Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 325

Archive 320

←

Archive 323

Archive 324

Archive 325

Archive 326

Archive 327

→

Archive 330

Question on posting of photos

Hello there,

I have some pictures of very old monuments. Now, I want to post them on Wikimedia Commons but the very big thing this now the place from where I took pictures say-'Taking pictures are forbidden' but I got them when there was no message.So, should have thes pictures with my self or post them?

Thank You Komchi^✉_☆ 11:07, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Komchi. This is a complicated area, and I doubt if we can advise you here. Freedom of panorama suggests to me that it might depend on which country your monuments are in. I suggest you ask at the WP:MCQ. --ColinFine (talk) 11:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the situation is complicated but, especially if you have taken these photographs in India, you are very likely to be perfectly OK to upload them whatever notice was being displayed, then or now. By all means ask at WP:MCQ or simply upload one or two and see what happens. For India see here and here. Thincat (talk) 11:54, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank You @Thincat: and @ColinFine: Komchi^✉_☆ 12:23, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Redirect

Do redirect pages need to be categorised? Rubbish computer (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

In most cases, no. There are a few instances where a category may be appropriate, but it unlikely to be a serious issue even if one of these instances is missed. See Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects for the full guideline. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 13:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Rubbish computer (talk) 13:34, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: I'm sorry to contradict LukeSurl but yes you should try to categorize them, just not in the way you usually do. Take for example this redirect, which I have tagged as a redirect from an abbrieviation so it now appears here in Category:Redirects from initialisms. It is always a good idea to tag like this and Twinkle has a good tagging option to do it. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 14:12, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Rubbish computer (talk) 14:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I assumed Rubbish computer meant article categories (such as Category:Dogs in literature) rather than redirect tags (such as {{R from misspelling}}).--LukeSurl ^{t c}

Thank you both for your help. Rubbish computer (talk) 12:50, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Looking for second opinion

I attempted to remove as much peacock terminology from The Jewish Steppe as possible but I would like a second opinion as I feel the peacock term 'abundant' is hard to replace adequately here. Where can I find second opinions for issues such as these in general? Rubbish computer (talk) 13:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Rubbish computer. You have done a good job of toning down the wording of the article and I wouldn't worry too much about the word "abundant". I see two major problems, though: The current version is much more about the historical events than it is about the film itself. The referencing is very weak and I am not sure at this time that the film is even notable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:51, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I only went to this article after finding it in the category 'Articles with peacock terms' so I am not sure what to do about the other problems. Rubbish computer (talk) 12:53, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Book copying Wikipedia

I have found this ebook online which brazenly reuses Wikipedia's content, but claims the work as copyright of the compiler. I know this is a violation of Wikipedia's licensing. To whom should this be reported? --LukeSurl ^{t c} 11:10, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

This appears to be one in a series of similar eBooks by "Emereo Publishing". --LukeSurl ^{t c} 11:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
...and there are at least 50 instances of these eBooks being used as references on Wikipedia articles. :( --LukeSurl ^{t c} 11:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

This is a very common problem, since Wikipedia is designed for articles to be easily exported, so that they can be reused under the terms of the WP:CC BY-SA 3.0 or WP:GFDL license. Unfortunately, any system that makes it easy to reuse content legally also makes it easy to infringe on Wikipedia's copyright,. The correct procedure is for an editor of an affected article to contact the copyright infringer and make a complaint, because article editors retain the copyright to their contributions (it is not held by the Wikimedia Foundation). Wikipedia users who did not contribute to the version of the article that is reused illegally have no rights in this regard. For some advice on what to do, see WP:Mirrors and forks#Non-compliance process, or more generally WP:Copyrights. Knight of Truth (talk) 19:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not aware yet of any article I have edited being used in these books, though between the miriad eBooks there probably are one or two. There is also the other issue that 50+ references to Emereo material currently exist, all of which are probably instances of citogenesis. Is there a preferred channel for alerting the community to this, and/or getting these references cleared out? --LukeSurl ^{t c} 21:08, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Your best bet is probably the Reliable Source Noticeboard. It is also worth posting on the talk page of the affected article. The preferred approach is to be WP:Bold and fix it yourself, though, after making note of it. After all, it's not a given that a noticeboard post will actually attract an interested editor. In my experience the noticeboards are primarily useful for discussing what course of action is best, and then it will be most expedient to implement it yourself. Knight of Truth (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

This same issue came on a noticeboard (either ANI or AN) earlier this month where some company reproduced Wikipedia articles, and then these republished articles were used as references for other Wikipedia articles. I think some editors did a link search and found all instances and removed the links. I guess it isn't a rare situation and thanks for noticing, LukeSurl. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:17, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I did remove quite a few of these links earlier this evening though many, many more remain. Theroadislong (talk) 21:36, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

How to create multiple sandboxes?

Hi there. Can someone please tell me how to create multiple sandboxes? I've already created one article in my sandbox and wants to create another article in another sandbox. I don't want to take chances with the same template just in case I lose my original article. Thanks. CultureCouture (talk) 22:15, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @CultureCouture: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can go ahead and simply make another subpage that will serve as your second sandbox. You could do User:CultureCouture/sandbox2, or maybe User:CultureCouture/sandbox/2 (feel free to title it as you wish). ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, CultureCouture, welcome to the Teahouse. To make another sandbox, type in User:CultureCouture/sandbox2 into the search box. There will be a link to start the page. You can also name it something else, for example, User:CultureCouture/New article name. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 22:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks guys. Very helpful. Many thanks.CultureCouture (talk) 23:09, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Teahouse versus Help desk?

I was unfamiliar with the existence of this project, but I knew of the Help Desk. Both seem to be places to ask questions about the usage and workings of Wikipedia. Is there a specific difference between the two projects? Pikachu (talk) 05:03, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Pikachu: Anyone is welcome at either venue. The Teahouse just aims to be more friendly and welcoming (particularly for news editors), along with having a more "modern" layout that editors might find more appealing. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Expanding on the above, the Teahouse also lets both hosts and guests create profiles, which lets editors have a little introduction to each other while here. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:18, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

If, in saying that the Teahouse has a more 'modern' layout, SuperHamster means that the newest question is on top, that is a respect in which the Teahouse differs from everything else in Wikipedia. On every other Wikipedia page that has discussions (e.g., article talk pages, user talk pages, Teahouse, Help Desk, Reference Desk), new sections are posted at the bottom. New editors should not think that the Teahouse illustrates how talk pages work. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:07, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Not at all, I'm not a fan of the question ordering either - I should have clarified! I meant more along the lines of the the layout of the intro page, the "Ask a question" button that creates a popup dialogue instead of the traditional "start a new section" page, etc. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:09, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Other than that, the Teahouse, as noted, is primarily oriented to new editors and meant to be friendly. The Help Desk sometimes deals with more complicated or detailed questions. Either is a reasonable place for questions. Posting the same question to both locations is considered forum shopping and is likely to result in being rebuked. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:07, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Greetings @Pikachu:, On point, this TOTD article Wikipedia:Tip of the day/August 25 is a good explanation of WP helps depending on what you are looking to accomplish. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 02:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Headline chages/Username changing

Hi i want to change the head line of my page like (Tangowali to Tangowali17) how can i do this please help me to edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.sabuktageen (talk • contribs) 06:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hi M.sabuktageen the short answer is you don't. Firstly it is not your page, even although you created it - see Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. Also the Village's name is Tangowali not Tangowali17. Tangowali17 is the name of your fan sites, not that most have anything to do with Tangowali but contain adverts and personal posts, and they are certainly not official sites as claimed. Please do not attempt to use Wikipedia for promotion of your own sites, keep the fan sites separate, and the Wikipedia article Encyclopaedic - see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

what is This Tea House....? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FERNANDO HAZARD (talk • contribs) 03:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Re Re Re Draft:Satwant Singh Dhaliwal

It has been suggested to me to ask my question again. My questions relate to the broad comments rejecting the piece I posted. Since then I have, in the absence of specific and precise critique, attempted to revise the entry. Now, I need someone to look at it, approve it, and move it to the Wikipedia proper. Is there anyone here who would look at it and do the needful? Thank you. jefferyseow (talk) 07:51, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Re: Re editing of Draft:Satwant Singh Dhaliwal (Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 323)

Still waiting for a response. Thank you. jefferyseow (talk) 05:45, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I believe the article on the Chicken or Egg debate is dead wrong.

There seems to be overwhelming support for the egg being the winner in that paradox including Neil deGrasse Tyson and a long list of names on Wikipedia itself. I disagree, and I think I can prove it. I wrote my position out, but don't know if it should be under a sub-heading on the official chicken/egg page, if the chicken/egg should be overhauled, or another option. Is there an editor that would be in charge of deleting edits on that page that can point me in the right direction so my work doesn't get both stolen and deleted from the page causing me to lose credit?Chest Rockfield (talk) 03:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chest Rockfield and welcome to the Teahouse. If you have reliable sources to support your position please open a discussion on the article's talk page. If you don't have any reliable sources to support your position, then original research applies and you should avoid opening up a discussion based purely on opinion. Hope this helps Flat Out let's discuss it 04:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

The article in question is Chicken or the egg. However, I suggest that you do more reading about how Wikipedia works, because your concern about who is "in charge of deleting edits" and your concern about having your work be "stolen and deleted" so that you "lose credit" seems strange. Is this a class project in which you are required to edit the article to get credit, or do you want to be credited with ownership of an answer? Your comments don't seem consistent with how Wikipedia works. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, there must be someone in charge of deleting edits because several guides talk about how new edits are reviewed and may be deleted quickly. Regardless, you've answered my question. Thank you.Chest Rockfield (talk) 06:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Chest Rockfield: No one is really in "charge" of reviewing edits - anyone can do so! Editors who take the time to review recent edits, for example, are considered to be part of the recent changes patrol, while editors who patrol new pages are part of the new page patrol. Many editors also keep an eye on various articles that they're interest and/or knowledgeable in through their watchlist. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:10, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

So are you saying that there are no moderators that can revert pages, lock articles, and ban users?Chest Rockfield (talk) 07:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@Chest Rockfield:Anyone can revert pages. Admins can block disruptive users and lock pages subject to edit wars or a lot of vandalism. —teb728 t c 08:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I have created a redirect to a nonexistent page

I intended to create a redirect to an article which I have now forgotten the name of, as I instead created a redirect to Sam Hallion. The redirect is at Samuel Hallion and I don't know what to do. Rubbish computer (talk) 12:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer. I have deleted it. {{db-g7}} can be used to request deletion of your own page creations if they have no significant edits by others. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Rubbish computer (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

citing references and stuff...

hi there! I'm currently trying to create an article, but have been declined over a few things.. my main problem is trying to understand exactly how to cite a reference for it be acceptable and reliable. each of the links i have put up are of valid source, but I'm guessing I've not worded them right? I've also said not to 'peacock' speak, which I'm not sure what it means... any ideas? cause i am LOST haha. Gypsiestrampsandbulldogs (talk) 09:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, GT&B and welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse. The easiest way to learn how to cite references is to watch the three video clips at Referencing for beginners. The first two are only about two minutes long; the third is about five minutes. Citations to verify information should be placed right after the sentence or paragraph that contains the information.

Peacock terms are words that don't impart verifiable information. For example, from your lead paragraph, "... best known for his popular series of autobiographical books, which have been published worldwide in several languages." Popular is a peacock term. Who says? What constitutes popular? Remove it. Then, down in the body of the article, provide the number of copies sold and cite a reference so that the number can be verified. Were either of his books listed in the Best Seller List of a major publication? State the highest position reached on the list and the date, citing the source. Worldwide in several languages is vague. Were the books printed in Hindi? Chinese? Farsi? Only English language publishers are listed in your current draft. If translations were published, state the languages, publishers and dates, always with a citation to a reliable source. If the books were translated into Portuguese and/or Spanish, were they distributed to South America? Be specific and accurate, always citing a reliable source.

I hope this helps, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 14:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Can't get article approved for "reading like an advertisement"

Hi there! I have been having a super hard time getting this page up as it keeps getting rejected for "reading like an advertisement." I was wondering if anyone could please help identify some wording that would be contributing to this? I really want to get this page up. Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_Counts

Michaelcounts (talk) 15:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

You can see that the problem is the article does not explain why Michael Counts in notable. Also, wikipedia has a policy about conflict of interest ([[WP:COI|see here). If you can explain why you are notable; please put it in. Else, user your user page for work about yourself. Wikipedia is not for autobiographies. TheMagikCow (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I would give slightly different advice than User:TheMagikCow. Even if the original poster can explain why he is notable, he should not be submitting the article. The article is about himself, and (as mentioned in passing above), it violates the specific Wikipedia guideline on autobiographies and the more general policy against conflict of interest (that is, avoid writing about yourself, your family, your company, or otherwise with whom you are closely affiliated). These rules are needed in order to try to ensure neutral point of view, which is one of the core policies of Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Article about "Modular Drilling Rig"

Dear Sirs, I want to add an article about the topic "Modular Drilling Rig" - when these rigs are used, special features etc. Could you tell me if this would ok with the Wikipedia guidelines? Thanks in advance for your answer. Best regards Tanja Schmidt Tanja Schmidt 4869 (talk) 12:33, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Tanja Schmidt 4869 and welcome to the Teahouse. Firstly, I should point out that we're not all "sirs" here - this is just about the ultimate equal opportunity venue because most editors don't even disclose their sex (or age or ethnicity etc). But to answer your question, I suggest you first check the article Drilling rig to see whether the material you want is already covered there. If not, consider whether it is best to start a separate article, or add it to that existing article - the best place to discuss that is probably on the article's Talk page. That's where you will find the experts on the topic. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

But if you do write on it, Tanja Schmidt 4869, whether in a new article or in the existing article, please remember that every single piece of information you write must come from a published reliable source, which is referenced. Your own knowledge is useful for planning what to say, and finding the sources, but if you can't find a source for something, don't put it in. --ColinFine (talk) 17:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Automatic Welcome

Hello. Is there are a way to automatically welcome all new users? It seems like it would take forever to welcome each one manually, even with twinkle. If anyone responds, could they please ping me. Thanks Mbcap (talk) 17:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

This has been strongly rejected multiple times at WP:VILLAGE PUMP. Its even discouraged to welcome every user, especially those with few to no good contributions. Its pointless, creates extra pages that may never be used again, and having a bot do it seems super impersonal. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 17:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I understand. Thanks for the help. Mbcap (talk) 17:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mbcap: You can read a bit about the latest try at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_119#Automated_welcome_messages. Mainly people want them to be welcomed by a human who can help them. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 17:52, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of photo which I uploaded

I recently uploaded a Barnstar 2.0 photo but because I did not read the guidelines I used the wrong file format.So, now I want to delete it. Can any one help me? sorry for the inconvenience. File is https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wine_Barnstar.gif

Thank You. Komchi^✉_☆ 17:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Put the code {Db-g7} encased in 2 curly brackets on the file page. This will say that the author requests deletion. TheMagikCow (talk) 17:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@TheMagikCow:I can't do it! Komchi^✉_☆ 17:28, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I will do it and cite this discussion. TheMagikCow (talk) 17:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@TheMagikCow:Thank You and Sorry. Komchi^✉_☆ 17:32, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done No nee dto apologize! Glad to help. TheMagikCow (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@TheMagikCow:Will this now automatically delete or I have to do something else? Komchi^✉_☆ 17:44, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

It will delete wen an admin approves it. You do not have to do anything else. TheMagikCow (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@TheMagikCow: Thanks a lot! Komchi^✉_☆ 18:01, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Who can I contact to rollback a user's three consecutive edits?

A user made three consecutive edits to an article on the same day, which were a poor attempt at replacing an image on the article. Who can I contact to rollback those three edits?Lupine453 (talk) 18:00, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Lupine453. You do not need rollback to revert, ever. Rollback is a highly limited form of reverting that mechanically can only be used when the edits are the latest, and are consecutive. A manual revert, by contrast, allows you to revert to any revision in a page's history. You simply need to go to the page history, click on the date of the edit revision you wish to revert to (i.e. the one immediately before the three edits), click edit this page, and then save that version of the page. It's a good idea to always leave an edit summary explaining a revert. By the way, use of rollback for these edits, as you've described them, would actually be improper. Rollback is only for simple vandalism and the edits you describe may be misplaced, but sound as if made in good faith, without any bad intent. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:06, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

In this case, they are the latest edits. But I'll just go ahead and do the manual revision. Thanks Lupine453 (talk) 18:17, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello + Question

Hello, long time anon editor moving to a named account, long time wikia editor as well.

I also wanted to know, so I am the writer of this article

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

Citations are pretty much non existent on the web, most info was pulled directly off of the game. (which is on a web page) On Skyrim wikia this was suitable, but using the game as a citation I assume is a no no.

So that brings me to my real question

Are Russian sources suitable for English wiki articles?

Cyber demigod (talk) 23:25, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Russian language sources are definitely suitable for English wiki articles, but the same requirements of WP:Reliable sources apply. Basically we're looking for export opinion or editorial control. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:28, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Can you take a look at the article and tell me if the citations I have done so far are acceptable. The only english sources on the net sadly. No Metacritic. Cyber demigod (talk) 00:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

The references you have used need to be merged, so each appears only once. See Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Same_reference_used_more_than_once on how to do this. If you have access to the Russian-language name of the game I would add that, since it's a very useful search term for people to hunt down references with. Finding more, better quality references needs to remain a focus to get that into article space. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok I merged them, and I do need MORE citations right? Thanks for your help btw, English wikipedia is harder to get articles published on than all the other language versions. Cyber demigod (talk) 20:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

New Article

I'm relatively new on wikipedia. There are tourism related pages on every region of India, there was no such page on North East Part of India, so I created page Tourism in North East India. But when page was under construction and just 5-6 lines were written, one unregistered IP address nominated page for deletion, he/she was same IP address with whom I had conflict on some other page's talk section. He/She nominated my created page just in revenge, as in our earlier conflict wikipedia admin was ok with my point of view.

So I undid deletion request as article was just 1% completed at that time. Now article is 70% completed, but when I type Tourism in North East India on google then I am not seeing any result of this new page. Is there any mistake done on my side? Thank you. --Human3015 19:16, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey, again! I found it at Google by typing Wikipedia after it. Easy! DangerousJXD (talk) 21:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Redirect problem (new)

I know it looks like I have made the same mistake again but there is a page entitled QualPro on Wikipedia which isn't working through the redirect QualPro, Inc., the title of which is another way of referring to the same company. What am I doing wrong? Rubbish computer (talk) 12:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

In that case, what you did wrong was spelling, see this correction. David Biddulph (talk) 13:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh I see now. Thank you. Rubbish computer (talk) 22:23, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Rejected Article - what to do better?

My article "GowithOh" got rejected last night and I would need some help to fix it, because Itried to write it in the most helpful and uncommercial way. Is it about the sources? What would you change/add?

Thanks so much for your help and time!

Nathandew (talk) 06:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Nathandew. Because your article has been deleted, those of us who are not administrators can't see how well (or poorly) referenced it was. I can say, though, that it is highly unusual for a well-referenced article about a notable topic to be deleted. The best tool I have right now to evaluate the notability of the topic "GowithOh" is a good old fashioned Google search. That search (admittedly imperfect) tells me that GowithOh is an apartment rental agency in Barcelona. Is that correct? If so, then you will have an uphill challenge explaining how a run-of-the-mill apartment rental agency is notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Please be aware that this is an encyclopedia, not a directory of every business on Planet Earth. If it was, my small business would have an article on Wikipedia, but it doesn't. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Nathandew, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is User:Nathandew/sandbox a copy of the article you tried to create? If so, there are two key problems:

1. It contains blatantly promotional language such as: "Besides hand-picked vacation rentals from private owners, GowithOh distinguishes itself with a multilingual customer service all year around" In other words, it's written like an ad for the company, not an encyclopedia article.

2. There's no evidence that the subject passes the inclusion criteria for businesses and organizations. All the sources are to the company itself or press-release based material. A viable article requires multiple published sources which are reliable and completely independent of both the company and each other. These sources must provide significant, in-depth coverage of the company, not mere mentions or announcements, and they must demonstrate that the company has a wider significance in the 'outside world', not just coverage in trade publications (whose articles often tend to be PR-based in any case).

If you have any connection with that company whatsoever, you have a conflict of interest. This may not be the case, but I'm pointing it out because editing with such a conflict is strongly discouraged. It is virtually impossible to write a neutral, accurate article under those circumstances or to take an objective stance as to whether the article belongs here at all.

I have a question for you. Bearing in mind that Wikipedia is not here to supply advertising or public relations services or to function as a business directory, in what way do you think this encyclopedia would benefit from your article? This is not a rhetorical question. It's to help you think through objectively what is required for an article here and whether there is a possibility that one on this company would be viable. The blue-linked phrases in my reply will take you to some pages that you'll find helpful. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 07:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Requesting aid in editing highly biased and convoluted article of high importance

This article about Singapore's recently deceased and long-time leader is highly favorable of him, and reads like a narrative. In reality, the leader is highly controversial in the nation and the article does not accurately reflect this.

See the article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew

StainlessSteelScorpion (talk) 02:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Yew has been extensively covered in Western media following his death, and the accounts in reliable sources seem consistent with the tone and content of Wikipedia's article. This includes his successes, his one significant failure in Singapore being ejected from Malaysia, and criticisms over his autocratic approach. It's not clear what you feel is missing or wrongly presented. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, he has been covered in Western media, but Yew remains highly controversial in Singapore and the article places a heavy bias towards Yew. I have begun removing some of these pieces. Additionally, much of the article is disorganized and in narrative form.

How do I get help for my rejected article?

Can you please help me fix my rejected article? Thanks.Conceptual-Aesthetics (talk) 03:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Conceptual-Aesthetics and welcome to the Teahouse. I had a look at your draft (User:Conceptual-Aesthetics/sandbox). I'm sure your subject would pass the inclusion criteria for artists. For one thing, she has an entry in North American Women Artists of the Twentieth Century: A Biographical Dictionary and one of her works is held by the Tate Gallery in London. I think the problem was with the tone of the writing which comes across as slightly promotional and a bit like an essay because the qualitative evaluations of her work are not sourced independently. The article also needs some better sources. I'd be happy to help with it. We can discuss further on your talk page. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 08:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanking the uploader of an image

I would like to know if there is a simple way of thanking the uploader of an image to commons, which is then used in a Wikipedia article. I have come across wonderful and appropriate images in articles which deserve being given the appreciation that is due to the uploader. So the question is; how does one go about it? SovalValtos (talk) 23:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @SovalValtos: Welcome to the Teahouse. One idea is to award a barnstar. Barnstars are awards you can give to other editors for a variety of things (good edits, images, vandalism reverting, etc.); you could consider awarding either Template:The Photographer's Barnstar or Template:Valued Picture Barnstar to editors who have uploaded valuable pictures and photos. If you want to award a barnstar at the Commons instead of here, you can find their barnstars here. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your guidance User:SuperHamster. Now to put it into action. SovalValtos (talk) 09:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

hatnotes how to do

what are the best Hatnotes for this (if any)

I am a bit busy editing the pages hyperbolic geometry and hyperbolic space

and I think they both needs an hat note

my draft ideas are something like:

for hyperbolic geometry:

This article is about the two dimensional geometry for the three and higer dimensional cases see hyperbolic space.

for hyperbolic space:

This article is about the three and higer dimensional geometry, see hyperbolic geometry for the two dimensional geometry.

Both articles are about hyperbolic geometry but it is a good idea to have this split otherwise hyperbolic geometry gets mutch to complicated (but also very good to introduce this split early)

any suggestions? (or maybe suggestions to do it completely different)

PS I am not so happy with the hyperlinks in my suggestions, they are just as draft idea (Hyperbolic geometry is just not euclidean geometry) WillemienH (talk) 11:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

TW

Can I use WP:TW to welcome new users or give warning message to users engaged in disruptive editing.As in the page its mentioned that autoconfirmed registered users can have that facility. Or I have to spend some more time . If yes , then How to use it ? Cosmic Emperor (talk) 10:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hi CosmicEmperor you should be able to use it. It's unclear where your problem is? Do you have Twinkle enabled, if not go to [[Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets|Preferences > Gadgets] and enable. If enabled when your on a users talk page you should have "Warn" and "Wel" options in the "TW" drop-down in the top right. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:23, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

what are the contents to be added

The contents in Nanohealth are not sufficinet what else has to be added Sushmaswamy (talk) 09:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Sushmaswamy and welcome to Teahouse!
Yes Nanohealth doesn't have sufficient info. Adding more information from reliable source could be the way out!
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 10:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Sushmaswamy, and welcome from me too. I had a look at NanoHealth and have copyedited and expanded it slightly as well as adding references. The tags on the article were not highlighting "lack of information". They were highlighting very promotional language and a lack of inline citations. I have addressed those issues and removed the tags. As this is a very new company, but notable in that it has won the Hult Prize, I strongly suggest you not add any further information to it for now. What's now there is balanced, neutral and verifiable. When the company grows and receives further coverage in completely independent published sources (not press releases), relevant developments can be added with inline citations to support them. Please do not add information about its "vision", "mission". etc. That is very inappropriate and is one of the reasons why at least two other editors removed a large amount of material from the article. Readers who wish to read about the company's mission and vision can go to its website. Hope that helps and best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 13:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Edited information posted to the wrong section...

Greetings: I run the Sickle Cell Association of New Jersey, state chapter of the SCDAA. I attempted to post background information into our section of the SCDAA wiki site. I'm a new user and somehow the information I posted was logged onto the "Nevada" section and the "New Jersey" Section seems to have been deleted. Please advise on how I can remedy this. Thanks MaryMBLaMar (talk) 13:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Apart from your minor problem with the formatting of the section heading, the more significant problem is that none of the material which you added had references to published independent reliable sources, so I have reverted your edit. You need to read Wikipedia's advice for editors with a conflict of interest, and then if you do have material supported by reliable sources you can make suggestions on the article talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

The added material was also rather promotional in tone.--ukexpat (talk) 13:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Trying to type a symbol

I am trying to type a German B symbol on the redirect Grossenhain, to a page written 'Gro_enhain' with a German B symbol there instead-Grobenhain redirects to it. How do I type this symbol? Rubbish computer (talk) 22:25, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Is this: ß it? If it is just copy it. DangerousJXD (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

To type it, you can use Alt + 225 (Windows). --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 22:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: See also ß#Keyboards. But if you don't know how to cut, copy, and paste in your browser then I suggest you learn it if it's possible. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

The "B symbol" (actually a double-s symbol) is also available on any edit page. Just below the edit window there are a bunch of symbols available (the drop-down menu will probably say "Insert" if you haven't used it before). Select "Latin" in the drop-down menu, and you'll find the ß at the end of the s's. Clicking on it will insert it wherever your cursor is in the edit window. Deor (talk) 00:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both. Rubbish computer (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Quick question

G'day! What is "purge"? I've seen people say it and I've seen links to "purge" things. DangerousJXD (talk) 01:01, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@DangerousJXD: Hey and welcome! That is a great question that isn't explained very often. Basically, some pages use transclusions and templates. When the page that is transcluded is updated, it doesn't immediately update everything else because of some fancy server stuff. If you really want to know more, WP:PURGE is the place to read. (I did a bad job of explaining.... maybe just read the link. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 01:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

So it's a bit like the "Refresh" button on a Web browser, forcing it to go back to the source and pick up the latest copy...--Gronk Oz (talk) 04:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, kinda sorta. A browser refresh/cache bypass happens on your computer. A purge happens at the Wikipedia server level.--ukexpat (talk) 15:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Total Newby

Hello, sorry for this probably simple question, however I really don't know how to change the article name of my first article. I tried to follow the beginners introduction (which seem very beginner unfriendly to me) and typed the article's name "user: username: short article name", however, now it made exactly this whole line the name of my article. I am very

disappointed, I did never think that writing a Wikipedia article can be that complicated....

16:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki tales GO (talk • contribs)

Hi Wiki tales GO, the suggestion is to draft an article on, for example "Very furry cats" you can start it at User:Wiki tales GO/Very furry cats - which is fine. But you could also use Drafts:Very furry cats. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC).

wikitables

Hi all, I've recently joined Wikipedia and am working on a draft page for a local TV show Draft:Six_Degrees_(or_6_Degrees). It's fairly basic at present but I'm having issues with wikitables. I've created three for each series/season to date but the formatting is off for the header rows of each table. I've looked at other pages with similar tables but can't see what I'm doing wrong. It's probably something obvious; any ideas? Thanks!Bodb Derg (talk) 15:30, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Bodb Derg, welcome to the Teahouse. The problem seems to be that you don't have a "Title" heading. It should be right after the "Episode" heading. But if this series doesn't have titles for its episodes, I don't know how to hide the entire column. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 15:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

As explained at Template:Episode list omitting the episode title parameter should result in no column. It may be that the authors of the template assumed that all episodes would have names. I will investigate further. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC).

"Title" is the only parameter declared as "Required". The Title column is treated differently in the code (at Module:Episode list) from the others, because it concatenates all the relevant ones of "Title", "RTitle", "AltTitle", and "RAltTitle". David Biddulph (talk) 16:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Indeed: I have created a fix in the sandbox (and applied it to the first table on the draft).

The code implies that episode number will always be there, but title won't (it increments the cell count when it comes to it) - however it does not check for existence.

Given the 120k uses of this template I will request comments before putting the change live.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC).

personal profile

How do I submit my personal profile for consideration to be placed on Wikipedia?

George A. Ramirez (talk) 15:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, George, welcome to the Teahouse. I think you may be confused about what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is not for people to place their personal profiles. Pages about people here should contain information from outside sources (newspapers, books, magazines, and so on), not from their personal experience. Trying to write about yourself on Wikipedia is a bad idea (here's why). Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 15:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Well you must not create your profile as an article on Wikipedia, but you can certainly have an userpage: you can design it beautifully without any restrictions (that doesn't mean that you can break the rules for example using non-free media) just click on this and start creating
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 17:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I know you are trying to be helpful, aGastya, but I don't think it is useful to direct George to editing his user page. While the rules are more relaxed about user pages, they are still supposed to be relevant to the user as a Wikipedia editor. It's fine to put some brief biographical information on your user page if you wish, but it is very definitely "this Wikipedia user is sharing something about themselves to the Wikipedia community". Putting a full CV on your user page would not be appropriate. If George would like to stay, and become a Wikipedia editor, they are welcome to create their User page. But probably not at this point. --ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Is there a way to see the text of a deleted article?

I'm trying to find out if there is a way to see the text of a deleted article? The one I am interested in is this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Visitors_and_residents

Thank you! Merrilee (talk) 17:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Merrillee. Only administrators can see the text of a deleted article. But you can ask the admin who did the deletion (Mark Arsten) if they will restore it either as a user sandbox for you or in an email. --ColinFine (talk) 17:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Help :D

Hi, I am just trying to update a bio and I realize i've bitten off more than I can chew. Is it possible to hire people to edit, if I given them photo, article links, references, etc? I don't want to mess it up but there was minimal info on the site before and I want to fix it. Thank you so much, Katherine Wikieditor2344 (talk) 17:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Katherine! Welcome to Teahouse.
Probably you can go to the talk page. It is often mentioned the portals in which that article belong. You can find other editors there who might be happy to help and enrich the content!
Now the point is how to find editors? The ones who post questions are generally the ones who contribute to that article. Or often those portals have a Userbox for the Wikiproject members. Click on Transclusions and you will find other Editors too.
hope that helps
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 17:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Katherine. Many Wikipedia editors dislike the use of paid editors, but despite various proposals, they have not been forbidden. Please see WP:PAY and the following section for how they should behave. I don't know of a forum for finding people to take such work, but there may be one.

I am concerned that you say "trying to update a bio", but given that you are considering paying somebody to edit it, I suspect that it is an article about you or somebody you work for. If this is so, you have a conflict of interest, and are strongly discouraged from editing the article at all (or paying somebody else to). --ColinFine (talk) 18:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Delete account?

It seems that no account can be deleted from Wikipedia. Is this true? If it is true, why? -Capikiw 186.84.1.82 (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes that is true, for the attribution reasons given on the page to which I gave you a link when you asked at #Trouble signing in below. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hadn't refreshed the page. Looking it up now. Thanks -Capikiw 186.84.1.82 (talk) 18:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Is there a particular reason why...

...this place is glitchy. I like stats but that place is always having issues it seems. DangerousJXD (talk) 08:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi DangerousJXD, and welcome to teahouse!
Yes: X's Tools has many (and seriously many!) problems: It isn't working for mine too!

Here, i had asked this question previously: and i hope you are satisfied by the answer which i was provided
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 09:38, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, at present: it is working! And you can now see the stats!
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 18:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Mistake in Edit summary

What if i type Edit summary wrong?
Today, by mistake: instead of writing updated alexa I wrote Ted Leonsis, Chairman.
I was updating Alexa ranks. so i copied edit summary "updated alexa" and was pasting it in the summary box. But at the same time I moved Ted Leonsis in another field and thus copied that text and later pasted it in summary and hit saved.
I know it is wrong. But how much wrong?
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 17:38, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, aGastya. There is no way to change an edit summary afterwards. If you feel the error is important, you can make a dummy edit, and leave a new edit summary with the correction. The old one will still be there in the history, but the new one will appear after it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

But ColinFine; it won't be counted as Vandalism or something like misguiding, is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acagastya (talk • contribs)

@Acagastya: Don't worry. The edit summary in [1] was a harmless mistake and the page history [2] shows other recent edits where you correctly wrote "updated alexa" (I don't think filling a page history with daily updates of Alexa ranks is a good idea but that's another matter). It's a problem if controversial edits use misleading edit summaries like "fix typo" to avoid scrutiny. In such a case you should have made a dummy edit to explain it but here it isn't necessary. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

New entry - I don't understand why the references aren't good enough, they are independent

I'm writing an entry about Tariq Goddard which has been rejected...This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. I've read the notes on notability and the content of the entry makes it clear that he obviously is notable. The references I give are reliable and independent so has it been declined because I haven't given enough references? I can provide more if necessary but I don't wish to spend a long time doing this if there is another reason it's been declined. Thank you for your help.Emma Goddard (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Emma Goddard, and welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at your article (Draft:Tariq Goddard) the first thing I noticed was that all the references were broken - but before I could fix it David Biddulph beat me to the punch. Take a look at how they are laid out now, and use that as a guide for your references in future. Secondly, IMDB is not considered a reliable source, leaving only two - that is hardly "extensive". Even so, the facts that are supported by those references are:

1. When he was born;
2. That his first book in 2002 was nominated for an award;
3. That he sold film rights to another book.

Those really are not enough to establish notability. If you can provide independent coverage for the various awards listed, that would help.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi from me too, Emma. I've done some work on your draft, as I think that, ultimately, the subject would pass our criteria for inclusion and have added quite a few references. However, there are many claims for which I can find no independent verification. The text of the draft also adheres way too closely to the subject's official biographies. I would suggest removing the claims for which you cannot find verification and re-writing the article as more of a biographical narrative, rather than a list of claimed recognitions. At the moment it reads like a book jacket blurb. The source I added from The Scotsman has a lot of interesting biographical background which you can incorporate. Your draft will be much better for it and have a much better chance of being accepted. Hope that helps and best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Emma Goddard: I've just gone ahead and moved it to the main article space. The article would pass the minimum standards laid out at WP:GNG now; everything else is just normal editing (expanding, clean-up, etc.) Thank you for using our draft-and-review process at WP:AFC. As you become more experienced at Wikipedia, and start to learn what subjects make good articles, you can eventually just start creating articles in the main article space. But thanks to the help of everyone else as well, and happy editing. --Jayron32 18:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

And I have created a Wikidata item and added the WPBio template to the article's talk page.--ukexpat (talk) 20:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, everyone, for your helpEmma Goddard (talk) 20:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Alexa rank

Why does not .org websites have Alexa field?
It shows "Unknown Field" in Visual Editor
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 17:47, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Can you point us towards an article where this occurs please? --LukeSurl ^{t c} 18:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't know: i found it for some website (most likely to be code.org). first there is no dot-org infobox: but code.org has no infoboxes. i will try to recall for which site this query generated
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 04:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Code.org could do with the addition of {{Infobox website}}, and I would very much encourage you to add that. Perhaps you've noticed that some articles (such as Yahoo!) use {{Infobox dot-com company}}. There is no comparitive "Infobox dot-org company" infobox becuase a "dot-org" company isn't really a thing. For most articles about dot-org websites, {{Infobox website}} is probably sufficient.

You can see an implementation of {{Infobox website}} on the article about Wikipedia itself. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 09:25, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

brillant.org is a website,which has a B² feature for which we need to pay. Which contradicts the general idea about .org website. It doesn't advertise. and That is the only source of money (except donation by a foundation: i am not even sure about that if someone donates!) So it gets revenue from there.
it is confusing.
So what actually is it @LukeSurl?
and how to deal with it?
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 12:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

{{Infobox website}} is sufficient for most websites, including commercial sites. There is a field "commercial" which you can set to "yes" for commercial sites. If you're unsure if a website counts as commercial or not, just leave that field blank. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Acagastya: brillant.org is an advertisement page we have no reason whatsoever to make an article about or mention anywhere, unless there is hidden content I haven't found. It's possible for a .org website to be commercial. See .org. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Working to remove bias, what's next?

Did a once over on TimeLine Theatre Company to remove bias, remove inappropriate external links, and make it align with the NPOV policy—is there anything questionable remaining from the article? I don't want to prematurely remove any page tags.

Also, better to post questions here or on the page's talk page? New at this, but desperately trying to learn! Sterling1997 (talk) 17:18, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Sterling1997 hello and welcome to The Teahouse. Yes, it is better to use the talk page when you are referring to a specific article. Coming here is useful if no one responds there.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Theroadislong has determined that the tags are no longer necessary, and has made some other edits, so the article is fine now. It could probably be better, but it doesn't need the tags that were there.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you both! Sterling1997 (talk) 22:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)