Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 49

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 45

←

Archive 47

→

Incorrect Photo needs deleting...

Can you point me to a place where I can learn how to delete a photo of someone (not living) that is incorrect on the wikipedia page? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.34.191 (talk) 18:16, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and the Teahouse! Could you please provide us with some more information about the article and photo in question? Preferably, you can post links to the article by using [[(article name)]] and to the file by using [[File:(name)]] or just copy the http:// link here surrounded by [ and ]. If you provide this, I can go take a look for you and see what I can do about it. Also, do you have another image in mind that you would like it to be replaced with? If so, I'd need some more information about this image before I could add it. Thanks! gwickwire | Leave a message 16:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Trying to find Abilene Reporter Newspaper Obituaries March 15, 1971 Abilene, Tx 79601

Hello, I am trying to find the Obituaries Abilene, Texas from Abilene Reporter Newspaper dated March 15th, 1971 Tona Worthington Age 10 years oldCathy Simmons (talk) 08:11, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Cathy, and welcome to the teahouse! There's a website called the newspaperarchive that has scanned in the Abilene newpaper from that day. It's a pay site; if that's a problem you might want to drop by the wikipedia resource exchange and see if someone has a subscription or lives in the area and can drop in at the library for you. Good luck! Garamond Lethe 10:17, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

talk pages

How do I talk on talk pages?DeeElf (talk) 07:28, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse, DeeElf! That's a great question. I'll divide my answer up into several parts: finding the talk page, opening the editor, a few editing conventions, and two really important things to remember.

At the top left corner of your browser window you should see two tabs. One will be labelled "Project page" or "Article" or "Template" depending on the content of that wikipedia page. In these cases (and most other cases) there will be a second tab labelled "Talk". If you click on that you'll be taken to the talk page of the item you were looking at.
Once you're at the talk page you have the ability to contribute to the conversation. Talk pages are divided into sections and at the right of each section is a link labelled "edit": click that to edit just that section (that's probably what you'll want to do most of the time). If you want to start a new section &mdash if you have a new question or would like to raise a new topic — then click on the "New section" link in the group of tabs at the top right of your browser window. If you want to be able to edit anywhere in the talk page at once, there's an "Edit" link in the same group of tabs that will give you that ability.
At this point you should have a text editor on your screen with the text and markup of the existing comments. Here are a few conventions to get you started.

If you're replying to someone, you should generally reply underneath what they said and indent your text one level deeper than theirs. To indent, use one or more colons (":") at the beginning of your paragraph and just keep typing — no need to hit return to make a new line.

This line is indented with three colons (":::"),

This one with four ("::::").

And this one with five (":::::").

When the comment nesting starts to get unreadable you can "outdent" using the outdent template {{od}}.

If you want to create a link to a wikipedia page, use double square brackets: [[Elf]] turns into Elf and [[User:Garamond Lethe|Garamond Lethe]] turns into Garamond Lethe. Links outside of wikipedia just take a single square bracket: [http://www.nytimes.com New York Times] turns into New York Times.
When you're done with your comment there are three final things to do before hitting the "Save page" button at the bottom of the page. First, remember to sign your comment: just type in ~~~~. (There's also a button at the top of the edit box that will do this for you.) Second, take advantage of the "Show preview" button. Finally, fill in the "Edit summary" box just underneath the edit window.

The above should take care of 98% of your editing. There's a much more complete writeup at WP:Talk and WP:Edit, but they're probably best read after you've made a few dozen edits. If there was some aspect of editing talk pages that you needed that I didn't cover, go ahead and edit this page and let me know and either I or somebody else will help.

Have fun!

Garamond Lethe 17:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Editing- correct publisher

While I am editing, which publisher would be correct to use for a url address, the copyright publishing co. or the actual url address co.? Rubycrystal (talk) 19:44, 12 October 2012 (UTC)RubycrystalRubycrystal (talk) 19:44, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Rubycrystal, can you give us an example? MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:57, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for responding. I believe that I figured it out. However, here is an example: http://www.computerweekly.com/news/1280091610/Amazon-UK-business-founder-backs-Shutl-online-delivery-service TechTarget is the copyright publisher |ComputerWeekly is the url address that published the article, Amazon UK business founder backs Shutl online delivery service. I assumed the correct publisher was ComputerWeekly but questioned after. Which publisher is correct?

Thank you, Rubycrystal (talk) 14:37, 14 October 2012 (UTC)Rubycrystal

How should one deal with original research being readded into an article?

I removed an entire section of original research in the fork bomb article a while ago, in line with what I read at Wikipedia:No original research. Today that same content was readded verbatim with no change in the lack of references. I have left a message for the user, but assuming that they do not engage me, how should one best deal with this situation? — cdwn 21:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi cdwn, and welcome to the Teahouse! Looking at the two links (Thanks for providing them!), it seems like some editors just feel you removed too much information at one time. I would suggest going to the talk page and posting there about the issues you have with the section in question. There, other editors and yourself can talk about what needs to be done, before people just start doing things. If you need any more help, don't hesitate to ask me! gwickwire | Leave a message 21:33, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I already posted about this on the talk page prior to the removal, and have not since received any response from any other editor. I'm confused about your suggestion, is talk page discussion able to override site-wide policy? If not, why should one wait for discussion to remove prohibited content; surely if this is a problem the discussion should revolve around the policy and not the article? Thanks. — cdwn 21:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

That's a hard question to answer. The short answer is that if editors come to a consensus on doing something that violates a Wikipedia Policy, then it's acceptable for the editors to ignore all rules for that instance. However, you only waited a day before acting on the article. Most times, it's polite to give other editors at least 7 days, or one week, to respond to your message. If nobody responds, however, don't take it as an "Okay" for your request. I personally think that on this page, it would be best to post another message at the bottom of the page, with something like: "I'd like to see if anyone has a citation for 'x', and if not, I would like to know if anyone would accept a removal under [[WP:OR]] (I used <nowiki> tags here to make that show up so you could copy if you wanted), which states that we don't allow original, uncited, research in articles." Then give people time to respond before acting again. And you are right about removing policy violations, however, after one revertion, we usually go to determine a consensus, to avoid edit wars. In other words, if you remove it, and another editor adds it back, then find a consensus first. That consensus can be anything, such as remove the material, edit it, add more, find citations, etc. Once again, if you have another question, feel free to ask! gwickwire | Leave a message 22:02, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

If one has to ask for acceptance as a prerequisite before performing actions that are in line with policy, then what is the point of having policy at all? I'm also slightly bemused that it is considered a requirement for me to seek engagement for that purpose, but there has been no mention of the same terms applying to the person readding the content that violates policy. I'll post again on the talk page, but what should I do if nobody engages, and thus no consensus is reached? — cdwn 22:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

As it stands it's not necessarily against any policy. As gwickwire suggests it could be that all the problem is, is that he material is uncited and isn't necessarily original research. The suggestion that you post again to the talk page is about as good as it gets with the lowest risk of hitting an edit war. NtheP (talk) 22:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I came up with nothing on a fairly extensive search for references about any defusal technique. You could be right, though, but as far as I have read, unreferenced content should also be removed. — cdwn 22:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I'm sorry, I wasn't completely clear. What you did was fine. You did not have to ask for acceptance the first time. However, if someone reverts it, you should ask first, otherwise you will get into an edit war, and possibly violate the 3 revert rule. It isn't a requirement for anyone to ask anyone anything before doing anything. If nobody engages, and therefore, no consensus is reached, post on my talk page in one week, and I will take a look at it and do what I can. I'm real sorry that this has become as much as an issue as it has, and I thank you for bearing with us here. Some people just leave after something like this. Another source you may want to look at is seeing if the page is under any WikiProjects (by going to the top of its talk page) and commenting in those WikiProjects to notify them. If you need more help, ask! gwickwire | Leave a message 22:28, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

No need to apologise, I'm just not yet fully understanding in what manner policy is applied. I'll do as suggested; thanks for the help! :-) — cdwn 22:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, that's done. — cdwn 23:06, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay! If nobody responds within a week, go ahead and send me a reminder on my talk page. I'll watch the page as well, so I can help you with the discussion if you need it. gwickwire | Leave a message 23:28, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

How do you remove banner asking for citations from reliable and independent sources once you add them?

I recently edited and added citations to an article that had this banner at the top:

This article relies on references to primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject. Please add citations from reliable and independent sources. (July 2012)

Now that I fulfilled the request, is there a way to take it off?

Thanks very much.

Misssarta (talk) 18:50, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Which article is it? If you click edit on the whole page at the top it will have something like {{primarysources}} . Just delete that bit.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 18:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the quick reply, it's on journalist Chuck Philips. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misssarta (talk • contribs) 19:40, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

How to delete a page that is redundant of another?

I work for EFILM and need to delete the EFILM page as the EFILM Digital Laboratories page has the correct and most current information. I created the EFILM page by mistake after not realizing a previous page had been created. This is an urgent issue as we are getting ready to launch a new website and all info needs to be correct. Thank you. Bydeluxe (talk) 17:37, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Bydeluxe, welcome to The Teahouse. Most editors cannot delete articles. This is left up to an administrator. I see that there are speedy deletion tags on the page; these will be reviewed by an administrator within the next day. Before I answer your question, I have a few concerns about what you are requesting. First, you said that you work for the company. Generally speaking, you should avoid creating articles about companies for which you are working because you have a conflict of interest and it is generally difficult to write the article from a neutral standpoint. Secondly, neither the company nor you has absolute authority over what the "correct" page on Wikipedia should be, as neither editors nor their subjects own articles here, and so the interests of your company are secondary to the goals of Wikipedia. However, if the name of the company has indeed officially changed, the article's title can likely be changed as well. So far, the current website uses the name EFILM, so it will likely stay that way until other evidence has arisen. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:49, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Also, it sounds like a merge proposal was made for contents to be moved into EFILM, which I think makes the most sense given the circumstances. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:51, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi Jethrobot, thank you for your time and info. I would like to merge the pages under the name EFILM Digital Laboratories. How can this be done? Also, when merging the pages, which article content takes the cake? Bydeluxe (talk) 18:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Bydeluxe: the older article should take precedence, so here's what I'd do:

Open the older of the two for editing, make any needed modifications including pasting in content from the newer, and leave a clear WP:Edit summary indicating that you're pasting in content from the newer, redudant version you created.
Once you have everything you need from the newer version duplicated in the older version, go to the newer and request speedy deletion as a duplicate article, adding mention that you've successfully merged content into the older article. Once the new article is deleted, its space will be empty, and you'll be able to move the old article to the new title.

That said, both versions have significant issues in that they're written as advertising and don't meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If having a good-looking and credible wiki page is important to y'all during whatever business changes you're making, I strongly advise you get the page right with Wiki guidelines. A page covered in tags or clearly "cheating" the advertising rules just looks sketchy. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Deleting of Drew Bontadelli

I just received a message about Drew Bontadelli being deleted . What can I do to prevent an article from being deleted? How can I add a reference or source to it? User:Ashbeckjonathan Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 13:03, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ashbeckjonathan, welcome to the Teahouse. In purely technical terms, you can prevent the article from being deleted by removing the text

{{Proposed deletion/dated |concern = No references outside of companies/teams he worked for. Needs to have independent, reliable references |timestamp = 20121016014343 }}

from the top of the page in Edit mode; however, this doesn't deal with the root cause of the problem and a number of other deletion processes exist for the article. The main issue is that there is no suggestion in the article that Bontadelli meets the basic guidelines for inclusion. To show that he does, you need to demonstrate that reliable, independent sources (such as newspapers, books or magazines) have written about him - note that they must be independent, so his employer's website or his own broadcasts are not sufficient.

Once you've found such sources, you can include them in the article as follows: find a fact in the text which is supported by the source, put the source (ideally with a link) right after that fact, then put the markup tags <ref> and </ref> on either side of it. Thus, if you find a newspaper article that says, "Bontadelli, who graduated from Cal Poly...", you would incorporate it into the article like this:

Bontadelli is a graduate of [[Cal Poly]].<ref>"Sports Announcer Eats Hat", Pentunket Observer, March 28 2011, page 20</ref>

or something similar. More information is available at Help:References. Hope this helps, Yunshui 雲‍水 13:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I need help to upload a picture on a page about my newly released book my friends made

this is the link can someone please help? The Price for Peace by Brayden Summerfield

BraydenBrayden Summerfield (talk) 09:30, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Your account will need to be 4 days old with 10 edits to be able to upload pictures. That apart the article is likely to be deleted as being about a non-notable self-published book.--Charles (talk) 12:36, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Okeh, that applies for now to this specific item, but how about adding how pictures are uploaded in general. Also, how do we get pictures from Wiks in other languages. There are a lot articles in the German and Spanish Wiks that have pictures that would enhance the quality of the English Wik. Kdammers (talk) 04:10, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

where to go?

where to go to tell everyone that the first sentence should be good -- Talk:Differential equation#very important example of what is good -- too many garbage articles on wikipedia AND they dont let you make them better, which, obviously is funny Coginsys (talk) 08:02, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

if you dont reply with something directly and definitely helpful like in my last request on here then ill just ignore youCoginsys (talk)

Hi. Per I Jethrobot's note on your talk page, you might want to consider rewording this request in order not to discourage people from helping. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 10:23, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Car insur

'hi not sure if I'mdeion this rite if not let me know Firstly thang for providing this incredible service... I am stuck once again battling my insurance company over a payment... I hav a vehicle which I'm sure is not in any conditionto concider fixing, how ever the company in question is trying to repair it, not only that they dnt want to do it them selves they have given me the car bak and said to fix it my self and they will pay?????WTF The car was purchased for 7.5k 1month ago and repairs r in access of 6k. I believe I am intitled to the 11k agreed insurance value but obviously hav no chance or ability of gettin a straight answer out of them with all the shit they talk. Can anyone addvise best course of action or path I should walk to get to where I need so badly to be???? Many thanks u new best Allie ;) ' (101.119.15.185 (talk) 05:37, 16 October 2012 (UTC))

Hi. You could try the reference desk, but I'm afraid that this may not be a question we can help you with. All the best. -- Trevj (talk) 10:32, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Article on Spaniel

Hi, First thing this morning I noticed that an IP had changed the Spaniel article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaniel) so throughout the article 'Spaniel' read as 'Spaniard'. I reverted this. Someone has now undone my reversion. Maybe I'm reading this totally wrongly but I don't want to revert it again. Would it be possible for someone here to have a look at it to make sure I'm not just having a completely senile moment? Sagaciousphil (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Someone seems to have sorted it in the time it's taken me to type the question! Sagaciousphil (talk) 15:23, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Ha! funny how fast things can work around here, right? It looks like a new editor was reverting the edit, go figure. Thanks for letting us know though, and you were in the right to revert it the first time :) Great job! SarahStierch (talk) 17:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Sagaciousphil. Good catch. In the case of unambiguous vandalism like that you are welcome to revert as many times as necessary to protect Wikipedia. The usual two reverts per day limit does not apply to vandalism.--Charles (talk) 18:36, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Using previously written information (I represent the copyright holder)

Hello - I am the webmaster for a charitable trust and some time ago I prepared an article for Wikipedia using information from one of the trusts webpages but it was rejected because the work was copyright. The article concerned the history of the oldest surviving motor lifeboat (James Stevens No.14). As the Trust is the owner of the article why can I not post the same article on Wikipedia. After all the history is what it is and it has all been researched and verified. Please clarify and suggest a way round the problem. Many Thanks Trevor.Bright (talk) 07:54, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Trevor, and welcome to the Teahouse. The main problem with adding copyrighted material to Wikipedia is that Wikipedia's own copyright licence allows free reuse (including commerical reuse) and alteration of all Wikipedia material. As a result, any material added to Wikipedia must be available under the same licensing terms, since it may be reused and altered at any time. Assuming that the Trust is happy for its text to be treated in this manner, they can release it under a CC-BY-SA licence and it can be used in Wikipedia. A release to this effect will need to be posted on the Trust's webpage. Note that the text cannot be released for use only on Wikipedia; it must be made freely available to anyone who wishes to use it.

There is more information on this at Donating copyrighted materials; it would be a good idea for you to read this page before proceeding. It's also worth noting that if the text has an unencyclopedic or promotional tone (I haven't checked) then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia anyway. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC) Having checked the deleted article, the tone looks fine, so just ignore that last sentence. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks. I understand now. Trevor.Bright (talk) 08:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Friendly Editing question

How do you like editing? Is it easy? It's very fun for me. How about you? Is it fun? Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 20:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi again! It's not always easy, but I find it very fun! I actually didn't do much real content work up until a few months ago; I kinda regret that decision because, although it doesn't come entirely naturally to me, it's a lot more fun than I expected it to be. Challenging, but where's the fun in everything being easy? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey Ashbeckjonathan! Editing is actually quite fun and entertaining because once you save the edit, the whole world can see it. -- Luke (Talk) 22:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ashbeckjonathan! Generally I really enjoy editing, but it depends a bit on what I'm working on. My best every experience was working on the Shrine of Remembrance, because I had that wonderful experience of working in sync with other contributers. :) No arguments or disputes - just a random group of people all trying to make a great article. It was easy to do, very supportive, and very fun. At other times when we're worried about presenting something correctly, but where there is a strong disagreement as to what that means, it can be less fun - but even then I enjoy knowing that I'm inolved in the project. :) - Bilby (talk) 00:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, I'll echo what Writ Keeper, LuK3, and Bilby said, I find editing Wikipedia to be fun. It is challenging, but I enjoy problem solving and Wikipedia gives me an outlet to do that. It is rewarding for me seeing an article go from a one liner stub, up to a good-article, or seeing a brand new editor who has no clue blossom into one of the most respected editors around. I find it fun, challenging, and rewarding. Go Phightins! 01:30, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Posting article

Thanks to a lot of folks who have been giving me pointers, especially Matthew V. How do I know the article is ready for release? Many thanks and looking forward to start another one. :-) CHHistory (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Article here: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Luo Xian Xiang

Hi there. You just need to add a template at the top to submit it. {{AFC submission}} is the template. There is a backlog at the moment, so it may take some time (I'm not sure how long). I have mad a few tiny style changes, and I would suggest that you remove some of the Chinese from the "additional references" and format them as bulleted hyperlinks (I have done the bottom few to show how - you don't need to have all the text in the [], generally the titel of the page). Some of these links might be more appropriate in an External links section. Sources that are in Chinese should be marked either "(Chinese)" or with {{Zh icon}} which shows as (in Chinese). Rich Farmbrough, 01:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC).
S

~~:Well, the article is now in mainspace, meaning a reviewer at AFC has accepted the submission. Keep up the good work! Go Phightins! 01:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)~~

My apologies, I misread that. There is a significant backlog of submissions awaiting review at AFC (that's another area I work in), so it may take some time, but the article looks good and will likely be accepted. Nice job! Go Phightins! 01:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Looking for guidance on my first time article.

I seem to keep getting hit by the reference gods. I've included several outside sources. It is about a podcast that has been going for 5 years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/WDWNewsToday

Thanks. Ericxedge (talk) 20:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Eric, thanks for stopping by the Teahouse. Looking at the article it has so far been declined three times on not establishing the notability of the podcast. You do have plenty of references but the problem is that most of them are related to the subject being mostly from other Disney sites. Your best bet is to find references from sites that are nothing to do with the Disney organisation in any shape or form.

Not directly related to the notability but looking at the content, I see that a lot of the episode guides are written in the first person, for example, "On this weeks show, we begin . . ." (my emphasis). Are you quoting the podcast summary in which case there are potential copyright issues are are you in some way connected with the podcast where you might have a conflict of interest. The summaries should be written in a neutral fashion, ideally in the third person. I'm sorry if this is coming over as bad news, especially when you have obviously put a lot of work into the article so far, but I'm afraid at the moment it isn't meeting some of the kjey principles of Wikipedia. NtheP (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'm just a fan of the podcast. In order to complete the task quickly I did just cut and paste their show notes. I'll work on correcting that. Looking for clarification on ... "Your best bet is to find references from sites that are nothing to do with the Disney organisation in any shape or form." ... As finding references to the podcast but from a non-dinsey website?... Or things documented in the wiki referencing back to non-disney sites... or should my references not include the actual podcast's website?... Also, I am making the podcast notability or the wiki? Ericxedge (talk) 12:05, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Eric, it's references about the podcast that are from non-Disney sites that are needed to establish that it is a notable subject and merits an item on Wikipedia. NtheP (talk) 08:26, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Further Assistance

I was given tremendous assistance getting my first article created by the generous folks here, but I now require further assistance with other matters. I wondered if there was a more efficient way to pose questions or ask a specific group of people for direct answers/advice. Now that I'm here I'm noticing things I can do to improve particular articles as well as the one I originally created. I don't want to do anything without the feedback from a professional or someone who is experienced. I suppose I'm asking if there is a mentor program or something of the like. Many thanks in advanceCcard12 (talk) 23:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

If you are specifically looking for a mentor program, there's always the Adopt-a-User program. If you're just looking for someone to help you get the ropes, you can go there. If you pretty much know what you want to do already, and just suspect that you'll have questions every once in a while, you can feel free to post them here! gwickwire | Leave a message 23:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, Ccard, thanks for stopping back by again. This desk is always available for any other help you may need, so if you have any specific questions or need any specific guidance, here is as good of a place as any to ask. You could also ask at the Wikipedia:Help desk, which gets more traffic than this desk does, though you'll find that the ethos is a bit more hurried there than here. Whatever you choose, always remember to be bold! You can't break anything, and as long as you are trying in earnest to improve all the time, no one can ask anymore than that. Good luck, and if there's anything at all you need help with, always feel free to ask! --Jayron32 04:43, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. But that's just it. It feels bothersome and not everything I'd like to do or get answers on will be solved here. I cant ask this of you. I have too many queries and its so public. I could attend a seminar on this and still not feel right. I can correct a spelling mistake, but how do you link articles to one another when they are orphans, how do you know how to add images and additional content to the side bar so that articles are more complete? Everyone said paying people here is wrong but maybe it isn't because I'm lost. I appreciate the help very much. Ccard12 (talk) 05:24, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey Ccard12. Don't worry about asking questions-- we like receiving them, honest. I think a good place to start with those kinds of questions is this primer here, which covers a lot of stuff about article creation you might find useful. Also, to link to your articles, you just need to find places in other Wikipedia articles where that article might be relevant. Then, you just add brackets around the term like this: [[ ]] which has the effect of this for say, Pink Floyd: Pink Floyd. The stuff in the sidebar is discussed in some detail at this page on infoboxes (if I understood what you meant by "sidebar"). Also, about paying us, we're all volunteers here and enjoy giving our time in this way without expectation of compensation. Helping others carries a certain kind of satisfaction for the vast majority of us here. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 05:32, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Why there are two mothers?

I'd like to know why in the article about king Philip V of Macedon there are given 2 names for his mother: Chryseis and Pithia (in the box) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_V_of_Macedon

Because I'm not sure 100% about neither of them in order to edit myself, and only one being "the right one" ;) please let someone more experienced go check an choose one.

Thank You! Saxafrax (talk) 18:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Saxafrax, welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at the references and other articles, I'd go with Chryseis being his mother (Phthia being one of his father's other wives) but I'm not an expert in ancient Greek history. I'd suggest you raise your question at either Talk:Philip V of Macedon or one of the WikiProjects listed on that talk page. NtheP (talk) 19:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Saxafrax! I would add another possible place to ask is at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. Rich Farmbrough, 01:54, 19 October 2012 (UTC).

Papillon (dog)

Hi, Sorry to trouble you again so soon! Someone made three changes to the Papillon [1] page this morning; not exactly vandalism (?) but perhaps more kindly described as inappropriate? Looks like an IP has since tried to rectify some of the changes but not managed it very well. Is it possible to revert more than one amendment in one go, or does it have to be done as three (possibly four) reverts? Hopefully, like yesterday, someone may already have sorted it before I finish typing! Sagaciousphil (talk) 14:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Phil, it is possible to make undo multiple edits in one go but it depends on what the interactions between the various edits are (there are full details at WP:UNDO if you want all the technical details). There is though another option available called Reverting which allows editors to take an article back to an earlier version. Here I have used the reversion facility to go back to a version prior to the unhelpful edits. NtheP (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!

I'm trying to pick up as much as I can as I go along - I'll try to get better, I promise; I just get confused easily

Sagaciousphil (talk) 16:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Undoing redirects

Gosh, I guess I should know by know, but I don't. Sigh. How do you? Sincerely, His Excellency's Jester Bonkers The Clown (talk) 11:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Bonkers, hi and welcome. A page that is simply a redirect can be edited like any other page if the redirection is not longer applicable, for example if page A is a sub topic of article B and A redirects to B, but A is now being expanded into a full article of it's own then removing the redirect is fine. Looking at your contribution history I wonder if you actually mean how do you undo a move? This can be done as long as the redirect hasn't been edited. So for example if Page C was moved to Page D; and C is now just a redirect to D; then you can move D back to C as long as C hasn't been edited in intervening period. If C has been edited has then only an administrator can make the move and you would need to file a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves for this to happen. NtheP (talk) 11:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't know about the option to move back if the redirect is unedited. For non-controversial (e.g. policy-based) moves, there's no need to make a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves - just place {{Db-move}} to alert an admin to have look and perform the move.-- Trevj (talk) 12:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Coordinates

Hi. I am wanting to add coordinates to articles near my area, but I'm a bit unsure about how precise I should make them. I've read Wikipedia:Geo#Precision, but I'm still kind of confused. I'm also wondering if there is a preferred method for imputing them, like minutes and seconds, or decimals. I don't want to do it wrong and then have to do it over, so any other things I should know about adding coordinates would be helpful. Thanks. qwekiop147 --> user, talk 05:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Qwekiop147! Here are some answers (I tried to answer them in order):

The precision of the location can depend on what type of object it is (city, landmark, etc.).
There is no preferred method – you can use whatever you want since they all show up the same (if you are using the {{coord}} template).
There is a slight difference in the appearance depending if a coordinate is for the whole article or if it is within the article (inline).

Could you please give us some specific examples?

Also, ***contributions looked at*** you seem to be doing well with the coordinates you have been adding recently. Keep up the good work!

–– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 05:52, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Forgot to mention: the documentation for Template:Coord also has some good information about coordinates. –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for answering my questions! The coordinates that I'm most confused about are provincial electoral districts like Brandon East, Fort Rouge (electoral district), and Minnedosa (electoral district). --qwekiop147 --> user, talk 21:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Those are electoral districts, so I don't think they need to be too precise – maybe three decimal points (.000)? –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense. Thank you for all your help! --qwekiop147 --> user, talk 23:05, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

A related question...how do you get coordinates off of online mapping programs such as Google Maps, Bing Maps, or Yahoo maps? Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

For Google Maps, right click where you want the coordinates to point to and then click "What's Here". The coordinates for that spot will appear in the search. --qwekiop147 --> user, talk 21:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It's generally best to input coordinates in the same format as the source. The only exception I would make is where the source has obviously converted from one format to another (lots of decimal coords ending in 6666666 is a clue, for example) where I would convert them back. The reason is that the original coords are usually implicitly stating their own accuracy. So 60 degrees 37 minutes is clearly accurate to about a minute - a sixtieth of a degree, whereas 60.6167 (or 60.616667, etc) seems accurate to a thousandth of a degree. Conversely 4.23 degrees converts to 4 degrees 13 minutes 48 seconds, the first gives the impression of accuracy to 1/100 of a degree, the second a misleading impression of 1/3600.

All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 04:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC).

Uploading Audio Media

I love the little boxes within articles that have playable audio files ... when I went to research "how-to" via Wikipedia, it was just like all the rest ... impossible to follow, and even harder to understand ... does anyone have any experience in this to quickly and easily explain "how" one might go about creating an audio file for an article? (Please do not just post a link for templates) Thanks in advance! Impromp2Music (talk) 16:39, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Improp2Music, hi and welcome. Uploading audio files follows the same guidance as uploading image files.

Go to Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, and find the file you want to upload. The preferred format is Ogg Vorbis but midi files are also acceptable.
Enter a useful descriptive name for the file and a description of the contents.
Step 3 is probably the hardest, and that is establishing that the audio you are uploading has the relevant permission. Ideally it's a free to use file meaning that it's either copyright free or there is express permission given by the copyright owner for the file to be used. The other alternative is that it qualifies as Non-free content

That's really all there is to it. Most problems are because files used are not copyright free. NtheP (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Impromp2Music! Here are some simple steps:

First, you must upload the file by clicking on the "Upload file" link on the left column under "Toolbox". The wizard is pretty self-explanatory, but if you need any assistance, feel free to ask.
The next step is to add the Template:Listen template to the article with the following code:

{{listen |filename=FILENAME.ogg |title=TITLE |description=DESCRIPTION |pos=left_or_right}}

Here are the parameters to fill in:

Parameter	Description
filename	Required: The name of the (audio) file you uploaded
title	Required: The title of the audio – no quotation marks or wikilinks, please
description	Optional: A description of the audio file
pos	Optional: The position of the box – either "left" or "right"

If you have any further questions, just ask! –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

'DOI' problem

First, let me admit to being an imposter (I'm not really a "new editor"). If you could refer me to the proper forum, that would be okay. ;) The 'DOI' problem is documented in a reasonably logical sequence in this talk section:Talk:Zhongfeng_Mingben#DOI - And my question is simply, am I doing something wrong? -or is it a problem with the DOI site? -with the document in question? -or a WP:DOI cite-bot problem? -planetary alignment? -wrong shoes? -maybe I need to take a shower? ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 16:32, 19 October 2012 (UTC) 74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Eric, hi and welcome. I think if anything it's a problem with the DOI site and 10.1513 not being acknowledged by that site. You can submit a missing DOI report at the site http://dx.doi.org/. NtheP (talk) 21:38, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - error reported. I knew it wasn't me! ;) Maybe I should take a shower anyway ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 22:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

how to remove "additional citations for verification" clause from page

hello everyone, about 5 months ago i created this page: Stav Shaffir, and the admin who authorized it (Sarah Stierch) added that clause to it at some point (i think). i asked around what needed to be done for its removal and i have since provided ample references to everything stated there. so - i was wondering, what else needs to be done? and if its good now, who do i ask to remove it? incidentally, sarah's page says she is on vacation which is why i'm posting the question here. thanks in advance!! Idoshlomo (talk) 15:16, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Idoshlomo, thanks for coming to The Teahouse. If you feel like you've addressed the issue, you yourself are free to remove the tag at anytime. Judging from my own look at your page, it looks like you've done an excellent job of sourcing the content in your article, though I notice the "Early Life" section has no references. Sometimes, these sections are not exactly the main focus of the article, and so you might want to find some references for it if you are able to. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 15:33, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Greetings, Idoshlomo! Congratulations on adding so many great sources to the article. My quick skim shows that nearly all content seems to be substantiated with reliable sources, so terrific effort in that respect. In general, once you feel you've addressed the maintenance tag, you may simply remove it. I have removed it from this article. Thanks for your hard work. Go Phightins! 15:33, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

hey guys - thanks very much for your support and for removing the tag, i had no idea i could do it myself :)

i'll keep looking for more sources, especially for that first section. thanks again!! Idoshlomo (talk) 23:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Making a Map

Hello,

I am still learning new things on wikipedia. I love geography and many of my articles deal with that subject. I like using maps and using maps already created on wikipedia. As I look at many articles I notice maps with highlighted areas, counties of states, states or regions of countries. My question is, lets say I want to highlight many areas of a state or certain spots on a map. Do I need to create a map of my own? How is this done?

Thanks for your help and advise Brybry1999 (talk) 22:23, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! This is uncharted territory (no pun intended) for me...I would suggest downloading a map from the Commons and then highlighting using Paint or Photoshop or whatever other photo-modifying program you want, and then re-uploading it. There may be an easier way, but I'm not aware of one. Sorry for my lack of expertise. Go Phightins! 23:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Brybry! I think you may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps. There are LOTS of tips for map making there, including links to documents about standards and conventions for map making. In the section titled "Best practices / Conventions" there's a navigation box. If you click "show" it has a bunch of links you can follow for tools to help you make all kinds of maps. Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Resources has links to some good programs that can be used in making graphics of all types, including maps. Does this help? --Jayron32 00:23, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Job Opportunities

Hello,

I am an advid Wikipedia user, and I love editing and creating articles. My question is, is there any job opportunities in the wikipedia world? Brybry1999 (talk) 21:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! By job opportunities, do you mean for paid editing? Or do you mean a job in the technical works of the MediaWiki software? Wikipedia doesn't allow paid editing, but if you are a great technical whiz, you may want to go to the Wikimedia Foundation's "job openings" page. There you can see any jobs currently open with the Wikimedia Foundation. If you have another question, feel free to ask! gwickwire | Leave a message 21:57, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

User boxes

How do I post user boxes on my page? Please don't give me one of those cite atricles, because they are difficult to understand. Please leave a message on my talkpage stating that you've answered here. DEIDRA C. (talk) 17:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Is there a specific one you want to add? Generally, when I see one I like on someone else's userpage, I copy the code (which is contained within {{}}) and copy-paste it onto my userpage. There is a bank of them at WP:USERBOX, where you can look through, but that's kind of tedious. Should you have further questions, let me know. Thanks for coming to the Teahouse--Go Phightins! 17:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

permission to licence use of my image.

Dear Sir,

My image has been uploaded at wiki : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abhijeet_Sinha.jpg

I want to grant permission for licencing its use. Please guide me.

Regards Abhijeet — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.161.110.69 (talk) 16:51, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Abhijeet, welcome to the Teahouse. As the notice added to the page at Commons says if you are the author of the image then you need to provide evidence that you are the author of the photo by sending proof to permissions-commons

wikimedia.org. I suspect the reason it was tagged in the first place was because it has previously been on Facebook so proof that it really is your photo is needed. NtheP (talk) 17:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

edit did not change article?

I edited the David Wexler (lawyer) page to correct the misspelling of David Winick (shown in red) where Winnick is spelled with two n's but the change did not take place on the page. I tried that edit again with same result. The corrected spelling now shows in the edit box but not on the page. What should I do?King.parker3 (talk) 14:35, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, King.parker, welcome back! if you're talking about this edit, what's actually happening is that you're changing the spelling of his name in the ref tag, not the article body. So, if you go down to the "References" section, you'll see that his name is now spelled "Winick" there. There's another occurrence of "winnick", a little further past the one you changed; that's the one that's in the article body. You'll be able to tell it's the right one because it's surrounded by double brackets ([[ ... ]]), which is what's turning it into a red link. Hope this helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:59, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Very many thanks...it was obvious but I still missed it.King.parker3 (talk) 22:05, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

How to deal with an editor who may be overly biased

Hi, since I am still relatively a novice in wikipedia I am asking the question here. On the main wikipage that I have been editing there is one editor who has consistently deleted sourced information and used edit reversions to get rid of sourced information. The article in question is about a church, a religious organization, and most of these things take place in its "controversy" section where accusations against the church are dealt with. At first each edit that I have made their to add multiple points of view, delete unsourced information, and remove implications not supported explicitly by the sources have been met with deletions and edit revisions.

Some of them included an erroneous accusation of misrepresenting sources even though the information they removed was inside the sources themselves. Attempts to change subsection titles to confirm with wiki policy have been met with resistance. At times I feel that the editor is trying to keep a certain image of the subsection preserved, mostly one that sheds an overly negative image of the church.

On our talk pages and the article's talk page he has expressed the belief that these accusations are factual beyond a shadow of a doubt. Now that is okay, it is the editor's opinion, but it is this belief that I feel is causing troublesome edit reversions. All his edits seem to only shed negative light on the church and has made blanket accusations of plagerism against me. A close paraphrasing tag was removed by another editor and he reinserted it. He also badly translated (rather mistranslated) a quote from an Spanish paper and reverted my deletion since it was misquoted and out of place which made the church appear bad.

What should I do about the user? This has been happening over long time now. How do I know my feelings are well founded or just a knee jerk reaction?

The artilce in question is La Luz del Mundo Fordx12 (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! Which article is it? Go Phightins! 15:04, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

La Luz del Mundo - got a bit mixed in with the sig :-) NtheP (talk) 15:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh, my apologies...for some reason I thought that was part of a username. I'll take a look. Go Phightins! 15:20, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

First off, your feelings are clearly well-founded. You're acting in good faith, which is pivotal to success on Wikipedia. Secondly, you could ask for a third opinion, where a third person will come in and evaluate the two sides and offer, well, a third opinion on the articles' talk page. I haven't finished reading everything yet and may not get to right now, but that would be my initial read on the situation. Go Phightins! 15:24, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

My Twinkle is not working

My Twinkle is not working. I am unable to see any twinkle options in any wikipedia page for past four days. -RAT -- catch the Rat's tail 02:06, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I'll fling some questions at ya: Have you tried in a different browser? Are you sure that Twinkle is properly installed? Thanks, Theo polisme 02:16, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and ask a few more if you don't mind.

What browser are you using exactly?
How long have you had Twinkle installed and working for?
What OS are you on (Windows XP, Vista, 7, Mac OSX Snow, Lion, Ubuntu, etc)
Is the box still checked under 'gadgets' in your preferences?

Thanks for answering these! Sorry about the extra questions, but I'd love to help! gwickwire | Leave a message 02:20, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Also, you might want to ask your question at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle. –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I tried in IE8 and Firefox 16. It is not working in both browsers. I will try in Chrome next time. What version of Java is required for this twinkle to perform normally. I am using Version 6 Update 20. I cannot update it because it is a corporate computer and I have limited permissions. I am using twinkle for about five months and yes it is still checked under Gadgets. I tried unchecking and rechecking it. And the OS is Win XP SP3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayabharat (talk • contribs) 02:32, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

You may want to pose this at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). They are a little more technically inclined (probably) than some of the editors here. No offense... Go Phightins! 03:31, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

The Village pump is a great idea to ask this. The only thing I can come up with is possibly your employer restricting javascript use by employees on corporate computers. The issue shouldn't be one of an installed Java, as that is seperate from Javascript (as far as I know). The Village pump would be able to help you fix that. Sorry we couldn't be of more help here! gwickwire | Leave a message 03:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for you trying to help. I will ask the same question there. --RAT -- catch the Rat's tail 20:56, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Article Denied - Sounds Too Much Like Advertisement - Language Help?

Hey Teahouse Crew,

I have a page up that I thought was ready to go but apparently it sounds like an advertisement. I only got one comment on how to change it, or at least how it specifically needed to be improved - Comment: Having an entire section devoted to all the positive reviews is not neutral. I'd take those reviews and use it to cite the article.

This is the article, [[2]] and any more comments would be helpful. Is it just the Reception section that needs work? Thanks again team.

Kingofbreaker (talk) 22:00, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I have responded on the page, read my response there for my ideas please :) gwickwire | Leave a message 22:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Hi Kingofbreaker, welcome to the Teahouse! Sarah is a very experienced reviewer so her comments have merit. The introduction of the 'Reception' section could be seen as unsubstantiated and promotional. In my view, this could be solved by simply commencing it with "Several critics have praised The Art of War for its strong characters, visual intensity.... " After all you can never prove that every person that has ever written about the book has heaped praise on it. On the other hand you can show (as you have already done) that there have been several expert reviews published about the book. On the basis of the reviews, your article should satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements for books. Sionk (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! gwickwire, what do you mean by using the reviews themselves as citations? Could you possibly point me to an example? I'm sorry, it's just a little confusing because I thought I was using the reviews as citations?Kingofbreaker (talk) 01:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure! Right now, you use blogs that reference the reviews as citations. Skip the middleman (blog) and use the link to the review itself as a citation. Does that make more sense? gwickwire | Leave a message 01:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey gwickwire, I wanna say that makes a little more sense, but I don't know if it does. Ok so maybe I'm confused with the language between "reference" and "citation." Are we talking about the Reception section or the Notes section? I swear I'm not trying to be difficult, but I'm new to this and the language is throwing me off I think. I'm probably going to take this to the live talk help madness but any extra advice/help would be absolutely appreciated! Thanks again.Kingofbreaker (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Can you help me get started? My goal is to eventually edit in the arts and entertainment fields.

I .just joined today (21 Oct. 2012). I would like to create a bio page on an actor and then help edit and maintain these pages. Thanks, CitykittyCitykitty02 (talk) 05:13, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Citykitty02! Welcome to Wikipedia! When you are starting out, the first thing you need to keep in mind is that new articles are tricky. I normally tell people to resist making one for a bit, if they can, as there are a bunch of policies that come into play. However, if you want to give it a shot, the first thing you need to do is to make sure that there are sources that can be used to create the article. For that, you need to find some independent articles about the actor that discuss him or her. The problem is that Wikipedia needs some neutral sources to build an article from, but in many cases the actor isn't well enough known to have had coverage, so we have to wait until there is more about him or her. The best sources are things like books, magazine or newspaper articles, as they help a lot.

If you have the sources, then the process is a bit easier. I'd go with the wizard at Wikipedia:Article wizard - it will guide you through the steps better than I can explain them. :) But feel free to throw more questions this way if anything in that is confusing (which it does tend to be). The biggest step is lining up the references before you start, as not having them is the most likely reason why a new article might be declined. - Bilby (talk) 05:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

How do you nominate articles?

how do you nominate articles?Ferrari Enzo 2 (talk) 03:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back, Ferrari Enzo. Could you clarify what you mean by "nominate?" There are a lot of nomination processes here, such as nominations for good articles, featured articles, and articles for deletion. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 04:57, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

AMDSI

Please explain me how and what kind of article can be posted on wikipedia?Kshitij Bhardwaj 14:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kb893 (talk • contribs)

Hi, Kshitij, welcome to the Teahouse! That's quite the question. Wikipedia isn't meant to have articles on every single thing in the universe; instead, we try to have articles on subjects that are notable. Notability has a special meaning on Wikipedia: at its core, it means that any subject of an article must have been talked about in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (like major newspapers, for example). There are a lot of articles that could be useful, like the one that you created for AMDSI, but they have to be notable, too, so that we can use sources to write about them. That's the short version; you can get the loooong version on this page, but beware: it's long! If you'd rather just ask us questions about notability, we'd be happy to keep helping you, too. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:53, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

A Loong no rude word story on the topic you have picked and no advertising Ferrari Enzo 2 2:45 PM (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferrari Enzo 2 (talk • contribs)