Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 161

This is an archive of past discussions. 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 talk page.

Archive 155

←

Archive 159

→

Userboxes???

~~How do you make your own? ThatRusskiiGuy (talk) 20:51, 28 November 2013 (UTC)~~

Figured it out. Nevermind. ThatRusskiiGuy (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Human Nutrition does not refer red tagged

I'm having trouble with a couple reference links on Human Nutrition. 71 and such that apparently do not refer. Cannot seem to fix them myself. Any help? Lbockhorn (talk) 06:40, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I believe I fixed the 71 link

Wicks Steve (talk) 10:41, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Lbockhorn. I glanced at the article (wow that's a long article) and didn't see any red links so I'm guessing that Wicks Steve fixed all of them. One thing you might find useful for the future is the link tool in the basic edit widgets. In the pallete with Bold, Italic, etc. there is a graphic of a link. If you use that you can tell ahead of time if you are linking to an actual article and with the completion capability you can type part of a name and see if any article(s) partially match. Also, here is a page you might find useful Wikipedia:Red link recovery RedDog (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!! Lbockhorn (talk) 05:17, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Stub

I submitted an article. It was rejected. I would like to simplify it and re-submit as a stub. How do I make it clear that I am submitting a stub and not an article?Steve Beimel (talk) 14:19, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Steve. As I explained to you before, a stub is an article, subject to exactly the same requirements. It's a way of classifying articles, not a separate type of page. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:24, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Would I be correct in saying a stub is just an article with a {{Articlename-stub}} tag at the end?Wicks Steve (talk) 15:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

It's a fraction more complex than that, but not much. Basically, a stub is any article that is about an encyclopedic subject, but that doesn't provide encyclopedic coverage. For example, a page that says, "Footown is a town in Barland" is about a suitable topic (pretty much any inhabited settlement is considered notable on Wikipedia) but doesn't really tell the reader anything about the subject - chances are that if they're looking for it, they already know it's a town in Barland. That would be an example of a stub, whether it has a stub tag on it or not. On the other hand, a page that provided Footown's population demographics, geographical features, transport links, major sites and history would not be a stub, even if it were tagged as one. More at WP:STUB. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

A stub is simply a very short article. Length is not a consideration in reviewing submissions. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:19, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

A stub is an article, but just a very short article that doesn't really meet our goal of providing encyclopedic coverage of a topic. You may run across articles tagged as stubs that once were stubs, but have since been expanded. Simply remove the stub tag in such cases, explaining why.

In the early days of Wikipedia, when the total number of articles was far lower, it was considered acceptable to crank out a large number of stubs quickly, under the assumption that the stubs would be expanded and improved in short order. And that's what happened in the majority of cases. But in 2013, no one should write a stub on purpose, in my opinion. If a topic is notable enough for new article, spend the time to make it a halfway decent article, with solid referencing to show notability. That's my opinion, at least. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:24, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

editing text and posting pics

I admit it. I'm an internet & html mess, losser and punk. I am also dyslexic. its kinda a gift. I can research and kind find anything and I mean anything. BUT can't post or write about it at all. is there and fools group on wiki. I have encountered the editors guild and have met the tribe before. I have nothing to prove just lots of text and info to place before the motoring public. EstebanMartin (talk) 01:49, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I have compiled tons of primary info on Capt. Hermann Bottcher and really dont know how to present it on wikipedia. Have picture from 1944 need to post. Any help or advice is appreciated. I have been researching him for years bbut cant deal with the html jazz. EstebanMartin (talk) 02:49, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, EstebanMartin. I suggest that you write up your material in your sandbox, which is a place for messing around that you can find in a menu at the top of your user page. List your research sources at the bottom of the sandbox. Don't worry about the coding and the formatting. Come back here to the Teahouse when you're ready, and we will look it over. If your basic work is good, it is an easy matter to code it properly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:24, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

A page for Captain Hermann J. F. Bottcher (13 July 1909 – December 31, 1944) already exists

Herman Bottcher Wicks Steve (talk) 10:51, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

My advice remains the same under these specific circumstances. Sandbox work by someone who needs help with Wikicode can form the basis for either a new article, or for expansion of an existing article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:36, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

How should lists be handled

I came across the article about root beer, and found articles about individual brands of root beer. That led me to wonder if there was a list of brands of root beer, but couldn't find one.

If I wanted to create a list of something, is it best to:

create a category page - downside being if an article doesn't exist, or hasn't had the category tag added it doesn't get included,
create an article that just lists items with links to relavent articles if they exist - is this notable? not sure what kind of citation would be preferred,
a list of brands could be added as a section of the general topic article - uncertainty about citation
neither, existing search functionality is deemed sufficient, or
some other option I'm unaware of

Thanks, Savacken (talk) 18:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Savacken. There are many ways to organize and correlate information here on Wikipedia, and the simplest but one of the best is the wikilink. So, an article about a brand of root beer should have a link to the main article, Root beer. Two other powerful tools are categories and list articles. One is not preferred over another, each has advantages and disadvantages, and both should be used in many circumstances. I think a list article of root beer brands would be a fine addition to the encyclopedia, and encourage you to create it. Please read WP:LIST for the details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

What is Adoption?

I have seen that many people have been "adopted". What is "Adoption"? Thanks.Speedy Editing ^hit_me_up 14:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Adoption is a process via which a new editor can get regular help and guidance from a more experienced editor. Often, this involves an adoption school - a set of predetermined tasks or quizzes - of some sort. have a look at Adopt-a-user for more details. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:26, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

As someone who has been adopted and graduated, I can endorse the program wholeheartedly. John from Idegon (talk) 06:10, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Query regarding changing an article.

How can i change an existing article "Indira Gandhi Polytechnic Collge,Mahe" to an educational institute specific page with College logo, motto, staff details, etc ..? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachinmtk (talk • contribs) 14:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Sachin. I'm not sure what you mean. The article Indira Gandhi Polytechnic College, Mahe is already a page about the educational institution. If you can improve it (with information referenced to reliable sources) you are welcome to do so, but I'm not sure what you want to change it to. If you mean you want to change it to a directory entry for the college, the answer is emphatically, No. Wikipedia is not a directory. You may certainly add the a logo, subject to the restrictions in WP:LOGO, but you should not list staff unless they are individually notable, and you certainly should not list contact details for them. --ColinFine (talk) 09:35, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

How to make article about entertainment more notable?

Hi All! I'm a newbie here and requesting for some intellectual help. I've prepared an article about useful and convenient application for Android devices - Astro Player: Astro Player How can I make it notable and worthy for submission? Vasiliy.Zhukov (talk) 08:43, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Здравствуйте, Василий. The only way to make the article show that the subject is notable is to find several places where reliable sources (major newspapers or magazines, not fan-contributed sites, and having no connection with Astro Player or its developers) have written at length about Astro Player, and then reference these sites. At present you have referenced only the official web site (which may be used to reference only uncontroversial factual data, and does not figure in establishing notability) and Apps Zoom, which might be a reliable site: this depends on whether it has a reputation for being edited reliably. You need to find more places where people have written about it in places with a reputation for reliable editing: I'm afraid that if these do not exist, then the app is simply not notable at present, and may not have an article however it is written.

If you do find the sources and establish notability, the article needs a lot of work. You need to remove all the advertising language, cut down the long list of features to an encyclopaedic list of major items, and remove the links to social media sites. And all the description of it needs to come from your reference, not from your personal estimation. I have changed your link above to an internal Wikilink --ColinFine (talk) 12:54, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Colin! Thank you to your answer! This is a good advice. I think there are some references in the Internet to Astro Player. Will try to find it and improve the article. Could I ask you to recheck the article after the changes? Vasiliy.Zhukov (talk) 13:59, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, again! I have found one printing book for android users. Android for users Could it be as a reference, though it is written in Russian? Or it could just be for russian pages? Vasiliy.Zhukov (talk) 11:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Editing query

Hello, I am a relatively new editor - editing regularly since the end of January 2013, mainly Australian articles. I hope my question is not too 'dumb'. When I am editing I often see the following "Use dmy dates|date=(e.g.) November 2013" and "Use Australian English|date= (e.g.) November 2013". If the date is old I routinely update it but it has only just struck me that I don't know what these notations do, and is it important to revise the date? Are they just reminders or do they actually action something? Can someone enlighten me please. Cheers. Melbourne3163 (talk) 17:45, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Pretty sure those are just reminders, to keep some American editor (for example) from coming in and "correcting" the spelling or date format. The date in the template is just when that notice was added, I don't think you have to update it. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:16, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks for your reply. Much appreciated. Melbourne3163 (talk) 18:22, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Rename an article to one of its redirects

I want to rename Taiwan Railway Administration to Taiwan Railways Administration because "Railways" in the name is supposed to have an "s" but the proper name is already a redirect? What should I do? Transphasic (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Transphasic! Your best bet is to read over WP:RMT -- Moxy (talk) 22:56, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

The only page history of Taiwan Railways Administration is creating the redirect to Taiwan Railway Administration. Per WP:MOR that means you should be able to move the latter to the former without being an administrator. Have you tried? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:18, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Done

Wicks Steve (talk) 11:45, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

And what do you know, a clueless admin reverts the edit without specifying why. Very helpful.

Wicks Steve (talk) 12:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

He did specify why, in his edit summary. You performed a cut-and-paste move, thus destroying the attribution history for the article. Primehunter therefore had to undo your mistake before he could move the article in the correct way (which has now been done). Please don't throw around accusations of cluelessness unless you are very sure of your position... Yunshui 雲‍水 12:55, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, please ask politely why something was done if you don't understand it. I did it minutes before your post, I did explain it in the edit summary [1] with a link to Wikipedia:How to fix cut-and-paste moves, and I was writing a post for here with further explanation when you attacked me. Cut-and-paste moves lose the page history and breaks our license. You didn't even say in the edit summary where you were copying from, which is also required when you copy content by others, in order to give attribution to the original authors. I reverted the illegal move but it meant an administrator was now required to perform a correct move so I did that too. It is important to revert cut-and-paste moves quickly because it complicates the fix if edits are made to the pasted page, so I reverted it before discussing it. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:07, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

There was no edit summary when I looked. And the reply doesn't state the article has to be renamed, it just says anyone can do it. Attribution history, would that be the list of changes for an article?

As for asking politely why something was done, you will find it on your talk page posted some time ago.

So you are saying to avoid breaking a license I would have had to type out the whole article again?? That makes no sense.Wicks Steve (talk) 13:26, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

No, you would have needed to move the article in the usual way - which you can do over a redirect if (and only if) the target has been edited just once to create such a redirect. After you copied the text there, you made it impossible for anyone other than an administrator to perform the move, since the target page now had multiple revisions. Had you read the link to WP:MOR that Primehunter provided above, you would be aware of this.

No-one is going to blame you for not knowing how to perform a page move over a redirect correctly; the majority of editors probably don't know how to do it. However, when you have been pointed to the instructions for performing such a move, then make a cut-and-paste move instead (which is almost never permissible, since it violates the copyright of every previous editor to the page), then complain when your mistake is fixed by a competent administrator, then continue to complain that you've been hard-done by, well, that doesn't paint a terribly pretty picture. Accept that you made a mistake, read up on the policies that apply (WP:Copying within Wikipedia and WP:Attribution) and move on. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:40, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

No. To avoid breaking a licence you would do a move, rather than a copy and paste. PrimeHunter provided the relevant links at the time. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

The edit summary was always there. It's impossible, also for admins, to add or change an edit summary later. See Help:Edit summary#Fixing. As I said, I was writing a more detailed reply for here when you attacked me. And yes, you were polite at User talk:PrimeHunter#Taiwan Railway Administration/Taiwan Railways Administration, but being rude is usually worse on a common page like this Teahouse, where people are more likely to be offended that others will see attacks on them. "Revert cut-and-paste move" with the wikilink was a perfectly fine edit summary. If you don't understand an edit then always look for the edit summary, and if it contains wikilinks to pages you don't know then follow the links. Discussion posts also often contain explanatory wikilinks. Above I wrote "an administrator was now required to perform a correct move so I did that too". The link on "move" explains how to perform a correct move. It's easier than an incorrect cut-and-paste move. And my original post said "Per WP:MOR that means you should be able to move". That link also goes to Wikipedia:Moving a page. Before writing it I already checked that Transphasic had recently moved pages before and knew how to do it. Otherwise I would also have explained the move tab here instead of only linking. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:49, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

If by rude you mean use of the term 'clueless', I apologise for this said in the heat of the moment, although I am sure you skin is thick enough.Wicks Steve (talk) 14:06, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the mistake in missing the WP:MOR thing. Those shortcut terms are everywhere, they just tend to blend into the background. I am of an age when cutting and pasting was accepted as a solution. A serious question. How exactly does cutting-and-pasting violate the copyright of every previous editor to a page?Wicks Steve (talk) 14:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, you release your contributions under a free licence, but you still retain the copyright on text you created. If someone reuses it, they have to credit you, or at least credit Wikipedia so that the copyright can be traced back to you. Such attribution is normally provided by the page history, which shows who wrote what, and when. However, when you cut a large section of text and paste it into a new page, the first edit to that page shows only that you created a large chunk of text - it doesn't show where the text came from. In effect, you're claiming that you wrote the text, which isn't true - it was written by other users, and you're infringing on their copyright by making that claim, even tacitly. Page moves preserve the edit history, so this isn't an issue - it will show that the page was moved, but it also shows who wrote all the text. Hope that helps make things a bit clearer. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:39, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Test editWicks Steve (talk) 14:50, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes that was easy to understand, thank you for clearing that up.

It must mean that the 'attributions' showing who wrote what, are stored separate to the page. Wicks Steve (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Not exactly "separate"; they get stored on a subpage of the main article (or any other page). Click on the "View history" tab at the top right of any editable page to see the contribution history. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:08, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

It is easy to see why you'd find it hard to believe I took a Computer Science degree at Kingston Polytechnic in 1984, before it was relabelled a University. I am already familiar with contribution history and most other simpler things, it's more a case of a reluctance to read manuals unless totally necessary, expecting systems to be intuitive, enabling them to be learned, and preferring to learn through a process of trial and error.

Wicks Steve (talk) 16:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Well that takes care of that. Thanks! Transphasic (talk) 21:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

New page

hi i would like to create a new page to describe about Happy to be single. Please help me how to create it

shree karthick ShreeKarthick (talk) 04:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ShreeKarthick. We already have an article called Single person. If you want to write about your feelings about this, then I have to say that this is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. You might want to try a blog or a social networking site instead. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:33, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Editing

I want to get a random page to edit. How do I do that? Kenneth16622 (talk) 03:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kenneth16622. Take a look at the menu on the left side of a Wikipedia page. The fifth item on the menu list is "Random article". Click that and get to work. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:17, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!Kenneth16622 (talk) 16:10, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I need help with my article

Hello, I have created an article but the only one working on it, but if this continues I don't think I'll be able to finish it, and it's already been asked to deleted. I really want this article to be completed but there's no way I have time or energy to finish it alone. Basically I was wondering where I could find or ask others to help with editing, creating, and finding references.

Thanks!

BigBluBloodBigRedMachineWildcatsBengalsandReds (talk) 19:40, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, WildcatsBengalsandReds and welcome to The Teahouse. A better way to start is to move your article to User:WildcatsBengalsandReds/Blue Bloods (College Basketball) so you can work on it without interference.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Now you have acknowledged your first problem: no references. Where did you get the informartion in the first place? Who decided this team was "great"? You can't have a word like that unless it is a quote from a reliable source.

As for how to insert them, you use <ref>What you want the footnote to say</ref> after the information being referenced. At the bottom of the page under the heading "==References==", put {{reflist}}.

And you will need a lot more detail.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:15, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

You should read about citing sources in order to know exactly what to put in your footnotes.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 16:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Copyright Question

I'm working on the biography of an artist and pioneer in animated film. One of his short works is on YouTube and various other places on the internet and many stills from the film are found using Google. The film (La Joie de Vivre) is considered by some to be an important work of art and is in the Art Deco style. It was made in France by an American and a Brit (I am doing the biography of the American-- the other man already has a Wikipedia biography) and was released in 1934. Both men are dead. I cannot believe this film is under copyright and would dearly love to post an image from the film on the biography... would really dress it up and provide an example of the man's work. I was able to link to the whole film. How do I find out if I can use an image of the film? As I said, the men who made it are dead, they worked in Paris. Much of their work was lost in WWII. Thanks. Kathrynklos (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello Kathrynklos, and welcome to the Teahouse. As a general rule, any creative work published or released in the United States since 1923 should be assumed to be copyrighted, unless we have specific evidence to the contrary. Presence on YouTube or in a Google search is not such evidence, as copyright violations are legion there. World War II has no effect on copyright. Death of the creators does not end copyright, as it passes to their heirs or estate. Any use of copyrighted film images must be in accordance with WP:FAIRUSE, which does not mean that there is no copyright, but instead that we can use an image under narrowly defined circumstances without infringing the copyright. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:38, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Cullen. I should have explained that the film was released in France in 1934 and I don't believe it was seen in the US until it began showing up in film festivals put on by colleges and libraries in the 1970s, but I could be wrong. My parents were acquainted with Hector Hoppin (the subject of my project) and in the 1960s he believed the film had been lost due to the war (as had most of his artwork and other films). But a year or two prior to his death, he was able to see the film at a film festival. I don't know how it was found... I was too young and dumb to ask the right questions. Didn't see it myself until it showed up on YouTube. I know a great deal about this man but it would be "primary research" so am sticking to what I can find in print and on line. I do know who Hector's heirs are and know they have no connection to this film. Fragments of another Hoppin/Gross animated film were discovered in London in the '70s and restored and that film is copyrighted by the restorers and is located at the New York Public Library. I have a feeling there is a "spoils of war" sort of thing going on... at least in regard to that film. Anyway, I guess we can make-do with the link to La Joie de Vivre on YouTube [2].Kathrynklos (talk) 15:59, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

@Kathrynklos: Hey Kathrynklos. Note that we have a help page dedicated to answering media copyright questions. See Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Please see generally Commons:Copyright rules by territory for a list of rule by country and Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France since I think French copyright is the issue here. As best I can make out (and I don't have great confidence in this area; please consider asking for a second opinion at the help page I linked), the work is still copyrighted and will not become public domain until January 6, 2063 being 70 years after the death of Anthony Gross on September 8, 1984, plus an 8 year and 120 day extension for World War II, unless Hoppin died later, which I did not track down, and which would make the copyright's expiration even later.

However, if indeed the work is still copyrighted, that does not mean you could not use a portion of it for educational purposes in the article under fair use. If you need help or advice with that, you could come back here or ask at the help desk (you could also contact me directly; I'd be glad to help to the best of my ability). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:13, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

P.S. There is one more issue regarding the copyright. If the work is not in the public domain, then the YouTube video (which does not purport to be by anyone with permission) is a copyright violation, and so it must be removed from the article, as we do not permit linking to works that are themselves copyright violations. See WP:ELNEVER.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

His heirs do have a connection to the film, as the copyrights are part of his estate. The copyright exists even if the heirs aren't aware of it and even if the copyright has negligible monetary value. The fact that the film was first shown in the U.S. many years later does not mean it is not copyrighted. It must be assumed to be copyrighted unless we have solid evidence that it isn't. I agree with Fuhghettaboutit that we can't link to the YouTube video, unless it is certain that the video is authorized by the current copyright holder. A still from the film can be added under fair use, as could a poster for the film, if one exists. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:17, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I did learn something new, though: French copyright does take World War II into account, and extends the copyright of prewar works by a time equal to the duration of the war. Fascinating. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:42, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, thanks. One thing I like about this new hobby of mine is "learning". And one of the hard lessons of life is that sometimes "common sense" cannot prevail, because it leaves too much open to interpretation. *sigh* Knowing Hector Hoppin, he would be delighted his little film is on YouTube and anywhere else. (He did die before Gross, btw). Kathrynklos (talk) 22:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Table cell align with finer control

Hi, I want to make some nice tables, but can't figure out how to control the cell alignment.

In the table below I want to make "Start" and "End" left aligned in the cell, and "100" and "50" right aligned in the cell.

Is that possible, and how ?

Is it possible with standard Wikipedia markup, or is HTML markup required ?

The example is also at: User:MortenZdk/sandbox_table

Any help is appreciated :-)

Description	Summary	Info 1	Info 2
Start	100	35	65
End	50	17	33

MortenZdk (talk) 16:48, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I think this is what you need or at least this shows how to do what you want:

Description	Summary	Info 1	Info 2
Start	100	35	65
End	50	17	33

The relevant documentation is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Table#Positioning RedDog (talk) 20:25, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that worked fine.

MortenZdk (talk) 22:19, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Suzanne Pleshette

Do you guys know Suzanne Pleshette? She was a lovely actress. Her article says "She continued acting until 2001, four years before her death." But she died in 2008. Can can someone please fix this? I tried to fix it but there's something wrong with my computer when I try to save it says Service Unavailable 108.46.96.174 (talk) 23:17, 30 November 2013 (UTC) 108.46.96.174 (talk) 23:17, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing the error. She was acting on TV as late as 2004, so I have changed 2001 to 2004. Though she stopped acting then, she was interviewed and appeared in documentaries in her final years. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Article Title Change: Hetaera to Hetaira

Hi,

I was recently reviewing the Hetaera article, which discusses a type of courtesan in Ancient Greece. In the article, these courtesans are referred to both as “hetaerae” and “hetairai,” with the former spelling being used predominantly.

However, I feel that the “hetairai” spelling should be the primary spelling and that “Hetaira” (the singular form) should be the title of the article. This change should be made because “hetaera” comes from Medieval Latin while “hetaira” comes directly from Ancient Greek. (See “Hetaera” Entry in Online Etymology Dictionary as a reference.) I wouldn't have a problem with the “hetaera” spelling, except that the article's references use the term “hetaira” and while the article mentions many Greek historical figures and primary sources, it doesn't mention a lot of Latinate ones.

Despite this reasoning, I'm hesitant to change the article's title and content because I'm a newbie editor and I don't want to (1) create an editorial mess or (2) offend people with more classical knowledge than me.

This account brings me to my question: should I edit the article on my own or somehow look for approval from other editors?

Thanks for helping me with this. I hope this question is appropriate for the Teahouse. 67.174.12.194 (talk) 02:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor 67 and so on. Any question about editing Wikipedia is welcome here. I was going to recommend that you raise the issue on the article's talk page, but noticed that you already have. I also lack the classical knowledge, but in general, we use the article title most commonly used by the reliable sources that discuss the topic in detail. Also worthy of mention is that a spelling in the Latin alphabet of a word from Ancient Greek does not actually come "directly" from that language, as it used a different alphabet. It is instead a transliteration. See Romanization of Greek for more information. I suggest that you wait a few days for response on the talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Help on Wiki entry African-American family structure

Dear Teahouse,

I would really appreciate if you all would look over the African-American family structure article as I hope to create an all encompassing article representing the African-American family structure. MichaelSamJr (talk) 00:28, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, MichaelSamJr. As we already have an article African-American family structure, you should set out to improve the existing article rather than creating a new article. I suggest beginning by writing a critique of the current version on the article's talk page, as a way of checking your perceptions against the opinions of other interested editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

MichaelSamJr, I have now read the article's talk page and see that you are the primary author and are actively seeking input from other editors. This is the right approach, and I apologize for misunderstanding your question on first reading. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:32, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Notability

I was going to ask this at the notability noticeboard, but saw that it was now shut. Is Dan Tan Seet Eng noticeable? He was the leader of a major match fixing ring. Thanks, Mat ty.007 10:48, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

The best question to ask whether deciding an individual is notable is: "does the subject have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject?" A more detailed guide, known as the General Notability Guidelines can be found at WP:GNG. But if the subject doesn't have multiple independent sources covering them (such as magazine or newspaper articles, tv news clips, documentaries, encyclopaedia articles etc) then they're not notable. If they do, then they are. Hope this helps. - Shudde ^talk 10:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I am reasonably familiar with the GNG, but I didn't want to waste my time, so wanted to check that he was notable. Given a Google search, and a Google news search, I would say he is. Thanks, Mat ty.007 10:56, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

It can be hard sometimes to determine whether the person is the subject of the article, or just mentioned in passing as part of coverage of another topic. - Shudde ^talk 10:59, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

One example is this of which he is definitely the subject. Thanks, Mat ty.007 11:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

That is a strong source, Matty.007, but please be careful to write the article in compliance with our policy on biographies of living people. The challenge is that his notability comes from allegations of criminal behavior. However, he hasn't been convicted, and it seems he is being held without charges in Singapore, but has been charged in other countries. Please do not state in Wikipedia's voice that he is guilty, and use the highest quality sources for references. Avoid citing sensationalistic, tabloid-style coverage. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:38, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I am trying to be wary this time, so have written the article in my sandbox and asked a few editors to have a look over it. Thanks, Mat ty.007 08:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Turn a subsection of an existing article into a separate article

Hei! We are a group of students and would like to expand the subsection of an existing article into a separate page. Can anyone help us how to do this? Thank you! CaroEhr (talk) 19:31, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

@CaroEhr: Welcome to the Teahouse. Splitting a section of an article into a new article is simple. All you really have to do is copy over the content (link to the article you got it from in the edit summary), and summarize the new article at the top of the page (this is called the lead section). Two optional (but recommended) steps are to put {{Copied}} on the new article's talk page and add {{Main|new article}} n the old subsection. Happy editing, --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 19:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

See more at Wikipedia:Splitting. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:42, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Jakob and PrimeHunter! Somehow I did not come over the splitting article!CaroEhr (talk) 19:49, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Another question, can the new article have the same title as the old subsection? If so, how do I create the new page, if searching it on wiki and then clicking on create does not work, if a subsection already exists.CaroEhr (talk) 13:27, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes definitely! What's currently happening is you're being redirected from the page you want to create to the existing article. When you arrive at the existing article you should see, in small writing at the top, "Redirected from [article name]". Click on the article name and you'll end up at the article you want to create, just replace the redirect code :) Samwalton9 (talk) 13:37, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Sorry, I am new to wikipedia and the whole thing seems rather complicated ;-)CaroEhr (talk) 13:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

No worries! That's what this page is here for, if you need anything feel free to ask me on my talk page. Samwalton9 (talk) 14:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

1 11 21 1211 111221 ?

complete the series by telling us next two no. to come monty 18:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohanagrawal13 (talk • contribs)

This isn't a page for puzzles but we have an article about that sequence. Just enter it in our search box. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

My courses

In user preferences there is an option to list 'my courses'. I have looked at the list of courses. Are these all provided free of charge? Greenmaven (talk) 09:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Greenmaven. The option is at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-misc. Special:Courses shows these courses are mostly offered by universities. It's often part of a university course for students there. Wikipedia:Course pages#Education Program course and institution pages says: Any user may enroll as a student using an "Enroll" tab at the top of the course page. To prevent non-students from enrolling on a course page, an enrollment token may be set that must be entered upon enrollment. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Submitting portrait photos for bios

Hi. Have just submitted my first article for approval. The tutorials were a lot of help and generally clear; but I've stumbled onto an element for which I can't seem to find instruction. I want to submit a b/w portrait photo of my subject along with the article, yet I can't find instruction on how to do this. Can someone please point me in the right direction? The photo is not copyrighted: it was used extensively at the time for newspapers and advertising, and the company that used it went out of business ten years ago. Thanks. Kana 18:43, 27 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Butcan (talk • contribs)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse, Butcan. The factors you mention do not allow us to conclude that the photo is not copyrighted. It is routine for copyrighted photos to be used in newspapers and advertising, and this has no effect on copyrights. When a company goes out of business, it is common for its intellectual property including copyrights to pass to its creditors, or the copyright may belong to the original photographer. Bankruptcy does not make copyrights disappear. Unless you have explicit information showing that the photo is copyright-free, or has been released under an acceptable Creative Commons license, then we must assume that a copyright exists. In that case, the photo can only be used under narrow fair use provisions. In the case of a person, that would be only if the person was dead. If the person is alive, there is always the chance that a freely licensed photo could be obtained. If you give more details about the situation and the photo, we may be able to provide more help. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:53, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Jim. By way of intorduction: my "real" name is Eugene, or Gene.

Thanks for your very informative reply to my query about how to upload photos. Since I posted that question I've discovered the tutorial pages on posting photos and have printed them out for future reference. Now, back to the particular photo I would like to upload - After reading your reply last night I called my source for the photo and he gave me its history. Before I go into detail, I feel a bit of an explanation on how things usually get done in Hawaii is necessary. We are very casual about things we do, and little thought is given to possible consequences. Usually it works out fine, but sometimes it can lead to a big mess. The subject of the photo and my profile, his name was John, owned a very good Canon camera. His best friend, Jerry, was the source of the photo I want to use. For decades, John and Jerry would use the camera to take photos of each other as the need for publicity pics arose. In the mid-1980s John called Jerry to come over to his studio in Kona to take some publicity photos which Jerry did with John's camera. John had the pics developed, selected the ones he wanted to use, and turned the negatives over to his publisher who then made prints for the press releases. Usually, the negatives would be returned to John, but Jerry can't say with 100% certainty that happened in this case. Jerry, by the way, as executor of John's estate, is currently going through thousands of negatives, prints and slides before sending them off to the Univ. of Northern Iowa with all of John's papers. So, the question: who owns the copyright to the subject photo? If Jerry does, he says he would be happy to write a release, or whatever is needed by the Wiki-folks. He feels John's publisher wouldn't have any claim to the photo since they were just using it for a short time. If the copyright was John's, then Jerry as his executor, would be the person to give use permission. So, do we have our bases covered? Or do we have a big Hawaiian mess? I await your balanced and impartial wisdom with much anticipation. Cheers, Gene Kana 19:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Butcan (talk • contribs)

Hello Eugene, whom I will also call Butcan. Please be aware that I am not a copyright attorney, and I also don't play one on TV. I did visit Hawaii with my wife and son last month, though, and we cruised around the four major islands. Based on your description of the situation, I conclude that Jerry is the likely copyright holder, both as the original photographer, and as John's executor, who owned the camera and "commissioned" the photo in a Hawaiian style handshake deal. Accordingly, Jerry should set up an account on Wikimedia Commons, and upload the photo there, under a Creative Commons license allowing free use of the image by anyone. It's easy. That's if Jerry is willing to do so. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Good morning, Cullen328

Thanks for the above. I called Jerry and he's agreed to do what it takes to get said photo uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and available for the article. Meanwhile, I've gone ahead and submitted the biography on the artist, and it has entered the pipeline. Exciting stuff!

Butcan Kana 21:03, 1 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Butcan (talk • contribs)

Can i make pages about these things

Animal urine, and Cow urine... Adding into pages like "Urine", or Urine therapy may distract from the actual subject.

Can be made into long pages, if tried. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:46, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Bladesmulti. To answer that question you need to consider those topics in the context of Wikipedia:notability So for example if people write articles or books on the topic it's more likely to be notable. You also should probably look here at Wikipedia:Splitting_article That describes when there is so much info on a sub-topic that it's worth it's own article and how to make that change when needed. Also, before making a change like that be sure to describe what and why you plan to make the change on the Talk Page of the article where the current information exists. My intuition would be "Cow Urine" doesn't rate it's own article but I don't know anything about the topic. RedDog (talk) 00:15, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Creating a book, but unable to save it

I do not understand what is happening w/ the creation of my book. When it is downloaded I can't save it in my computer (there is a closed padlock icon) and in the side window the save function is desabled. I have already create my account. Thank you, Cacilda CarvalhoCacilda Carvalho (talk) 12:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

What book are you referring to? Samwalton9 (talk) 12:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Although you have made an account, it is not yet Autoconfirmed, as you have not had an account for 4 days, nor made 10 edits. According to WP:AUTOCONFIRM "Autoconfirmed users may ...save books to the wiki" I suspect you need to fulfill these criteria, and then the disabled functions will become enabled. Arjayay (talk) 13:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

You need autoconfirmation to save a book in your account for later editing, but you don't need autoconfirmation to download a book you just assembled. Which book format do you choose? Do you reach a screen saying "Download the file"? Can you right click that link and choose to save it? Which browser do you have? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:21, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Unsure how to upload website screenshot

I want to upload a screenshot for an article I'm making, about a game portal, GameJolt. I'm having problems with "Provide source and copyright information"- what should I be picking? The screenshot is of the homepage, which is accessible for everyone, if that means anything. Thanks.Honno (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Honno, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has to take copyright very seriously. The homepage is undoubtedly copyright, and a screenshot of it will be subject to that same copyright. It may not be used anywhere in Wikipedia, unless it can be used in a way which meets all the criteria for using non-free material. I am not familiar enough with that to be sure, but I doubt that it can be used. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 21:48, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Greetings Honno and welcome to the teahouse. To expand a bit on what Colin said Copyright issues are some of the most tricky things that Wikipedia editors have to deal with. It's one of the most common sources of confusion because the standards that people are used to on the general Internet are not the same !here. At Wikipedia we have to take copyright very seriously because there are legal issues. So in general when you need an image the best place to go is the wikipedia:commons Anything in there is something Wikipedia has the rights to. That probably won't help you though. However, there is a fair use exception that MAY apply in your case. I simply don't know I don't edit articles about video games. But for music albums you can use the cover art from the album with a fair use exemption. And I looked at articles for Grand Theft Auto and World of Warcraft and they seemed to use the cover art from the box so maybe you can. I do agree with Colin though this is a rare case when the normal wp:be bold has to be tempered with legal considerations and if you aren't sure better to assume you can't use it. Here are some articles to look at to figure it out: wp:non-free content and Wikipedia:Non-free_use_rationale_guideline. BTW, one more thing to consider, how notable is GameJolt? Have there been articles written specifically about it in the press? If not it may not even meet the requirements for wp:notability so the question would be moot. RedDog (talk) 22:33, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

One last point, from your comment it sounds as if you have already found the Upload form to upload a fair use file. If you have and if you are going through the process of answering those questions and you are at a point that none of the questions apply to your case then you are unfortunately done, if at any point in that process you don't see one of the possible exceptions that applies to your case then your case does not fall under fair use and you can't use the file. RedDog (talk) 22:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

First of all, [3] here's the article in question (as you can see, it's currently pending review). Regarding notability, I believe GameJolt is notable enough- first page on "indie games", a few high profile games (including being the main legitimate host of IWBTG since december 2008), and has been talked about on reliable, independant sources a few times. Actually, looking at the Websitenotability, it says the subject needs "The website or content has won a well-known, reputable, and independent award, either from a publication or organisation," which is a problem. I disagree with that necessity, but that's for another discussion. Anyway, presuming the article is legitimate, what if I get the owner's permission? I'm a moderator on the site (yeah yeah, it's neutral and not advertising and all) and could get something, although I'm not sure what could constitute as evidence. I'd also not want to take up too much of the owners time. What would Wikipedia want? Honno (talk) 07:15, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Honno. I am afraid that you are putting the cart before the horse here, and I hope you understand the metaphor. What I mean is that, if the topic is notable and worthy of an article on Wikipedia, and if a screenshot is appropriate for that article, then and only then would it be appropriate to upload the screenshot. We never, ever, ever add fair use images to any page that is not a main space encyclopedia article. It simply isn't allowed under Wikipedia's copyright policies. So please focus on the immediate task at hand: getting the draft article accepted to the main space of the encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that, getting a bit enthusiastic with this wikipedia business. Thanks for the time you've guys spent to comprehensibly answer me. Honno (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

image permissions

Am totally not clear on image permissions. In this case I have permission from the image owner to use it in one wikipedia article... what do I use on the image wizard? Thanks. Anne Wayman Annewannew (talk) 18:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The image owner needs to follow the process described at WP:donating copyrighted material. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Annewannew. Adding to what David Biddulph said, the fastest and easiest way is for the image owner to set up an account at Wikimedia Commons, which takes only a couple of minutes, and upload the image under an appropriate license, which is also easy using the upload wizard. Please be sure that the image owner understands that anyone, anywhere can use that image for any purpose without payment or permission. Depending on the license selected, other users may be required to credit the image owner. They can't limit use to one article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:19, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

If you are referring to a company logo, then no permission is needed from the owner for fair use of a low resolution version in an article about the company. That fair use image can only be used in a completed article (not a draft) about that company, and the image will be hosted here on Wikipedia. Wikimedia Commons is for freely licensed images only. I discussed this in your other question below as well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:43, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Changing Article's Heading

I wish to edit the heading of an article already accepted and published. My article is a biography of Australian theatre director Rex Cramphorn. His full name - Rex Roy Cramphorn - has been used for the heading of the article. I wish his full name to be retained in the text, but his second given name "Roy" to be omitted from the heading.

I haven't yet found a way of editing the heading - to make it "Rex Cramphorn". Sovereign Court John Austin 23:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sovereign Court (talk • contribs)

I've moved the page to Rex Cramphorn for you :) For the future see WP:MOVE. Samwalton9 (talk) 23:20, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Join a WikiProject

How do I join a WikiProject? Thanks! Cogito-Ergo-Sum 03:17, 2 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CogitoErgoSum14 (talk • contribs)

Hi CogitoErgoSum14, welcome to the Teahouse! The main page of a WikiProject usally has a list of participants/members or a link to such a list. Click the edit link at the list and add your username in the same format as the existing entries. Many WikiProjects also have a template you can optionally display on your user page to show you are in the project. If you say which WikiProject you want to join then we can say more. You are also allowed to post to a WikiProject discussion page and edit pages within its scope without joining the project. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I was able to successfully join the WikiProject in question. Cogito-Ergo-Sum (talk) 23:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

not understanding how to code references / reference template

Am trying to use this: Page text.^[1]

to foot note prizes using an reference to a page at the FTC - http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0199-prize-offers - using this code two things happen:

1 the sentence is truncated

2 when I put it in the article I'm told I don't have the right reference template... have tried a bunch of things that don't work... can someone help please?

Anne Wayman Annewannew (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Annewannew. When you tried to create a reference, your opening reference tag was lacking a ">" at the end. Each reference tag must start with a "<" and end with a ">", and there must be a starting tag before the content of the reference, and an ending tag after that content. The syntax must be precise. Please read Referencing for beginners for more detail. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:33, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

In addition, I noticed that you are trying to add a company logo to your draft. Our fair use policy only allows use of a company logo in a main space encyclopedia article, not in a draft article. So, please wait until your article is ready to go live, and then upload the logo in accordance with policy, and add it to the article then. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:38, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Anne. In addition to the great info that Cullen gave you one other thing you might like to know, there is a tool you can use to make entering references easier. You don't need to worry about syntax and things nearly as much. When you edit a page look for the toolbar of widgets: Bold, Italic, etc. Click on "Cite" at the far right. That should create another row beneath the pallete that is specific to citation of references. Click on the "Templates" drop down menu and select the kind of reference you need: book, journal, news, etc. The system will then give you a form to fill out. There are lots of fields in every form but remember most of them are optional, if you don't know all the info (actually if you ever fill one of those out completely that would be a first I bet) just fill in what you know, click done and the system will generate the code for a reference automatically for you at the point where your cursor was when you started. Good luck! RedDog (talk) 23:44, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Creating a new page for a section of a pre-existing page.

Would it violate any Wikipedia guidelines if I separated out the "Coast Line" section on Western Line, Taiwan into its own page? The Coast Line is a paired rail line with the Mountain Line, which has its own page. Does that qualify for Wikipedia:Notability? Transphasic (talk) 22:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Transphasic. The short answer is that separating out one section of an article does not violate any Wikipedia policies. That doesn't mean it's necessarily a good idea, as with a lot of things it all depends. There are two main things I would suggest you look at. First, the subject of Wikipedia:notability That article goes over the criteria for when a topic rates it's own article. The primary criterion is: are there 3rd party (e.g. newspaper, magazine) sources that have written about the topic? so in this case if people talk about the specific Western Line, not just in the context of the Taiwan rail system but as an entity of it's own. If you decide to make it it's own topic then you need to look at Wikipedia:Splitting_article That describes how to make such a change. As always the place to start is on the Talk page of the current article. Post something there proposing the change and see what people think. One other point, when I looked at the existing article I noticed it had a tag saying it needs better 3rd party references. My advice would be to start there. Before you think about making a new article make the current one as good as possible, or at least good enough so that it doesn't need that tag. Find stories about the railway (including about but not necessarily limited to the Coast Line) and add those as references. You will need to do that anyway if you want to justify why Coast Line needs to be it's own article. RedDog (talk) 03:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

^ Link text, additional text.

[test-1] Link text, additional text.

[1]