Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 374

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 370←Archive 372Archive 373Archive 374Archive 375Archive 376→Archive 380

Primary sources tag from past dates for new articles

Hi, I came across this - Ashtapailu and Yūki Tabata. Both of these articles have been created recently but have a "primary sources tag (past dates)". How is that possible I am unable to understand ? Looks suspicious when looking at the page history. Just a thought, is it purposely done by author while creating the article, then too author should put the current dates (of post article creation). Please clarify...I come across these often. Thanks! Peppy Paneer (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Peppy Paneer. Yes, it does look rather curious, doesn't it? Without asking the page creators themselves, I'm not exactly sure either. It might very well be that the creator is aware of those issues to the page and intentionally adds those tags to inform other editors of those issues. But indeed, the "date" parameters do say they were added some time in the past, before the pages were ever created—Yūki Tabata says "August 2012", so it could be that that was a typo. Another possibility might be that the pages are recreations of formerly deleted pages, and the page creator is copy-pasting the former deleted page with the maintenance tags still on it. In any case, Ashtapailu has been deleted and protected against creation, and Yūki Tabata appears to me to might satisfy section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion (no indication of importance). Mz7 (talk) 22:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC), revised 22:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Upon closer inspection, I'm not sure about A7 for Yūki Tabata. While it only consists only of an infobox, it does mention that Tabata was the creator of Black Clover, a notable manga, and it could be argued that that is a claim of significance. I would feel more comfortable if we opened a deletion discussion for that article if notability is in question, but I'm digressing now from the point of the original question. Mz7 (talk) 22:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I have fairly high confidence based on the first edit and seeing the lack of deleted contributions, that this happened because the creator (smartly) went to another article on a comic book creator to crib the specific infobox, but then copied {{BLP sources|date=August 2012}} placed above it without a space, which easily could be taken for part of the template code.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:09, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Aha! That makes sense. Thanks. Mz7 (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Improving notability

Hi, my article has been rejected thrice and I was looking for some help. I think I have resolved the coatracking claims, but I'm struggling with improving notability. I've added a 'contributors' section to show how it is notable compared to other journals but don't know what more I can do. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Also, would the journal's blog or ISSUU online page help or would that be considered unreliable? Thank you

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praznath Amiya96 (talk) 11:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

You could add the publisher and where it was published, both of which I found just by Googling. I would remove the "Publications" section just because it adds nothing to the article that can't be said in one sentence. That section makes it look like you are just trying to take up space on the page. You could also add some other information about the publisher. You could also look for sources that use this journal as a reference to find more relevant information.

There's not a lot available about this journal, and I do not know if it is notable -- but there is more information available to you through simple searching than you have included in your article. If you do not mind, I could make some edits to your draft. Surgenski (talk) 14:54, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The fact that "there is not a lot available about the journal" is pretty much the definition of content that does not merit a stand alone article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
...or, of course, that it predates the internet.)Jabberwoch 19:27, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you all for your help, I've taken the advice into account and removed the 'Publications' sub-section and added in information about the publisher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amiya96 (talk • contribs) 07:33, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Complaint

Where does one go to make a formal complaint about an administrator's behaviour? Thanks, --Rubbish computer 23:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: I'm sorry you've had to feel this way about an administrator. The first thing to do regarding any conduct dispute is to talk with the other user on their talk page. It can be tricky, but always remember to be civil and treat the other with respect, even if you feel they are not treating you the same way. Explain to them what you think they did wrong, and listen to their answer with an open mind. Always remember to assume good faith—most of us are trying to make the encyclopedia better, and Wikipedia is not a battleground. If you still feel there is an issue with the other user, then you may choose to follow through with the dispute resolution process (see § Resolving user conduct disputes). The first step of a user conduct dispute (following communication with the other user, naturally) is generally Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ("ANI"). If this fails to achieve a consensus on the way forward, or if the dispute concerns private information such as email, the final avenue of dispute resolution for conduct disputes is a request for arbitration. I hope this helps. Respectfully, Mz7 (talk) 23:55, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@Mz7: Thanks. --Rubbish computer 23:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

It is worth bearing in mind that if you complain at WP:ANI about an administrator's conduct, your behaviour as well as his will be under scrutiny, and in an extreme case it could be you that suffers boomerang sanctions. Of course if you are confident that you haven't contributed to the problem, you need have no fears in this regard. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi All, I am trying to find a Google Capital Logo. I did upload a version of the logo, but it's now going to be deleted due to copyright... (Sorry new to this!). Can anyone help me at all? - Blitzernnn (talk) 08:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Blitzernnn. Some logos can be uploaded to the Commons – which is only for (suitably) free images – because they only consist of simple geometric shapes and/or text and therefore do not meet threshold of originality, but I don't think this logo qualifies. However, a low resolution version of that image can be uploaded here and used in the article (and nowhere else) under a claim of fair use, if properly annotated on the image's description page with a copyright license and fair use rationale. For an example you might emulate, see File:Ohio Valley Conference logo.png. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 09:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey, Fuhghettaboutit. Many thanks for confirming that for me. Say for an example i found a logo for it what would i have to do to be able to not get it deleted? Kind Regards - Blitzernnn (talk) 09:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
@Blitzernnn: Well I thought the one you uploaded already to the commons would be the one you would use, but upon a local upload, to Wikipedia, under a claim of fair use as described above. That should avoid deletion. Maybe you aren't clear on the difference. The Wikimedia Commons, where you uploaded the logo, is a separate website. It is also run by the Wikimedia foundation but it is not the same as Wikipedia. The Commons is only for suitably free images and no fair use images can be uploaded there. For that reason, the image will properly be deleted, from there; I am suggesting you upload it here, not there. Does that help?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 09:33, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Where would i upload it then? To Wikimedia Commons? - Blitzernnn (talk) 09:36, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
No, that's where you already uploaded it, and where it is (properly) up for deletion. The Commons does not allow fair use images. Wikipedia does. You would upload it to Wikipedia, this site, not the Commons. I linked above our upload wizard.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 09:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

moving article from draft to approved

The article I wrote is listed as a draft. Not visible in search. Am I right that i need to do 10 edits before I can move it out of draft to full status. Does a minor edit count as an edit? Feel like I have done 10 already but might be wrong.

Sorry if you've answered this before but confused. ` Jebblz (talk) 10:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

It looks as if you have done the requisite number of edits to be WP:autoconfirmed, but I would recommend that you go through the WP:AFC process and submit your draft for review. If you move it yourself and people decide it isn't suitable as an article it is liable to be deleted. As a draft for AFC review, if there are shortcomings you will be given advice for improving it, but (apart from absolute no-nos like copyright violations) it will stay there to allow you to improve it. At first glance it looks OK to me, but I'm not an expert AFC reviewer. I've added a tag to make it easy for you to submit it for review. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:52, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect article "subtitle"

I'm working on the pages about Ursula K. Le Guin and her works, most recently on the three-book series Annals of the Western Shore. In the mobile view, but not in the desktop view, that page has the "subtitle" "novel by Ursula K. Le Guin". That's not correct, and her other series pages, such as Earthsea, have accurate subtitles.

I've been adjusting categories, including creating Category:Series by Ursula K. Le Guin and adding it to the page. I can't see anything in the wikicode that would produce that line. How are these subtitles generated, and how can I get this one to be correct? --Thnidu (talk) 10:10, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Thnidu. Mobile subtitles are copied from Wikidata. In the desktop version, click "Wikidata item" in the left pane. The Wikidata description for Earthsea is longer than I think is preferred. "Book series by Ursula K. Le Guin" should be sufficient for Annals of the Western Shore. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Company pages?

Hi! My company page has a bunch of flags saying we need to cite external sources for our information. Well, the number of employees, size of company, services, etc. is obviously all internal information. Is there a category for company pages to avoid this? Surely other companies have this same issue, but are not flagged. Thanks! Write Ed (talk) 13:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Write Ed, and welcome to the Teahouse. The relevant policy here is Wikipedia:Verifiability, which requires that information such as this be supported by a reference to a reliable source. My suggestion would be that any information that is purely internal to a company should not be included in a Wikipedia article, because it can't be verified by anyone other than company employees. If there are other company articles that this applies to, then the same policy should apply there, but as you can imagine, with 4,941,791 articles currently on the English-language Wikipedia, this is quite difficult to keep on top of. I would also encourage you to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, which strongly discourages users from editing articles about their employers. A better approach is to post suggestions and requests on the article's talk page, and leave it to editors who don't have a conflict of interest to make changes to the actual article text. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:06, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

What is this

What is the teahouse?Icy monster gun (talk) 18:55, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Icy monster gun, and welcome to the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly place for new editors to ask questions about Wikipedia so that more experienced editors can answer them. --Rubbish computer 19:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi @Icy monster gun:, welcome to the Wikipedia Teahouse!This is a place where the community, admins and editors hangout. If you have any doubts about editing or want to learn about scripts, tools or anything, these kind gentle men will help you out! Komchi✉☆ 17:05, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Retrieving article from Speedy Deletion

Please help me with... retrieving my speedy deletion page title Elle(blogger) I will work on it to correct the mistakes. Can you help me. thank you so much in advance. There wasn't notice from the Anthony Bradbury who didn't considered such thing can be edit and be filled up for the missing purposes. Thanks. Help me retrieve to make it right. DDAENT (talk) 10:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 DoneI think you are helped out by Onel5969 - Komchi✉☆ 17:08, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

New editor, tips on adding to an existing page

Hello World,

I'd like to make additions to several pages and I would like to know the best way of approaching page creators and editors and watchers in a respectful way. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

DouglasDouglas Williamson 20:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglas Earth87 (talk • contribs)

Location of the talk page tab
Hello Douglas Earth87, welcome to the Teahouse! The best way to suggest improvements and discuss with editors interested in a particular page is on that page's talk page, which is located in a tab at the top of each page (see image). Once there, click the tab that says "New section" to add a new topic of discussion to the talk page. Alternatively, if there is one particular editor that you want to talk to, you can contact them on their "user talk page", which can be found by searching for "User talk:username".
Our talk page guidelines has some good information over how you should conduct yourself on talk pages. The biggest things to remember are to refrain from edit warring, which means repeatedly undoing another user's edits in favor of your preferred version of a page, and to maintain an atmosphere of civility, which means to treat others with respect, even when and especially when you disagree. Wikipedia encourages you to be bold while editing, so don't be afraid to make big changes, but don't be alarmed if your additions get removed at first. If this happens, that's when you want to discuss it with the other editor on the talk page. I would also give Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot a read—it has some good tips on, well, how to stay cool when the editing gets hot.
I know this is a lot to read, and I apologize if I overwhelmed you. If you take nothing else away, take this: we're all here to build the best encyclopedia possible, but we sometimes disagree on how to do that; it can be easy to take comments that disagree with you personally, but remember that the goal is improving the encyclopedia, not to attack you or other editors. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse again! Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 22:01, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, User:Mz7. Much appreciated. Douglas Williamson 17:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Editing Dr Gulati's Article on Wikipedia

Dear Teahouse,

Dr Ashok Gulati has an article on wikipedia but it is not complete.We want to edit it in an organised way.We have tried to do it earlier but it was deleted from your side saying that we cannot upload any new information without reference.We were suggested if at all we would like to upload the information again.So I am writing to you.We have the relevant codes and references for his work.We also have the login id and password for the article.I want to seek your suggestion as to how should we go about it.Can we do it through the user id or shall we send the information to you, if yes, then how?.Thanks,Priti Rajput (203.92.34.114 (talk) 10:17, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

203.92.34.114, welcome to the Teahouse. Just to clarify, Wikipedia articles do not have login IDs and passwords; rather, user accounts do, and with an account you can edit articles. You posted this message whilst logged out (hence why it appears with your IP address). Could you let us know what your account name is? It also sounds like you might be sharing an account, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia (see the explanation at WP:NOSHARING). Can I also ask whether you have a personal connection with Ashok Gulati, which might result in a conflict of interest? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, IP user. I fear you misunderstand how Wikipedia works. Dr Gulati does not have an article in Wikipedia. Nobody on the planet has an article in Wikipedia. Wikipedia has articles about many people, but those people do not in any way at all own or control the articles about them. A Wikipedia article, especially about a living person, should be 100% based on reliable published information, and nearly 100% based on material about the subject which is written and published by people unconnected with the subject. You are welcome to improve the Ashok Gulati, as long as every single thing you add is cited to a reliable published source, and in particular contains no judgments, evaluative language, analyses or conclusions unless they are directly taken from a cited source independent of Gulati. --ColinFine (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Uploading a photograph I took of someone who has died

Hi, Is it OK if I upload to a Wikipedia article a photograph that I took of my father, who died in April this year? FJW (talk) 17:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

If your father is the subject of a Wikipedia article, then a picture of him is probably welcome; and if you took the picture yourself, you almost certainly own the copyright, and are free to release it under a suitable licence. Please upload it to Wikimedia Commons, so that any Mediawiki project (including other-language Wikipedias) may use it. I suggest you use the Upload wizard. --ColinFine (talk) 18:01, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Update an existing article

Hello! I would like to update an existing article and I am wondering about the process. The existing article is part of the Wiki-Projects: New York/Libraries/and Arts and has been rated as Start-class on the projects’ quality scale. I started with the existing text in my sandbox2 and I expanded, reorganized and changed it. So my question is: What am I doing now? Should I copy it from my sandbox to the article’s talk page (in a new section maybe) asking for comments or suggestions (I checked that the main editor of the existing article is not active anymore)? Or directly to the article’s page, explaining what I change? Or should I submitted it first for review to the Wiki-projects that this article belongs for updating the quality (if yes, how)? Thank you very much in advance! EVDiam (talk) 18:20, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, this link doesn't work when I save the page and try to click on the link: "Dana Hee, who has a very good Wikipedia page here.". Dana Hee does have a wikipedia page, so is there a syntax error?

Cityside189 (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Cityside189:!
Content within Wikipedia is divided into different "spaces" which are identified by a prefix (or lack thereof). the link above directs people to the "Wikipedia" space which is kind of the back office running Wikipedia type content, and there is no page in that space. There is a page in the main article space (without a prefix) at Dana Hee. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
The difference can be seen between mop which leads to the "main article space" article about the cleaning device, and Wikipedia:MOP which leads to the "Wikipedia space" shortcut MOP which leads to the page about the Wikipedians who have access to the cleaning tools. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:33, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank Red Pen of Doom. This explains it well and I appreciate it. Cityside189 (talk) 18:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Where do I begin to write my article?

I just signed on, and I want to create an article about a businessman, but don't know where to beginJudyalmer (talk) 16:34, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I've put a few links on your user talk page, including Your first article. You'll also need to know about notability, reliable sources, and referencing. Happy editing! - David Biddulph (talk) 16:41, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
If you are inexperienced, it is best to create the article in draft space and submit it for review, as the links will explain. If you create an article in article space, and it doesn't meet Wikipedia standards, it is likely to be deleted, and you will have to ask to have it moved back to user space or draft space via requests for undeletion. If you create an article in draft space, and submit it for approval, and it doesn't meet Wikipedia standards, it will be sent back to you with comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:51, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, I'm new and trying to set up my user page, like I see a lot of people do. Are there articles you could point me to? And thank you for volunteering at the Tea House, it's very nice to have this service available!!  :)

Cityside189 (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse you might find some useful tips here Wikipedia:User page design center Have fun. Theroadislong (talk) 21:14, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate the time, energy and patience you have with new users like myself.

Cityside189 (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Ad Like Entry

I wrote what was dictated to me then correct grammar and punctuation. The article is exactly as it all happened. The account was given to me by the very person who began the business and has intimate knowledge of the events during the years of that business. In reply from Wiki, it was noted it appears to be more like an ad. Please tell me how I may remedy this issue so that this valuable piece of history may be published in Wikipedia. AngelleVW (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi AngelleVW, and welcome to the Teahouse. I presume that you are referring to the draft that you have posted at User:AngelleVW/sandbox? There are a number of issues here. The one that you mention is about neutrality, but I think a more fundamental issue is that of sourcing. All material on Wikipedia needs to be verifiable, which means that it needs to be backed up by reliable, published sources. It sounds like you wrote this draft based on someone's recollection rather than on published sources. Unfortunately, this doesn't meet Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability. If I can also comment on your text, it's not actually clear to me what the subject of the article is supposed to be. Is it about William John Jacobs, or a sand track, or a go-kart business? A further issue is whether the subject meets what is known as the notability requirement, which is that topics need to have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject for them to be covered by Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
The person's recollection can be considered a reliable source if a reputable newspaper, magazine or book publishes it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:52, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
But the published interview would not be third party and so would not reach the threshold for a stand alone article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I was told that my first article was not allowed?

I want to write an article, a good article for the Joy Community that will be read.

What must I do?

4Reverend (talk) 19:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

First, it appears that you are saying that you want to write about your own congregation or church. That is conflict of interest, and is strongly discouraged because your article will probably be overly promotional. You did write one article that appears to have been speedy-deleted because it was very short and did not explain its notability. Please read Wikipedia's policies on notability, which means having been mentioned by independent reliable sources. Also, it is a good idea for inexperienced editors to create articles in draft space rather than in article space. Articles created in article space, as you discovered, can be deleted. Articles created in draft space are submitted for review. If they don't meet Wikipedia standards, they will normally be sent back with comments, and you can improve them. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and has neutral articles on encyclopedic subjects. It is not a directory in which anyone can be listed. If your church, community, or congregation has not received third-party coverage, it may not qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
@4Reverend: You seem to be here to promote an agenda, one that is not very clear but involves "easy listening satanic" as a music genre of the "The one and only Church of Satan", all of which appears to be the brainchild of one man, who calls himself the "jew killer" and other names, and it goes on and on in a word salad screed so incoherent I cannot even tell who it's supposed to offend. This material has no place on Wikipedia, anywhere. Wikipedia is not here to promote this material. It will not be accepted.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Where to put an assessment request for a wikiproject astronomy article

Where to put an assessment request for a wikiproject astronomy article? I want to request an assessment for this article Adolphson_Observatory Rami.shareef (talk) 23:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey Rami. Some Wikiprojects have a dedicated place to make an assessment request but I could find none here (you probably already looked and that lack sparked your post). I suggest just posting to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy. It seems to be a fairly well monitored page by project members. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:29, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

How to remove error messages in article

Hi everyone! I have been working on a non-profit's page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Psychopathological_Association). In March, this article was flagged for need additional citations and possibly not meeting the notability guideline. Since then, I have expanded the article using multiple references and I feel the organization meets notability. However, I do not know if I am allowed to remove these messages or if that is unethical? I am still getting used to the wikipedia methods and I do not want to make any unethical changes. Please advise! Thanks! BHinNJ (talk) 23:40, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't use the word "unethical", but you are prudent to ask if the changes will be considered disruptive. My advice is to ask on the article talk page, Talk: American Psychopathological Association for consensus, and that is the usual approach to tags. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi BHinNJ and welcome to the teahouse. I put a reply on your talkpage.CV9933 (talk) 21:05, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Robert McClenon, I appreciate your weighing in on this. Will follow up on the talk page! BHinNJ (talk) 02:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

How long to wait?

Hello, and thank you for taking my question. i have made some initial edits to talk pages in areas I'm interested in. I see that some of the pages have not been edited for a number of months. I am "watching" those pages by clicking that box on the bottom, I assume that if changes are made I will be notified in my messages "light" on my top menu. How long should I wait before making the edits themselves if no one responds to my Talkpage ideas?

Thanks again for your help and volunteerism with new folks like me.

Cityside189 (talk) 00:29, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

@Cityside189: Changes to pages that you watch are only shown in your Special:Watchlist. The number at the top of window next to your user name will not show a change to a watched page (see WP:Notifications). If you watch Example, any change to that page or its talk page causes Example (or Talk:Example) to appear on your watchlist. That's a bit of over-simplification because people often choose the option to not show (that is, hide) bot edits, and that means if a bot edits the page it will not appear on the watchlist, which means you can miss a change. I won't try to write a manual here (see WP:WATCHLIST)—the point is that you work your way down the watchlist and view the history page of any article of interest to see what happened since your last visit. Don't sweat on how long to wait—if unsure about a proposed edit, wait a couple of days, then go ahead. If more confident, edit it now (WP:BOLD) and see if anyone objects. Often people won't reply to a generic talk page comment/question, particularly if they do not have an objection, so the only way to find out what people really think is to make the edit. Johnuniq (talk) 02:26, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Help with article ApartmentADDA

This is regarding article ApartmentADDA. Its the third time that the article has been rejected, saying that the article reads more like an advertisement. Can you please help me understand if there are some sentences are giving this impression? Or is the language not neutral. What I have mentioned in the article are all facts. And all the references are of major news and web publications of India. Request your help please.

Krishanuthe13th (talk) 04:14, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Krishanuthe13th. When I read the draft, phrases like "Additional Solutions for Apartment Ecosystem" and "accounting solutions" leap out at me as advertising language of the sort that would be part of a marketing brochure or a company website, as opposed to a neutral encyclopedia. What the heck is an "apartment ecosystem" other than marketing jargon? A "solution" is a chemical substance dissolved in water or a liquid solvent, or the result of a mathematical analysis. Using that word for a service that a business offers its customers is advertising jargon, not neutral encyclopedia language. Your draft article shows signs of being based on the reprinting of press releases sent out by the company, and contains many unreferenced assertions. Every evaluative assertion must be cited to a truly independent, reliable source, with no regurgitation of press release language allowed. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I completely agree with Cullen on the tone of the article. I feel a little stronger about the source. Excepting one, all your sources were either obviously written off a press release or were transcripts of interviews with principals of the company with little to no journalism involved. The sole source that actually appeared to be journalism was a discussion of all the available software in the market segment, and as such, was not the discussion in detail that is needed to show notability. John from Idegon (talk) 05:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

This might be a stupid question, but I might as well ask it anyway. Who decides when there are enough links to other articles and it's okay to remove the tag? This page has an example of the tag that I'm talking about. Do you just remove it when you think that it has enough links or does an admin have to do it? Gamermadness (talk) 04:48, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Gamermadness, there are no stupid questions at the Teahouse! The answer is yes, anyone may remove any maintenance tag from the top of article if they feel the issue represented by the tag has been resolved or is not present. However, if you do decide to remove, you are generally expected to explain your edit as you would normally do in the edit summary—explain why you are removing the tag. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 06:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the response Mz7! I didn't want to remove any tags that I wasn't allowed to remove. I'll remember this for next time. Gamermadness (talk) 06:16, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
@Gamermadness: You're welcome. I thought it was a very reasonable question, from where I was. Also, I'll add that I personally believe that there are indeed enough links at Anthony Lancelot Dias that the {{underlinked}} tag can be removed. Mz7 (talk) 06:30, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and removed the tag since it seems like it has enough links. Thanks for the help with my question Mz7 and happy editing! Gamermadness (talk) 06:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

New page - About a person

Hi, i am trying to create a page about a person who is not alive who was a famous astrologer. I have few links as the refernces. However, about the person,details are available in books and online magazine. I have given the online magazine as references. How to avoid the speedy deletion of my article. Can anyone lookinto my article and let me know what needs to be added/improved to make the article live.

whenever i am creating an article, speedy deletion is tagged into it, though i am providing the enough references for that. I have created a user page, even for that speedy deletion is tagged. The article link below. Please provide your valuable feedback to me

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Priyamathid/sandbox/Raghavachary Priyamathid (talk) 03:55, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Priyamathid. I must be honest with you and express my own personal opinion that your current draft is far too promotional and lacks neutrality. I think that it is highly likely that your draft will be deleted. If you want to rewrite it, please do so in a style which is rigorously and stringently neutral and non-promotional. Every assertion you make must be cited to a reliable, independent source. Please read WP:FRINGE for guidancecabout writing articles about fringe science topics. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:50, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
The reason that the speedy deletion request was showing in your userspace draft is that (for reasons best known to you) you had included the speedy deletion tag {{db-person}}. As it happens, that criterion, A7, applies only to articles, not to user pages, so I have removed the tag. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:15, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I see also that though you have a list of general references at the foot of the article, you haven't indicated which reference supports which statement in the article. This is normally done by providing the references as footnotes, see Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:51, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Stop

I wanna stop receiving the magazines in mail. How do I take my name and address of you list — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.97.91.116 (talk) 17:00, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not send magazines in the mail. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 4 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. - --David Biddulph (talk) 17:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

WP:UNCIVIL comments, where do I go to ask for mediation or interference to return to WP:CIVIL conversation?

First time asking question here. There are a growing number of WP:UNCIVIL comments on Talk:Give 'em enough Rope. I am wondering if there is a noticeboard or request service to ask for a neutral party to intervene and return to, or at least move closer to, WP:CIVIL discussion. Thanks, Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2015 (UTC) To clarify, I am asking specifically about the "Requested Move" section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drcrazy102 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Dr Crazy 102, welcome to the Teahouse. Civility is a difficult topic to address, and while I haven't closely examined the comments at the discussion you linked, I can give you general advice. My recommendation is typically to be very cautious about accusing other editors of incivility. Sometimes, a heated discussion can make other editors understandably bitter. Such is, in my opinion, an inherent aspect of a collaborative project like Wikipedia. It's easy to mistake very direct or frank disagreement with disrespect or incivility. Consider whether it was something you might have said that may have provoked a defensive response, and if you are offended, realize that that might not have been the other party's intention. To address your question, Wikipedia does have a dispute resolution process where uninvolved editors can examine user conduct. The first step is typically to contact the other user on their talk page, explaining clearly, but politely, what it was you felt was not civil. Listen to their response with an open mind. Remember, it is sometimes helpful to simply disengage. If you still feel there is a very serious issue that needs to be immediately addressed, you may choose to file a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ("ANI"); however, please be prepared to have your own actions scrutinized if you decide to do this. Respectfully, Mz7 (talk) 19:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
@Mz7:, thanks for the links though it was less about some of my comments, though I can see how they may have been taken, , and more about the discussion as a whole becoming uncivil between several users. Someone else has opened an ANI report which will hopefully help. Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 00:54, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

REVIEW MY ARTICLE BEFORE I SUBMIT IT

Hello I will be delighted if you can help me review my article before I submit. Find link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Runcie_C._W._Chidebe

Thanks Runciecwc (talk) 23:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Runciecwc: it looks like you have a lot of work ahead of you. 1) The first section doesnt have any sources, 2)the external links you have throughout the body will need to go (if they are reliably published sources, you can turn them into citations, if they have a Wikipedia article you can turn them into an internal Wikilink , otherwise you need to get rid of them) but 3) most of all it clearly seems to be lacking in the major criteria for a stand alone article: that independent reliably published sources have covered the subject in depth. The only source that looks reliable to me is the Forbes, and that doesnt mention the subject of the article Chidebe at all. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:03, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

How do I find "reliable" sources?

Recently I created and article about a production company but it was no approved due to me not having reliable sources. What counts as a reliable source? There are not to many sites that have info on this production company.

Someone please help!

Abonk94 (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Abonk94. Often, if you want to find about how something works in Wikipedia, you can find a relevant page by putting Wikipedia: (or WP:) before the subject. So WP:reliable sources is a page which answers your question in detail. But broadly, it is a source which has a reputation for fact-checking, such as a major newspaper, or a book from a reputable publisher. User-generated sources such as blogs, iMDB, wikis (including Wikipedia) and social networks, are almost never regarded as reliable.
If there are indeed not many reliable sites that discuss this company, then it is by definition not notable, and it is impossible at present to write an acceptable article on it. --ColinFine (talk) 23:26, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
@Abonk94: If you don't have access to a library, books.google.com and news.google.com and scholar.google.com do a pretty good, but not perfect, job of whittling out a lot of the non reliable sources . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Pictures in BLP

We can use copyright pictures in movie and TV series pages but not in Biographies of living person. Right?Aero Slicer 12:26, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Aero Slicer. In general, the answer is yes, that's correct. On a more specific level, you can sometimes use low resolution copyrighted images under a claim of fair use in a specific article that is located in the article mainspace, where the picture has been properly provided a copyright license tag and a fair use rationale for use in that article, and where that use meets all of the fair use criteria. Pictures of living persons generally cannot meet the fair use criteria, because they are replaceable ("where no free equivalent is available, or could be created") with a free picture. After all, there's always the possibility of a person taking a snapshot of the person while they are living and releasing it under a compatible free license or into the public domain. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:11, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Aero Slicer, generally what Fuhghettaboutit says above is correct. However there are a few exceptions. If an image of a living person is of that person at a particular, historically significant moment, that is relevant to the article, then a fair use image might be accepted. An image of a President being sworn in, perhaps. Or if a person is notable largely for a particular event, an image of that event. A particularly famous, iconic image of a person, particularly if the picture was directly mentioned in the article, might qualify. A screenshot or still of an actor (now retired) performing his or her signature role might qualify. (For example William Shatner includes an image of Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk of Star Trek.) But these are rare cases. For the most part, images of living people must be under fully free licenses, or in the public domain. DES (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
(actually the "Shatner as Capt. Kirk" is a free use image because of the vary rare combination of the date and purpose of its original publication) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello I am new editor and have joined today itself and I would like to know how to create 'infobox' for any page.

KalEl2794 (talk) 17:48, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, KalEl2794. Infoboxes are created by templates, which are pieces of "fill in the blank" wikicode. In simple terms, you copy and paste the blank template code into the beginning of the article, and then you fill in applicable information in the various fields. You do not need to fill in every item. Please read Wikipedia:List of infoboxes. There are a lot of them. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. KalEl2794 (talk) 04:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

How to merge Articles on wikipedia and why the similar articles allowed on wiki?

Hello ,

I found similar articles on wikipedia. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlife_Protection_Act,_1972 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Life_(Protection)_Amendment_Act,_2002

Wild life protection act 1972 article is available on wikipedia, there was an amendment in 2002 in Wild life protection act 1972.

How these two can be merged with each other as the amendment is part of principle act. Two write up on similar topic and again one is the amendment in the principle act - i am sure it is against the wiki policy and merger of both has been allowed.

Priyadarshivishal23 (talk) 11:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)priyadarshivishal23

Events in a Nations History by Year Articles

I've created a series of articles regarding events that have occurred in Sri Lanka in the past few decades which had not been created previously. But when I come to this page [1] it shows the same events maybe more in this page. The articles I created can be referred here [2], I have created more these two just correspond so im not really sure if I'm doing the right thing here :/ Thanks. CyberWarfare (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Is this the wrong place to ask this question?? CyberWarfare (talk) 22:50, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi CyberWarfare. I'm sorry but I'm not quite sure what what your question is. You created the article 1995 in Sri Lanka. You put it in the category Category:1995 in Sri Lanka. So the category page lists it, along with all the other articles that have that category at the bottom of the page. StarryGrandma (talk) 06:08, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
If the OP's concern is that the two events listed at 1995 in Sri Lanka are not listed at Category:1995 in Sri Lanka, the explanation is that they are listed in the sub-category Category:1995 crimes in Sri Lanka, which is in turn listed in the main category. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Alright, so basically the pages are category pages which include a list of pages which fit into that category meaning its not a separate article? It just includes all articles in that category. Thanks StarryGrandma & David Biddulph, initially I thought they were 2 separate articles with the same content so I thought I was creating a duplicate. --CyberWarfare (talk) 12:28, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Category pages like Category:1995 in Sri Lanka merely list the articles which have the relevant category included (normally at the bottom of the article). Pages like 1995 in Sri Lanka are ordinarly text articles which list events, usually link to their specific articles, and provide a sentence or so of information on each. The two systems exist independently. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Some editor removed some link from a page

Some editor had removed many reliable source link from a page , in spite of repeated request in Talk page the same not added. Provided some new links also , but neither the same added or given any response. Can any one help ? Ruproy1972 (talk) 12:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Ruproy1972 hello and welcome to The Teahouse. Which article?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
This seems to be related to either Save Indian Family or Save Indian Family Foundation. I'm not clear on exactly what the problem is.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:02, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Vchimpanzee The same related to Save Indian Family, would you please help to add some links , whcih are from reliable source. only Ruproy1972 (talk) 04:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


Dear Vchimpanzee

This are some article As I am not so good to understand about the content and wiki policy, but feel the same are from reliable source and should be added in Save Indian Family

Men's rights group to raise marital rape issue on I-Day 'Harassed' men set up meet Spare a thought for innocent husbands Forum for abused men – SIF- BHAI

An abusive wife?

Husbands victimized by wives plead for help related to AP and new state Telangana for SIF . Ruproy1972 (talk) 04:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Ruproy1972 "Spare a thought for innocent husbands" is someone's opinion and could only be used if you identify who said it and call it his opinion, but I suppose the others would be all right.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what to do next

I uploaded draft articles on the 'Blackburn Cycle' on 5&7 August , both of which were rejected. I thought I knew what was required and sent a new draft, but there has been no response to the new draft. Any advice would be welcome. Thank you. Anthony Blackburn (talk) 08:06, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at 05.25, 7 August 2015‎ was declined at 09:06, 7 August 2015‎ by The Average Wikipedian who stated - "Submission fails Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not"
I suggest you read that policy to understand why your article is not acceptable - specifically because you are trying to promote your product.
All of our articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Until you can cite such coverage, the Blackburn cycle does not meet our notability requirement so there cannot be an article about it on Wikipedia, - Arjayay (talk) 08:24, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
There is also a notice on your user talk page that the draft has been declined.--ukexpat (talk) 12:58, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi Anthony and welcome to the teahouse. I can see from your article that you have put an enormous amount of time effort and money into a novel idea and not surprisingly want the world to know about it. If your invention takes off, there will be lots of things written about it and at that point the Blackburn Cycle will become notable. As it is now though, it isn’t considered notable on here as mentioned in the above replies. Please don’t be discouraged, take a look around and try improving your editing skills, you can still work on your article and improve it to a higher standard. I would like to think it might even make a featured article one day. In the mean time, put the kettle on, have a nice cup of tea and ask whatever questions you like. CV9933 (talk) 16:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Uploading new article

I created my first article for Wikipedia on Wednesday evening, entitled 'Rev C.H. Dick'. I clicked 'save page'. The article has not appeared on Wikipedia and I can't locate it anywhere in my user space. Have I done something wrong? Have I not understood properly how to upload new articles, or is it going through a process of approval? Username Dsbartholomew.91.125.237.198 (talk) 10:13, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Dsbartholomew. I have looked at your contributions, global contributions, deleted contributions, as well as the filter log (a program that blocks certain edits), and I cannot find any record of any page like this being created by you. It thus appears, for whatever reason, it was never saved. One of the ways this often happens – especially when you've had the editing screen open for a long time, though this does not necessarily have to be true – is that you get a message when you try to save that says "Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data." In such cases you might think you saved but it never "took". It is incredibly frustrating when you lose material you've worked hard on and it's unretrievable. Did you save a copy? That is the lesson for the future. Wish I could give you a magic pill but it looks like it's gone. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:31, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I created it in sandbox, and thought that when I clicked on 'save page' that was the process for uploading it. Or at the very least that it would have been saved somewhere in my userspace. I have a copy of my article, but had done all the work on reformatting the references to conform with Wikipedia.Dsbartholomew (talk) 12:09, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

If you were editing with a different IP you may have created it in the global Wikipedia:Sandbox rather than your own user sandbox. Wikipedia:Sandbox gets cleared regularly; we could have found the history if you had made the edit while logged on either with your registered account or as the IP under which you asked the question above, but the contribution records for both show no sign of such an edit, so it is lost. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Since you do have a registered user ID, and since you have had an experience with the unpredictability of IP addresses, I would suggest being careful to be sure that you are logged on when editing. IP addresses shift, and don't have private sandboxes. Good luck. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:42, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

How do I repost my article for review?

An article about Malcolm McClain was submitted by a co-worker. That person no longer works for the company, so I've been tasked with getting the article published. I resubmitted and have learned the original reviewer is no longer active. I was advised by the Wikipedia information team to have Teahouse review. Please let me know exactly (in steps as I find Wikipedia very difficult to navigate) how I do this. Thank youLauriespratt (talk) 14:25, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

First, the article is Draft: Malcolm McClain. In the future, when asking for advice on an article, please provide proper wikilinks to make it easier for us. Second, we know that it takes a while to learn to navigate Wikipedia. Wikipedia recommends that you play WP:The Wikipedia Adventure to help learn. Third, I am posting a welcome banner to your user page with many links. Please read them for additional learning. We know that it takes a while to learn. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
@Lauriespratt: Whoever "tasked" you and your predecessor has put you in an awkward position - see our policy on conflicts of interest WP:COI and the Terms of Use . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

to download my pictures

Following the suggestion when writing the text for the article, I used the "Gallery" for identifying my pictures on my computer. Those pictures never got into the text. What to do? 71.139.4.205 (talk) 17:42, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot display images stored on you computer, they must be uploaded, preferably to Wikimedia Commons. Once uploaded they can be displayed in an article. Standard advice follows:
  • If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
  • If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.--ukexpat (talk) 19:35, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to The Teahouse. It would be helpful if you told us what article and who you are. The above post is the only edit by your IP, so you must have been signed in.
Also, Wikimedia Commons can only be used for the photos if you took them yourself or have permission from the copyright holder to use them for any purpose including commercial use with only acknowledgement of where the photos came from. Otherwise they must meet fair use requirements to be uploaded to English Wikipedia.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

What Should I do?

I started an account today and Im having trouble finding things to do on wikipedia. I looked at some of the pages that were marked with having issues like grammar and references and I didn't have enought knowledge on some of them to even make some of the simple edits and I couldnt see myself doing that nonstop while I am on here. Are there any other things to do on Wikipedia that are a little more exciting? I doubt there are many things that arent on here yet but I think making articles might be more interesting so is there a easy way to figure out what isnt already on here. Also how to I get the little rectangles on my page? And I dont understand what subpages are used for, I know how to make them but the article didnt really explsin the uses. Aslo is there a article that explains how to color my signature? Thank You and can you reply to my talk page because I want to be alerted because I wont be looking at this. Glacialfrost (talk) 00:01, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Glacialfrost, I think what you might be looking for in a mentor, an experienced editor who can answer the questions that come up as you learning about editing Wikipedia. One place you might look is at Wikipedia:Co-op. The Teahouse is ideal for specific questions about submitting articles or single topics but a mentor might be more available for the range of questions that come up. Liz Read! Talk! 01:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank You Glacialfrost (talk) 01:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Glacialfrost hello and welcome to The Teahouse. WP:SIG explains signatures. A simple way to learn about them and the way I did it, is to edit a talk page that has a signature you like and copy how the signature was created, making sure to replace the other person's name with yours.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Vchimpanzee. I already got a mentor who answered all that but I appreciate it. As a note to anyone else, my questions were all answered. GlacialFrost (Talk) 21:58, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_374&oldid=1043471020"