Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 321

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 315

←

Archive 319

→

user contributions

                      ^^^^^To reply

@EordE6 Also, what did you mean by semi hidden in the edit history?

Studentcollege (talk) 02:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Studentcollege: By that I mean, if I go to the article, the edits will no longer be displayed. But once again, if I click the history button (see the one in the top right here), I can see my edit and everyone elses from the past. Also as I have said before, please reply in this section (don't use the ask a new question button.)

user contributions

If you make a contribution to an article page and that contribution goes directly to your user contributions page then that contribution cannot be deleted am i right? Studentcollege (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Studentcollege: I know you may be new here but consider this a formal warning. Do not post this same question repetitively here again. It will be considered spam and could be removed. Instead, respond to the editors who answered previously by using the little blue edit link next to the title of the section or on our talk pages. I will copy this message to your talk page too. Thanks for your cooperation. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 01:57, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@EordE6 on your latest post what did you mean by undo the edit or remove it from the article? Studentcollege (talk) 02:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Studentcollege: For example look at this history page. You see next to each edit there is a small link labeled undo? You can go to here and try it out if you wish. This will remove whatever that person just added to the article from the main view of the article, but your edit will always remain, semi-hidden in the edit history. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 02:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

user contributions

So once you make a contribution on an article page that contribution goes straight to your user contributions page and that contribution cannot be deleted am i right?

Studentcollege (talk) 01:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Studentcollege: Yes, that's correct. The answers to your other questions below expand on this. If you ever wish to clarify or expand on a question you've already asked, you can do so in the same section - no need to create a new one :) ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Studentcollege: Welcome... again. If you scroll down a bit you will see this has been answered multiple times but I will sum it up. You can always undo the edit or remove it from the article, but it will always be visible in your user contributions for viewing. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 01:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

user contributions

I also want to know if you look at your own contributions page then I guess you cannot delete your contributions from your own account am I right? Studentcollege (talk) 00:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Studentcollege. Once you have made a valid edit, it will be part of your public edit history forever. If an editor, for example, makes a death threat accompanied by a string of obscenities, or violates copyright, those edits will be removed from public view by an administrator, but will still be visible to administrators and a small number of other highly trusted users. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:12, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

user contributions

Hello, I just want to know if you can delete some of your own user contributions from your own account?

Studentcollege (talk) 23:39, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Studentcollege: thanks for stopping by. No, every change is preserved forever in Wikipedia's database. A special class of users called administrators have a tool that allows them to sorta delete things, in the sense that they can hide specific edits from public view. But that is only done for very specific reasons, and not just willy-nilly. I hope that helps! --Jayron 32 23:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Studentcollege. Jayron32 is quite right that the logs always contain the historical record of changes, but I'm not sure if that is what you were asking about. You have not made any edits so far, so I guess this is a hypothetical question, and I will give a couple of hypothetical answers. If you make an edit and then later you change your mind, you may be able to "undo" that change by clicking the "Undo" link from the article's History page (it may depend on what other changes have been made since). The log will still show both the original change and the undo. If you can't undo, then you can always edit the article again to put right any mistakes. On the other hand, if you create a sub-page in your user space (which might be named something like "User:Studentcollege/Butterflies") and you want to delete that entire page, then you can request an Admin delete it by adding the following code at the top of the page: {{db-userreq|rationale=Brief reason goes here.}} . I hope that makes sense; if we did not cover what you wanted, please come back and ask specifically.--Gronk Oz (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

So I guess all your contributions will forever remain on your user contributions and cannot be deleted am i right? And just so you know newly created wikipedia users will always say the exact same questions just to clarify on certain things@EoRdE6

Studentcollege (talk) 04:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Studentcollege: Yes to sum this up again, your edits are permanently viewable in your user contributions. Nothing you do can get them removed from there. This is to ensure accountability for bad edits and vandalism, and to allow reviews when people are asking for higher permissions (rollback, file mover, adminship etc). Your edits will always be in your user contributions.

EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 04:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you @EordE6 for your patience and kindness.

Studentcollege (talk) 04:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

should i inform author?

Should I tell people on a talk page when I have made an edit? Is there a page with explanations for the abbr. Like rfc, diff, etcetc? Sorry if this has been asked62.107.1.225 (talk) 13:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. In general there is no need for you to discuss on the article talk page if the edit you have made to the article is supported by references to published independent reliable sources. You may, however, need to discuss if your edit is disputed. As for the abbreviations, try WP:Glossary. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

But it is a good idea to provide an edit summary for every edit. It does not always need to be expansive – and people often do use short abbreviations just like you asked for a page to translate – but telling others at least something of what you've done upon an edit is a stand-in, basically, for exactly what your question is about: informing people of your edit. Especially when your edit is not self-explanatory, or might be seen as controversial, I'd take the time to explain more clearly what you've done in the edit summary. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:38, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

2 same articles...

Hi,

>Tyrants of the Rising Sun
>Tyrants of the Rising Sun: Live in Japan

2 same articles and i don't know how to gather them (i didn't found a help content for that). Need help from community :)

Husky Dream (talk) 15:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Husky Dream. Someone appears to have taken care of that. While we're waiting for details, I'd just like to mention that there is a better way to link to Wikipedia articles, using just the name of the article and double brackets. For example, your first link could be written [[Tyrants of the Rising Sun]], giving Tyrants of the Rising Sun. See also Help:Link#Wikilinks. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Looking for a more detailed explanation regarding my article being declined

Draft:Johnny C. Taylor, Jr.

I used 11 articles from a range of independent, reliable, published sources, and did not use any materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed, however the article was declined and I was told I did these things which I did not do. Can someone provide an actual explanation or assistance?

Kevin-tmcf (talk) 16:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The first sentence which I chose at random was "However, most HR departments are still using the same old cookie-cutter approach to finding new hires". I find that this is a direct quote from the sales blurb from Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/The-Trouble-HR-Insiders-Finding/dp/0814413447, and I see that almost the entirety of the section Draft:Johnny C. Taylor, Jr.#Author is taken from that same sales blurb. Firstly you are likely to find that copying that text verbatim is a copyright violation, but secondly it is extremely unlikely that you will ever find a sales blurb which is written in a non-promotional neutral point of view as required by Wikipedia. If you don't want it to sound like an advertisement, don't copy an advertisement. Write it in your own words. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Kevin-tmcf, I was just going to point out a few phrases that would cause issue but I see you have already removed them (I got distracted for half an hour mid reply), it already reads much better - good work. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Kevin-tmcf I am not a Teahouse host but I noticed the second part of your user name tmcf might be associated with Thurgood Marshall College Fund which is mentioned in your article. Might you have a conflict of interest? Others could better advise than I if you have. SovalValtos (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Policy regarding behaviour in arbitration fora

Recently I have noticed quite a bit of nastiness in places like Arbitration Requests/Enforcement, Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents etc. To be clear, is it allowed to show contempt for previous Arbcom decisions, in particular to make veiled Nazi references (e.g. "Superior orders") in characterizing their actions (er... unwillingness to WP:IAR I guess?), in the middle of those discussions? Is WP:CIVIL actually actionable in any way, or is there some other policy to cite here? 70.24.6.180 (talk) 05:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. You have chosen to spend time in the areas of Wikipedia where the most intractible and emotional disputes are discussed, often at mind-numbing length. Almost inevitably, these are places where tempers often run high, and people often vent their emotions in an ugly fashion. One great thing about volunteering with this encyclopedia is that you get to choose where to participate. So, if you prefer "sweetness and light", volunteer to help kindergarteners work on art projects, and do not hang out at the drunk tank at the county jail late on Saturday night. Figuratively, of course. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay, but should it then follow that I am blocked when I point out that behaviour, observe another IP get blocked (and the comment reverted) for making far more reasonable criticism, and get blocked again myself when I attempt to restore that which has been censored (by the person who was criticized, no less)? I am more than willing to roll up my sleeves, and don't particularly expect kind treatment, but to me contributing to Wikipedia means ensuring that rules are consistently and fairly applied and that hypocrites and the corrupt are dealt with appropriately. I have been repeatedly accused of signing out of my (nonexistent) account in order to point out these things. The simple truth of the matter is that it is because of the things I point out that I cannot in good conscience create an account. 70.24.6.180 (talk) 07:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Creating an account gives you a higher degree of anonymity by far than editing from your IP address. The advice I give you now is the same advice I would give any editor: Take things slow and steady at places like AE and ANI. Be very, very careful to avoid disruptive editing such as calling people hypocrites and corrupt, and do not try to evade a block. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:07, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The pages you mention are for frank discussion. As long as people are prepared to use their accounts and thus own their expressions of opinion, both sharpness and forthrightness are acceptable IMO. On the other hand, editing those pages logged out or from an SPA sock while posing as uninvolved is discouraged. (Incidentally I see you just posted on ANI, claiming to be "uninvolved" in the matter under discussion.[1] But how is anyone to know?)

This page, the Teahouse, is "a support space designed specifically for new editors";[2] it's not intended for hints and roundabout passive-aggressive accusations from experienced editors. At least say who you're specifically accusing of what, preferably with diffs. And, if it needs saying: if you're blocked, don't post at all. Since I'm not a regular here, I won't remove your question as trolling, but that is actually what I think should be done. Bishonen | talk 15:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC).

Added note: the IP above has acknowledged here that they're the same person as 76.64.12.157 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), which is currently blocked for disruption. Blocked per WP:EVADE. Bishonen | talk 18:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC).

How to find a previous post

I have a message that a post from last week was answered. The link went to pg 310 of the archives, but the post referred to wasn't there. Went 5 pages back to 305 and five fowards to 315. How do you locate posts like this? CaptJayRuffins (talk) 19:10, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Was it this one? - I found it by putting CaptJayRuffins in the Archive search box - there was only one match. Arjayay (talk) 19:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Looking for help with "formal tone"

Hi there, My article was declined as it did not have the formal tone required - is it possible to get some help with this? victoriafoleyannis 17:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicki Foley-Annis (talk • contribs)

Vicki Foley-Annis hello and welcome to The Teahouse. There are some obvious problems with Draft:Epicure (party-plan company).

"Epicure™" should not be used. We do not use "TM" in articles. Also, the first use of the name should be Epicure. The external link, which we do not allow in articles, should be at the end of the article inside the template {{Official}} under the heading "External links"; headings are explained below.

Another problem: you must use complete sentences. And they should be in past tense for everything that has happened.

Put [[Wikilinks]] in the article whenever you think a person might want to refer to another Wikipedia article about a name or term you used.

You can use an infobox at the top. Details about the company do not go at the end, but should be displayed at the top. To see what an infobox should look like go to Duke Energy and click on "edit this page" or "edit" at the top. I'm not sure what you would see but it's one of those. Then copy the code (everything above "'''Duke Energy''', headquartered in [[Charlotte, North Carolina]],") move it to where you edit your draft, and replace that company's details with yours, where appropriate.

And the sections of the article should be identified with == Headings ==. You take the section names you have now and put them between pairs of equal signs.

It is preferred that references be inline. Take each reference you have at the end of the article, put it between <ref> and </ref>, and place it immediately after the part of the article that the reference supports. If you use the reference more than once, name it. <ref name=Epicure>, for example, where you define it, goes before the reference instead of just <ref>. Then when you use it again, <ref name=Epicure/>. At the end of the article, == References == should be followed on the next line by {{reflist}}. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Picture cropping

I would like this picture cropped for Chandler Parsons' page. Where I can request this? --DangerousJXD (talk) 07:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello DangerousJXD. You can do it yourself. Download a copy, crop it as you see fit using any graphics program, and then upload it back to Commons, making it clear that it is a cropped derivatative version of the original image. This is basic graphics file work requiring no special expertise. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I am using a phone... Also I would have little idea how to do that anyway. –DangerousJXD (talk) 08:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

You can also use Template:Annotated image, which can crop the original picture without having to upload a new one. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Shall I just take this to the article's talk page? –DangerousJXD (talk) 01:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, DangerousJXD. To quote my god-daughter, "YouTube is your friend." I'm not sure what type of phone you have, but YouTube will show you how to crop pictures with it. For instance, if you have an Android phone here is a quick (less than a minute) instruction for how to do it using the built-in Gallery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQDaG8WbnYw Hope this helps! --Gronk Oz (talk) 07:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Picture

This picture [3] is in Gujarati Wikipedia , but I am not able to use it in English Wikipedia . You can see my edit CosmicEmperor (talk) 03:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse CosmicEmperor. No, gu:File:Chaitanya mahaprabhu.jpg is uploaded only to Gujarati Wikipedia. In order to use it, it would need to be uploaded to Commons (or English Wikipedia). And in order to upload it, it would need a licensing tag, which is absent on Gujarati Wikipedia (so the file may be in risk of deletion even there). —teb728 t c 05:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Looking further, I see that the similarly named Commons:File:Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.jpg was deleted with the summary "Copyright violation: dervative of windows wallpaper + flickr washing", but I can't see if it is the same image. —teb728 t c 07:37, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

editing articles

How can I find someone who can post changes. I am totally baffled by the various instructions and these pages which take a person in circles. I only want to edit 3 articles which have gross errors in them.76.7.176.125 (talk) 15:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Most articles are editable by anyone including you, by simply clicking the blue Edit near the top right of the page. A few articles are what we call Semi-Protected, which means you either need an account to edit them, or need to post your request on the Talk page. So you should be able to "post the changes" by using the edit button and making them yourself. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 15:19, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Article that contradicts itself

In this section Kalaroa Upazila#Education it states there are more than 12 colleges, and 8 colleges, in this geographical region of Bangladesh. It contradicts itself but I don't know how to tell which statement is right as this article's one reference does not include this.Rubbish computer (talk) 15:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, RC. You could mark the conflicting statements with {{dubious}} tags, and create a section on the Talk page to discuss the issue. Perhaps at the same time you could encourage an editor to provide a reference, using this example to illustrate why they are so important.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I will mark these statements. Rubbish computer (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Grammar title problem

I created the redirect Tourism in saint martin, intending to call it 'Tourism in Saint Martin'. Do I need to make a different redirect with the correct grammar or will this one suffice? Rubbish computer (talk) 17:53, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer, welcome to the Teahouse. It depends much upon the search term. If users are most likely to search for that page using that term/heading then creating a redirect for that specific term is important. Otherwise, not so much.--Chamith (talk) 18:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

This is kind of off-topic. But why did you redirect Tourism in saint martin to Economy of Saint Martin? Is economy of Saint Martin mainly based on Tourism? --Chamith (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Can an editor please take a look at my article?

Hi all, I created an article on the STOP Bang Questionnaire and I was wondering if someone can take a look at it and let me know how it can be improved?

Thank you! Lambbchops (talk) 15:47, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Lambbchops. I took a very quick look at your article and I think it'll probably make it into the encyclopedia but it relies very heavily on primary sources. In addition, you do have a conflict of interest because you work for this guy right? I still think you did a fine job of being objective. Your article will sail through the process if you can find tertiary and secondary sources that help to establish the notability of the wide use of this questionnaire. What would you say was your best reference? Is it in a high level journal? The preponderance of primary sources is sort of like self endorsement. Remember this is an encyclopedia article and not really a means to publicize and encourage the use of the questionnaire. It won't take much to bring it up to standard.

Bfpage |leave a message 18:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Please create an article about Magnes the shepherd.

Magnes was a Cretan shepherd in north Magnesia. It is believed that he discovered Lodestone ( and thus magnetite). Please feature it. 62.231.239.140 (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Magnes the Shepherd is mentioned in the history of geomagnetism article. I encourage you to write a draft article about this character using the Articles for Creation process. Cheers LukeSurl^{t c} 17:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Done. See Magnes the shepherd. Everyone reading this is truly welcome to add to it!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

That turned out to be a very nice article. It's nice to see how well the Teahouse can work.

Bfpage |leave a message 18:55, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Need to update a logo

Hello, I'm trying to update the logo on the Bristol Alliance of Companies page. I went through the upload process to create this file: File:BristolAllianceCompanies Logo.png

When I went to edit the page, however, I noticed the option to update a logo. I'm not sure if I should upload again. I've never done this before, so I'm unclear on next steps.

Would someone help me with this, please? CaseyWriter (talk) 18:34, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi CaseyWriter, you successfully uploaded the image File:BristolAllianceCompanies Logo.png so no need to upload again. I fixed the error in the Non-free use rationale template. I'm not really sure what you mean by "I noticed the option to update a logo" unless you just mean the "upload file" link in the left hand Tools menu? If so this is just a generic link. To update the logo on the page edit it (top right) and edit the name of the file (first line), add an Edit summary, preview if your not sure if its all ok, then "save page" when happy (this is all assuming your not using the visual editor thingy). Give it a try and any problems, just come ask. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

It worked! Thank you very much, KylieTastic CaseyWriter (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Creating a new page and proposed deletion on an old page.

I have been trying to create a page to point to or distinguish Gordon Gray, the publisher from Gordon Gray, the producer. I have added refernces but the page keeps getting declined. (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Madegray/sandbox). After receiving the decline notice for that page, I then received a proposed speedy deletion for an additional page that I used as a footnote for the new page on Gordon Gray, has been up for about two years. (Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia_Magazine) and I am not sure why or how to remedy this.Madegray (talk) 21:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Madegray hello and welcome to The Teahouse. I'm sure your article on Gordon Gray (publisher) could be improved to the point that it would be able to stay on Wikipedia. One of the problems is references. Where you use references, it is best to have them inline, meaning <ref>Source</ref> immediately after what the reference supports. You should give the source a title and wither a work (for a newspaper or book) or a publisher (for a reputable web site). Then you use {{reflist}} in the references section and that will cause your references to appear there.

One of your references is a Wikipedia article, and this is not allowed. Wikipedia is not considered reliable because anyone can edit it. The best thing to do is find the sources for the article you used as a source, and use those references for your article. And it is not the article you used as a source which was speedily deleted. It was an image.

A couple of other problems I can correct myself, if you wouldn't mind. I'll give you some other directions: Instead of a heading for "Gordon Gray", change his name on the first reference to Gordon Gray. And add blue links to terms that people might want to read more about. You use [[brackets]] for this purpose. And I'm not sure "media mogul" is a term you want to use. It sounds promotional.

Finally, with external links, the official web site may be fine. Use {{Official}} for that. For the others, I'm not sure these are allowed.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Madegray: You can remove the deletion request from Mafia Magazine as it isn't a speedy deletion tag, it is a proposed deletion tag. Anyone can removes these to prevent deletion. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 21:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I would appreciate any help you can offer and feel free to make whatever edits you are willing to help with. I will follow your advice and repair the sentences and find more references. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 22:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Necessary, or not?

Hello!

I have two questions if that ain't too much of a problem :) Firstly, I'd like to know, is it necessary to list every single person that worked on the book/publication one wants to cite or use as reference? Or is mentioning the main editor "sufficient"? My second question is, I'd like to know how, when having to cite the same source several times on a page, how to shorten in the info between the < ref> tags, so that only the authors name usually remains within the tag when quoted from the second time and on.

I focus myself namely often on fixing sister cities and cooperation agreements between international cities, and it happens often that one source will be citing the info needed for let's say, 10+ cities on the same page. This could save me some time and I think it's the way it's supposed to be eventually, no? (at least that's the assumption I got here in my short time :) )

Thanks a lot in advance! Orangesaft (talk) 18:38, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Greetings, Orangesaft and thank you for visiting the Teahouse. Here's the easy answer:WP:Citation templates. It appears to me that you have some leeway in deciding how to reference such a work. There is not one firm-solid-established-citation system on Wikipedia but you do want to make the information as accessible as possible. Best Regards,

Bfpage |leave a message 18:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Orangesaft: About the using shortening, a simple way is during the first use of a reference type <ref name=whatever>Reference goes here</ref>, and then next time it is needed type <ref name=whatever />. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 21:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Orangesaft - even traditional organizations like the Royal Astronomical Society have to shorten their lists of authors sometimes, such as the following example I came across the other day:

Bauer, A. E.; Hopkins, A. M.; and 23 authors (2013). "Galaxy And Mass Assembly (GAMA): Linking Star Formation Histories and Stellar Mass Growth". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (MNRAS). 434: 209.{{cite journal}}:  CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)

I figure if that is how they cite it themselves, it's good enough for me. --Gronk Oz (talk) 02:10, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Considered for deletion

I have received a message saying that a page is being considered for deletion due to no "no coverage in reliable third-party sources". Sources have been added when page was created. Similar sources that have been selected by similar magazines. I am not sure what other "reliable" sources would be required? Or is this a personal matter concerning Huon's sarcasm? Please let me know what other sources would be required to prove it is a printed magazine?Madegray (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

The page in question is Mafia Magazine. The sources that had been given (compare this revision) were not reliable third-party sources, but largely themselves, their publisher and their distribution company. Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspapers or reputable trade magazines discussing Mafia Magazine in some detail. For all I can tell, no such coverage exists, which means that Wikipedia should not have an article about Mafia Magazine. Mere existence is not enough; a subject must be notable for Wikipedia to write about it. Huon (talk) 00:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

This link is a reference (citation) that is not written by mafia Magazine but an independent source that was featured in Mafia Magazine. Link: http://www.prlog.org/12106591-hip-hop-fashion-designer-michael-porter-featured-in-mafia-magazine.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 00:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

PRLog is a press release distribution service. Press releases are not subject to editorial oversight and are not considered reliable sources. Huon (talk) 01:03, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to delete the page, Huon. You seem determined to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 01:07, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Madegray, Huon will not be deleting your article. An admin will do that after the deletion discussion has been open for 10 days and a consensus has been reached to delete it. It appears to be a foregone conclusion that will happen, however. I too could find nothing to indicate any notability for the publication. Perhaps it is just WP:TOOSOON. John from Idegon (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. We will withdraw our submission of Mafia Magazine and delete the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 03:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Question re: the "definition" of consensus on WP

Okay, so as well as a (very, very dead) RfC I'm involved in right now, I've been investigating the nature of RfCs and how they typically go on Wikipedia, and I'm finding myself a little confused. So an RfC's result is determined by finding consensus on a given matter, right-- but how is that achieved? How is consensus really "defined" on WP, per se?

I understand that the technical answer is that it's "mutual agreement", but I don't really get how that's achieved through RfCs since opposing opinions and disagreement are the catalyst for RfCs. Is the result determined by the way of a majority-wins situation, or the way of whichever side presents a more convincing side in the debate (since it even states in WP:CONSENSUS that it's not a voting or democracy system, I find it really odd to see RfC's counting votes or listing who is on X or Y side of the debate)-- or is it ideally supposed to cumulate in a meet-everyone-halfway, compromise-based solution where everyone is at least okay with part of the result? Does it depend on how contentious or ideologically sensitive the topic area is?

Additionally, is one's responsibility in an RfC more than just contributing their two cents-- should I work towards crafting a solution based on everyone's input as well as putting in my own? Or is that up to someone else, like an uninvolved editor? What if the topic area is noncontentious and/or not of interest to most (admittedly, I think my going to the trouble of doing an RfC over something like Alien spit was a little silly, but I just didn't know how else to keep the discussion in a constructive direction)?

I know that was a lot of me yakking about this, but I feel like it's something important to set straight in my mind. I'd appreciate input. BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 13:37, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Great question and thank you for stopping by the Teahouse, BlusterBlaster. I have to admit right from the start that if I have trouble falling asleep tonight, the discussion to which you refer is what I'm going to read to take me off to ZZZZZZZZZ land. If it were me, and I might be a little more likely to go ahead and make the edits and then see if anyone cares enough to make a reversion, but that probably is not really in the spirit of consensus building. Are all these bits and pieces important enough to all the discuss-ants to NOT come to an agreement. It seems to me that when I am involved in discussing articles for deletion the comments are short and sweet and end up getting closed by an administrator. This drawn out process is too much for me. If I were interested enough in the topic, I probably would leave the discussion and come back later (a month) to see if things had wound up. ....alien spit? Really?

Bfpage |leave a message 21:39, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

"Discuss-ants" makes me think of this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:37, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Have some more tea. I certainly don't see anything wrong with trying to come to some sort of consensus in a Request for comment. But it seems to me that a Request for comment is just that: People comment and when most folks (or some folks) have weighed in, then you yourself can decide what to do. I agree with Bfpage here that, when you have pondered all the comments, you can make your proposed edit under WP:BRD and see what happens: perhaps get into a very heavy back-and-forth about the aptness or inaptness of your said edit. But perhaps not. Anyway, Consensus is often gained through one chivalrous person just giving up with a shrug of the shoulders and walking away. GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:59, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

(Sorry for the delayed response; NS got absolutely walloped in snow and I've spent the last two days pulling my hair out about not being able to get to work...) Thanks for the answers, guys, I'll keep that counsel in mind. I'm fairly certain the editor who raised the whole Alien spit weight issue to begin with has lost interest in pressing it anyway... color me unsurprised, it's not exactly the most riveting thing to argue about. BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 12:04, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Declined article

Hi I am a first time author, but followed guidelines as i understood them and my article is being declined for formatting/layout issues.

Would you be able to help in the specifics of whats holding the article back?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Barry_Hughes

Looking forward to your response

Thanks H.Johnstone15 (talk) 11:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

First, the article apparently was meant to have headings, as it should, but the headings should be marked off with equal signs so that they are boldface. That is the most obvious layout issue. I haven't reviewed the references in detail, but I didn't see any footnotes in the article body, only a list of references at the end. When a fact is reported about the subject, it should be followed immediately by a footnote. I think that other editors may have other suggestions. The most obvious one has to do with boldface headings. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:49, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

how can I be the official member of Wiki?

how can I be the official member of Wiki? 85.154.172.215 (talk) 13:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi IP editor 85.154.172.215, their is no such thing as an official member of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is edited by everyone, within the current policies. If you want to edit articles you can, just as you added an edit here. However if you want to be a more known editor then just create an account. You may want o look at Wikipedia:Introduction and then maybe do the The Wikipedia Adventure to learn the basics]] — Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Page Name

Hi There,

I have just created a Wikipedia page.

It is my first page and is really a draft at this stage.

My name is Jack Picone. The Page is User:Jack Picone (Photographer). My question is why is 'User' before my name and how can I delete it so it just appears as Jack Picone (Photographer).

Any advice you can give me will be very much appreciated.

Best, Jack Jack Picone (Photographer) (talk) 14:47, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

There are two problems. The first, and less serious, is the one that you are asking about, which is that you entered the article in user space rather than in mainspace (article space). The more serious problem is that you tried to create an article about yourself. See the policy on autobiographies and the conflict of interest policy, and the violation of those policies is why your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

changing redirect

While editing a wikipedia article about a bishop with the surname Peterkin, I noticed that a quick search just for his last name (apparently fairly common for those of Welsh descent) always ended up in a start-class page for a 1939 film, Scrambled Eggs. After his sister was named one of the honoree women this year by the Library of Virginia, I quickly set up a page not only for her, but an additional one for the surname. Within 10 minutes of posting it (before finishing cleanup), someone patrolled it and marked it for notability. Personally, I think the redirect to the fairly unnotable cartoon character is the problem, but I don't know how to correct it.Jweaver28 (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Done - I have edited the redirect to point to Peterkin (surname), which also does have an entry for the obscure cartoon. The trick to editing a redirect is that it takes you to the target page, and you then have to click the redirect note to edit the redirect itself. See WP:Redirect for more information. As I said to another editor recently, it's easier to do it if you know how to do it than it is to explain. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Pixel gun 3d

Miterrkids (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC) I wrote an article ten minutes ago and now it is gone. Can you help?Miterrkids (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Miterrkids, your article is not gone (yet) it is here Pixel Gun 3D. However it has been flagged for speedy deletion as it looks like its just promotion, and has no references. There is a message on your talk page that points this out. You can contest the deletion, but you'll need to be quick before it is deleted. You would also need to add some good references for it to be shown to be notable and not deleted. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Regular visitor asking yet another question - sorry!

So I've been editing Newgrounds regularly since I joined, and I'm running into issues since information I need is blocked by my work's firewall, and I don't have time to edit at home-- There's benefit to be had from other hands on the article, essentially. No other regular editors frequent the article as far as I can see aside from the site's founder User:Tfulp, and I've already gauged the COI situation there on his talkpage-- he's a really beneficial and nonproblematic flavor of COI editor, and I just hope I didn't scare him off since he hasn't edited since I approached him... anyway, back to my question.

Is there a specific noticeboard I can go to in order to recruit editors for general-purpose improvement of an article, where there isn't a specific issue with the article aside from a lack of information or content to bring it up to snuff? BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 14:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @BlusterBlaster: There may be more projects out there that I don't know of, but what you describe reminded me of Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement. It's a project where editors nominate articles to be collaboratively worked on for a week, with the goal of good or featured status. Articles can be nominated here. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:40, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Article

Hello,

I'm an actor. I'm on IMDb, IMDbPro, and various other sites. My big movie will come out this year. It is Death in the Desert. I just created an account on here today. May I add an article on myself and my career?

Thanks for your help!

Timothy Skyler Dunigan (talk) 21:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Timothy Skyler Dunigan: I suggest your read WP:NOTEBLP for more on whether you are notable enough for an article. A quick Google News search pulls back nothing, and the only thing on Google is the IMDb with lots of uncredited roles (don't really count). Also I suggest reading WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY too. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 22:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Timothy Skyler Dunigan hello and welcome to The Teahouse. First of all, are you notable? That means are there reputable newspapers and journals which have written extensively about you? Second, if you are, it is not recommended that you write the article yourself. People who write about themselves have trouble with a neutral point of view. The closer you are to a subject the harder it is to write about that subject as someone would who is not connected.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I've had speaking roles and my name in the credits. I have a large newspaper article on me that just ran back in October of 2014. Timothy Skyler Dunigan (talk) 23:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Timothy Skyler Dunigan: Lots of people have small speaking roles, an even more are listed in the credits. Now this newspaper article, are we talking small town local news or something bigger? And in honest reply to your original question, yes you may add an article on yourself, but there is no guarantee it won't get deleted and it is highly likes it will at least get an AfD. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 23:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome

I am afraid you cant add by yourself,

Please read here

Aftab Banoori ^(Talk) 03:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Timothy Skyler Dunigan. The situation is not quite as clear-cut as Aftabbanoori is saying: you are not forbidden from writing an article on yourself, but you are strongly discouraged, and as other replies have indicated, you are likely to find it hard to write an article about yourself which will be acceptable.

One way to think about the issue is in terms of verifiability. All information in Wikipedia (especially on living people) is required to verifiable from reliable published sources, and most of it from sources unconnected with the subject. This means that

If a fact or claim has not been published, it may not go in the article
If it has been published only in an unreliable source such as iMDB, Wikipedia, a social media site or a blog, it may not go in the article
If it has been published only on your website, your agent's website, the website of a film you're in, or in a press release from any of these, it may possibly go in the article, but only if it is uncontroversial factual data like dates and places, not any kind of evaluative statements
If it is any kind of promotional language (eg "star", "promising", "ground-breaking", "tear-jerker", "block-buster") it may not go into the article.
If it is any kind of judgment, evaluation or conclusion, it may go into the article only if a reliable published sources has said it.
If any published reliable source has been critical of you, this should also go into the article.

Given these limitations, do you think there is enough material at present for anybody to write an article about you? And if so, do you think you can write it? --ColinFine (talk) 10:47, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Article declined for importance

Hi, I submitted a value - Maria Kong, who are an israeli dance/theatre contemporary troupe. their work is registered and of great importance to israeli cultural development, they follow punchdrunk immersive theatre etc..

how can I prove this topic is of cultural value and worth a wikipedia page?? this has been the reason for the decline, I find it hard to prove....

thanks for any help and tips.

AKastelmacher (talk) 15:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

The article Draft: Maria Kong was declined, as it says, because it does not provide information about notability of the group. That is, why do other people want to read the article? I will also comment that the article needs copy-editing, and could have been declined on that ground also. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, AKastelmacher. The issue is not "is it important", but "have several reliable publishers (such as major newspapers) already thought it worth having somebody write at length about the subject?" If you can find several reliable sources, independent of Maria Kong, who have published articles about them, then you can reference these articles, and the draft will be acceptable. If you "find it hard to prove", this suggests that they have not (yet) been written about in this way, and a Wikipedia article about them cannot be sustained. By the way: sources do not have to be in English, but they must be substantial and independent of the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 10:55, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

conflict of (dis)interest with subject of potential article

I wish to create an article about a British theatre producer. He is in A C & C Blacks 'Who's Who' so has a public profile, but I was surprised to discover that he has no entry on Wikipedia. I thought I should address that. However, he produces a theatre company of which I am a part, so I have some involvement with him. Should I proceed or am I deemed to have some conflict of (dis)interest.Imamoca (talk) 10:34, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Imamoca. If you are part of a company of which he is a producer, you do have a potential conflict of interest. That does not prevent you from writing an article on him, but you need to be careful and transparent about it. Declare your conflict of interest on your user page, use the articles for creation process (I would suggest using the article wizard, in fact) and be ready to be reviewed strictly. You first need to find independent reliable sources which talk about him at length: don't put anything in the article which you haven't found in a published source. Note that Who's Who doesn't count as a reliable independent source, since the content is self-generated. --ColinFine (talk) 11:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Lost and Don't know where to start re-writing on my draft.

So I've been trying to publish an article Draft: Hassan's Optician Co. I've been working on for at least a month and I'm stuck. I'm a novice at writing anything actually and I was hoping someone could help me out?

This article was the first optician and first official approved optician store in Kuwait just to give you an idea why I thought it should be written.

Thank you, Krystel Espiritu (talk) 05:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. I have gone ahead and cleaned and accepted your article. I am not saying it will stick, and I continue to suggest you improve it, but it can now be found at Hassan's Optician Co. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 19:03, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello @EoRdE6:,

Thank you so much for your help and I will continue working on it but could you kindly advice me on where I could improve it further from your perspective? I really appreciate it, Krystel Espiritu (talk) 06:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

@EoRdE6:Also I have a lot of hard copies of newspaper articles is there a way I can publish them online and use those links as references? If yes, could you refer me to sites where I can publish them? Because most of the newspaper websites here their archive only dates back 3 years. Krystel Espiritu (talk) 08:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Also I've been told that it is not necessary for that source to be available online. It is quite sufficient to provide the source information of the newspaper article (newspaper name, issue number, page etc.) Krystel Espiritu (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

To add to User:Krystel Espiritu, it is certainly recommended to provide an online source--this makes verification easy, and lets others improve the article if they get more information out of the source you used. If the newspaper is out of copyright, you could upload a scan to WikiSource or Wikimedia Commons and link to that in your citation. But you are free to cite offline sources so long as they are verifiable; a published newspaper that is no doubt archived somewhere (even if only on microfilm in a single Kuwaiti library) qualifies. Use sources that provide the best information for the article; that they are easy to verify is just a bonus. Knight of Truth (talk) 18:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Knight of Truth:I was actually thinking of using WikiSource & Wikimedia Commons for a certain document I have, it's the first license given to Hassan's by the Kuwaiti Department of health. I believe the documents according to copyright territory qualifies as pd-old or even pd-scan since they're over 7 decades old. This document even states that they are the first optician store, it even has the date, the people involved and even where it's from. Could I use this? and again Thank you, Krystel Espiritu (talk) 06:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Krystel Espiritu. The trouble with uploading unpublished documents and then using them as references is that there's no provenance: to put it bluntly, nobody can tell whether they are genuine. (I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the certificate you have; but the point of references in Wikipedia is to establish verifiable facts, and in these days of photoshop it is unfortunately easy to falsify documents). --ColinFine (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

How should I upload screenshots?

What category do screenshots go in? I have a cropped screenshot of formatted code that I want to upload, but I don't want to be blocked from editing! I understand that Wikipedia isn't a cloud storage service, and strongly believe that this file can be used in an article. IndiePhunq (talk) 21:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi IndiePhunq if they are images of formatted code then you should not have any copyright issues, and as long as they are intended for use in articles then no one should accuse you of using Wikipedia as cloud storage. However normally for code you would not use images, but use syntax highlighting as you have done on your user page. Maybe look at Extension:SyntaxHighlight GeSHi as well. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:04, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

User Page design

Is it compulsory for experienced Users/Adiminstrators/Check Users to design their User Page . How do they create a Unique design with animations and graphics.CosmicEmperor (talk) 14:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi CosmicEmperor no its certainly not compulsory to have a user page. If you look on Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits you'll find half a dozen in the top 1000 without user pages at all (red), and others with not much on them. As for the how do make one, the best way is to look at other peoples and copy bits and ideas you like. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Is there a way to cite video games as a reference?

As comic books and films are able to be cited; can video games? There is an approximate time that events occur in video games, or chapter titles; however the medium is obviously worth academic discussion and citation. Bullets and Bracelets (talk) 15:38, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Bullets and Bracelets. I don't see why they shouldn't be; but I cannot think of a circumstance in which one would be a secondary source, so the restrictions on primary sources would apply. --ColinFine (talk) 16:37, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Describing the plot summary of a game typically does not require a reference at all. --Jakob (talk) 16:50, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bullets and Bracelets: You can definitely cite video games themselves for sources, such as for plot elements. Care should be taken, however, that no original research is performed. As mentioned above, secondary sources are also preferred and should be used when available. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Video_games describes citing video games for video game articles; you can also use Template:Cite video game when citing video games. For an example of a video game being cited, check out the plot section for Luigi's Mansion. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the template; I asked that citations for video games be illustrated on the page for citing sources. On a side note, do MLA APA or Chicago have in house ways to cite video games? Bullets and Bracelets (talk) 19:57, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bullets and Bracelets: No problem! I'm only a bit familiar with MLA, and I don't have the official book or anything to check, but I believe both either include instructions for citing video games, or can be easily adapted for them. A quick Google search brought up this guide for MLA, and this suggestion for Chicago. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

How do you change a page's title?

I think this page Danny king-bisungu has a grammatical error in its name. This is written as 'King-Bisungu' throughout the article. Rubbish computer (talk) 19:40, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Rubbish computer. We change titles using the "move" function, which is explained at WP:MOVE. To do so, use of a registered account at least four days old with at least ten edits is required. We call such accounts "autoconfirmed". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:19, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for welcoming me back and for explaining this. I don't know if it is you who has moved the page but thank you to whoever has done. Rubbish computer (talk) 20:29, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Using other biographies as sources

Hi I am new and have read through WP:BLP but I don't come across something where it states Wikipedia is not allowed to use biographies from reliable sources? I want to make a draft for a BLP but I need clarity on whether I can use biographies from the likes of Billboard (magazine) and Contactmusic.com on a Wiki biography? Thanks. Slay A Bit (talk) 15:26, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Slay A Bit. Billboard is definitely a reliable source, and I will look into the other one. Every citation must be evaluated in context, so Billboard in general is reliable for information about entertainers. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:23, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Contactmusic.com has professional staff and so is probably reliable in most cases. We are looking for sources with professional editorial control, and a reputation for accuracy in its field and correcting errors. We want to stay away from publications that push rumors and sensationalistic speculation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:28, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much Cullen328. Slay A Bit (talk) 20:45, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 321

user contributions

user contributions

user contributions

user contributions

user contributions

Top icon problem

should i inform author?

2 same articles...

Looking for a more detailed explanation regarding my article being declined

Policy regarding behaviour in arbitration fora

How to find a previous post

Looking for help with "formal tone"

Picture cropping

Picture

editing articles

Article that contradicts itself

Grammar title problem

Can an editor please take a look at my article?

Please create an article about Magnes the shepherd.

Need to update a logo

Creating a new page and proposed deletion on an old page.

Necessary, or not?

Considered for deletion

Question re: the "definition" of consensus on WP

Declined article

how can I be the official member of Wiki?

Page Name

changing redirect

Pixel gun 3d

Regular visitor asking yet another question - sorry!

Article

Article declined for importance

conflict of (dis)interest with subject of potential article

Lost and Don't know where to start re-writing on my draft.

How should I upload screenshots?

User Page design

Is there a way to cite video games as a reference?

How do you change a page's title?

Using other biographies as sources