Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 339

< Wikipedia:Teahouse‎ | Questions
Archive 335 ← Archive 337 Archive 338 Archive 339 Archive 340 Archive 341 → Archive 345

Hi all,

I am a new user creating a Wiki article on a charitable organization. I am trying to insert an in-text link to the organization's website, but I can't figure out how to do it. Any advice? I want this link to be in the middle of a paragraph, not as a reference at the end of the paper. Bhynes2 (talk) 14:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bhynes2, welcome to the Teahouse. You do this by: [http://www.website.com Name of website page]. However, please read WP:EL: "Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia (external links), but they should not normally be placed in the body of an article." --NeilN talk to me 14:48, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hi, @Bhynes2:, and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is: don't. Wikipedia's Manual of Style has a section covering external links like this, which starts out: "External links should not normally be used in the body of an article." If it supports the statements made in the article, use it as a references - if not, why is it there at all? However, note that there is also the "External links" section at the end of and article for further information outside Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:External links for details.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! Bhynes2 (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Welcome! Have some tea! I looked over your Draft:Love Your Melon article, and unfortunately it does not have any WP:Reliable sources, and it will probably be rejected. The university's public relations office is not a reliable source, since it is not a news organization and exists only to publicize the U. Try to find sources outside of the U, and if you can't, well, you will just have to realize that Love Your Melon is not WP:Notable in the Wikipedia sense of the word. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:41, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Article name not correct

I recently had an article accepted, but the name was changed and now does not reflect the actual names of the individuals I was writing about. the article shows up as Douglas Nemanic and Mary Nemanic. this is incorrect, how do I change it? Asb2324 (talk) 18:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

You need to move the page, here's a step-by-step guide on how to do it: Wikipedia:Moving_a_page#How_to_move_a_page
@Timtrent: Who moved the page, always a good to ask the mover first. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 18:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Interesting. I'd watch listed this draft and followed it through to the article. Noticed that the name seemed not to be the common name; WP:COMMONNAME applies, so moved it. Hadn't seen this request, and have no real idea whether I am being praised or criticised, but am happy with either.   Fiddle Faddle 21:20, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Welcome, Asb2324. I looked at the very interesting article but I had to remove a couple of sections because they were not sourced. There are now some tags at the top of the page: I'd suggest you take care of the problems they point out. If you don't know how, just ask on the Talk page over there, and somebody will probably help you. Good luck. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
The link is Talk:Doug and Mary Lou Nemanic. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 07:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Where did I go wrong?

Hi Wiki Editors,

I am slowly getting more involved w editing here at Wikipedia and am enjoying it-- learning as I go. Could someone please look over my latest submission and give me specifics on why it was declined as it seems to follow the guidelines to my knowledge…Thanks in advance…! --MacMason

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Emmanuel_“Manny”_Mijares

MacMason (talk) 21:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

@MacMason: The thing is, no-one can know everything straight away. The bit you don't yet know is WP:RS. You have not gone wrong, you just have not yet gone right. The review process is iterative. iTunes can never be a reference. I have no idea about Billboard. The changing fFate reference is a 404 error, I fear. I shy away from reviewing music articles. I can never quite get the trick to WP:MUSIC. I tend to stick to the fact that they are a living person.
For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage
You have no reason to know this. That is why you are using the WP:AFC process. You rely on the reviewers. Some of us communicate well, some less well. But we stand by our reviews and will discuss them. It's always worth asking the reviewer on their own talk page. Fiddle Faddle 22:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi FF

Thanks so much for your quick response

The thing is, I am using other WP articles as reference points, and indeed iTunes is used as a reference all over the place in WP-- and it should be..! After all, it proves the existence of a recording and provides even more information of the validity of those involved with the recording. It really is no different than being published in a newspaper and citing that article, actually….Also, Billboard HAS to be accepted as it is the industry-standard magazine for chart listings for the entire world…So I guess this leaves me in the position of asking the declining editor what is missing? Thanks for your help-- MacMason MacMason (talk) 22:36, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, MacMason. You're right that iTunes can be a reference for the existence of a recording. The relevant policy is WP:RS#E-commerce sources, which says " inline citations may be allowed to e-commerce pages such as that of a book on a bookseller's page or an album on its streaming-music page, in order to verify such things as titles and running times. Journalistic and academic sources are preferable, however, and e-commerce links should be replaced with non-commercial reliable sources if available." However, what your draft lacks is any references for the statements in the text (apart from one referenced to the foundation's own website): for an article about a living person, every single claim about them should be individually referenced to a reliable publihsed source, and most of them to sources indepependent of the subject. Even more important, you haven't a single references to a substantial piece about Mijares by someone unconnected with him and published in a reliable place. Without a couple of these, he does not meet the criteria for notability (in Wikipedia's special sense) and the article will never be accepted. --ColinFine (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Colin,

Awesome answer! Thanks for the advice, ColinFine. I will make changes asap… Regards, MacMason MacMason (talk) 23:20, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello MacMason. I definitely think that Billboard (magazine) is a generally reliable source for the music industry, although no source is 100% reliable, and every source needs to be evaluated in context. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to ColinFine for correcting me over iTunes as a reference. We learn something every day. Fiddle Faddle 07:50, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Help on 'Ebrington Manor fruit farm shootings article

I've written an article 'Ebrington Manor fruit farm shootings' of which I was a victim. I need help to make it better add references etc but am finding whole process of finding my way round Wikipedia very much a fog of confusion. It doesn't gell with being easy to understand at all. Charles Everett (Vegibagger) Perhaps I should first change user name to to something including my name. 92.29.134.95 (talk) 23:48, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

You can try this tutorial: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TWA/Portal. If you have more questions just post them here. UnluckyClover77 (talk) 23:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
You are not signed in, that is why your user name did not appear. However, there is no way you should be writing about a crime you were the victim of. The article will be deleted undoubtably, as you have absolutely no references. All content in Wikipedia needs to come from already published sources. Even if your perceptions were not colored by being a victim in this incident that would be true. An encyclopedia is not the place for original content. John from Idegon (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
When you say you need help to "add references", do you mean that you have identified some references and you need help putting them into the article, or are you asking for help to find some references in the first place? As others have said above, Wikipedia articles require references to independent, reliable published sources. I can't find the article you refer to, so perhaps it has been deleted already; otherwise, please provide a link to it so we can give more specific help.--Gronk Oz (talk) 05:14, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, here's the page wherein the deletion was explained. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Vegibagger. I believe User:John from Idegon was the administrator who deleted it. Just go to his Talk page and ask him about the problem. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:50, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen a more incorrect answer here at the Teahouse. I am not an administrator nor have I ever played one on tv. the administrator who deleted the article after I nominated it for deletion is HJ Mitchell. I can tell you why I nominated it. It again comes down to references. You absolutely cannot say negative things about a person, even if they are true, without references. Ever. Saying somebody shot someone is a pretty doggone negative. I'm not saying it's not true, just you cannot say it without a source, an already published reliable source. Now if the event seemed notable, perhaps it would have been worth searching for a source, but a shooting without fatalities, without any notable people involved, and without any implications for society as a whole will never be notable. I'm sorry you had to go through that and realize it was probably quite traumatic for you and your family, and quite possibly your community too. But please try to understand, it really does not matter to the rest of the world. John from Idegon (talk) 08:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Also not an admin, but I was tempted to mark it for deletion as unsourced, negative BLP too- making accusations about shootings without sources is not acceptable, so I agree with the actions of @John from Idegon:. Also, unless the event has significant independent coverage, then it shouldn't be included- I could find no mentions of this event anywhere when searching for it. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Italics

Are the biological terms to be italicized? (example terrestrial ecosystem). I made the phylum and division italicised
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

The scientific names like pathera leo, bos indicus etc. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 17:59, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
To agree with RRD13, taxonomic names should be italicized. They are considered to be Latin. Other than that, biological terms should only be italicized if they are foreign (not fully naturalized in English) or for emphasis. Also, taxonomic levels of genus or above should be capitalized, but species should not be capitalized (and species names should be preceded with the genus or its abbreviation). Robert McClenon (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon and Royroydeb: I was not saying about the Latin names. Just the hierarchy of biological classification's eight major taxonomic ranks. Thanks for answering.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 18:17, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
The names of the principal ranks are not italicized. They are English. (Phylum is fully naturalized in English.) The phyla and lower-level groupings are italicized, but not the terminology for the ranks. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
@Acagastya:, if you want to follow up all the gory details about this rule, see WP:MOSLIFE.--Gronk Oz (talk) 05:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
For the sake of clarity, I'm just going to throw in that only names of genera and species are italicized (such as Panthera leo). Names of phyla, orders, families, etc, are capitalized but not italicized, even though they are Latin in form. WP:MOSLIFE makes this explicit. Deor (talk) 13:44, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Updating an article

Hi, I work for DLP at Texas Instruments and would like to update the Digital Light Processing article as it is very out of date. For example, it's now known simply as DLP and the logo is wrong. I would like to use content from white papers, which I would reference. Is that sufficient?. The article is in the WikiProject Electronics section and I don't think that we want to go deeply into electronics but instead give information and an overview of what DLP offers. The article was recently quoted from, incorrectly, by a reporter, so the need to update is seen as important. I wrote on the talk page of the article on May 3 that I wanted to update but haven't received a response from the community yet. I'm a Wikipedia newbie and would appreciate guidance. Thanks. Txaussie (talk) 12:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Txaussie, hello and welcome to Wikipedia! In this situation, I think, it is better to find main author(s) of the following article and explain the situation on their talkpages. Sincerely, Ochilov (talk) 15:57, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Txaussie. Thanks for coming here and asking. My advice would be to extend what you've posted on Talk:Digital Light Processing to specify exactly what changes you want made, with references, so that you're asking something more specific than "Please help me". If you also use the template {{request edit}}, that will add it to a list of pages where there are edit requests, so somebody is more likely to see it. I'm not sure what white papers are in this context: are they published (so that a member of the public could get hold of a copy - maybe by ordering it through a library, but not having to go to the company for it)? If not, then you cannot use them as a source. If they are published by Texas, then they are primary sources, so they may be used to support uncontroversial factual data; but independent secondary sources are preferred, and should be the bulk of the sources referenced in any article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:45, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Attaching custom editing guidance to articles

User:Mattmill30/Comparison_of_peer-to-peer_lending_companies

I am creating a comprehensive overview of the peer-to-peer lending market and would like to attach editing guidance for this article in an effort to ensure the quality of the information and references are maintained.

Is there a provision for storing and associating such guidance? e.g. referencing a discussion article via a particular {{ }} function

Mattmill30 (talk) 13:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Mattmill30. As far as I know, there is no template to do this; but there are two ways I have seen it done. One is to attach an Edit notice to the page - but you'll need to persuade an admin to do it for you: I don't know how readily admins will do this, but the page I linked to tells you how to request one. The other is to use HTML comments - put the text between <!-- and -->, and it will show up when somebody edits the page, but not in the displayed page. I'm a little concerned that you might be trying to own the page, though. --ColinFine (talk) 16:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for this information. I am not trying to own the page. Rather, because users will benefit from the logical structure of the table content continuing to be authored strictly according to an editing style, I want to specify the standard. Ideally the edit notice would also be editable, so that the standard can be updated to reflect any enhancements to the table structures. Mattmill30 (talk) 18:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Where is the Barbarian Gate?

When I was stationed with NATO in Italy, many of the intelligence briefs referenced the "Barbarian Gate" which apparently was a common route used by the barbarians when they invaded Italy. I am guessing it is located in either Austria or Slovenia. There was was concern back in the days of the "cold war", that the Russians could use the same route to invade Italy.

Thanks Vince Corry 146.145.162.170 (talk) 14:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our aim here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know.
But I still wonder is it a question?
I don't think it will help in editing.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Greetings, Vince. This is a question (which doesn't seem like homework at all) that would be better asked at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous. I recommend that you copy the question there. Deor (talk) 16:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@Deor: How come this be a question? I can't figure out the meaning what the IP editor wants?
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 16:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
aGastya, look at the title of the section. --ColinFine (talk) 16:58, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Person editing from 146.145.162.170. While it is correct that this type of question is better asked at the Reference desk, as this page is for questions about Wikipedia itself, I believe I have the answer for you. Rather than repeat what it says, please read the the middle paragraph at the following page from the introduction to the 2014 book The Southern Flank of NATO, 1951–1959. After that, you might get further information by reading our article on Gorizia. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Seeing records/responses in Talk pages even after an article is deleted

Hi! I posted a draft of a page I was working on as a "Talk page" and it got deleted. I did try to contest the deletion, and the user who deleted it gave a reasoning. I would like to be able to refer back to both of these bodies of information, but I cannot seem to find where they are. Are those permanently gone? Bhynes2 (talk) 05:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bhynes2, welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, I'm not sure why you posted a draft as Talk page. As far as I know it's definitely not acceptable. Speaking of the deleted pages, for you?, yes, they are permanently gone. Only admins, checkusers, and oversighters can view the content of deleted pages. If you can remember the username of that specific admin who deleted the page you could ask him/her again why he/she deleted the talk page you created.
P.S: Usually the admin notifies you on your talk page when he/she deletes a page you created. But I can't seem to find anything on your talk which is rather confusing--Chamith (talk) 06:38, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@ChamithN: The talk page was almost an identical copy of Draft:Love Your Melon. --NeilN talk to me 07:09, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Bhynes2, under certain circumstances you can follow the directions at WP:REFUND and get a copy of the deleted article to work on in your user space.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

New Article (Juba88 (talk) 07:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC))

Dear All, I am new editor and i have created article about Miss World Africa 2012 and Miss World 3rd runner up Atong Demach. I need help to improve it and make it show once anyone type her name on google. Can you please help. Thank you(Juba88 (talk) 07:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Juba88 hello and welcome to The Teahouse. I took a quick look at the article and it seems okay but could be better. I am not familiar with a lot of the sources used but I will trust that most of these are reliable until told otherwise.
It appears English is not your first language but the problems with grammar and spelling can easily be fixed. The important thing is making sure Demach qualifies as notable, and I think she does. The biggest problem is that the "Early life" section has no references. Make sure everything said in that section comes from an independent reliable source.
There are some red links to topics that I don't think we will have articles about. Instead of Miss World 2012, link instead to Miss World, for example. In the infobox at the top of the page, this would be done with [[Miss World|Miss World 2012]].
And we probably need to have more links to other topics. South Sudan is the most obvious one as this is a new country most people would not know much about.
This is a good effort for a first article.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

MW and WS

Are both mediawiki and wikispecies considered as external links?
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 13:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Acagastya, H:IW may have what you are looking for.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

For the edit on Isla Vista Shootings I made, are the sources reliable enough?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2014_Isla_Vista_killings&type=revision&diff=661059909&oldid=659369067

Ylevental (talk) 12:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I took I quick look through your sources and they appear to be fairly reliable. The inclusion of several reliable media sources such as Time and the New York post articles definitely support the statements you have made. Thanks for improving Wikipedia   Winner 42 Talk to me! 13:14, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
My pleasure!! Ylevental (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Also hi Reddit! Winner 42 Talk to me! 13:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, it got reverted. I left a message on your talk page. Ylevental (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
I looked at your content and references and reinserted both back into the article.   Bfpage |leave a message  20:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
That was an ill advised revert. Your reasoning didn't address the fact that consensus was not gained for inclusion. You are teaching people to edit war, yay you. Arkon (talk) 21:09, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest question

I'm just starting out editing Wikipedia and I'd like to add a page about Little Flowers Girls Club, I believe it is notable enough for it's own Wikipedia page. My one problem is that I work for the company which publishes the Little Flowers Girls Club materials. My question is, would it be permissible for me to submit the basic information about the club as a stub? Even though I have a conflict of interest I think I can write the basic information about the club in a neutral light. CharlotteWatk (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Conflict of interest is one of the more complex issues on Wikipedia. In general, Wikipedia discourages people from editing subjects that they have a close connection to. In this particular case, I recommend writing a draft article using the Articles for Creation process. This method allows the article to be worked on and approved by experienced editors before it enters the encyclopedia. It is also important to note that the Wikimedia Foundation requires disclosure of conflicts of interest, this can be done in a statement on your user page or on the talk pages of the articles you edit. You can find the complete COI policy here. I hope that you have found this helpful, if you have anymore questions, feel free to ask me. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:18, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

How to make Archive

Hi all, I want to make archive of my talk page as I see archives on other's talk pages, but I don't see any option for making Archives on my talk page. Kindly help me, I don't know how to make archives. --Human3015 01:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Human3015. If you want to manually create an archive:
  1. Go to your talk page and make a link to a not-yet created archive subpage at the top. Call it whatever you'd like but I'd suggest User:Human3015/Archive 1, then save the page;
  2. Click edit this page at the top of your talk page and highlight from the first talk page post down to a few sections before the end and cut it and save the page (I'd leave an Help:edit summary saying something about archiving so you can easily search for that point in the history in the future);
  3. Open the red link to the archive page you save before, paste and save (you can also add {{Talk archive}} to the top and the bottom of the page though I've never seen any real purpose). That's it.
There's much more at Help:Archiving a talk page, including how to have a Dalek archive your page periodically. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Hello, Human3015, and welcome to the Teahouse!. Simply prepend:
{{subst:Setup auto archiving}}
{{Archive box|search=yes}}
at the top of your talk page and a bot will be around withing a few days and take care of the rest for you. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 02:55, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks both of you. --Human3015 08:59, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Human3015, to add to the excellent advice from Fuhghettaboutit the best name for your archive would actually be User talk:Human3015/Archive 1. And you really should have a link to your main talk page in your signature. I would suggest the closing brackets follow "Human ''' </span>" (you have to do ''' before the closing brackets so I added to what you have, and then did that again later), with new opening brackets followed by "User talk:Human3015|''' " before "<span style="color:green;">"..— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
And I see that is not a red link above, so someone understood what was meant. You did have help.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Vchimpanzee, thank you for your advice. Your suggestion on adding talk page is very valuable, I wanted to do it since I joined Wikipedia. I just did it. --Human3015 talk • 21:58, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Can a user hide his/her user page from search engines?

Is there a method for users to hide their user pages from search engines? If yes, can someone provide (or direct me to) details? If no, can someone provide (or direct me to) the reasons for not providing such a method? Thanks much. Timrooks (talk) 16:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. For your question, there exists a template called by {{NOINDEX}} (link here) which you can add to the top of your user page and prevent it from being indexed by search engines. Tutelary (talk) 18:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@Timrooks: A further note is that, while the major search engines are likely to obey this 'instruction', that is not the case with the bit players. There is no guarantee of online privacy anywhere on the internet. Engines like Google are very quick to index Wikipedia. If they have indexed a page already it can take them a while to forget it. Fiddle Faddle 22:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Getting started with my profile...

How do I get some of the different cool things on the profile page? I just joined today and was wondering if there is a article on that...Airplane Maniac (talk) 21:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Airplane Maniac, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm guessing you mean your user page: you are welcome to put information about yourself on there, but it should be mostly about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. Have a look at the user page design center. --ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks ColinFine! I have been able to get my profile page started well now! It's not very good, but it will do... Now, to do more editing... :D Airplane Maniac (talk) 00:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I want to edit something!!

Where do I start? What is the best way to jump in?

Thx SusanChana (talk) 00:22, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

@SusanChana: Hello and welcome! Well, the best way that I found to "jump right in" is to find a subject that interested me, and see how I can fix it up. I started editing an article about my home town, branched out to other topics that interested me (like movies I liked or sports teams I followed) and eventually found ways I could contribute new articles, or rewrite articles from scratch, that I found needed it. I would recommend that you start small and look for topics that you really like and have a lot of interest in. If you want to just help anywhere that is needed, Wikipedia:Community portal has a lot of specific sorts of help that is needed, from general copyediting, to adding references where needed, to adding needed images. It's hard to know what to recommend without knowing your interest, but maybe something at the Community portal would catch your interest. --Jayron32 00:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
@SusanChana: Hello, I'd also recommend Today's article for improvement (currently Home appliance). It is a great collaborative editing project the works together on improving one chosen article a week. It is a great place to start for those who want to work together with others in article improvement. Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:01, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Who is allowed to "vote" on Requests for Administratorship (RfAs)?

Can any Wikipedia user comment, or is it limited to current Administrators. Carl Henderson (talk) 01:05, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Never mind. I found the answer.Carl Henderson (talk) 01:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
In case anyone else is searching the archives for this, anyone is allowed to comment on an RfA but !voting is limited to logged in users, there are no other qualifications required. Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:23, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

General editing question

Hi! I recently created a page for a piece by artist Barbara Kruger. It can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_Are_Not_Yourself. This might be an unusual question to post here, but does this page look ok? Is it alright to include criticism and interpretation in a post for a piece of art? Thanks!

Anwenparrott (talk) 20:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse! The page looks fine, criticism and analysis sections are good as long as they are balanced and reflect what critics say about the work (ie they aren't your personal opinion). Great job on the article  . Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Indeed, Anwenparrott, if there is significant criticism in reliable published sources, omitting it would lead to an unbalanced article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Anwenparrott. I do have a concern about the image of this work of art which has been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, under a Creative Commons license. Are you aware that this license allows anyone to reuse the image for any purpose including commercial uses without payment? All that is required is attribution to the artist. In other words, anybody can make a poster, greeting card, T-shirt, coffee mug, refrigerator magnet, or anything else under the sun, without paying a single penny to the artist, as long as there is a line in small print at the bottom attributing the work to the artist. This seems contrary to the artist's best interests, but if she understands this deeply and agrees to it, then that is fine.
Instead, I would have recommended uploading the image here on Wikipedia under a claim of legitimate use of non-free content, which would have protected the artist's financial rights to the image, and prevented its re-use anywhere. Please see WP:NFCI #7 for details. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

What to do?

What is meant by Attribute to Author? I saw one of my images was used by a website without even notifying me. What should I do? And how are the other photographers protected from this malpractice?
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 03:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey again Acagastya. If you're talking about an image that you owned and uploaded under a free Creative Commons license, like CC-BY-SA 3.0, then you own the copyright, and they have a free right to use it so long as they "give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made" (see the specific license for its details). You might also look at Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia to see what they should be doing. If they are just using it without giving you credit, then they are violating your copyright but it's up to you to act. There is some advice given at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks#Non-compliance process (see also Wikipedia:Standard CC-BY-SA violation letter), which may be adaptable, but it and the pages linking from it are really geared toward violations in use of Wikipedia article content. Of course, if you released the copyright into the public domain, then they can use it without any attribution whatever. What was the image? How is it licensed? Can you link us to the site that's using it? In general, any questions you ask here or at any other help forum without providing specifics ties the hands of responders to answer with targeted advice.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:16, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Welcome back to the Teahouse, Acagastya. If you donated an image to Wikimedia Commons under an acceptable Creative Commons license, then there is absolutely no requirement or expectation that you be notified if someone re-uses your image. So, when you say that a website used your image "without even notifying me", then please realize that is how the game is played, and that is a core concept in freely licensing images for re-use. All that is required is attribution. Nothing more. If you expect notification in the future, do not release your images under a license that does not require notification. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:11, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

New editor submitting new article for a company in need of help

I put a good amount of time into following the first-time-making-articles guide on Wikipedia, for a growing company I know of which currently does not have a wikipedia article. After a few hours putting together the first draft, I submitted the page live to /wiki/Vuevent and the page survived for about 8 hours, before being nominated for Speedy Deletion along CSD A7 and CSD G11. It was midnight at the time of the nomination, and, to my expectation, the article was deleted in the next 2 hours while I was sleeping.

Of course, after doing some more homework on wikipedia, I realized that the sourcing is incredibly important, if not the most important concept of the wiki (cross checking etc.). To the advice of the admin who deleted the bad wiki, I rebuilt the page from scratch using my sandbox.

I am requesting people check out my sandbox, and give me specific advice about which CSD clauses may still be affected, and more importantly, any specific parts of the submission which should be removed etc. To my understanding, if I was marked for speedy deletion, my submission was "unquestionably" bad, and an obvious candidate for deletion.

I know not to take this personally, so I went out and did my research homework and came back with over 20 sources (my original submitted article noted only 2 sources!).

I appreciate your time and input - all of it! Please check out what I intend to submit as an article for wiki/Vuevent for Vuevent inc., currently stored on my sandbox at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jderocher/Sandbox

Best wishes and thanks, Jderocher (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jderocher: Wikipedia often feels a harsh place. I've only given your sandbox a skim, not a detailed read or review. On the surface it looks like a decent start. I suggest you click the big blue Submit button. What this does is offers the draft to reviewers to review and push back to you iteratively with comments. It can be a tough process, but not as tough as outright deletion. Fiddle Faddle 22:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@Timtrent Thank you - I have gone ahead and submitted the draft for review.

Jderocher (talk) 22:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jderocher: Now you have submitted it do not just await a review. Continue to improve the draft when you see the need. Submission does not set it in stone. I've been in and performed some basic tidying for you, and migrated it to the Draft: namespace (you will still find it by clicking your sandbox for now, don't worry). I;d review it myself, but I'm tired.
Be prepared to have it pushed back to you more than once. If you don't understand the reviewer's comments when it happens, ask them on their talk pages. Fiddle Faddle 22:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@Jderocher: I've had the chance to review the draft now at Draft:Vuevent, and   Declined it this time for the reasons stated on it. This is not a reason for despair, just for improvement. Go to work with a will and be encouraged that you have some meat to work with from the comment on the draft. Fiddle Faddle 08:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

"Help me"

Hello. I know one way a user may get help is by putting "{{help me}}" on their talk page; I know there is a page the editors who end up helping them monitors to see that they left the template in the first place (the Help Me page?). Where is this page? —DangerousJXD (talk) 04:34, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I think Category:Wikipedians looking for help is the page you want. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Though @Mj has given you the accurate answer: shortcut is CAT:HM. If you edit through mobile bookmark it!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 09:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-automated edits

I know I am probably asking something extremely obvious but how do semi-automated edits work? I don't understand. Rubbish computer (talk) 17:26, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Rubbish computer I believe "Semi-automated edits" would refer to those made with tools like Huggle, Twinkle and STiki. i.e. not fully automatic such as the bots, but where just a click or two does an edit. So human initiated, but the tool preform the edit and creates the actual content (i.e. in the case of warnings). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Rubbish computer (talk) 18:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Updating Company Info

Hello,

Am I allowed to update company information if it is false on the current page? For example, the company legal name is wrong as well as a photo that is being used.

Thanks!216.143.116.8 (talk) 18:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes as long as the information is verified preferably by 3rd party sources using references. I'm obliged to tell you to read WP:COI and I'm sure a few other users will chime in below with more information about it soon   EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 18:52, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Editing the Artical for a Game

How far into depth am I allowed to go into the rules of a game? I want to make the article Titanic: The Board Game better, but I don't know how far into depth I am allowed to go... Airplane Maniac (talk) 01:42, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, you can go fairly deep into the rules. Chess is an example of a fantastic board game article and it spends roughly a third of the article talking about the rules. You can always feel free to be bold though when adding new content. Happy editing! Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
I have a slightly different view, Airplane Maniac. Chess is a non-commercial game with origins in antiquity, played freely worldwide, and widely acknowledged as a game worthy of in-depth academic analysis. Its rules are relatively simple though its subtleties are deep and profound. Titanic: The Board Game, on the other hand, is a commercial game of far more narrow interest. The company that markets and sells the game has the means and the resources to instruct their customers in how to play the game. Per WP:NOTMANUAL, it is not appropriate for Wikipedia to instruct commercial customers how to play this game. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:56, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
So, are you saying that I shouldn't add more to it in the area of gameplay,Cullen328?--Airplane Maniac (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Question Regarding Rejected Article

I initially wrote to the editor of my Wikipedia article who referred me to this page, here is my question copied below:

Hello, I wanted to send a message to question why my article has continued to be rejected. I wanted to add an article about a local comedian Des Dowling because he is a known comedian in Australia, particularly in Melbourne and already has quite a few Wikipedia mentions which can be linked to an official page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coxy%27s_Big_Break https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1116_SEN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinne_(Australian_TV_series)

He is also regularly mentioned in local Melbourne media as a comedian/local celebrity, which is why I wanted to add him to the Wikipedia database. I have added independent media mentions of him to show that he is a prominent local celebrity. My wikipedia username is samanthalenkic. Thank you for your time. Regards, Samantha Samanthalenkic (talk) 00:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Samanthalenkic and welcome. I have had a look at your Draft and the reasons given are that the subject doesn't meet the criteria for notable individuals. As a Melburnian, let me see if I can assist you in getting the Draft up to standard. Flat Out talk to me 03:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Query regarding MOS

I could have asked it at the Portal, but if I need it for future. So
In cricket (game), is the letter C, in the headings and sub-headings like International centuries to be in upper case? And are these type of rules in the other sports too?
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 08:29, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

It should be lower-case I believe. The general Wikipedia rule (on MOS:HEADING) is that words in titles/headings should only be capitalised if they are names or proper nouns, which centuries isn't. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

How to "Request for deletion

Hello There currently is a stub article [General Service Area] which is wikilinked to by every town, village and community in Nova Scotia, Canada. One editor in particular has taken it upon his/her self to change over 1600 articles to use this obscure stub as the definition for each and every community in this Province rather than the usual wikilinks (town, village, community etc.) used by the rest of Wikipedia. Seeing as how NS is apparently the only region in the world that uses this definition and the definition could be eliminated at any time by the stroke of a pen by the NS Government, I would wonder if the project would be better served if we simply deleted this article under WP:N as a Google search using the phrase gives few (if any) reliable sources? This particular editor has become active again in the last couple of days and simply refuses to engage anyone who attempts to talk with him/her. See [1] Thank You,  Aloha27 talk  23:07, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

@Aloha27: Having looked at this issue I think it is worthy of administrative attention, so have opened a discussion at WP:ANI where any editor who wishes may comment. I have done this because the issue you report seems to me to be more weighty than the Teahouse should be handling, though is, I think, borderline for the other venue. Fiddle Faddle 10:47, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

How do I change (correct) the title of an existing article?

How do I change (correct) the title of an existing article. Just need to add a word to the title to change it from a general-public term to a term specific to the content.Shonzey (talk) 18:41, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

@Shonzey: Welcome! To move/rename a page you use the WP:MOVE function with the tab at the top of the page. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 18:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand. I don't want to MOVE anything; just fix the title by changing one word. (I realize that changing the title has ripple effects from other articles, but must start by fixing this one title.)

Maybe method requires opening a new article with the correct title, then using MOVE to migrate all the content. Is that it? If so, I still need more guidance.Shonzey (talk) 17:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

@Shonzey: Moving an article is how you change the title on Wikipedia without getting rid of the article's history. If you give me the title of the article and what change you want I can do it for you. Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
@Shonzey and Winner 42: I'm going to take a guess at Just in time (business). EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 19:06, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect information on an already published Wikipedia article.

How do I add/edit a Wikipedia article?2602:306:B8F2:D860:144A:587:BF6B:9BB9 (talk) 15:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

By clicking Edit source.
Here, at WP:EDIT you will get all the guidelines!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:33, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
@Acagastya: It's just Edit for non-logged in users (actually anyone not in the VE beta) EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 19:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay, Click Edit if not logged it.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 19:21, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I suggest you take a your through the Wikipedia:Tutorial, which will explain these and other matters, and give you a foundation in the basics of editing. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm currently working on the biography of Sir Frederick Page (1917-2005). I have a nice image of his signature from "Yates, I. R. (2006). "Sir Frederick William Page CBE FREng. 20 February 1917 -- 29 May 2005: Elected FRS 1978". Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society 52: 231–210" But I am unsure of the copyright status of the signature and if it falls into the category of fair use KreyszigB (talk) 20:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey KreyszigB. Signatures are copyrighted, so long as they are sufficiently artistic for copyright protection (I suppose one might describe the two ends as block letters versus a unique cursive with a face included in it). See {{PD-signature}} and Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag. It's unfortunate that the consideration here seems to require a judgement call with no brightline rule. I'm going to have to punt and say that after viewing his signature in the pdf, it seems to me pretty much right in the grey area and I just don't know. If it is copyrighted, I don't think fair use is sustainable. A low-res photograph of him, yes, that meets the contextual significance standard of the fair use policy – it "would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic". I don't think this is true for a signature, absent extenuating circumstances (like the person was famous for the way they signed, and that's covered in the article). You might want to ask for a second opinion at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:21, 7 May 2015 (UTC)


Thanks, I can follow your reasoning, after all I'ts not the most important thing about him, but it is of minor interest. I've reposted the question on the Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. KreyszigB (talk) 06:01, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Fuhghettaboutit, something is missing from your response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Ha. If that's an invitation to play twenty questions, I'll start with "what"?:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:49, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I see, someone removed part of my post (checking page history) aha, it was removed by the OP when he responded, here. I can see exactly how that happened, he was intending to follow the post by navigating there and used cut instead of copy to get the title.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:54, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Signature question

I would like to change my signature so that Rubbish leads to my user page and computer leads to my talk page and both are in italics. How do I do this? Thanks, Rubbish computer (talk) 15:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

WP:SIGN will guide you. But the way you want it:
[[User:Rubbish computer|''Rubbish'']][[User talk:Rubbish computer|''Computer'']].
Paste it in Signature filed of Special:Preferences. And don't forget to tick: Treat the above as WikiMark up.
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 15:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
The above produces RubbishComputer. Maybe you want [[User:Rubbish computer|''Rubbish'']] [[User talk:Rubbish computer|''computer'']] to produce Rubbish computer. By the way Acagastya, you only need one <nowiki>...</nowiki> around the whole string to display code. The source is hard to read when it's littered with nowikis. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thank you but I have changed this already. Rubbish computer 22:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Christ Acagastya got enough <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags yet???   EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 22:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually @PrimeHunter: At the beginning, I used only a couple of sets. But it rendered as [[User:Rubbish computer|Rubbish]][[User talk:Rubbish computer|Computer]]. But then I realised a small mistake. Both the words were in italics and the '' was not visible. Thus I had used many! I was sick looking at it. But the one who wants it, mostly will copy from here to save time and won't see the codes!
aGastya  ✉ Dicere Aliquid :) 22:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

TO JEREMIAH RE: EDIT OF NATIONAL AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ASSOCIATION

Jeremiah Y.:

Regarding the National Automotive Parts Association ("NAPA") entry, you left a message saying that my edit seemed to be a test so you changed it? Nothing about my edit appeared to be changed, but, in any case, as Mr. Baxter's granddaughter, I felt obligated to correct the information on the site, especially since Wikipedia had NAPA being created as a retailer in 1925 by a company that didn't even exist until 1928. That inconsistency was there in black and white, yet no one noticed that the facts, as stated, were impossible. It also was not a retailer until Genuine Parts did whatever it did to make it so after 1970 or 1980.

Since the first edit, I have refined the text and eliminated extraneous information so that it reads better. Can you explain why you thought my corrections were a test and what you did to change them? Thank you for your anticipated clarification. MarthaQualitymatters1555 (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2015 (UTC) 76.180.67.212 (talk) 05:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Qualitymatters1555. A better place to post this comment would be Talk:National Automotive Parts Association. Jeremiah Y. might not see your post here. RockMagnetist(talk) 06:28, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

self published books

Hello, May we cite self published, scholarly books (published by Create Space, for example) with an ISBN number under Further Reading? Vocatur (talk) 09:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Generally, no. Further reading sections shouldn't contain links that wouldn't meet Wikipedia's reliable sources guidelines. The only exception would be if the author of the book in question was already well-known in the relevant field and had previously been published on the subject by a reputable publishing house. Otherwise, self-published books don't belong in Further reading sections. Yunshui 雲水 09:56, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

This concerns an author known in the relevant field who has been published by a reputable publishing house. Should I put his books under References or Further Reading? Vocatur (talk) 10:53, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

@Vocatur: I think there are two separate issues here: citing his books, presumably as a reference for him, which, usually, is not appropriate whoever published them, and placing books under a "Further reading" section.
The first is sometimes seen as complex. Let me try to explain. If s/he manufactured vacuum cleaners, the cleaners would be her/his work. A vacuum cleaner could not be a reference for her/him, simply because it is the product he makes. So it is with his books. However, a review of her/his work by others tends to be a review of her/him and her/his methods, so is a reference
The second is a judgement call about whether such a section is appropriate at all, and, if so, what its content ought to be. I would err on the side of caution in this area, choosing to list only the most significant of his works, and then by ISBN to avoid linking to the site of a single vendor. Fiddle Faddle 11:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks for your thoughtful answer. I have not explained well: this does not concern an article about the above-mentioned historian, but rather listing his books here and there under "Further Reading" on OTHER notable people he has written about! Vocatur (talk) 11:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I assume we're talking about Albert B. Southywick here? If so, his books might be appropriate - he's reliable enough to be used as a source in books from OUP and Princeton UP, so clearly historical scholars recognise his validity; he's also been published by a reputable publishing house in the past. I'd imagine, though, that his books would be better as sources for expanding the articles in question, rather than just tagged on as "Further reading". Yunshui 雲水 11:32, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for this useful reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vocatur (talk • contribs) 13:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

can't find my question

I asked a question here on Wikipedia:Tearoom approximately three weeks ago, but now I can't find the question or possible answers. Any tips on how to find it? Would it help to have the exact wording of the question summary, I didn't think to write it down at the time? The question involved a section I added to the article "Mold" about artists who had used mold in art pieces. When I looked at the article I saw my section was gone. I couldn't seem to get any info about the deletion on the "edit" page, but wasn't sure I was looking correctly. Is there a way to know if a person deliberately deleted the section? Is there a way to know who did it? Is there a way to contact the person as I'd like to know why it was deleted? Thank you.69.230.179.59 (talk) 14:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The questions has been answered here- questions that no-one has commented on for a few days get automatically archived. For future reference, on the right-hand side, there's a search bar that searches this page's archives. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Multiple merges in Parental leave

Hi! With the advice of my instructor in a Wiki Education program, I have merged several related (short!) pages together into the existing Parental leave article. I'm brand new to editing Wikipedia this quarter and would love community feedback on how to make the article better! Melody.waring (talk) 03:08, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Just did a quick look through at your changes and everything looks good to me. By the way, I can't think of a better article to edit for a Feminist Economics class! Happy editing! Winner 42 Talk to me! 14:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you!! Appreciate your vote of confidence. :) Melody.waring (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_339&oldid=1142564726"