Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 201

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 195

←

Archive 199

→

Uploading picture

I'm having trouble understanding what photo's are accepted on wikipedia. And yesterday I was told the photo needs to get onto the wiki domain before it can be uploaded. I have a few photo's I don't think are copyrighted, can someone help?Cnannos (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Cnannos. We take copyright very seriously here on Wikipedia, and when you say you "don't think" the photos are copyrighted, that is cause for concern. Unless you have evidence that a photo is not copyrighted, then we have to assume that it is. A photo originally published in the U.S. before 1923 is no longer copyrighted. Most photos created by employees of the U.S. Federal government are in the public domain and not protected by copyright. A large majority of other photos are copyrighted. If you take a photo yourself, you can release it under a Creative Commons license and upload it to Wikimedia Commons. But this does not apply to photos of items that are themselves copyrighted. Please see WP:NFCI for a list of the very limited exceptions that allow some use of copyrighted images. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen, if the person I'm making my wiki page about uploaded the photo himself to the wiki page, work that work as public domain? I'm making a page about a notable person but I might be able to contact his PR or manager. If that would't work, is there a way for me to try to upload the photo's I have now and see? I'm not sure even how to upload a photo. Because then I think I'm ready for my site to go live. Cnannos (talk) 19:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Cnannos. On its own, that wouldn't be enough. But if the copyright holder (who may or may not be the same person as the subject of the photo) were willing to license it under the CC-BY-SA licence or similar (which allow anybody to use it for any purpose, including commercial, as long as they attribute it correctly), then they could do so. They would have to follow the right process (explained in donating copyright materials) so that Wikipedia could be sure that the image was licensed by the person entitled to do so. --ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Remember that the copyright usually belongs to the photographer, rather than the subject of the photo, see Wikipedia:Image use policy#User-created images. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:43, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

fixing a table

Hi there. So I was translating Bonneville-sur-Touques and I had to create two tables. I followed the pattern shown here but something is awry and neither table is showing correctly. It doesn't seem to know when a new line is starting. Help fixing it please? Thanks! 184.147.128.82 (talk) 00:47, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I've made a small change which may be what you were trying to do? --David Biddulph (talk) 01:24, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

And a slightly different change to another section where you had made a different error in table formatting. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:33, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, that's exactly it! 184.147.128.82 (talk) 13:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Bartholomew Bretherton entry

I have rewritten the entry for Bartholomew Bretherton because it was inaccurate and confused 3 different notable people of the same name who belonged to the same family. I am aware that what I have written should be 3 separate entries but it is beyond me to do this. (I am 76). I would be happy for one of your editors to fix it. What you could do in a short time would take me forever. I am one of three family members who have researched this family for many years and we are tired of reading wrong information about our family. I was the only one brave enough to try to fix it. In the process of writing it I accidentally deleted the link to Loyola House, and one to the Grand National. Perhaps you could put them back. Audrey Ansell Audrey202 222.153.72.42 (talk) 09:11, 11 April 2014 (UTC) 222.153.72.42 (talk) 09:11, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

HI, Ms. Ansell and welcome to The Teahouse. The article as you have left it is not right for Wikipedia but I don't have time to repair it right now. It is possible the three entries can be separate if each person is notable by Wikipedia's definition. I have made the corrections you specifically asked for, but the article will need more attention than I am prepared to give it at this time.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. There is one article for Bartholomew Bretherton senior and his family (including his nephew who inherited the property) and another for Bartholomew Bretherton the Grand National winning jockey. Other than adding links to other Wikipedia articles, I haven't changed the wording.

Thank you for writing and clearing up the details about them. Pjposullivan (talk) 15:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

help me

Does good electric grounding help us to reduce our electricity bill from unwanted electricity in the circuit Wilsonkota (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

To editor Wilsonkota: Hello, welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, this forum is intended for help about editing Wikipedia. You may want to raise this question on the science reference desk. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 18:08, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I added links to Tibetan Music Awards But It Still Shows Padlock Next To Them - why?

Hello,

The guidelines state "You can edit semi-protected pages. IP Address users cannot edit pages of this security level, but Autoconfirmed users can (and usually you will become an autoconfirmed user after just 10 edits and 4 days)."

I added some directly relevant links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_of_Tibet#External_links

but they still have a padlock next to them after 10 edits and more than 7 days.

Could you please explain what I have not done correctly?

Thanks :) Johny Om (talk) 18:44, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

@Johny Om: Welcome to the Teahouse. The padlock just means that the site you're linking to is an https site instead of an http one. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org has no padlock, but https://en.wikipedia.org does. Happy editing. --Jakob (talk) 18:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Copyright/Photos ...Confused!

I am so confused ....I have asked many questions regarding copyrights, and basically everyone always tells me that if the pic is approved and posted on Wikipedia then it can be reused on Wikipedia. People constantly tell me that I have to get the copyright holder to agree to Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License which allows any one to copy this and use it with attribution. Why then if I use a photo approved on Wikipedia from another page would it not be approved on mine, and if there are licences that say that only one person can use this photo and no one else can, then why hasn't anyone told me that when I have asked. My pending photo would be easier to obtain if I told the copyright holder that no one can use it except for me and my page, but I have been told differently. Could someone clarify this. If there is such a licence, which one is it? And why can't I use other photos from Wikipedia as they are already approved....??? Anetek3D (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I am not sure what you have asked nor been answered, but; it is not correct that any picture used on Wikipedia may freely be reused. Many images, such as album covers for example, are used in accordance with Wikipedia's "fair use" guidelines and may only be used when a fair use rationale substantiates a valid reason for its use. I am sorry that you are confused over this, and more-so, that I can not give a better answer.—John Cline (talk) 21:38, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I will try to clarify, Anetek3D: There are two general types of photos (or more broadly images) used on Wikipedia, depending on the copyright and licensing status for each image.

The first type are images which are free of copyright restrictions or made freely available by the copyright holder under a Creative Commons license for use for any purpose, without asking for permission, with only the requirement of attribution. Copyright has expired on images first published in the U.S. before 1923, for example. Photos by employees of the U.S. Federal government are also in the public domain. Many amateur photographers freely license their work, but professionals usually don't. That general category of image can be used in any Wikipedia article, on any user or talk page, or off Wikipedia as well. Those images are hosted on Wikimedia Commons, a sister project.

The second type are images which are copyrighted, but which we use here on English Wikipedia under the legal principle of fair use and in compliance with our non-free content criteria for images. These are low-resolution images used under a detailed rationale in a single Wikipedia article. These are what we call non-replaceable images, and common examples include corporate logos, book and album covers, movie posters, images of famous art works in the context of critical commentary, portraits of people who have since died, and so on. These images are hosted right here on Wikipedia.

Once you understand this clear-cut distinction, it becomes much easier to deal with reuse of images. As for dealing with the copyright holder, it is not possible for them to release their work for use in only a specific article. Re-use is open-ended and free under any acceptable Creative Commons license. Make sure that they understand the license. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:47, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Anetek3D, I noticed your post below under the heading "Admin??". So, let me comment based on that specific example of the article Gerald Fried. The file File:Gerald Fried.jpg has been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and it seems that evidence of licensing under CC BY-SA 3.0 has been emailed to the OTRS volunteers. If the details in the email are in order showing that the photographer has freely licensed the image, then this image is in the first type I described above, and can be freely re-used with attribution.

On the other hand, the movie poster and TV screen shot images such as File:The Man from U.N.C.L.E.jpg that you tried to add to the article are images of the second type. They are images of copyrighted content which can be used only in one specific article each, namely about the specific movie or TV show. Use in other articles is considered a copyright violation, and it is the responsibility of any editor, administrator or not, to remove improper use of such images as soon as that usage is discovered. Removing such content is not "power tripping". If an experienced editor tells you that that such usage is improper, then please do not restore the content until you fully understand the applicable policies and guidelines. By way, you can check the licensing status of any image by clicking on the image and reading the licensing information connected to that image. This is an important legal issue. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

New article about a poet

Hello, there is a poet in South Dakota that I would like to write an article about. She is not well known outside of SD/NE area. Would this be acceptable to the Wiki terms of article writing?

208.107.45.222 (talk) 16:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Please read our notability guideline for creative artists. I suppose that it is possible that a poet could be so well known in the Dakotas as to be notable enough to meet that guideline, but I would expect that they would have also received significant coverage elsewhere too. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:27, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

As Cullen 328 said, You can write an article about any artist but it should have WP:IS. You should go through WP:THIRDPARTY which states that "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." A.Minkowiski^{_Lets t@lk} 07:57, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Using non-English references?

I'm planning to edit (and possibly create) a few articles related to Algeria. For example, the list of universities, which is incomplete. The reference cited in the article is in English, but only has a limited number of universities. A more complete listing can be found on the Ministry of Higher Education website, but it's only in French and Arabic. Can I still use it as a reference?

RubyALG (talk) 16:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You can use non-English sources if English sources aren't available, but please read WP:NONENG. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy reply, David. So I'll keep the English list, add the French/Arabic one, and keep looking for an English version. Is that right? RubyALG (talk) 16:19, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Is there a bot that can archive all the web sources used in an article for me?

Is there a bot I can send a request to archive all the sources in an article or does one like that not exist? Nathan121212 (talk) 15:00, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Such a bot does not exist to my knowledge. Last year someone made a bot a bit like that, but didn't get community approval and they implemented the idea clumsily. The user got banned and the bot was shelved. --LukeSurl^{t c} 22:01, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah! I wondered why that website was blacklisted. It is often the only source I can find for something that has expired. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC).

You can manually request the Internet Archive to do so. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC).

Am I citing stuff properly?

Can anyone tell me if I have been citing and referencing stuff correctly. I just copy the 'template' from another reference on the page and change the parameters. Is there an easier way? Thanks Oxfordowl1 (talk) 22:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Your references look fine. Look at User:Yunshui/References for beginners for a good introduction to writing references and finding the easier way. Happy editing. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:51, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I, too, fill in my references manually, Oxfordowl1. You can find lots of blank templates at Wikipedia:Citation templates. I open the online source or a Google Books page in one window, and then the blank template in another window. I simply cut and paste the reference information into the appropriate template fields. I might use a third window to verify whether the author has a Wikipedia biography, or whether the publisher has an article, and so on. You want to wikilink such things to make your references as complete and informative as possible. It is nice to be able to find out quickly that an author has credentials and that a publisher is respectable and not fringe. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks StarryGrandma. That beginner guide is really useful. Cullen328, so I should wikilink the author or web page/book when I fill that infomation in the reference template? Should I do that in all circumstances that there is a wikipedia page for the author or book? I appreciate the help. Oxfordowl1 (talk) 12:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I wikilink within a reference to articles about the author, book, magazine or newspaper, publisher and city of publication when those articles exist. It isn't mandatory, but I consider it "best practice". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I would really avoid wiki-linking the city, as it would constitute overlinking. As to the other entities it is a judgement call - is it reasonably likely to be a useful link? Some small, specialist publisher (like The Tolkien Society) is more likely to be a useful link than Cambridge University Press. Also be careful with author names, they often link to the wrong person. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:36, 14 April 2014 (UTC).

How to add evidence of previous edit re Distinguished Conduct Medal

Hi, I recently edited the page regarding The Royal Field Artillery, adding a new D.C.M recipient, Arthur G Hobbs of the above regiment to its page. I have the relevant proof of the receipt, namely A London Gazette supplement dated 17 April 1918.Having placed his name rather crudely I am asking how to improve, and add the citation to his name. I am as they say a novice to all things Computer, so please could you answer in a way you would tell a 5yr old going on 70.Cromwell 1649 (talk) 17:13, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Although any recipient of such a medal is "notable" in normal terms, under Wikipedia's definition in lists such as Royal Field Artillery#Notable members they mean notable in the terms used to determine who gets a Wikipedia article, which for military personnel is outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Notability_guide#People, so I fear that the entry will be removed from the list. If it remained, the process for referencing is described at WP:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

To reference the London Gazette there is a special template: {{London Gazette}}.

You will find a page-issue/date index to the London Gazette (1665 - 2010) at Wikipedia:London_Gazette_Index (a little something I knocked up a while ago

).

The London Gazette is a bit of a bugger for dates, if you have the page number

If you have the page number we can find the issue and supplement, and can cite it in the article like this

If not, let me know what information you have and we will find it together from part of the index at Wikipedia:London_Gazette_Index/19/1918#April.

All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:51, 14 April 2014 (UTC).

Would you please help me with an article?

Hi, I'm a fairly new editor to articles. I like to expand, refine and historically check certain articles which I enjoy. I've only ever created one page however that is an article for creation it is called Highbury Theatre Centre an extremely historically important local theatre in the Sutton Coldfield area of Birmingham, England. I have resubmitted the article a couple of times, each time I've been told that unfortunately it's not been accepted. I have referenced and scoured the internet for reliable sources etc and believe the article to have quite a lot of honest, reliable references etc. I was wondering if anybody at the teahouse would be able to assist me at all, in checking the page is okay and satisfactory in the hope of it being passed and becoming a 'proper' article on Wikipedia. Many Thanks, PB49230 PB49230 (talk) 22:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I'd be happy to help you polish the article. What the article needs in order to be accepted is to say why this particular playhouse is important. It's not enough to just describe it, you have to say why this theater is more important than other theaters. Unfortunately most theaters aren't notable and as is, the theater doesn't sound like it meets notability requirements. Is there more that you can write about it to demonstrate notability? Definitely prepare yourself for the possibility that no matter what, the article may not be accepted. If it ultimately does not meet notability requirements, you may look into other avenues for this article. Other websites, for example. Or it may find a mention on another page, perhaps the page about that city or neighborhood. I can give you a few pieces of advice on how to fix other aspects of the article. For one thing, several parts are unsourced. For instance the audience capacity and the entire "milestones" section. Also, wikipedia really frowns on bare url's for references. If you need help fixing them, let me know. :-) Bali88 (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello PB49230. I'm afraid I must disagree with some (not all) of what Bali88 says: I would like to banish the word "important" from this page and other help pages. The criterion for Wikipedia articles is "notability", which is defined in a very special way, and has only a weak relation to "importance". (Our page on Wikipedia:Notability says "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below." - emphasis added). And you do not need to say "why this theater is more important than other theaters" - its ranking with respect to other establishments is irrelevant: the article must show why this theatre meets the criteria for notability.

What the article needs to do is to reference reliable published sources which have talked about the HTC in depth. At present it has none. As far as I can see all the current references either don't work, just mention it in passing, or relate to something other than the HTC, such as the founder. In order to establish that the thaetre is notable you need to find articles in reliable sources independent of the theatre (such as major newspapers or books from reputable publishers) which talk at length about the HTC itself (not about its founders, directors, performers etc). If these do not at present exist, then the centre does not currently count as notable in Wikipedia's sense, and an article on it is not at present acceptable, however it is written. --ColinFine (talk) 07:37, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah...I've never thought about the difference between the two words. Thanks for pointing that out :-) Bali88 (talk) 09:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

French Wikipedia

This unanswered question has been moved to the top of the page for higher visibility. Please use a ping in any answer.-- 10:11, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey TeaHouse,

I am looking to begin working on translations but can't seem to find good communities on the French wikipedia. Does anyone know of anywhere (here or there) to get started in?

Thanks, ForrestLyle (talk) 21:13, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

@ForrestLyle: Sorry that no one has replied to your query. I suggest that as a first step you post a message on the Wikiproject France talk page elaborating on what you want to help with. Good luck! ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 15:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

create user profile

my user profile was deleted over the weekend (as I think it probably has been before) and I just wanted some guidelines for creating one. AFreelanceEditor (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

AFreelanceEditor Read Username policy relating to your username and User pages →Enock4seth ^(talk) 13:07, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

@Afreelanceeditor: Your previous user page was promotional, but the current one is not so and will thus be kept. --Jakob (talk) (Please comment on my editor review.) 15:40, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Website license

Hi, Spokeo's website term of use seems to say their images are released in public domain or fair use and can be used for commercial purposes, does it mean I can upload their pictures to Wikipedia? Thanks (Monkelese (talk) 13:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Monkelese and welcome to the teahouse. I'm afraid you can't use most spokeo images on Wikipedia. Their terms allow for limited release for personal use whereas Wikipedia normally requires that such materials are available under a Creative Commons license. Spokeo's conditions state that "Certain content provided on Spokeo.com may be sourced from other third party sites and if noted, is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareALike License. Your use of any such content must also comply with those license terms", which means content licensed in that fashion can be reused on Wikipedia under the same terms. The guidelines for Fair use claims can be found here. Cheers, ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 15:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

"Spokeo Photos provides access to proprietary images owned by third parties" - this in itself means that for any image you wanted to use, you'd have to do at least some amount of digging to determine if the image was owned by a third party and, if so, who that third party is and how that third party had licensed that particular image. No easy blanket-use policies here. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 22:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

IRC

I want contact administrators, through IRC, in what IRC canal it possible?--Toma646 (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Note: This question was placed at the bottom of the feed when it was added, I have moved it to the top for higher visibility. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Information about all of the IRC channels used by Wiimedians can be found at WP:IRC. Your best bet for contacting an admin is probably to ask in #wikipedia-en or #wikipedia-en-help. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 23:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Is "promotional tone" a good reason to delete an article?

Something that is mentioned quite frequently in AFD discussions is the fact that a specific article seems to be designed to promote a book, company, actor, etc. Now, I understand why a promotional tone is frowned upon and certainly an editor with a COI can be a problem, but people speak about this like the fact that an article is promotional/biased is a reason for deletion regardless of the notability of the subject. People often vote to delete and give the tone of the article as a reason for deletion. Personally, I disagree with this. I mean, if I'm Britney Spears' publicist and I write an article talking her up, that may be a good reason to rewrite the article and tell me to step back, but Britney doesn't stop being notable just because her article is biased. Am I missing some wikipedia guidelines or are the people who give this as a reason applying it incorrectly? Bali88 (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bali88. A "promotional tone" is not reason enough in itself to delete an article. And I am not aware of any serious attempt to delete our article about Britney Spears or anyone comparable based on promotional tone alone. However, a "promotional tone" is often detected in articles where the notability evident in Britney Spears is otherwise completely lacking. So, if the topic is clearly notable, and a "promotional tone" is the only problem with the article, then the article should be kept, and improved though the normal process of editing. But if notability cannot be established, then such promotional articles should be deleted promptly, within a week or so. That is sufficient time to establish genuine notability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

That said, if a topic is unambiguously promotional and there is almost nothing worth saving in the article it could be speedily deleted by CSD G11; though even that says that rewriting would be preferable if the topic is actually notable. Sam Walton (talk) 08:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I too would much prefer that such an article was "stubbed" than deleted. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:22, 14 April 2014 (UTC).

I'm going to throw in my 2 cents. I think this is one of those questions that there is no definitive right or wrong answer and it depends on your overall philosophy about editing. My philosophy is that deleting is better than stubbing. My background is software engineering so I tend to think about Wikipedia as a big software system that needs to be maintained. In that context -- and given the kinds of requests and the general quality of what I see on the site now -- I'm much more worried about out of control growth than about the remote possibility that some article should exist and doesn't. My assessment of Wikipedia is that right now almost all the articles that really need to exist already do. People used the example of Britney Spears above and if there really was someone as well known as Ms. Spears who didn't have an article already that would be a good argument but I would bet Mitt Romney dollars that it's not. All the Britneys and Justins all ready have articles started. The risk is that every day ten people try creating new articles for bands that no one but them and their friends have ever heard of. When Wikipedia first started there was a rational emphasis on growth. But we have started now and are very successful and out of control growth resulting in poor quality articles is IMHO a far greater problem now than not enough coverage of topics. MadScientistX11 (talk) 13:30, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

To clarify...I'm not saying that all the AFD nominations for which this is being used as an argument are Britney Spears level notability, just that I feel like people are focusing on that the wrong things in many nominations. Instead of debating whether the person is notable, they discuss the fact that the article is biased or poorly sourced as if those are valid reasons to delete an article. For instance, there was a blogger awhile back who had apparently written his own page for promotion purposes. It seemed like everyone just kept talking about the bias inherent in the page as opposed to the notability of this particular blogger. I just didn't know if I would be out of line if I said "let's get back on track here guys!" Someone nominated the Monique Lhuillier page recently because of sourcing and promotional tone. She's not quite on the level of Britney spears, but quite obviously meets notability guidelines. Although, it's entirely possible that the nominator simply didn't google her prior to the nomination. Bali88 (talk) 23:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fishing Creek (North Branch Susquehanna River)/archive3

This unanswered question has been moved to the top of the page for higher visibility. Please use a ping in any answer.-- 10:11, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Would someone mind reviewing the above FAC so it doesn't get failed for inactivity? Thanks, --Jakob (talk) 21:53, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Adding video and audio to an entry

So, I ggogled this question, and I found an otdated video instruction on how to do this (either that or I am blind and dumb as I cannot find several ogf the settings reffered to here on my wikipedia page) anyone have a link to a set of instructions on how to add video that is actual (April 2014)

Thanks!

CelisRojo (talk) 09:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi CelisRojo. Help:Files might have the information you need - basically you upload and embed videos in much the same way as image files. One important thing to note is that videos must be in Ogg (Theora) format; Wikipedia doesn't yet support other file types. Once you have created your video, you can upload it in much the same way as you would upload an image. Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

searching for images in Wikimedia Commons

Hello - I am a teacher in the Wikimedia Education Program. One of my students uploaded a photo to the Commons (his own) to accompany his Wikipedia article. He's able to link to the photo using the file name, so far so good, but when we search for the photo using the Commons search tool, it does not come up. The file is https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boiler_Scale.JPG . I would like to help him and also understand better how the Commons search works. Thanks! Michelev (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I should add that we are searching with the words "boiler scale." I have tried various options in the advanced search tool. Michelev (talk) 04:01, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Michelev. I see that three different versions of the file were uploaded almost simultaneously about ten hours ago. Also, the file description is exceptionally brief, and the image is not categorized. Based on my experience, it can take quite a while for a new file to be indexed on Wikimedia Commons. I expect that the file will be easier to find soon. You can advise your student to write a more detailed explanation of the image in its file description page, and to add the image to one or more categories. This will help make the much image easier to find. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

@Michelev: I've added three categories, which should improve the search results for the image. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 05:12, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Boiler Scale.JPG has been indexed by search now and is the first result on "Boiler Scale". See Help:Searching#Delay in updating the search index. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:43, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

The subject of an article which kept on getting deleted is tempted to do it himself because he knows the materials and references that can support the article.

I know someone who was written about in Wikipedia but the article, for some reason, kept getting deleted. This person expressed he wanted to know the write of his biography so he may lead him to references and external links the writer may use in the biography. Unfortunately, he doesn't know the biographer. I feel that he's tempted to do it himself as who would be the most knowledgeable of those references but himself. But, under the guidelines, such practice is discouraged in Wikipedia. How does Wikipedia deal with it? What if he can maintain neutrality? And because he knows the right references and sources for the article, facts can be verifiable? Edcor1967 (talk) 12:41, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The page to read is WP:Autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

@Edcor1967: What you should do is wait for someone else to write an article on you. If you really are notable (extensive coverage in reliable sources you didn't write), someone else will eventually do it and it is more likely to be neutral. If you must write an article on yourself, you may want to follow the instructions here. --Jakob (talk) 13:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

You could request an Admin to tell you the user name(s) of those who attempted to write the article. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:21, 14 April 2014 (UTC).

Thank you User:David Biddulph for the prompt reply to my query. Thanks also to User:Rich Farmbrough. I appreciate all your help for this new-comer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edcor1967 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you user:Jakec, your reply is much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edcor1967 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

How do I create an article on Wikipedia?

Hi everyone, I am new to Wikipedia and I'm quite confused, I would like to create an article but have no idea how to do it. Thanks for taking the time to read this and have a nice day. International House Malta (talk) 13:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi International House Malta and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that before you create an article you will need to change your user name. Names that are clearly promotional in nature are not permitted under Wikipedia guidelines. I now see that you have already been blocked from editing because of that. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 15:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

exasperating article creation

I have submitted an article. It has now been rejected three times The goal posts keep changing. The article has links to already established Wiki pages. The article is about a notable company (notable to scientists and academics) which has so many listed verifiable independent, prestigious and third party references. What more do you want? I do not have any hair left to tear out! Please advise. Khanom (talk) 15:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Khanom and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry to hear that you are having difficulties getting your article accepted. I will find the article and leave my comments on your talk page. Cheers, ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 15:39, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Done Please see your talk page. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 16:03, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I will make a few comments here, Khanom. Your draft article needs to be written in an encyclopedic style. In its current form, it does not even mention its subject, "Cecil Instruments Limited" until the third paragraph. That company name should be the first three words of the opening sentence, and that sentence and those that follow should describe the company, not the marketplace that the company serves. If you have not already done so, please read our notability guideline for companies. To summarize briefly, we are looking for significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Your current reference list does not inspire confidence that the company meets the threshold of that kind of significant coverage. Inline references are preferred, and in all cases where the source is available online, you should link to that source within your reference. Please read referencing for beginners and restructure your references accordingly. When you say that the "goal posts are changing", I understand your point, but see it in a slightly different way. If I am reviewing a draft article and see ten problems, I may focus in my comments on the three that seem most serious to me. Another reviewer may consider two other problems to also be serious. There is no final approval here on Wikipedia, and even a good article of long standing can be improved. Any article can be criticized by any editor, for a variety of reasons. Our goal is to improve the encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

User page

I am just starting and am creating my User page, how ever I have several projects. and feel uncomfortable talking about myself so much. just wanted some pointers in hope that I am moving in the right direction. I have wanted to work on this since DMOG. Horror Movie Man (talk) 08:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Horror Movie Man. You don't need to disclose any information that you are uncomfortable sharing. In my opinion, your user page is a bit too promotional. It should mostly discuss your work, plans and goals here on Wikipedia. I noticed that you tried to edit some templates and reference names in an article, Horror film. Those terms are part of the wikicode, and you should not try to change them until you have a better understanding of how the wikicode works. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Acceptable language

In a Talk discussion about what content should be included in article, I have been dealing with a user, who wants to put in additional details into the article that 3 past Talk discussions, including one in which the user participated, have agreed are not needed.

In my response to their proposal, I have used, clear concise statements within very short paragraphs, similar to what I am writing now and have referenced the 3 past Talk discussions.

While I have focused on the content issues with a rational presentation of the facts, the user has repeatedly responded with the type of language below when referring to my responses, while trying to make their case for adding details:

"wall-o-text rantings", "insane discussions", "you slapped at the top of this insane discussion", "utterly beside the point", "wikilawyering", "boldface ranting" and "hooting and hollering", “this discussion is insane, and that's a statement of fact, not a personal attack", as well as "blah/blah/fix", "blah blah/comment" and "blah blah/reply" in the Talk History edit comments when responding to me.

I continually asked the user to focus on the content issues without this derogatory language, and yet the user persisted. The user, even went so far as to edit one of their saved responses, which already had derogatory language, just to add more derogatory language.

Is this type of language and behavior tolerated at Wikipedia?

Does it rise to the level of personal attacks and derogatory comments about my responses where that user could be temporarily blocked for this type of language, or are there any other alternative recommended actions?

Thanks for your consideration. Wondering55 (talk) 01:27, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Wondering55. After reading the talk page in question, I recommend that all the editors involved in that dispute try to adopt a less combative attitude. I also recommend making a major effort to be more concise and less repetitive when arguing a point. The essay WP:TLDR has some good advice in that regard. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Given that I have just noticed your lengthy attempt to raise this same complaint at WP:ANI, I also recommend that you read WP:FORUMSHOPPING, and take to heart the excellent advice that a wide range of experienced editors have offered you in recent days. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

So far no one has addressed whether the quoted language above is acceptable and deserves a block. Is any type of personal attack and derogatory comments acceptable, just because an editor does not like the way someone is presenting their argument?

I was not using a combative attitude when I used words like "reasonable", "compromise", and "in a spirit of cooperation". I'm not sure what WP:TLDR has to offer since it focuses on overly long unformatted statements. There were no such statements. It also recommends "to distill one's thoughts into bite size pieces", which is exactly how I made my presentations.

It should also be noted that WP:TLDR "is sometimes used as a tactic to thwart the kinds of discussion which are essential in collaborative editing."

If referenced excellent advice from others was that I should avoid WP:TLDR, which is inaccurate, that I should not even be in Wikipedia as a user, and that I am squandering the attention of volunteers, even though the length of my request was no longer than many others that received no such administrator comments, then we have a difference of opinion. I did follow the constructive advice of one administrator and condensed my version to a 160 word request to see if a user's quoted comments and behaviors are considered personal attacks that deserve blocking or further actions.

Can someone with a neutral point of view please provide some constructive comments about my question about how to handle personal attacks and derogatory language, and if any other actions or Wikipedia resources would be considered appropriate to address the type of quoted comments above? Can someone please offer me assistance?Wondering55 (talk) 03:42, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Blocks of other editors are exceptionally unlikely in this case, in my opinion. I will repeat my advice to please avoid forum shopping. You took it to ANI, and didn't receive the response you hoped for. Please don't take it elsewhere. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

There was no response to the basis of my request about what can or should be done about these types of personal attacks and denigrating comments or identification of Wikipedia's resources to address these issues. I am not forum shopping. I am looking for Wikipedia administrators or users to engage in a dialogue and respond to address my actual request rather than looking to simply blame me for something I have not done in the simple act of making my request. I am looking for Wikipedia administrators or users to engage in a dialogue about acceptable language by users in Talk discussions.

I would appreciate if you or someone else could elaborate on why the types of denigrating comments that I outlined would not be subject to any block. If there are any Wikipedia guidelines that you or someone else can point me to on how to address these issues in the future, that would also be helpful. Thanks. Wondering55 (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Bartholomew Bretherton Rainhill

I have added more information about Bartholomew Bretherton (1775-1857) but need somsone to add the references I cited to the reference list. Could one of your editors , perhaps pjposullivan, do this and check what I have written. Audrey 202 Audrey202 (talk) 20:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello again, Audrey. I did some of what you wanted, and also did some tidying up where I found obvious problems. Someone else may want to check behind me because I don't know the exact formatting that should be used.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Question to Wiki editor "Vchimpanzee"

I opened up your answer to my question at work & didn't have time to copy or study your answer to my question & wanted to read your answer provided today at home where I have the time to read and analyze. When I got home, I spent over 30 minutes attempting to view your response and could no longer find it; even in an archive. I'm not stupid. I'm only somewhat computer savvy but spend more than 9 hours a day on the computer so am disappointed this system is so cryptic. I clicked on Zsportsgeek, 0, Talk, Sandbox, Preferences, Beta, Watchlist, Contributions, Read, archives and could not find your answer when I needed it. However, thank you for taking the time and attempting to help me with my baseball question about Fred BrottZsportsgeek (talk) 05:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Zsportsgeek. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 200, Question #33. I took a look at your contributions list, found where you had posted your question on April 11, noted the heading of your question, and then checked the most recent Teahouse archive. There it was. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:07, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Cullen. I believe it's time to propose a way to show where a question has been archived somehow in the talkback template. And Zsportsgeek, I'm glad I could help.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

At the time that a question is answered (and a talkback message provided if the answerer decides to do so), the question and answer will not have been archived, so the talkback message will not be able to refer to the archive. I can't see it being practicable to change each talkback message subsequently when each message is archived. It usually isn't difficult to find the message in the archive search, using either the thread title or the questioner's user name. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Marking unclear text

Hi there, Actually I have two questions. I've just registered today, and in spite of going through the tutorial, I guess I haven't learned all of the tricks yet. While attempting to edit, I've come across certain terms and abbreviations which I am unable to decipher. Can I somehow mark them so that someone else can have a look at them? My second question is: How do I get back to my teahouse profile after leaving the teahouse? It seems as though I'm always asked to create one, even though I've already done so. Regards EliotPost (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Eliot. For your first query, there are a couple of options. You can go to the Talk page of the article (every article has a Talk page associated with it, for example Foobar has the talk page Talk:Foobar) and post a message detailing your issue. Alternatively, you can add the code {{clarify}} at the exact word or phrase, this will produce a little marker like this:^{[clarification needed]}. In both cases, this should attract the attention of other editors.

As regards your second query, don't worry about that, your profile is created and regardless, it's management is not a requirement for contributing here. 99% of the Teahouse is about asking good questions; something you've clearly already done with aplomb! --LukeSurl^{t c}

Also Wikipedia:Please clarify has some useful help about requesting clarification. --LukeSurl^{t c} 22:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

(e/c) @EliotPost: Hi Eliot. You can make a list of these terms and abbreviations as you're going along, maybe in a word or wordpad document and then when you're ready just post it and ask us here. What I would suggest though is if there is any coding to them, it might be a good idea to place the following tags around such items in your list <nowiki> list </nowiki> The reason for this is that there are certain types of codes that actually expand when you are not editing into various displays when you save—especially anything enclosed in doubled curly braces e.g., {{something}}. (See Help:Template.) Placing these <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags around such items tell the software not to expand them when you save.

Regarding getting back to your Teahouse profile, I'm not certain I know what you are referring to, sorry; maybe your edits to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Guests/Right column and so on? Anyway, you can click "Contributions" at the top of any page to see a list of your contributions and see what you've edited and can click on any item to go back to it. You can also save a link to any page you'd like on your user page to create easy access. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Searching for links from other Wikipedia pages?

I'm evaluating Wikipedia pages created by my students, and I want to check whether other Wikipedia pages link to these pages. Is there a way to search for pages that link to a given page? Rosieredfield (talk) 22:26, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

@Rosieredfield: Hi Rosie. Sure. Navigate to a page you wish to check. You will see on the left hand side of the page a menu labeled "tools". It will likely be collapsed but click the arrow to get the dropdown and then choose "What links here". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:34, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Request to stop deleting article before more authentic sources are added.

Hi Teahouse Members,

I have created an article about Catalyzer Startup Accelerator that is very popular in Hyderabad circles. They offer free startup advices and workshops across colleges and institutes. So I decided to start an article. However, it is marked for deletion. The gentleman who recommended it for deletion mentions that the source cited from YourStory. YourStory is very popular in India, its not internationally known but any startup in India knows YourStory.com.

Many local language newspaper have written articles about Catalyzer Startup Accelerator. My question is "However they are not available online. How do I stop someone from deleting the article for few weeks before I upload the local newspaper scanned copies?"

Also, can i invite few of my friends who are familiar with this organization to provide sources they have?

Your response will be appreciated.

Chaitanyasri (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)Chaitanya

Welcome to the Teahouse. The possible deletion is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catalyzer Startup Accelerator. Sources do not need to be on-line. You can use a newspaper as a reference if you fill in the relevant parameters in a template such as {{cite news}}. If you were to "upload the local newspaper scanned copies" as you suggest, that would be a copyright violation and might get you blocked from editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:04, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi David,

Thanks, sure, I will cite news as suggested. But can we request for some time?

Thanks again.

Chaitanyasri (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

If and when the article gets deleted, you can go to the administrator that deletes it and ask that it be "userfied" to you so you can work on it on a page in your userspace. It will not be in the encyclopedia itself at that time, but will be available for you to edit until you can add sources that show notability. Keep in mind that for a company to be considered notable, you must show references from reliable, independent, secondary sources that discuss the subject in detail. In addition, for companies, some of your sources must either be from publications of wide circulation (like general interest magazines) or from local sources from seperate geographic areas. John from Idegon (talk) 18:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

It's unlikely that the AFD discussion will be extended beyond the normal time. I would suggest that before the article gets deleted (if that is the outcome of the AFD), you copy the source into a user subpage, perhaps at User:Chaitanyasri/Catalyzer startup accelerator (or back into your sandbox where you had a previous unsuccessful attempt), then you can work on it at your leisure, and then when it is adequately sourced you could submit it through the WP:AFC process where it will be reviewed and would be unlikely to be deleted unless it suffered from severe problems such as copyright violation. You were always running the risk of deletion when you tried to create an article directly, immediately after your sandbox draft had been declined during AFC review; you would have been better off trying to improve that draft and resubmit it for review after you had addressed the feedback. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Now I get it. Sure I will follow your advice. Thanks.

Chaitanyasri (talk) 01:30, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Post an article on the corresponding discussion page

Hi! How can I post a changed article on DKSH on the discussion page of the existing DKSH page? Before I make the changes on the article, I want to get a feedback of other editors. Thanks!Fantree (talk) 13:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Fantree, thanks for stopping by. Go to the talk page, Talk:DKSH and start a new section called "Proposed rewrite" or something like that. Put your proposed revsion there, explain why you think the change should be made and supply the independent, reliable, verifiable sources that support what you are suggesting. Invite comment from others by leaving a note at relevant project talk pages like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Switzerland and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thailand and wait to see what response you get. Feel free to respond to comments but remember comments should be on the subject not the editor and that most editors are acting in good faith so don't get hurt or annoyed if there is disagreement. Nthep (talk) 13:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your detailed info! Unfortunately, I don't understand HOW to start a new section on the Talk:DKSH page. If I click on the link, there doesn't show up no such functionality. Could you please explain the process step by step? Fantree (talk) 08:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk pages are editable in the same way as articles. At the top of the page are a number of tabs; one is edit source which will allow you to edit the entire page, another is new section which will create a new section for you and is probably the easiest way of adding new information. There's more about this and a useful video at Help:Using talk pages. Nthep (talk) 08:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

How do I change a page name?

Can someone tell me how I change a page name please? I want to change the name of a page from 'The Plug' to 'Plug (nightclub)'. Please can you be very specific about what I need to do. I tried to change it yesterday but assume that I did it wrong FlicketyPlug (talk) 09:56, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi FlicketyPlug the process is described at WP:MOVE. I would encourage you to be clear about the correct title,is it The Plug Nightclub, Plug Nightclub, or Plug (nightclub)? Flat Out let's discuss it 10:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Huggle warning

How can we warn users in huggle ? Zince34' 11:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse! Here's a list of what each of the buttons at the top of the program do:

Check out the Huggle manual for a more in-depth guide to what each of the buttons at the top of the program do, along with anything else regarding Huggle. Good luck and revert carefully, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 12:19, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Positon of boxes in User Page

Hi, I have some problems about my user page (User:Rommtt). It's the position of the boxes, cause I want the user boxes to go right and the pic of the day to be middle in the page. Hope someone can help me. Big thanks to you!

--Rommtt (talk) 10:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

How's this? Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:31, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Rommtt (talk) 12:52, 16 April 2014 (UTC)