Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 920

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 915

←

Archive 918

→

Edit-a-thon attendee question

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

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

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

American football infobox text size inconsistency

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

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

New to Wikipedia

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

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

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

Are there rules about cultural influence on the wikipedia content

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

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

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

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

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

Is Customer Service Article Completed ?

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

White space

I want to create a page for my company and myself

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

Thank you and best regards

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

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

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

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

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

List of notable awards

Easy Question - How does a page move from Draft?

Italicise

Hello, I need some help creating my account page.

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

deleting a copyrighted image

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

Need help with requested articles with existing images

Draft

Publishing my wikipedia page - Akeem Griffiths

Good afternoon,

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

Many thanks,

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

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

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

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

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

Publishing our wikipedia page - Akeem Griffiths

Hi Ian,

Many thanks for the quick reply.

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

Akeem Griffiths - Our Wikipedia page

Hi Teahouse,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hi Colin,

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

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

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

Unfortunately i am not a wikipedia editor.

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

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

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

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

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

Many thanks.

New article

Host

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

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

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

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

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

Marked for deletion ... how to respond?

RationalWiki

Why is not my artist profile published?

Unable to log in with username

Username vs User Page

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

Coding on table

Waiting since months...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Infobox Song problem

Need navigational template help

Help with Philosophy's definition

Templates meaning

How to create new articles and protect them from new editors

Editing articles

Quick question about Twinkle

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Nick Moyes: I missed the option to add custom uw templates to Twinkle

. I added some templates. Have I done it right? Is there a way to sort them? Adam9007 (talk) 22:20, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

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

Publishing our wikipedia page - Akeem Griffiths

Akeem Griffiths - Our Wikipedia page

Related Articles