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not entirely clear on what you are asking; your watchlist will display recent edits to every page in your watchlist when you view it. Are you saying you want it to update in real time without you having to do anything? I'm not aware of any page on Wikipedia with that capability(off the top of my head at least) 331dot (talk) 22:01, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Simpleuseredit: I am equally unclear as to what you're asking for. But in response to 331dot's comment, I'd point to the 'Live Update' button on the upper right of the Watchlist screen, which is quite handy. You can set it to email you an alert whenever a watchlist article is edited. You could then scroll through them at your leisure to see what had been edited - would that help? ((Special:Recent Changes also updates in real time, too, if you tell it to.) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

sorry, in fact I didn't make it clear, I meant email notifications. They arrive only once and if I don't review the change, I am not notified about any further changes. Simpleuseredit (talk) 22:12, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Simpleuseredit: Are you really sure about that? I don't think that's the case at all. I've only just reactivated my emails for watchlists (after an 18 month break) and I'm sure I get multiple messages - one for each time the Teahouse is changed, whether I've looked at the email, or not. I'm also not aware of my emails feeding back to Wikipedia to say I've opened a notification email. But now you've raised the question, I really am going to have to keep an eye on it to be certain one way or another! You might like to wade through both Help:Watchlist and Wikipedia:Customizing watchlists for anything that seems relevant. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:28, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

​Sadly not possible yet, this is an unresolved problem (phab:T33928). – Thjarkur (talk) 22:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

if there ever is a voting for this upgrade, please notify me, thank you! Simpleuseredit (talk) 22:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

@Simpleuseredit: There are all sorts of options for getting notifications - see Help:Preferences#Notifications. RockMagnetist(talk) 22:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

​Sometimes it is possible to bump old Phabricator tickets by commenting on them. If it's only a handful of pages you're interested in watching closely, your second best option might be one of those page monitoring services. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:12, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you,Thjarkur! Simpleuseredit (talk) 10:27, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I am an expert when it comes to pokemon and I see a problem with the generation 8 pokemon. First off, if we have no association to Kubfu, Urshifu,and Calyrex, then what are they doing in the list of gen 8 Pokemon? Also, what are the 2 "Regi" Pokemon in the list for? We have no data about them. UB Blacephalon (talk) 06:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi UB Blacephalon. Generally, the best place to discuss improvements, problems, etc. related to a specific article is on the article's corresponding talk page. It's not clear what article you feel needs to be changed, but maybe a good place to discuss this would be at Talk:Pokémon or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon because that's where you're likely to find editors familiar with the subject matter who can best help you sort things out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Marchjuly. I'll see what I can do! UB Blacephalon (talk) 13:12, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I was editing the Wikipedia page for Citizenship Amendment Act protests (mostly grammar in the timeline) but yesterday I got a message on my talk page from DBigXray telling me to use the tense that was initially used (it was past tense and I changed it to present tense) and directed me to WP:TENSE. But there is no statement saying that the past tense should be used for timelines also, while many results including the first one on the Google search for "what tense to use in a timeline" say present tense. So, does WP:TENSE mandate past tense for timelines though it isn't mentioned? RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 12:44, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi RedBulbBlueBlood9911. I’m not sure if there’s one correct tense that applies to all cases, but maybe this would something better discussed at Talk:Citizenship Amendment Act protests. I do think that the historical present is often used in English when discussing past events, particularly when writing about things in an historical context; so, maybe that’s something which might work in this case. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

(responding to ping) RedBulbBlueBlood9911, MOS:TENSE and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Statements_likely_to_become_outdated cover it. The article is about a protest and the events are quickly getting outdated. The entire article is in past tense and writing some section/s in present looks out of place. Changing it to present tense and then after some time again changing all the present tense verbs to past seems like a unnecessary effort to me. (please ping me when you respond to me)--DBigXrayᗙ 13:03, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Better to use past tense as each passing day of the protest becoming history and past continous tense in some cases where it can't be written in past tense. Dey subrata (talk) 15:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I just barely avoided being scammed by a supposed recruitment website (beBee.com) thanks to its' Wikipedia entry. I noticed that there has recently been edits and reversions of edits of this entry and had I visited it at the wrong time, I might have fallen for the scam. As I want to prevent others from falling for the scam, I created this account to ask for guidance regarding the verifiable content and assume good faith policies in this specific case.

Users who have reverted edits of this entry claim that sources that are warning about the scam are not worthy of inclusion (online reviews etc). I agree with this sentiment. However, the unfortunate consequence of removing a non-verifiable claim (by Wikipedia standards) is that unwitting users may visit the Wikipedia entry and leave with no indication that the scam website is untrustworthy. It seems obvious to me that the verifiable content and assume good faith policy is being misused in order to create a veneer of credibility in this case. I assume this is a somewhat recurring problem on Wikipedia that I have only just encountered. After some research and dodging a lot of gaslighting, I have come to the conclusion that the website is running a scam by reading various online reviews on Trustpilot, Reddit and LinkedIn — hardly sources that belong in a Wikipedia entry or is considered to be verifiable content. I wonder if there is any best practice to go by when dealing with these issues in order to help people stay safe online. Can anyone provide some insight?

In case the link above does not work, here is a direct link to the Wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeBee. Œil (talk) 12:19, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Unless we have a reliable source that accuses it of being a scam, we can't add that. I have looked it up and, other than claims in a customer review site, which isn't considered reliable, haven't found anything saying this is a scam. People seem unhappy that it charges you to apply for a job, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a scam. Are you aware of any reliable sources criticizing beBee.com, or demonstrating that it is not legitimate? VdSV9•♫ 14:39, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Due to the language barrier, I may be using too severe terminology. By scam, I meant more like a dishonest scheme and I am not suggesting that they are doing anything illegal. I think that people are unhappy because they are not being upfront with their business model and reveal a paywall only after the user has made an account, submitted relevant documents and becoming psychologically invested in the idea of applying. In other words, they are actively misleading their users. I didn't get that far in the process (thanks to the warning in the Wikipedia entry) so I may be wrong regarding the details. Regardless, the answer to your question is that there is no way that I know of to get a reliable source to cite in order to make a permanent warning in the article. In a way, I suppose that is the beauty of it and the purpose of creating the Wikipedia entry in the first place. I just feel complicit in wasting people's time and potentially even their money since the Wikipedia entry may be the first thing they look up in order to get a grasp of the website's credibility. Œil (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Œil, I think it'd be possible to mention that the site requires you to pay, but probably not outright call it a scam or sham. [[User:Moonythedwarf|moonythedwarf]] (Braden N.) (talk) 17:04, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hay, I've got a question. How do you put a png image in an infobox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RavianW (talk • contribs) 14:05, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@RavianW You should see the "image" row in the infobox. if you are making one yourself then add it in just below the name. you may also want to add a caption or even a "image size" depending on what type of infobox REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:17, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi! I would like to add a photo to a wiki page, but I'm confused about the different licensing options.

I'm hoping someone can help me.

There is a photo that I like on Flickr, but it's copyrighted by an organization. The org is fine with the photo being posted on Wiki.

QUESTION: Would it be easier to change the copyright on Flickr and then upload it OR to have someone at the org fill out the Interactive Release Generator OR perhaps even have them donate the photo to Wiki?

I would appreciate any help.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliecmi (talk • contribs) 17:07, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@Juliecmi: Any of those is fine. Note that the license must allow for reuse for any purpose, not just use on Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 17:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Juliecmi. You can't change the copyright on Flickr. Only the uploader can do that, and then only if the uploader is the copyright holder or has permission. The copyright holder (in this case the organization, it appears) must decide to release the image under a compatible free license, such as the CC-BY-SA license, and then post the new license with the image, or send a release to "permissions-commons@wikimedia.org" by email. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for details. RudolfRed is correct that any compatible license must allow use by anyone for any purpose, including commercial use without fee. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:37, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi I am adding old football kits to Wikipedia. and I have just come across a kit which I cannot find a pattern for I have checked Wikimedia commons but I cannot find anything! would someone be able to help? the kit is the Derby County 1894–95 home kit see REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:28, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, REDMAN 2019. Although this isn't my field (I've only done this once before, years back), I feel obliged to try and help you as Derby County F.C. is my local football club (not that I watch the sport, mind you). I assume the issue is that there is either a) no red/black striped body at Template:Football kit/pattern list, and no b) shape shown for long arms? I see you've created other patterns of the period with short sleeves, so does b) actually matter?

It seems to me that you should identify all the 'best fit' graphics you need, albeit with the wrong colours and try to get someone to change and upload them for you, if you can't do it yourself. It's important to remove the need for guesswork for what exactly you need - as most of us are rubbish at mind-reading here. Having worked out exactly what you're asking for, you could then try, either at Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab (where you can make a formal request), or at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, or even at my local wikiproject: Wikipedia:WikiProject Derbyshire. If you decide to post at more than one forum, please explain and link to identical posts on the other fora so that people can check and avoid creating the same thing for you twice. I hope this helps a bit.

That having been said, doesn't the guidance at Template:Football kit allow you to create more individual patterns? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:10, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I was wondering for a biography, is it ok to use a newspaper clipping from an old newspaper as a source? I mean, could a photo be taken of the clipping and cited as a source with name of paper, date etc?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwayslp (talk • contribs) 15:04, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

A photo of the clipping might well be a copyright violation (depending on the date of publication of the paper), but you can cite it merely by giving the name of the paper, date, and whatever other information you can give (perhaps using {{cite news}}). --David Biddulph (talk) 15:10, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Alwayslp, and welcome to the Teahouse. A newspaper story can be used as a source even if the story is not available online. There is no need to photograph or scan a clipping, and doing so would probably be a copyright infringement, and so Wikipedia would not link to any such scan or image if you did post it.

Simply provide the title of the story, the date it was published, the name of the paper (location helps if not obvious -- you don't need to tell us where the New York Times, the Times of London or the Washington Post is located). You can also include a short quotation from the news story to show what facts it is supporting.

There are various archive services for newspapers, both on- and offline. (I subscribe to one, plus two specific papers with their own archives.) Given citation info, some editor will almost surely be able to verify the citation.

I hope that is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:16, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!Alwayslp (talk) 20:25, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Human Rights literally not written in MH Act, why removed?

Better yet to a control F on the human rights act.. only in the title

Ps, Dwarf, from my previous attempt of a page is not to promote myself, im almost homeless, so, I just wanted people to remember what I looked like before being a Tramp

Nevermind that anyway, this info is vital for people suffering under this smokescreened genocide, sectioning human emotions like the jewish and locking up for no reason (like film Minority Report) and Forcing them to take meds + a LOT have died due to this, meds, suicide, violence, etc.

Jonny please reply kindly, think dude was NEON who removed this quote, np — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonny Abet (talk • contribs) 20:16, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey Jonny Abet. While you may have meant well, an edit like this one is not appropriate. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we don't provide how-to guides or step-by-step instructions. Beyond that, the absence of this terminology appears to be your own personal commentary, which is not allowed under Wikipedia's prohibition on original research. GMG^talk 20:27, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jonny Abet. I belive you are talking about this edit to Mental Health Act 2007, in which A-NEUN reverted some changes of yours. It saves a lot of time if you include a wiki-link when you talk about an article (or draft) here.

While i don't know for sure why A-NEUN reverted your change, Wikipedia article do not normally include instructions to the reader on how to search for things. If there is a revert and you want to know why it was made, or think it was incorrect, the best way is to go to the article talk page (here Talk:Mental Health Act 2007) and post a request for an explanation, or your reasons for thinking your edit proper, and ping the editor who dis the revert. Be sure to sign such a comment in the same edit or the ping will not work. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:31, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering if a podcast is a permissible source for someone's biography? A podcast with an interview of that person? Thank you!

Alwayslp (talk) 20:24, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

If it is an interview with the subject, then I would say that is an acceptable source for things that can be sourced to primary sources (i.e. specific facts). WP:RSPRIMARY has more information if you're still looking for more info. Happy editing! -- a lad insane (Channel 2) 20:35, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Alwayslp, and welcome to the Teahouse. Like a website, or a book, or even a YouTube video, podcasts may or may not be reliable sources. it depends who publishs a source and how. If a podcast is a one-person operation, like a fan-site, it will not be considered reliable unless that person is an expert in the field (whatever field the podcast deals with). But if the podcast is produced by an organization with a reputation for accuracy and editorial control, it mayt well be reliable, just as if it was a magazine published by that same organization. Similar standards apply to all sources. it is not whether it is print, audio or video, online or paper that matters, but the reputation of the people or organization responsible, and the presence of editorial control.

Many podcasts are one-person operations, and no more reliable than personal web sites. Others are created by highly reliable groups or organizations. Those can be used, like any other source.

However, an interview with the subject of an article, whether it appears in a pod cast or in the New York Times, is normally not an independent source as such it can be used only as a self-published source, for facts about what the subject has said, or for non-controversial statements not in dispute, never for anything about any other person, and it does not count towards notability. (Exception, some stories combine an interview with an extensive intro or followup by the reporter. In those cases the part in the reporter's voice may count as independent.) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

curprev 19:59, 18 January 2020‎ KylieTastic talk contribs‎ 1,318 bytes +66‎ Declining submission: test - Submission appears to be a test edit (AFCH 0.9.1) undothank

Um, if anyone could lend a type, it would be qwerty :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonny Abet (talk • contribs) 20:20, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

It is not easy to understand exactly what you want to say, but it looks like you are referring to your submission of this page (old version intentionally linked to show what it looked like at the time of submission). It is a string of incoherent text, not anything resembling an encyclopedia article. It is pretty common for people to post such strings of words to test how Wikipedia editing works, and it is not very odd that your submission was interpreted as another such test. --bonadea contributions talk 20:53, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I am researching E. Moody Boynton (d. 1927), colorful politician, orator, entrepreneur, inventor of the Boynton Bicycle Railroad, and such a relentless self-promoter that newspaper articles mention his continual visits to their offices. A key element of his story is the wealth and success he had with the invention of the Lightning Saw, a true technological advance. Many newspaper stories and even a book describe him as the Lightning Saw inventor. At least one article vividly describes his trials and errors in the Lightning Saw inventing process.

US patent documents, however, show that Moody's older brother Alfred was the actual inventor. Alfred immediately assigned the patent to Moody and it was Moody's business skills (and subsequent improving patents) that made this such a success. I've been through at least a hundred secondary sources and none caught the falsehood. A similar, though less important, fib involves Moody's elaborations about his estate, some of which can be disproven with secondary sources and one--ownership of the property--is disproven by recorded deeds on file.

How does one responsibly treat this kind of situation in view of Wikipedia rules against primary sources, original research, and judgmental observations such as "he claimed"?

Thank you for your advice Riverbend Trail (talk) 14:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

About the inventions, I would suggest to neutrally state that secondary sources give Moody credit, but the patent office records Alfred as the inventor. From what you say, there's no way to tell whether the story in the book or the patent office records are wrong about this. —Kusma (t·c) 15:10, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Good advice, Kusma. I will continue looking into secondary sources and use your approach. Thank you Riverbend Trail (talk) 21:19, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I've come across edits like this where someone changes all dates from BC to BCE or vice versa. Is this problematic, or should I just leave them? Lcodyh803 (talk) 22:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

The advice is at MOS:ERA. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I've been quite content as a redlink for the past fifteen years. Suddenly, someone has - without my request or permission - created a userpage for me. I can't undo the edit, and blanking the page does nothing. How do I go about getting this mess undone? pauli133 (talk) 22:33, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

You can request deletion by adding {{Db-userreq}} to the top of the page. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:41, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) hi @Pauli133: - no problem, I've deleted your userpage, to revert you to your nice red hue. If it happens in the future you can put {{Db-u1}} on your userpage - User request allows you to ask for it to be deleted, but not your user talk page. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:44, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both! All is right (and red) again! pauli133 (talk) 22:47, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I've created a page Jay Silver(musician) and it's been deleted multiple time even when I cited it with all possible links. What could be the issue?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newton256 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Newton256. Draft:Jay Silver (musician) still exists. You have not shown that this musician is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:00, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Your attempt to add the article to the encyclopedia was deleted as promotional and as a copyright violation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Youtube not accepted as a reference. David notMD (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, at the risk of being anal, it is not generally accepted as a reference. There are some rare exceptions. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Oh sure this has really been helpful, hope other sites like Spotify are acceptable as in the discography add up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newton256 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Newton256:Reliable sources need to have written about him in order for him to be notable. It's not enough for him to just have songs on Spotify.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 01:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

May I know which are the 10 most common warning templates, sorted in order? I'd like to design special warnings for those items. tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message; contribs) 00:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Interesting question, The Lord of Math. I presume you plan of making a bespoke notice equivalent to those most used ones. My guess would be:

• {{uw-vandalism1}} through to 4
• {{uw-delete1}} through to 4
• {{uw-unsourced1}} to 2

I use WP:Twinkle to allow me to quickly add one of my own welcome messages relevant to a WikiProject. One could do the same with warning templates, too. Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes I might not have been clear about the question. I'd like the most common series in descending order, so for example {{uw-vandalism1}} through 4 counts as just 1. How about those? tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message; contribs) 01:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

And I'm also curious who was the most blocked user/IP. I found that Special:Contributions/91.144.44.67 got blocked 192 times by User:ProcseeBot, including 145 61-day blocks from 10:41 to 15:29 UTC, 22 Nov 2011. Has anything got more broken than that? Just curious. tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message; contribs) 01:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I can't answer your second question. Here's what I use most:

• {{uw-vandalism1}}
• {{uw-test1}}
• {{uw-delete1}}
• {{uw-unsourced1}}
• {{uw-advert1}}
• {{uw-editsummary}}
• {{uw-spam1}}
• {{uw-coi}}
• {{uw-error1}}

It's too late for me to count or fine-sort them, but I hope this helps. See also Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:56, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I am obtaining consensus to remove or change the map in the Han Dynasty article. This is the map. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_dynasty#/media/File:Han_Dynasty_map_2CE.png

It shows map of Han dynasty at 2AD but at 2AD Han Dynasty did not occupy northern part of Korean Peninsula. It is a shame that there are such obvious historical inaccuracies in a featured artile. Jungguk (talk) 23:39, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@Jungguk: It is unclear whether you have a question. Do you have a question? Interstellarity (talk) 00:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: The question is, can I remove map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_dynasty#/media/File:Han_Dynasty_map_2CE.png in featured article of Han Dynasty as it is historically incorrect? Korea was not part of Han Dynasty in 2AD.

Jungguk, you would first want to bring this up on Talk:Han Dynasty and get consensus from other editors. If you get consensus, the map can be changed at the Graphics lab map workshop according to your specifications.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:09, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Jungguk: Just to clarify, the image is at c:File:Han Dynasty map 2CE.png and the dark blue includes what is currently North Korea. Are you saying that the small amount of blue that lies on the Korean peninsula should be gray (i.e., not included in the Han empire)? The image page says it was created by 复旦大学张超 on 2019-01-05, based on a cited book. Do you have that source or an alternate? I'll note that c:File:Han map.jpg as of 87 BC, also on the Han Dynasty page, includes that small section of the peninsula, too. There are many other maps at c:Category:Maps of the Han Dynasty. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:57, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Is there a specific tag I can add to an article to request formatting help or where do you request that type of help? Backround: The article 2019 Dallas tornado was created and was checked by a vote for deletion. It passed and remains an article. Since formatting takes a while to make, I copied/pasted the entire page into User:Elijahandskip/sandbox. I said on the talk page if you are editing the Dallas 2019 tornado page to edit on my talkpage. I worked some on basic formatting, but I don't know what headers/subheaders are needed based on the information already collected. Hopefully my question gets across correctly. -Thanks in advance for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elijahandskip (talk • contribs) 19:57, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Elijahandskip, do you want the tag on the article or your sandbox? Bkissin (talk) 20:10, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Problems: Editors may not see what you left on the existing article's Talk page, and thus make edits to the article. When you want to move content from your Sandbox into the article, you should accommodate their changes. When you think your Sandbox content is improved, do not submit it as a draft. Instead, copy pieces into the existing article. David notMD (talk) 20:43, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I do not agree with the idea that each U.S. tornado warrants its own article, especially as no fatalities. Perhaps kill the article and kill the draft, and add content to Tornadoes of 2019. David notMD (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

David notMD The reason it remained an article for 2 reasons. 1. It was a tornado in an extremely populated area that cut power out for hundreds of thousands. 2. It came within a mile of a former President's house. I do agree not every tornado warrents its own article, but this one passed a deletion vote, so for now it is an article.Elijahandskip (talk) 03:51, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

should i remove orphan template on Edgar Báez. List of Santos FC players contain link to Edgar Báez. please clarify or suggest Leela52452 (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Leela52452, yes, one link is enough. WP:ORPHAN has more. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:10, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

i may be wrong, however Beach road, Takoradi looks like an ad. it has only one source and the source seems to be real estate corporation. if i find similar, where and how should i report ? Leela52452 (talk) 06:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Leela52452. If you believe that this topic is not notable, then you can nominate the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. I share your concerns. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:41, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I nominated this page for deletion just now. Thanks for raising this concern. tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message; contribs) 07:03, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Can some help and guide me what has to be done more to get my college page published?

The page am talking about is Insight College festival.

I have already tried to get the sources attached.

Who will review it and when , it taking a lot of time , if there is any issue about the content or about the source it should be conveyed, so we can rectify it at the earlier.

Am trying to publish this page from last 10 days . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laveshpurswani (talk • contribs) 10:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Laveshpurswani, You have not even submitted it for review, and as such no-one will review it. Wikipedia does not have pages, it has articles, and the difference is pretty key: A page can contain whatever you want, a wikipedia article is carefully vetted and is subject to a large number of policies, like notability, which your draft appears to fail.

Courtesy link: User:Laveshpurswani/sandbox. moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 10:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Laveshpurswani (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your page is 'published' in that it is in your personal sandbox. It is not 'published' in that it is not formally a part of the encyclopedia yet; this is because you have not submitted it for a review. You should not submit it yet. If you were to submit it, it would probably be rejected, as you have not offered independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this event showing how it meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable event. These sources would be things like news coverage or other independent sources that have chosen on their own to write about the event. Your sources seem to be basic listings or announcements, which do not establish notability. You may find it helpful to read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial before further editing; successfully writing a new article is the hardest task on Wikipedia.

If you are associated with this event, you should review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 10:42, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

I have been trying to propose an edit to the opening paragraph on Optical Express's Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_Express as the information that is currently there is not factually correct. The change has been rejected by an editor however, independent sources to back up the information have been supplied. I have resubmitted a change request however, have not had a response to this in over 9 days. I was looking to see how I can go about getting the change accepted and made.

The current opening paragraph states: Optical Express is a retail optical services brand and laser eye surgery specialist in the United Kingdom.[ The company also provides refractive treatments such as lens surgery and cataract surgery.[

However, Optical Express is predominantly a refractive surgery brand and UK's leading provider in laser and intraocular lens surgery. Please refer to the ^[1] which states 'The biggest chain is Optical Express: it is said to do 6 out of 10 laser eye procedures in the UK, and has over 100 clinics.'

More information to back up the point that Optical Express is the UK's leading provider of laser and intraocular lens surgery can be found in the following Mintel Reports: ^{[2] [3]}

Optical Express also has almost 130 clinics in the UK. The list of these can be found here:^[4]

Can the opening statement be amended to the following, as it is purely stating facts?:

Founded in 1991, Optical Express has grown from one location to almost 130 clinics and has become the UK's leading provider of laser and Intraocular Lens surgery. As well as providing eye surgery the company also supplies glasses and contact lenses.

Can you let me know how I can go about getting this reviewed?

Thanks Trees88 (talk) 10:37, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Trees88, Your amendment, to me, does not appear to have the required encyclopedic tone that is necessary for wikipedia. moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 10:41, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Trees88 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your language above leads me to think that you work for Optical Express or otherwise are associated with them. If so, this is a conflict of interest(please review). If you work for them, you must comply with the paid editing policy; this is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

sir how to give a reference as I got this msg from wiki "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supernatural eerie (talk • contribs) 05:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Supernaturaleerie. I've created a new section for your question so it doesn't get mixed in with the discussion above this one. Orville^talk 05:51, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

The words in blue in the feedback messages (on the draft and on your user talk page) are wikilinks to useful help. Among those, one particular page which you should read is Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: This is about Draft:Detectives Of Supernatural. David notMD (talk) 12:17, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I was looking for some small help. I created an article User:Bookku/Me Too movement (Pakistan) in user namespace. Article is almost ready but before taking to main namespace Looking for help in English language Spell-check, punctuation, grammar check and corrections. Using better alternative words etc. Thanks in advance.

Bookku (talk) 14:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Bookku, I've moved it to Draft:Me Too movement (Pakistan), where other editors may be more willing to give it some attention. I'll do a little copy-editing myself. Maproom (talk) 16:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

A couple of times the logo has been removed for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Motor_Film_Awards

I've tried {{Non-free use rationale logo}} but I'm not entirely sure the right way of doing it. I understand that fair use is not allowed on commmons, but how do I add a logo as non-free?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by PewterCityGym (talk • contribs) 2020-01-22T16:42:45 (UTC)

Upload the image to enwiki ("Upload file" in the "Tools" menu), not to Commons, and use {{Non-free use rationale logo}} as the justification there. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:52, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, PewterCityGym, and welcome to the Teahouse. As you've found, you cannot upoad non-free material to Commons, but only to Wikipedia; and in doing so, you must show that it is to be used in a way that conforms with all the terms in the non-free content criteria: the template you included (which I have changed to a link rather than the template appearing on this page) is to gather that essential information. You'll need to explain what the problem is that you're having with it.

However: rather than spending time on icing the cake, I suggest you address the much more important issue of providing some independent sources for the Awards. At present, the article does nothing to establish that the Awards are notable, and (now that you have brought it to our notice) it is likely to get deleted. --ColinFine (talk) 16:55, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

It was denied for publication. I tried to update it according to guidelines. Should I do anything else? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:SOC_Telemed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlspriest (talk • contribs) 14:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Mlspriest: I'm guessing you're a professional PR or marketing person. This draft is written like a press release. The first thing I'd do is remove any unnecessary adjectives or adverbs from that draft. It's difficult for new editors to use them without it sounding promotional. Second, buzzwords and phrases like "provides solutions" and "enables customers" are meaningless PR-speak. When I'm talking to my friends, I don't say something like, "This car provides solutions to my consumer-centric needs and enables me to transport myself." And, so, an encyclopedia article should not be written like that, either. This is endemic in press releases that have been lightly edited to become Wikipedia articles. Try looking through this guide for creating new articles for general advice. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I am part of the PR team of a well-known businessman. My team and I are interested in opening a wiki page about him. How can we do that and how long will it last for the page to be approved?

Thanks guys!

Best, PR manager — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prteam23 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Prteam23. Best advice: "don't try". Wikipedia is not for promotion. If you do go forward, you will need to declare yourself a paid editor under WP:PAID. You would need to establish by independent sources tha thte subject is notable. And you will need to change your user name (which I am about to block) because a Wikipedia account should be for only one person, and your name at least implies shared use, which your question above seems to confirm. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:54, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Prteam23, and welcome to the Teahouse. Creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia. Creating one when you have a conflict of interest is even harder. Your concerns, as the PR team of your businessmen are, broadly speaking, in direct contention with Wikipedia's concerns as an encyclopaedia. Your concerns, very properly, are to get your client's name out there, and to present him in a favourable light: Wikipedia's concerns are, if he is notable (in Wikipedia's special sense of the word) to have an article about him that is a neutrally-written summary of what independent people have published about him, favourable or unfavourable; and if he does not meet the criteria for notability, not to have an article about him at all.

If you want to proceed with this, you must first make the mandatory declaration of your status as a paid editor; then you should create a draft and get it reviewed: see your first article. Remember that Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that you client has said, written, published or done, except as commented on by people who have no connection with him. The article should be based almost entirely on such independent published sources (and note that an article based on a press release or interview is not regarded as independent). Material from non-independent sources such as your client's website should be limited to uncontroversial factual data like places and dates.

If your draft is accepted, it will become an article (not a 'page') in Wikipedia, and thereafter neither you nor your client will have any control over its contents: your involvement should be limited to suggesting edits, that an uninvolved editor will decide how to implement.

In short: promotion of any kind is forbidden in Wikipedia, and if you are a PR team, you are likely to find it hard to avoid. --ColinFine (talk) 14:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

In answer to the second question, once you change User name, declare PAID, create a neutral point of view, referenced draft and submit it to Articles for creation (AfC), it can take as long as four months before it is reviewed and either accepted or declined. David notMD (talk) 17:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

i am coming across few orphan articles, the only link available are lists. i have gone ahead, however i am having second thoughts. few examples : Beyeler , List of Santos FC players, List of Wellington representative cricketers Leela52452 (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Have you read what it says at WP:Orphan? --David Biddulph (talk) 16:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: i got confused after reading it, in dilemma whether to use Disambiguation pages, english is not my mother tongue. Leela52452 (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Leela52452. Correctly adding an article to a list article is a legitimate way to de-orphan the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Please show me how to format the following:

<ref name=“Slo05”>{{cite book| title=The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning; editors=Keith J. Holyoak, Robert G. Morrison; article title=The Problem of Induction; authors=Steven A. Sloman, David A. Lagnado.

Thank you.TBR-qed (talk) 17:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, TBR-qed and welcome to the Teahosue. As displayed, this is incomplete. it should be something more like:

<ref name="Slo05">{{cite book |title=The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning |date=2005 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |editor-first1=Keith J. |editor-last1=Holyoak |editor-first2=Robert G. |editor-last2=Morrison |chapter=The Problem of Induction |first1=Steven A. |last1=Sloman |first2=David A. |last2=Lagnado |isbn=0521531012}}</ref>

Which will render as:^[1]

Note closing }} and closing ref tag. Note use of | (not ;) to introduce parameter values. Note parameters date, chapter, publisher, and isbn. Note straight not angled quotes in ref tag. Note separate parameters for each editor and each author. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:56, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi The question that I wanted to ask is how you make an article Bye — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilikeinfornmation (talk • contribs) 19:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Please, see Wikipedia:Your first article. Ruslik_Zero 19:10, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ilikeinfornmation, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Creating new articles from a blank start is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia, perhaps the hardest an inexperienced user is likely to face. In future I urge you to use the Article Wizard to create a draft under the Articles for Creation project. There, an experienced editor will review your draft once you think it is ready. Only when a reviewer approves will the draft be moved to the main article space. This avoids the situation where a deletion is requested soon after the initial version of an article is posted.

Also, please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article, if you have not already done so. The advice there can be very helpful, in my view. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

This article's name, Caffeine-Free Pepsi, does not appear on any official shop website I look for. Target. Walmart. Amazon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pomegranatecookie (talk • contribs) 01:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pomegranatecookie. The titles of Wikipedia articles are determined per WP:COMMONNAME so that's what you should basing any proposal to change the article's name on at Talk:Caffeine-Free Pepsi. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Pomegranatecookie. It's a bad idea to rush to change any article name. MarchJuly is right to suggest you raise it on the talk page. But don't just look at online shopping sites, Google Books show the current title is formally listed as a brand name so I, for one, would initially resist any such name change without good evidence to change my mind. I'd also look at the photo which gives us a bit of a clue to its name!^[1][2][3]  Nick Moyes (talk) 01:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Well, what about these? Target. Walmart. Amazon. They all display Pepsi Caffeine Free.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pomegranatecookie (talk • contribs) 01:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, didn't you link to those already. As stated before, too, it's something to discuss on the article Talk page and not rush to make sudden changes. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Pomegranatecookie: I just checked before turning in, and all three links you gave are to products that are not currently available - so maybe old, alternative brand names? Nick Moyes (talk) 02:02, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Pomegranatecookie: Though the current can design appears to put Pepsi first, it could be just an artistic choice. The product name according to Pepsi appears to be "Caffeine Free Pepsi" (no hyphen) consistently (e.g., ). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:12, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I agree that the WP:COMMONNAME is Caffeine-Free Pepsi (and therefore, the title should remain as is), but it looks like Pepsi has updated their naming convention. Their website currently lists products with the word Pepsi first, followed by the rest of the drink name (with the exception of the word Diet which still precedes Pepsi) on their website . A mention in the lede of the naming alternative may be appropriate. Orville^talk 05:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Orville: In addition to the product fact sheet, I see it as "Caffeine Free Pepsi" in spreadsheets generated from here. There's also this, leading to this. The custom fountain drink chart is missing the product, but has "Caffeine Free Diet Pepsi" here.

The "Pepsi Caffeine Free" seems to be limited to the pepsi.com site. As far as which is newer, in fine print at the bottom of this product page, it says "Last updated on January 11, 2018", while the more product info link, which leads back to pepsicobeveragefacts.com, says "Last updated on January 22, 2020".

I wonder if this is an (attempted?) internationalization issue, given that Romance languages use noun-adjective word order compared to English adjective-noun.

I'd say "Caffeine Free Pepsi" is the current name, and certainly the common name. I'm generally against mentioning all the minor variations in names (like word order) that add "clutter". I think readers can assume that such variations usually exist in practice without having to wade through it. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 19:15, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello all -- I apologize in advance for the length of this post; however, I am in need of assistance and want to share the facts.

The Wikipedia article in question is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donny_Boaz

I've been a member of Wikipedia for a while and have only made small updates to existing pages and have never encountered a problem before. A few days ago, I decided to jump into the deep end and launch my first article from scratch. Like all of you, my time is my inventory and I don't like to see it squandered. Also, I would never intentionally destroy someone else's work; however, that is what is now being done to my first full article.

FULL DISCLOSURE -- I only crafted the article to understand the Wikipedia publishing process. I had been wanting to do this for quite some time but the right opportunity never presented itself. In November 2019, my friend of 12 years, Donny Boaz, was signed to a multi-year contract with the long-running CBS soap opera, The Young and the Restless. FINALLY, I believed I had an opportunity to craft a Wikipedia article from scratch. (NOTE: I can prove that Donny and I know one another because he and I worked on a film together back in 2008/2009 and we are both listed in the Cast/Crew on IMDb. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1344640/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm)

Regarding the article I contributed on Donny Boaz:

- The 'editor' in question removed 22 of the 31 entries I had listed for Donny's filmography; only 9 entries currently remain.

- The 'editor' in question has TWICE removed Donny's photo (that Donny gave me the rights to use for this article).

- The 'editor' in question has removed verified biographical information from the info field where Donny's photo was. (The 'editor' removed Donny's birth name, date of birth, etc.

- The 'editor' in question has revised the opening paragraph to the page.

- The 'editor' in question has removed critical information from the first paragraph under Biography to where that section now begins with an opening sentence that makes absolutely no sense in its current format.

- The 'editor' in question has now issued threats that if I don't comply, my account "may be blocked from editing".

- The 'editor' in question has TWICE placed a "maintenance template" page on my article -- but the maintenance would not be needed if this 'editor' would stop removing content so that the article goes from one that makes sense to one that looks like a drunk wrote it.

- The 'editor' in question has this to say on their own Wikipedia profile page: "Hello, and welcome to my user page! I am livelikemusic and I work intensely with US daytime soap operas. I contribute to the current daytime soaps: The Young and the Restless, The Bold and the Beautiful, General Hospital, and Days of Our Lives. I created the webpage for Taylor Walker, however, due to WP:V it is no longer active. However, I brought the article back in 2012 following extensive addition of sources. Several people believe I am not a good editor; I'm just fiercely blunt. Some see it as a push-off, but I see it as a plus-side. Got beef with me? Bring it to me, not someone else."

- Have I inadvertently angered this 'editor' - that, allegedly, works "intensely with US daytime soap operas" - because I launched an article on my friend that has been signed to be a key player on Young and the Restless?

I had no idea that Wikipedia editors would intentionally - and repeatedly - sabotage another contributor's work. If I had known that, I would have never launched the page for Donny Boaz. But, now, I know for a fact that I've done nothing wrong. I am documenting all of these cases of sabotage to the Donny Boaz article -- including screen captures to prove my work is accurate and that it is originally-written.

FUN FACT: I am a journalist in the motorcycle industry and former editor for a magazine so I understand the need for original content and having that content pass Copyscape. The 'editor' in question accused me of plagiarizing content the first time he/she came after me. He/she did not accuse me of this on this second go-around; however, I did address that accusation the last time I repaired my work.

It's truly disheartening to see this take place and my heart goes out to other contributors that may have been run off due to virtual bullying like this.

Any positive help and suggestions on how to address this issue are much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RaineDevries13 (talk • contribs) 02:50, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

RaineDevries13, Howdy hello and welcome to the Teahouse! I know its disheartening to have your content undone, but there were reasons for all of it. Alas, the user who undid didn't explain it very well or discuss it with you. Hopefully I can try to shine some light on the situation.

For starters, anytime you have a conflict of interest (such as knowing the subject of an article) you should probably declare that before starting the article, by following the steps at WP:COI. Receiving compensation for edits in any way is a whole other can of worms, which must be declared by following the steps at WP:PAID.

• The films were removed because there wasn't a reliable source to confirm that fact. In general, the article is too short on sources. Also, note that IMDb is not a source that can be used for filmography as it is not reliable.
• Photo permissions are a tricky area. If you do have permission, you still need the copyright holder (i.e. the photographer, or Boaz) to email Wikipedia by following the steps about using the WikiMedia email system, OTRS.
• Biographical info that is unsourced, i.e. birthdate, is usually removed as we have no way of verifying it without a source. Our policy on living people is pretty strict, because living people can sue us if we get something really wrong :)
• Please note that anyone is free to edit any page, and that you do not own pages you create
• Being disruptive can lead you to being blocked, if an editor mentions blocking its usually good to either discuss with them why the brought it up, or seek guidance (as you've done here)
• The maintainence templates seem valid. They can be removed once the issues surrounding them are fixed. That can mainly be remedied by having quality sources.
• We do not allow copy and pasting, you are right. But we also don't allow original research, such as reporting. We only say what reliable sources say.
• Other notes on your article: its written more like a magazine piece, and not like a neutral encyclopedia article. Make sure the tone is neutral, and reads formally.

Whew...I know thats a lot. Learning to edit Wikipedia can be quite daunting at first. You've unwittingly jumped into the sharktank on your first go, creating new articles is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. Hopefully we can guide you through the processs, and make it less painful. Smooth sailing, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello all -- in reference to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donny_Boaz

CaptainEek graciously sent me this info: "Biographical info that is unsourced, i.e. birthdate, is usually removed as we have no way of verifying it without a source. Our policy on living people is pretty strict, because living people can sue us if we get something really wrong :)"

Fair enough -- however, if an article from CBS.com specifies Donny Boaz's birthdate as December 12, and I have cited that article the entire time as part of his Bio, then what more do I need to do to prove that he was born on December 12?

"December 12" is noted on the very last line: https://www.cbs.com/shows/the_young_and_the_restless/cast/216274/

RaineDevries13 (talk) 04:01, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello RaineDevries13, and thanks for coming to the Teahouse! I believe CaptainEek was using birthdate as an example of the type of information that we need to source, it isn't the only fact. Any fact inn the article that needs to be cited has to be reliably sourced, see WP:RS for more information on that. You don't need anything more to prove his birth date, that much is fine. Does a lot his answer your question? I am courtesy pinging @CaptainEek: so that they can reply also if they do wish. Thanks again for coming to the Teahouse! Puddleglum ^2.0 04:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to sign, repinging @RaineDevries13: and CaptainEek, sorry. Puddleglum ^2.0 04:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey RaineDevries13 & Puddleglum2.0 & CaptainEek, a little yes and a little no. There's still a bit of a vicious vortex in that only 3 of my source articles are left on the page as the other's have been removed by the 'editor' for some reason. And those source articles provided the necessary backup to my content. #1stepforward3stepsback — Preceding unsigned comment added by RaineDevries13 (talk • contribs) 04:42, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

RaineDevries13, I think it was probably removed because it wasn't stated inline, and thus there was no inline citation. But the situation is more complicated than that. The CBS source is not independent. Not only do our sources need to be reliable, they need to be independent of their subjects I imagine that the CBS bit was written by Boaz or his agent, and thus Boaz/CBS could say whatever they wanted. For very simple biographical info that is unlikely to be falsified or misleading, like birthdate, it would probably work as a source. And I would still prefer a better source. But for the rest of the info, I wouldn't trust it farther than I could throw it. What you really need is some independent sources, like magazine or newspaper coverage (online is fine). CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:47, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, RaineDevries13. I must agree with what CaptainEek wrote above. I also want to mention about dates oif birth specifically. As per WP:DOB (part of our policy about living people) we do not include full birth dates for living people unless these have already been widely published elsewhere, or published by or with the clear consent of the subject (such as on the subject's own personal web page). This is because such dates have little encyclopedic value, but can be used for identity theft or invasion or privacy. The year of birth is enough to give context in most cases. Do you really think the above cite is wide publication? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 04:51, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel @CaptainEek -- Thank you for your feedback. Ok....then what about this article that I have as a reference on the page that backs up more than 90% of the facts that I originally wrote in his Biography? It's not written by Boaz or an agent or a network. It's written by a journalist in a newspaper: https://www.waxahachietx.com/article/20151118/NEWS/151119425 RaineDevries13 (talk) 05:16, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Users outside of the US can read the suggested source on WayBack. For a @ping (aka @mention) you can use {{ping|DESiegel|CaptainEek}} at the same time as ~~~~, now done + rendered as @DESiegel and CaptainEek: 84.46.52.152 (talk) 08:10, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@RaineDevries13: When signing posts on talk pages, please use a space and four tildes after the very last line of your post. Nothing else should follow it. Like this:

blah blah blah last line of post. ~~~~

Thanks. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 19:25, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I have seen this section in many articles, usually the final one before the references. A particular band makes music based on historical events and personages. I made my first ever Wikipedia edits yesterday by making a note of that on the respective articles of 3 of the subjects of their songs. I kept it simple, 1-2 sentences and used the preview function to make sure it lined up with the articles formatting. I even linked to the wikipedia articles for the band, their country of origin, and the album names on which the songs in question appear. Today, I log back in and one user in particular took it upon themselves to delete all 3 of my additions.

I know that an "In popular culture" section is a perfectly valid addition to an article, and what I wrote is concise, factual, and accurate. I don't understand why someone would insist on trying to delete correct and accurate information from a wikipedia article. What do I do, I assume this will just end up in a back and forth revert war and I don't want that. Xap (talk) 11:03, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Xap Tallon Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The content you want to add does not have a citation or reference provided. This is why it is being removed. If you have a citation(such as an article about the band discussing its historical references in its songs), please provide it- or otherwise, please discuss the issue on the article talk page with the other editors involved. 331dot (talk) 11:09, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Xap Tallon. I think the key issue, as another editor has highlighted on your talk page, is that not only might this edit of yours possibly be regarded as 'trivia', but more importantly that you did not cite any reference to substantiate the specific claim. That responsibility is yours and probably only then can other editors judge whether or not it is really trivial, or highly germane to the topic of the article. Does that make sense? If you aren't sure how to add references, or if a source is any good, the best thing to do is to offer the information on the article talk page and see what other interested editors feel about that addition going ahead, or not. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Another aspect is that stuff like "martial prowess, ferocity, and fearlessness" comes across as WP:PUFFERY. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:37, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

What you want, for WP-purposes, is something like (not that good, doesn't mention the name of the song, but best I found with a short googling). Slightly disagreeing with 331dot, what you want is an (or more) independent WP:RS that noticed that the group has a song about the division and bothered to write something about it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:52, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

That triggered my DEnglish alert, in "prevent them falling into Allied hands" I miss a "from", and the "Allegations of war crimes" could be merged into the chronologically arranged history. Putting it mildly, enwiki is no WW2-fanzine. –84.46.52.152 (talk) 13:10, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

All of your attempts are to add mention of Sabaton (band) - a Swedish heavy metal band. Even with references, I would consider that trivia not worthy of describing as In popular culture. David notMD (talk) 17:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content. Such sections are controversial. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:56, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I was recently asked by a client to update the image on their page. I created an account and was able to delete the image that was there but I was not allowed to upload the image that the client gave me because it said that it didn't think that the image was mine. How can I get around this? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Internetremovals (talk • contribs) 19:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Internetremovals, Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! For starters, we require that paid editors formally disclose that by following the steps at WP:PAID. Failing to do so is a violation of the terms of service. Secondly, we only allow images that are freely usable. That means its either in the public domain, or the creator has licensed it under the right free license. What you need to do is email WikiMedia by following the steps here. Note that you are an employee of the person. If your employer does not have the copyright to the photo, then you will need to have the photographer contact WikiMedia. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:06, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse Internetremovals. Oh dear, there are a lot of issues here, not least of which is that I tend to feel someone who is paid to edit Wikipedia should not rely on free volunteer time to assist them in their business - you really ought to be able to find and navigate our help pages yourself.

The other issue is that there is an Australian company by the same name as this account. You may or may not be the same thing, but you may not edit with a promotional username, or one that suggests shared use. Therefore that account will shortly be soft-blocked, and you must choose another name to edit under. But before you attempt to make one more edit, you must read WP:PAID and follow the obligatory instructions to declare on our new userpage that you are being paid, and by whom. Then and only then should you read Wikipedia:Uploading images, making sure that you are the person who took the photograph, or it will not be acceptable for you to claim it as your own, and therefore to release it for commercial re-use. I hope this makes some sense, and I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news for you. I will make a point of monitoring the article you have begun to edit to ensure that you are not attempting to whitewash any content about this person. We have a policy of neutral tone in our articles, and good stuff and bad stuff can go in, providing it is referenced to reliably published sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

When I try to make a collapsed table something strange occurs:

{{nobr}} worked for me, I recall table layout on enwiki ~2005 (as XHTML 1 transitional).
–84.46.52.152 (talk) 07:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

How can we make the table format well so that the caption remains on one line while the table is collapsed? tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message; contribs) 05:56, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

The Lord of Math, Please sure to read MOS:COLLAPSE, as collapsible tables are generally discouraged although there are some exceptions. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

You can force the width with:

—[AlanM1(talk)]— 19:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

, not checking the MOS, I'm not planning to use it without a go from mobile + screenreader users. –84.46.53.93 (talk) 02:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I got a notification last week that I had to fix a page I edited. I've attempted this a couple time in the past few days and any time I try to fix with dab solver, I get an error message. Thankfully, someone was able to fix the issue for me, but is there still an issue using the dab solver? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sportsfan1976 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

You yourself fixed it with Dabsolver, in this edit, Sportsfan1976. Dabsolver is kind of sneaky that way, and it writes the edit summary as well.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

here the article says you can compute pcorr in these two ways, but there is no prove or reference that the correlation of residual and the inverse of covariance are equivalent. Could someone help me to prove this equivalence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.223.207.26 (talk) 21:03, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Try asking at the math reference desk: WP:RDM RudolfRed (talk) 23:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Partial_correlation is an ideal place to discuss that issue, 170.223.207.26.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

How do I get the "see also" link to include a section?

E.g. I want to use

but I want to link to Art of ancient egypt § Stelae instead of the whole article on the art of ancient Egypt.

Purplemoonsong (talk) 05:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

• Like this: *See also [[Art of Ancient Egypt#Stelae|Art of Ancient Egypt § Stelae]] -- Hoary (talk) 05:22, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Purplemoonsong. There are some examples of how to tweak a Template:See also given in Template:See also#Examples. If you want to add the "See also" reference as a hat note and the being a section in the body of the article you can do so by adding the syntax {{See also|article name#section name}} below the section heading of the relevant section. If, however, you just want to add an entry to the WP:SEEALSO section of an article, the method suggest above by Hoary should work fine. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:41, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Please help me that how can i change the title of a wikipedia page. Looking forward to hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeepSingh5 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

By "moving" it. (See the link titled "Move".) You are very new here. I strongly advise you not to move any page (aside from one that you have just created), until you have made a couple of hundred edits. -- Hoary (talk) 05:25, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi DeepSingh5. Moving a page can sometimes not only be a little tricky, it can also be something that not everyone may agree with; so, instead of trying to move the page yourself, you probably should first propose that it be moved on the article's talk page to see whether there's a consensus to do so. If it turns out that others also think the page should be moved, then most likely someone more experienced that yourself will be more than happy to do so. Some articles, however, don't have lots of editors watching/monitoring them which means you may not get a quick response from posting on the article's talk; so, you can also make a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves if you like since someone may respond faster there. Regardless of which approach you decide to take, you're going to have to be able to justify why you feel the page needs to be moved and how doing so would be in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines; for more information on this, please look at WP:COMMONNAME and WP:BEFOREMOVING. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I need advice about whether I should create a new article or add my desired content to a related, already existing article... just can't decide which is most appropriate. The existing article is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olduvai_Gorge, and the content I wish to add includes some detailed information and a photo of a newly constructed Olduvai Gorge monument at the entrance to the road leading to the gorge. Any guidance is appreciated. --Kufundisha (talk) 01:18, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Kufundisha, and welcome to the Teahouse. When in doubt, add content and references into an existing article. Whilst a monument might be notabe in its own right, it would require a number of in depth articles to be produced about it, and not just short news stories. Remember that content can always be moved out from one article into a new page if it has expanded too much in the first one. It's really appreciated that you've come to ask this question, so good luck with adding it to Olduvai Gorge. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Nick Moyes! Is it appropriate to thank you here? --Kufundisha (talk) 01:47, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Kufundisha: Of course it is, and you are indeed most welcome. Thanking people is something we don't do enough of here on Wikipedia, and it is just as encouraging to us old hands as it is to a new editor to know that their contribution is appreciated by someone. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Kufundisha: I would make a new section called Monument to be section six (pushing Gallery down one) and add this article as a source. [] TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 04:47, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton:Thanks for those suggestions . I had decided to create a new section to include the monument as well as the gorge museum (which was not previously mentioned in the article, surprisingly). There is already an existing article for the museum, which I thought should be linked from the gorge article. I added the new section just above the gallery, as you suggested. The source you mention is the very source I had selected to use, and was the best I could find at this point. I think my edit went pretty well, though I admit to being a bit frustrated by my attempts to situate images. I do not yet understand entirely what factors affect how/where images will land on the page and they seem to flit around unpredictably for me, making me feel like a bull in a china shop.--Kufundisha (talk) 06:08, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I am trying to create a Bibleography of Mr. Stalin Dayanand. He is an Indian Environmentalist based in Mumbai. His opinions are reflected in plethora of articles in newspapers and online news websites. Besides, he also writes column in Free Press Journal. He has also been invited to give talk at a TedX event in March, 2018. The reference links have been given for his presence in all the above. However, the page is still again and again nominated for speedy deletion. Please help me with the notability criteria that are lacking in it.

Below is the link for the Wikipedia page- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin_Dayanand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.186.226.137 (talk) 08:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

There was a deletion discussion the first time the page was created (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stalin_Dayanand). Recreating the page without any improvement is not going to lead to a different result. Stalin Dayanand is not a notable person. You need to explain why they are using good quality reliable sources. - X201 (talk) 09:25, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Telling people, here, about a "plethora of articles" will convince no-one. To get an article accepted, you will need to establish that its subject is notable by citing several reliable independent published sources with in-depth discussion of the subject. At present, Stalin Dayanand cites no sources at all. Maybe you need to read Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 09:57, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

It seems possible that Mr. Dayanand's news coverage is mostly about Save Aarey. It might be best to add Dayanand's activism to the Save Aarey section of the article Vanashakti. Firstly, however, 1.186.226.137, you must learn how to make proper citations of your sources.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:29, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

HI would like to right on the topic of "Sarin Foundation". It is the Sarin Memorial Legal Aid Foundation and is dedicated to the cause of protecting public interest, spreading legal literacy, taking up causes of general public importance for legal redressal and turning lawyers into socially responsible professionals.

Please suggest is the topic relevant and notable.

Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kufundisha (talk • contribs) 06:08, 23 January 2020 (UTC)‎— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shilpuaery (talk • contribs) 05:55, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi KufundishaShilpuaery. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), Wikipedia:Existence ≠ Notability and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause since your likely to find some helpful guidance on those pages.

After reading those pages, if you still feel that this is subject that can have a Wikipedia article written about it (i.e. it's Wikipedia notable), and you want to try and do so yourself, then please take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners for some general ideas on how to do so. Be advised that the writing a Wikipedia article can be a pretty challenging thing to do, particularly for new editors not very familiar with how Wikipedia works; so, you might want to start by creating a draft instead and slowly work on it as you learn more about Wikipedia. Then, when you think the draft is ready, you can submit it for review to Wikipedia:Articles for creation so that more experienced editors can look it over and make suggestions on how to improve it.

You don't have to do all of this of course, but doing so might save you some disappointment and also give you time to learn more about Wikipedia. Lots well-meaning but inexperienced editors try to add articles to Wikipedia all the time, but many of their efforts are not suitable for Wikipedia and end up being deleted fairly quickly. Although Wikipedia is always encouraging editors to create new articles, it also has established certain standards that it expects all articles to meet and sometimes it can take awhile to get a feel for what these are which is why many first efforts often end up being deleted.

Anyway, there are currently almost six million Wikipedia articles. While each of these articles certainly has one creator, most of them have been improved many times over the years by many different editors. One of the best ways to learn about how to create a new article is to try and improve already existing articles because it allows you to learn about relevant policies and guidelines see firsthand how they are being applied by other editors. So, maybe starting off by trying to help improve existing articles with actually help you someday create a new article from scratch. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC); [Note: Post edited by Marchjuly to correct name of person whose question was resplied to. -- 07:34, 23 January 2020 (UTC)]

@Marchjuly: Hello. I did not write the above question. I do not understand how my signature is connected with it. I did see this request earlier as I was reading a response from my communication in one of the previous questions, but it did not have my name associated with it at that time. My signature is attached to this by some error that I do not understand. --Kufundisha (talk) 07:05, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly misattributed it to you. I'm sure that this was just an innocent mistake. -- Hoary (talk) 07:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

My mistake Kufundisha. Sorry about that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:29, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I want to expand the existing article on Light Rail in Bristol, giving more of the historic context. My problem is that I am the source of the material because I was the project manager for the scheme in the 1990s.I have donated the supporting documents to the Bristol City Archive. Am I in danger of falling foul on the rules on self promotion, and the lack of published references (the documents were in the public domain at the time of scheme development, and I have a full list of them)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KSWC8230 (talk • contribs) 12:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Light rail in Bristol David notMD (talk) 16:15, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, KSWC8230, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's great that you want to contribute to an article; but, unfortunately, Wikipedia's core principle of verifiability means that every claim in an article must be backed up by a reliably published source. (It's not an absolute requirement that the source be cited, but if it can't be sourced, then it shouldn't be in the article). So I'm afraid that, unless the information you want to add can be found in a published source, you shouldn't add it. The problem is that, because Wikipedia may be edited by anybody, information can get changed, by accident, by a misunderstanding, or maliciously, and if there is no published source, then a reader has no way of checking it.

I fear that renders your second question irrelevant, but I'll answer it anyway: adding references to your own publications is indeed regarded as editing with a conflict of interest, and editors in this situation are recommended to suggest the addition, and leave it up to an uninvolved editor to decide what is appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine: thanks for your quick response. I had anticipated what the reaction to my queries might be, but it does seem to me to produce a bit of a paradox. I am able to write on this subject authoritatively, given I spent ten years in the middle of it, and have had the benefit of the documents relating to the project (not written by me, I should have explained, but mainly by the expert consultants employed for the purpose - and not referring to me personally). Copies of these documents (which I have deposited with the Bristol City Archive) were available at the time for public scrutiny, under transparency rules, but not published in the everyday sense of the word. So that seems to mean that I cannot at this time rely on them, or indeed my own first-hand experience. However, they will shortly be available via the Archive's website, together with a note requested from me by the Archivist making the links between them. Will that material be verifiable in Wikipedia's definition? (I should also add that I do not dispute anything in the existing article on this subject, but it is a bit "bare bones" in regard to the early historyKSWC8230 (talk) 11:38, 21 January 2020 (UTC).)

Once the documents you mentioned are made available, you can also post the links in the article's Talk Page and request willing editors to help you with the content or any specific information you want added. I can include this page to my Watchlist. Maybe I can contribute with the provided sources if I have time. Doing it yourself could be a waste of your efforts due to the COI issue previously cited. Regards, Darwin Naz (talk) 11:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Why in the corean war tha Canadian flag is wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:7981:1100:1AD:E313:CF7A:B130 (talk) 03:16, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Not wrong. That was the flag of Canada at the time. The maple leaf flag wasn't adopted until 1965. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:24, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

See more at Flag of Canada. Korean War (1950–1953) displays File:Flag of Canada (1921–1957).svg. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi this is probably a dumb request but could someone tell me how to create a football kit pattern using the UploadWizard? I have not done this before and need a bit of help.REDMAN 2019 (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi REDMAN 2019, it's only dumb in the sense that I replied to almost the same question here. You current question seems related, so was the guidance I linked to not sufficient? Presumably you have now created the pattern, but are confused how to upload the image to Commons? Or are you still having problems 'creating' the pattern in the first place?. The clearer you can be, the more easily we can assist you, or at least redirect you somewhere so you can assist yourself. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, In answer I am having problems 'creating'. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 19:55, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

To be precise I don't know what codes to use. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 20:11, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019: Precision really helps! Look, I'm not totally sure I can help you much, and certainly not without understanding precisely how far you've got, and where you are stuck. May I suggest you lay out your attempts on your own sandbox page where you can demonstrate how far you've got, try multiple versions and maybe allow me to play around there too for you?. I'm guessing it's that you can't recreate the seven stripes of red, white and black top used by Derby County in the 1890s? If so, it would really, really have helped if you had clearly explained precisely that, as none of us are mind readers, or can guess where you have got stuck. I can see from your userpage that you have experience in creating a wide range of patterns, so I know I'm probably talking to somebody who actually knows more about it that I do! Personally, if I it is the 7-striped shirt, I'd think about downloading an equivalent black and white version and trying to edit it and reupload a new coloured version myself. Is that a possible route for you? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:28, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Will try. thanks! REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi guys,

I'm not new around, however... I have been away for years, and I'm starting to get used to the coding and the rules and such. I'd like to know where would a good place to start. Also, I would like to know where or how I can change my username. Thanks a lots in advance. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 18:54, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back Miss Bono This will be what you are looking for... Wikipedia:Changing username All the best. Theroadislong (talk) 19:35, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I get paid to research and write from that research. In some cases I have been asked to edit or write articles on Wikipedia using that research. Until recently, I've declined doing any edits on Wikipedia because frankly, I wasn't ready to delve into the details of becoming an editor and honestly, they didn't need to be done. The original information on the articles was close enough and the cited source was sufficient.

Recently I was asked to write a short biography about Anne Klein the person and the company/brand. In my research I, of course, came to Wikipedia and found a low content article about Anne Klein that wasn't useful for my research.

Upon receipt of the biography paper I was asked if I could put the information on Wikipedia.

I believe my research can be an excellent addition to Wikipedia. At this point, it appears that I can either edit the existing article to such a point as to make it new or create a new article.

For comparison, here is the existing article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Klein

Here is my article in my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FastInfoPro/sandbox

I hope you can access it (yes, I am that new).

So here I sit. Happy to edit an existing article if that is what is deemed necessary, happy to publish mine as a new page and I believe reference the low-content page. Realizing that I was paid to do the original research though not paid to write a Wikipedia article so wondering if I need to reference anything in my userpage about that and to what detail.

I want to be a part of the Wikipedia world of creating quality information for people to trust and use.

Your guidance is greatly appreciated. --FastInfoPro (talk) 19:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)FastInfoPro

There's a page that details how to disclose paid contributions by editors on Wikipedia. You can find it here. Chlod (say hi) 20:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Can an experienced admin take a look at my contributions and advise me what I'm doing right and where I need to improve? Thanks :-) 5JVL9 (talk) 22:56, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

The only edit of yours I have checked was to Loring Park, where you deleted a sentence from the lead section with the edit summary "Remove redundant information found in events section." Lead sections are meant to summarise the rest of the article: the information in them should always be redundant. I suggest that you replace what you deleted. (I am not an admin.) Maproom (talk) 00:09, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello there, 5JVL9, and welcome to the Teahouse. Although I'm also not an administrator, I do have a reasonable amount of experience assessing people's contributions and their purpose for being here. As you have made only 43 edits in the last 10 months, it is rather hard to give you feedback. You were clearly being helpful back in July when you reported a number of possible sock puppets.

But in August you didn't acquit yourself so well at this discussion about how Carl Benjamin ought to be described. Have you since come to appreciate that we don't care how a person chooses to describe themselves, but we do report how Reliable Sources describe that person? This is a key element of how we work, and attempting to whitewash or tarnish political groups or individuals is very common here, though it often results in a block for the editors concerned - so do take care. Equally, this edit of yours to Jewish Defense League was swiftly reverted by an experience editor and that would have made me wonder a bit about your editing motives. So take care not to change things just because you think it sounds nicer, more anodyne, or more accusative. We have to stay neutral here and write in an encyclopaedic voice which reports what other reliable sources have said, and definitively not what we think sounds nicer, or which fits our agenda.

This edit was good in that it removed uncited content (and I couldn't find anything to support it, even though I suspect it might have some validity), but it did leave a section headed 'Concerns' without anything to be concerned about! So it might have been better to have thought how best to deal with that as well. You might have been better off adding a {{citation needed}} template. It flags up a concern, whilst still leaving the text you're challenging present for others to at least see there's a query over its veracity.

You've used edit summaries about half the time - I'd suggest you do so all the time. Did you know you can set your Personal 'Preferences' so that you are prompted if you attempt to 'Publish changes' without adding an edit summary? It's really helpful. I hope this feedback is also helpful. Keep going; take care only to change content based upon reliable, published sources and you should be fine. One of your topic areas of interest does look to be covered by WP:1RR sanctions, so avoid any reverting or editing warring, or those sanctions could kick in very easily. All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. :-) 5JVL9 (talk) 20:26, 23 January 2020 (UTC)