Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 358

Archive 355

Archive 356

Archive 357

Archive 358

Archive 359

Archive 360

→

Archive 365

Similar name

Hi I have a question here. Suppose, if there are 2 or more people with same name then how to create two different page. How to create Wikipedia disambiguation page?? I am having problem with this. Shankar Acharya is an economist but another Shankar Acharya (not created article on Wikipedia yet) is a Nepali actor/director. Now people may be confused with this. So what can be done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxboy (talk • contribs) 13:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Noxboy and welcoem to the Teahouse. In such a case, one, or possibly both names, will be modified to make them distinct. Fpr exmaple, we might have Shankar Acharya (actor) or Shankar Acharya (economist). See Wikipedia:Disambiguation for more details. DES ^(talk) 13:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Use of accents in Spanish with non-Spanish proper names

With a name in Spanish, like Bartolomé de Las Casas, everybody, including me, agrees that they should be spelled according to modern Spanish rules.

My query is about proper nouns of non-Spanish origin that are more commonly used in Spanish than in any other written language. Nahuatl and Teotihuacan, and many others, are written in modern Spanish with an accent. There's a rule in Spanish that says so. In modern Spanish, the accent (Spanish only uses acute) marks the stressed syllable. (See Spanish orthography for a full discussion, if interested. In the original languages, there was no alphabet.)

The English Wikipedia seems to use them without the accent. I can't find a style guide in WP that addresses this point. I think more good would be done by including the accents than omitting them, though I may be prejudiced since I know Spanish. Your guidance appreciated. deisenbe (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Deisenbe. Please see the section of the guideline at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) known by the shortcut WP:DIACRITICS. In short, the core gauge is the commonality of use in reliable English language sources. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Addition to External Links

I would like to add a link to the Vasculitis Foundation to each of the articles about the diseases on which they do research. This foundation provided the information and support that my mother and our family needed when she was diagnosed several years ago. I would like to link this information to alert others with these conditions that this resource exists. I added the link to two of the topics but when I tried to add it to a third one (their are many forms of vasculitis), I received a warning. Please let me know what I need to do--and if it's not okay for me to add these links.Pepper4984 (talk) 17:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Pepper, welcome to the Teahouse! I know your intentions are good, but no, that's not allowed. Wikipedia is pretty restrictive on the external links it allows in its articles: you can look at this page for more information, but the general idea is that external links must be directly connected to the subject to be okay for Wikipedia. I don't think linking to your foundation from disease articles will fly--linking to your foundation from a Wikipedia article about your foundation (should it be notable enough for one, which is a whole different story) is more the thing. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Redirection

Hoping to give back to Wikipedia, I have begun translating and expanding articles from German into English. In terms of content, I am fine; however, I am having some difficulty in learning the technicalities of form etc.: even having conversations with other users in the edit tab is a challenge for me.

Basically, I wanted to suggest that the entry for Max Weber Center on the English Wikipedia receive its own entry, rather than falling under the University of Erfurt. The institute is semi-autonomous, and the German Wikipedia has it listed on its own, with a redirection from the University of Erfurt.

How would I go about suggesting this move? I can't seem to figure out who, exactly, would need to be asked to do so. Foosland (talk) 14:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Foosland and welcome to the teahouse. No one needs to approve in advance, you can just boldly create such a article. However, remember that the policies on article inclusion and particularly notability are different here than on de. You might want to create Draft:Max Weber Center and make sure that you have sufficient independent referencs from reliable sources to clearly establish the notability of this center before you move to mainspace. DES ^(talk) 15:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Foosland:, Rather than a "German Wikipedia has a stand alone article about X, so English Wikipedia should, too." Think about it as described in this process: Wikipedia:Summary style - as enough content about subtopic Y is available/accumulated, subtopic Y spins off to be a stand alone subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

A bit unrelated to your question, but we could always use more people to help with Category:Articles needing translation from German Wikipedia. If you are having difficulty editing the formatting, you can try out Visual Editor which can be enabled in beta preferences. Winner 42 Talk to me! 21:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

primary source is a first hand account

I want to add some information to a page from a primary source. This information comes directly from the individual who participated in a historic event (the duty officer for the first F-100 mission of the USAF in the Viet Nam War).

Is it permissible to source information this way in a proposed addition. Does the reference have to be an already published source?

Here is the information I want to add:

On the 3rd or 4th of June in 1964, the Air Force sent 8 pilots from the 615th Tactical Fighter Squadron to Da Nang, Republic of Viet-Nam. Two Navy Recce aircraft had been fired upon, and this was the retaliatory force. The target was a 'AAA' site near the Plain of Jars, and the mission destroyed that site. This was the first official strike of the USAF in the Viet-Nam War.

Thanks,

KTroboy (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC) Kim Troboy KTroboy (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi KTroboy. No, you cannot use this content unless you can source it to a published reliable source. The verifiability policy requires that sources of information be available to the public in some accessible form – so that our readers can check the information themselves. See also our policy on no original research. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

That policy is unfortunate, then, although I can imagine why it is in place. I happen to have the qualifications to do original research, have been published, and had hoped to contribute here, but I guess this is not the outlet for me or the information I have.

KTroboy (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC) Kim Troboy KTroboy (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, KTroboy this can be frustrating. But it is the only way Wikipedia has to preserve verifiability and reliability for its readers. You may well be highly qualified to do and publish original research, but Wikipedia has no way to validate those qualifications, nor the quality of your research. Insted we rely on secondary sources to excersize editorial control when they publish content, checking the qualifications of authors and perhaps fact-checking their work. Publishers that have a reputation for doign this we consider reliable sources, and article content should be sourced to such reliable sources.

You could publish your interview and research elsewhere, as a biography or biographical sketch, in some appropriate venue. Then that publication can perhaps be a source for a Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk) 21:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Someone claimed my username

Hello, we are a company who would like to create a Wiki account using our name - but it seems to have been already claimed? How can we get it back - or see who uses it? (as they may be an employee or past employee)

63.145.79.4 (talk) 16:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, 63.145.79.4. No one owns a Wikipedia article, or can "claim" it. If you refer to a username, usernames should identify specific individuals, not companies. An account named for a company is often blocked from editing for that fact alone. Also, no account should be shared by multiple people. One Person -> One Account. Our privacy policy prevents revealing what person uses any particular account, except in very limited circumstances. DES ^(talk) 16:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi 63.145.79.4! To add to what is said above, many companies, or employees of companies, want to get accounts on the Wikipedia because they confuse it with Facebook or LinkedIn or other social sites where they can promote their company, something that Wikipedia as an encyclopedia is not meant for. So before you do anything, please read the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Best, w.carter-Talk 16:42, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Which username is it? PrimeHunter (talk) 16:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The Username is: SketchUp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.145.79.4 (talk) 17:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

There is an article SketchUp, but there is no User:SketchUp registered at this time. DES ^(talk) 17:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Three was a user User:Sketckup who was renamed to user:Sketchup~enwiki apparently de to a conflict with a user name on another mediawiki project. 17:19, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

It was User:Sketchup (created 8 December 2006, has made no edits) who was renamed to User:Sketchup~enwiki, due to a conflict with de:User:Sketchup (created 30 December 2011, apparently made 2 edits which have since been deleted). The poster wants the name SketchUp with upper case U. There has been no English Wikipedia user by that name but the global rights to the username belongs to commons:User:SketchUp (created 25 May 2007, made 33 edits in 2007). The username cannot be usurped without permission form the user but as mentioned above, it would also be against our username policy. None of the three accounts have specified an email address and the long inactivity makes it unlikely they would reply to posts to their user talk pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

So there is no way for me to claim this username? What if they are inactive for years...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.134.88.50 (talk) 00:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think so, no. But if you did somehow claim the name, and then used it to edit the SketchUp article, or about that buisnss, you would be promptly and permenantly blocked from further editing under that name in any case, so if that is what you hand in mind, it's not much of a loss. DES ^(talk) 00:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Can we see recent changes in articles related to specific WikiPorject?

If we click on "recent changes" we see ongoing changes in all Wikipedia articles, but can we see recent changes made in articles tagged with specific WikiProjects? -- Human3015 knock knock • 10:46, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Human3015: I believe only for some Wikiprojects, for example Wikiproject medicine has it set up at Special:RecentChangesLinked/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Lists_of_pages/Articles. Winner 42 Talk to me! 02:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Change name

Can we change the name of already created Wikipedia page or not? Suppose, there is a page called abcd .Can we change it into abcd (actor)...like this?( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxboy (talk • contribs) 02:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Noxboy, and welcome to the Teahosue. Yes, a page name can generally be changed. We call it "moving the page" and the process is described in detail at WP:MOVE. The short version is that there will be a link "Move page", proably under the page menu, dependin on your setup and preferences. If you click this a box will popup asking you to enter the new page anme, and if applicable the new namespace. In most cases, any autoconfirmed user can do this. If there is already a page at the target name, an admin must perform the move.

However, that does not say if the move is a good idea. We have some rather complex guidelines on how articles should be named. See Wikipedia:Article titles for a full list of them. One of the most important is that we normally use the most common name by which a subject is known in reliable English-language sources. Another is that we don't add parenthetical disambiguators such as Joe Doaks (actor) if there is only one "Joe Doaks" with an article on Wikipedia. We add such notes only when they are needed to avoid two different subjects having the same title. There is extensive discussion of this at Wikipedia:Disambiguation.

Finally, if a move might be contentious, the procedure at Wikipedia:Requested moves should often be followed, so that consensus can be obtaiends on the best name for an article or other page. DES ^(talk) 03:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

References not enough

Hello, I have been attempting to get a character listed on Wikipedia but have been rejected for not having an experts testimony that the character is relevant. The character was created by myself and is a cartoon representation of a bumblebee. It is used in a series of children's books to raise awareness of the plight of bees in America. It is true that the book is brand new and has yet to be reviewed, but the artistic representation exists and it is used in a work with a ISBN number and is listed on Amazon etc. I do not know where one would go to find an expert to review the character to make it relevant. I will do so if you can direct me to them. I notice that Wikipedia does list many other cartoon artistic representations of characters. How did they get on Wikipedia? Thank you for your time, James Padgett Makaena (talk) 19:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Makaena, and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, since you created the character, you have a clear conflict of interest and should not create or edit the article about the character, even should the character eventually become Notable, which it almost surely is not right now. If, as you say, the book featuring this charcater has yet to be reviewed, its being a real book with an ISBN number does not alone make it suitable for a Wikipedia article, however worthy the cause it represents. It is not a matter of "expert testimony" exactly. It is that Wikipedia does not publish original work. Wikipedia is not a place to make things better known. Wikipedia articles summerize what has already been published about a subject by reliable sources, mostly independent secondary sources. The books themselves would be primary sources, not secondary. They could show that the character exists, but not how notable it is. If some expert, or even some reviewer who is not particularly expert, discusses this character in some depth in an indepnedantly published reliable source, that could be used in an article. If this happens several times that would probab;y be enough to support a new article. Otherwise, no such article could properly be created, and if one was created anyway, it would pobably be deleted fairly quickly. I am sorry, but that is the way that Wikipedia works. DES ^(talk) 19:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It is unlikely that the character will ever be notable - however, reviews in prominent press might end up making the book notable. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It does sometimes happen that a character will become notable in its own right, occasinally even more widely known than the original works in which that character appeared. Sherlock Holmes is an example. But it is pretty rare, and I should think even more rare for a character from books written for children. It is not likely in this case, and if it does happen, Makaena, someone else will write the article. DES ^(talk) 00:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

What about Smoky the Cowhorse? But I get it. I'm just some guy out in Hawaii with some stupid kids book. Who cares?Makaena (talk) 03:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Makaena. Our article Smoky the Cowhorse is not an article about a character, but rather it is an article about a highly notable children's book that won a Newbery Medal in 1927. No one said or implied that the book you illustrated is "stupid" but you informed us yourself that the books are new and have not yet been reviewed. This is an encyclopedia and we do not have articles about unreviewed books or their characters. If your books are widely reviewed or win major prizes like the Newbery, then that is the right time for an article about the books. And if the character is widely discussed in reliable sources, or made into a movie or TV show, then perhaps an article about the character might be justified. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:15, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, Makaena, you are a guy who has recntly written a book. Maybe it will become the next Where the Wild Things Are and be read over and over by generations of loving readers. I don't know. But that hasn't happened yet. Wikipedia doesn't have articles abotu things that might be well known in the future. It has articles about things that have been written about by others in the past. Tha tis because we base articles not on what their creaors say of their work, but on nwhat independant relaible sources have said. That is how we stay neutral, not a site to advertise things or attack things. Instead we summerize how others have already described things. No ofence to your creation, or to you, is intended. Would you be offended by someone saying that you haven't won the Newbury Medal, yet? These things take time, and I wish your efforts well. DES ^(talk) 04:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

asking for permission

I want to give a semi-nude photo in Panties article (a girl wearing only panties with no clothes) , this kind of photo is found on Wikimedia commons .Farzana zardari (talk) 04:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Helo, Farzana zardari, and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't, strictly speaking, need anyone's permisison. (See WP:BOLD.) But then neither does anyone need permisison to undo your action. (See Bold, revert, discuss cycle.) There is already an image in that article of a woman wearing a G-string and nothing else. I question if another is needed. You could discuss this on Talk:Panties. DES ^(talk) 04:50, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@DES I have uploaded a new photo in Panties.Farzana zardari (talk) 04:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Farzana zardari. You added the photo and it was reverted shortly thereafter. I do not think the photo adds encyclopedic value to the article. If you want to include that photo, you need to gain consensus. Explain your reasoning on the article's talk page. There has been no discussion on that page in 2015, though various editors have tried to add provocative photos without explaining why. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

E-commerce portals as a reference ??

Hi, Can we use e-commerce websites as a reference ?? As I found some books available in different languages on e-commerce websites, so from their can I add the number of languages and languages against the name of the books on wiki ?? Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 09:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vivek.bekhabar. "E-commerce" is a somewhat broad category of website and the reliability of sources (reliability being a condition precedent to source use) is always context-specific, so I don't know if there really can be any proper answer given the broadness of the question. However, it seems to me that regardless of any particular site's reliability, the only way you could add the number of languages in a manner implying the total is known, would be if the source says the number as a total and not by counting the number they list. To do the former would be original research. You might be able say something like X is translated into at least X number of languages based on such a count, but you could not say "X has been translated into Y languages", because that implies the source gave the answer in some form of definite register. By the way, this site is called Wikipedia, not wiki. A wiki is any website using wiki software; there are thousands of them. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit I too had the same thought but was not sure. So, posted here. Thank you for the clarification.

It's Wikipedia. I got it. Thanks Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 08:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Connected Applications

This link from my preferences page showed I have 0 Connected applications. What are those applications that I can connect?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:OAuthManageMyGrants X Swordsman Xcalibur 09:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Here is the list of applications that you can be connected to.

Cheers --Lionratz (talk) 10:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Most are technical. Probably I don't need them at all.--X Swordsman Xcalibur 10:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Also note that Special:OAuthManageMyGrants includes the link "Learn more about connected applications". PrimeHunter (talk) 10:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

That is entirely up to you. Personally, I have never used these applications and that does not hinder my editing.

Have fun editing!--Lionratz (talk) 10:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Secure connection

I checked every preference settings. I can't find the secure connection https option --X Swordsman Xcalibur 04:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, X Swordsman. I get a HTTPS connection whenever I log in. Please read Wikipedia:Secure server for technical suggestions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, X Swordsman, Everyone should now et a secure connection (https) automatically, and so the option was removed. See WP:VPT#HTTPS by default for details and people who object. DES ^(talk) 12:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

discussion

How do I call the attention of all users who have contributed to a particular page, so that I can discuss with them before making any major edit.srini (talk) 10:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi srini as far as I know there is no way to do such a thing as this would be very bad on many articles where their would be hundreds of contributors, many with no great interest in the topic just doing things like vandal reverting, copy editing, formatting etc. However you can manually alert people with a mention either by including a link to the user as I just did with you here, or using templates such as {{Ping|Srinivasprabhu933}} or {{Mention|Srinivasprabhu933}}. If your referring to 2014–16 ICC Women's Championship then the history shows only two other main contributors so not much work to ping them. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
• Hey srini: if you want to discuss a big change, the article's talk page is usually the place to do that. You are also encouraged to just be bold and make the change yourself, especially if the page in question is a small or obscure one that is unlikely to attract much attention. Your changes will be seen by anyone who has that page on their watchlist, so people who have signed up to be notified when the page is edited will see the edits you have made. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 12:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Why are editors blocked from editing for 24 hours after they involve in edit wars?

Why are editors blocked from editing for 24 hours after they involve in edit wars even if their contributions look clean. Can't they be warned and left for once rather than blocking them? NextGenSam619^t@lk 14:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Read the edit-warring policy. The main problem with edit-warring is that at least one of the edit-warriors typically is trying to resolve a content dispute by persistence rather than by discussion. Content issues should be discussed on the article talk page; edit-warring avoids or interferes with discussion. Usually an editor is warned before being blocked. If an edit-warrior is well over 3RR (say, at 5RR) and is edit-warring against consensus of two or more editors, an admin may reasonably decide that it is necessary to block the edit-warrior in order to get their attention. To restate, usually the editor is warned before being blocked, but sometimes, based on admin judgment, a block may be the only way to get the attention of a persistent edit-warrior. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

help me adding photo

please help me adding this プリントパンティーの例：花柄パンティー|300px photo in Panties article.Farzana zardari (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Farzana zardari, I'm seeing you are adding this photo to article replacing current one. Current pic in Panties has 3 different panties and they looks new and decent, while pantie in your pic looks used one. If you want to add new pic then click a better photo, panties should be non-used and photography should be done in professional way. As said in article there are various kind of panties but article don't has real photos of all kind of panties, you can click photo of other kind of panties whose photos are not there in article. --Human3015 knock knock • 07:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Farzana zardari, your attempt to display this photo in the article has been reverted on the grounds explained above. Please respect that. Asking at the Teahouse will not change things. If these panties hold some special meaning for you, then you should treasure it yourself and not on the Wikipedia. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 08:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Asking almost the same question more than once within the span of less than a day is considered tendentious editing. You won't get a different answer by asking the question two (or three or four) times. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

problem in creating page

I would like to create a page for my teacher who teaches me chemistry in allahabad, India please tell me what should be the requirements Atifh8 (talk) 15:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, @Atifh8. Wikipedia only allows articles on topics which are notable: this means they need to have been talked about in several reliable secondary sources. Unfortunately, unless your teacher is particularly famous for reasons other than teaching chemistry, we cannot include them on Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 16:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

inserting a section to an article

I'm new to Wikipedia editing. I've tried to edit an article on Walther von Reichenau and left my edit in Talk and Sandbox for a few days but haven't gotten any sign that it's observable by anyone else.

I'd appreciate some feedback. Specifically, I'm looking for a way to add the section after "Nazi Support" and to integrate my references into the present ones.

Thanks!

Radixetramus (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Radixetramus, and welcome to the Teahouse. There has not been any edit, by anyone, to Talk:Walther von Reichenau since 2012. I don't see any edit by User:Radixetramus except to User talk:Radixetramus and a sandbox page of yours. You should discuss such a major addition at Talk:Walther von Reichenau. No one would be watching for such a discussion on your user talk page unless you had already been in conversation with them.

Technically, you simply edit the section above and add the new section after it, starting with the section title surrounded by paired equals signs, like this:

==New section title here==

The article Walther von Reichenau seems to use ordianry ref tags, so you could put your references inside ref tags, and they would be automatically included in the refernce list. Do not use "ibid", repeat the source information or use shortend footnoots. See our Referencing for Beginners page for details, and Help:Footnotes for more advanced topics on citing sources. I hope this helps. DES ^(talk) 16:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

You seem to have put your question and proposed content on your user talk page - while people can see that, no-one working on the article would know to look there. You should put questions and comments about an article's content on the article's talk page, which is the tab on the left next to 'Article'.

For adding references, see Help:Referencing_for_beginners - you describe the source where it's used, and they're automatically numbered and placed in the References section. I'd suggest that you use the citation templates (unless you're using VisualEditor of course). FLHerne (talk) 16:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Simple Wikipedia problem

I have a problem with using the Simple English Wikipedia and I am unsure of where to ask there. I can't edit it for some reason, although I managed to today, and I have VisualEditor switched on there. I don't know what VE does but it is making it much harder to use and I just want to switch it off. Thanks, Rubbish computer 18:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I think the page I was trying to edit was semi-protected or something, as I can edit others. However, I still do no know why VE is switched on or how to turn it off. Rubbish computer 18:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer. simple:Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing has the option "Temporarily disable VisualEditor while it is in beta". PrimeHunter (talk) 18:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thank you. Rubbish computer 18:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Maiden names as middle names

When did it become established that married woman use their maiden name as middle names, e.g. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Michelle Robinson Obama? I'd never heard of this practice before, but it seems to have become common in recent years. (ps, I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question, but I don't know where else I would ask it.) Zacwill16 (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, you are in luck, the Wikipedia:Reference desk is set up just to answer factual questions. You might try either the Miscellaneous or the Humanities Desk - both get a lot of traffic. Please ask at only one though. 184.147.138.101 (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I've asked it at the Humanities Desk. Zacwill16 (talk) 18:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Adding article in other languages

Sir, Is it possible to write an article other than english! Please do reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianjalianilkumar (talk • contribs) 19:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

On the Wikipedias for other languages, yes. On the English Wikipedia, no. Go to the main site, and find the language you wish to write the article in. That will take you to that language's Wikipedia. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikiwand

I saw this site, and its like an overlay for making the wiki interface of articles how you want. For example, editing the font. This is a link to it http://www.wikiwand.com/ Just wondered if it has any connection to to Wikipedia or Wikimedia in general. thanks Wrightie99 (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

If you take a look at Wikiwand, it doesn't seem to have any official connection to the Wikimedia Foundation. It seems like a nice site, though — I've seen some of its effects (e.g. different font, preview of links) created by user preferences (see WP:POP) and custom CSS, but I'm sure many readers without accounts (and without any technical knowledge) find it very useful. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

IP

I am dealing with a disruptive IP (see my contributions which will lead you to a talk page post). How can I proceed? —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm no expert in this area but warning templates are usually the response for a couple of unconstructive edits. If the IP (or, it seems IPs) are being continually disruptive, WP:AIV might be the place to go. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I myself call it vandalism but many would just see it as unproductive. It isn't clear 100% vandalism. That's why I won't / can't revert it again and that page you linked says it's only for full on vandalism. I haven't given a warning template but I have told them that it's inappropriate for the article multiple times. So I have pretty much warned them. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Winner 42 seems to have warned the user and I've tried to establish a short-term compromise on Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction with this edit. You've included some explanation in your edit summaries but I think you're going to need a bit of a more detailed rationale for removing the sourced paragraph. I advise you to post on the Talk:Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction and if the IP doesn't object within a reasonable amount of time, or if there is clear consensus from other users, you can remove it. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

What to do with dead links ?

Hi, at some articles I have found some dead links(page not found), being used as references. Should they be removed? Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vivek.bekhabar
Please do not remove deadlinks, but tag them with the deadlink template {{Dead link}}.
To quote WP:KDL "A dead, unarchived source URL may still be useful. Such a link indicates that information was (probably) verifiable in the past, and the link might provide another user with greater resources or expertise with enough information to find the reference."
You could try and find an alternative source of that information, or try using an internet archive, such as the Wayback Machine to find an archived copy of the original information, and then link that. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Link rot - Arjayay (talk) 12:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for the information, will use it when come across with such links. Vivek.bekhabar (talk) 06:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Changing

I request to change the Solapur Junction railway station to simply 'Solapur Railway Station because 'Solapur' is not an officially recognised 'junction' by Indian Railways. Its a normal railway station — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dongar Kathorekar (talk • contribs) 06:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

It looks like someone's done this for you, but in the future, you might want to read Wikipedia:Moving a page#How to move a page — any user can boldly change article titles by themselves if they think no-one will object. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:00, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Edit summaries

On some main pages for categories of articles needing cleanup there are suggested edit summaries, e.g. at WP:Dead-end pages, there is Dead-end pages clean up project; you can help!. Through these you can direct other editors to the category. Can you just make your own, relevant edit summary like this, e.g. after doing some work on an article tagged as promotional to make it less promotional you could put, Neutralising promotional content; You can help! I would like to do something like this but have not in case it means I am breaking a rule or something. Thanks, Rubbish computer 14:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, that looks like a good edit summary. I suggest you use it yourself a bit, see how others respond and then suggest it on the category talk page. Best of luck! Happy Squirrel (talk) 14:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

BTW, for some reason, the Wikicode is not appearing properly in the original question. Happy Squirrel (talk) 14:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Happysquirrel: Thanks. I've also fixed the code now. Rubbish computer 17:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

An experienced user reverted my edits without prior discussion and hasn't responded to my message on their talk page

Hello!

I noticed that a lot of articles on Indian Classical Music are starkly absent of audio recordings of the music itself. This absence exists in spite of free recordings of Indian Classical Music being available on the Internet(freesound.org etc). To resolve this, I started locating such recordings from the Internet, uploading them on Commons and referencing them on relevant articles.

These recordings were selected because

1. They are available under a free license.
2. They add immense value to relevant articles since audio recordings of a composition would offer a more weighty perspective into a composition than the text/notation/mention of the composition in an article.
3. They are recordings from a public concert or from research projects studying carnatic music, which means they adhere to the underlying notation of the song, and are not recordings of a bad quality.

All my recordings have been removed from the articles by User:VasuVR, an experienced editor who also maintains the music project, without a discussion on my talk page or the talk page of the article. Their reason for reverting the edits seems to be a mention of the WP:UNDUE tag in the comment while reverting the edit.

My queries on the user's talk page have also not received any response even though the user has edited articles on the date after I posted my query on their talk page. How can I contact the user, and initiate a transparent discussion so that a neutral conclusion can be reached? Aruna Sankaranarayanan 16:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the, Aruna Sankaranarayanan. It appears that the other editor has only made two edits since you left your message. I recommend being a bit more patient. You may want to propose adding the music files on the talk pages of the various articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

New Articles

Are new Users allowed to create new articles directly? Or, they have to submit draft?Aero Slicers (talk) 09:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Aero Slicers. Registered users are allowed to create new pages without needing assistance from anyone else. See Wikipedia:Your first article before you decide to write a new article, and make sure the topic is notable, and not already covered in Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello. As Bilrov said, you may create the article directly. However, creating and submitting a draft first to articles for creation gives you more of a safety net. Drafts give you more time to work before they are evaluated. Also, if a draft fails review, it is usually only declined and you can work on it further. If a new article fails new page patrol it tends to end up nominated for deletion. A middle option is to draft the article and then move it to article space yourself when you are happy with it. This gives you more time to work on it, but not the reviewer's comments. Anyways, the choice is entirely yours. All the best! Happy Squirrel (talk) 13:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Aero Slicers: For very new editors, I'd recommend Articles for creation. Once you've got a bit more experience, then create the article in a sandbox or similar. When you think it is ready, you can notify a relevane WikiProject that you have a proto-article and wish to have some eyes cast over it before release. Once other editors have had a chance to bash it into a better shape and give you some feedback, then it can be moved into mainspace. If you don't wish to keep the redirect created by such a move then it can be tagged for deletion and an admin will do the honours. When you get more experience and more confident, you can create articles direct in mainspace. Remember to back up facts by saying where you got them from and you'll be fine. Mjroots (talk) 20:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Just created a page it is on speedy delete.

Hello there,

Talash SE " The Search Engine Child Safe, SO I created this page, It should not considered as web contents because there are no service or companies yet provide a service such as Talash.ca. In Google you really have to do privacy check in order to do a safe. Many users around the world do not have google account or they may not even know about the privacy check. This Service is provided by Master Mine Media, a group of companies. We provide many different services and one them are the above. So I think It should not considered as webpage content. ThanksMMMAGC (talk) 20:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure that I understand the question. The article, as it stands, does not explain what is notable about the subject of the article. Also, the article is grammatically not in good shape, which makes it hard to see what you are trying to say or why it is notable. It needs more references and a lot of copy-editing. I suggest that you move it into user space or draft space and get help in working on it, because it certainly isn't ready to be included in article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, MMAGC. Like Robert McClenon, I don't fully understand your question. But I think that you are here to promote a particular company, claiming a justification in that it provides a service which is important. If that is the case, then I must tell you that promotion of any kind is forbidden on Wikipedia, no matter how worthy the cause. Only when a subject has already been written about by people unconnected with it can it be written about in Wikipedia. Judging from your user name, you may also have a conflict of interest, in which case you are strongly discouraged from writing about the company. --ColinFine (talk) 23:08, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Article Keeps getting denied - can't get clarity on why

Hello, I have an article I am writing for Robert Hanley (he is an actor/comedian/host). I have submitted it several times and I keep getting denied that the citations are not reliable, which I do not understand. I have primary citations from his website, IMDB, videos on the links showing him in the particular show/etc., plus I have secondary resources with several newspapers, and other sites.

I do not understand what else is needed and required? It has been a pretty frustrating experience, as the only comments I get are regarding resources. Since much of his work predates the internet, we have a lot of articles/newspapers/etc. but those do not seem to be acceptable. The last reviewer, who just denied it, referred me to here since he is gone until August. Please help me with some concrete understanding of what more would be needed as I would like to get this thing going. To my understanding, I have followed what is in the help guide. Thank you!

Saviodesigns (talk) 23:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

You apparently havent read the basic version of what is required for a stand alone article or how we define reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Primary sources are useless for establishing notability, as are user generated sources like IMDB and Wikia. Amidst all those citations, I managed to find two local newspapers about a single event (see WP:BLP1E), and an LA times feel-good piece with more focus on "actor has faith," rather than "Robert Hanley is a noteworthy actor."

My recommendation would be to collect all the professionally published secondary sources you can find, draft a summary of those, and use only that as an article. If that work, the subject might not be notable enough for the encyclopedia. If it does work, then you can fill it out some with a few details from his website (just don't give it WP:UNDUE weight, and don't use it to make any claims except about him and only him). When you cite something, cite only one thing at a time. If multiple citations support a single claim, present them as multiple citations instead of as a combined citation (because combined citations give the impression of WP:SYNTH). Ian.thomson (talk) 23:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the reply - since a lot of our resources predate the internet, is there any way to use those as resources if they are not online? I thoughtI was following the guidelines correctly but will revise it to try and do that - thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saviodesigns (talk • contribs) 23:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

By "our," do you mean that you're working with a group? Ian.thomson (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes there is, you can use any verifiable source, even if it's not online- for example newspapers not online can be cited, or publically available archives, if they have archive numbers. Also, I've asked questions about your username/use of "we" on your talkpage, please reply about them there before continuing to edit. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, for the benefit of all other users, seems they've now been blocked for username violations. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Adding pages in categories

I'm wanting to add a few articles into Category:Association football utility players. How do I do that? Thunder4231Rush (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse! In the source editor, add [[Category:Association football utility players]] at the bottom. Another option is wp:HotCat if you will be doing more category work. hope that helps! Happy Squirrel (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. So, what exactly is the source editor? I'm really new to this. Thunder4231Rush (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Thunder4231Rush. Happy Squirrel means what you get if you pick "Edit" at the top of the page when you are looking at most articles. Add the text Happy Squirrel gave you - including the double square brackets - at the bottom. Please note that putting a player in that category is implicitly making a claim about what kind of player they are: you should not do it unless the article explicitly says that the player is a utility player; and in turn the article should not make that claim unless it cites a reliable published source which says so. Wikipedia articles should not contain anybody's opinion - yours, mine, or anybody else's, except citing a reliable published source which advances that opinion. --ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much Colin Fine! So if I find a source that says that, say, Chris Tierney can play anywhere in the defense and in the midfield, and I put that source on Chris Tierney's article, would I then be able to add Chris Tierney into the category? Thunder4231Rush (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Its whatever you feel is need in the categories man mainly bots your talking to on hereArabAmazigh12 (talk) 22:34, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't know much soccer, but I do know I, and most of the other volunteers on here are human beings, even though my user page does claim I am a squirrel :) Thanks! Happy Squirrel (talk) 22:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Thunder4231Rush. It's a judgment call. I would have thought that you needed a source describing him as a "utility player", but this is partly influenced by the fact that I had never heard the phrase before this evening, and had to look it up to find out what it meant. I guess that if the phrase is widely used and understood in football, then maybe it is enough that he is described as playing in these different positions. I have no idea what ArabAmazigh12 is trying to say, by the way. --ColinFine (talk) 23:31, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I have been watching footie for almost 55 years and I have never heard that expression. Sounds rather subjective to me...--ukexpat (talk) 12:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Squirrel, Arab, and Colin! I'm gonna give it a try tomorrow. Thunder4231Rush (talk) 03:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Wiki page for local company

I would like to create a Wiki page for a local company I work for. Would this page probably be deleted because it is not "notable"? Thanks! SarahSills (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, SarahSills, and welcome to the Teahouse. If the company is purely local, than quite probably it would. Note that waht we have on Wikipeda (not just "wiki", there are many diferent wikis) are articles, which are supposed to be about encyclopedic, notable topics, rather than just "pages". See our guideline for notability of corporations. The simple version is that there must be coverage or discussion of the subject in some detail, in published independent reliable sources. These should be mre than merely local in scope, too.

Also, as an employee of the company, you have a very strong conflict of interest. If you were to start such an article, you would be required to opnely disclsoe your relationship, see our policy on paid editing. You are strongly discouraged from writing aout yourself or your employer, even if the topic is notable. If you did go ahead, I strongly urge you to use the Article wizard, but you would be likely to waste your time and find it frustrating, I am sorry to say. Is there any other topic you would be interested in writing about here? DES ^(talk) 02:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, SarahSills. We are all here to make the encyclopaedia as good as we can, often by improving articles. But if you are employed by that company, your idea of what would enhance an article about it is probably different from Wikipedia's consensus of what would do so. For Wikipedia, an article is improved by making sure it is rigorously sourced to reliable published sources, mostly to sources independent of the subject; written in a way that is determinedly neutral, and does not contain any marketing speak or any judgments or conclusions except those quoted from independent sources; and covers all published views of the subject, including any that are critical. --ColinFine (talk) 07:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Question about editing the article of a company I work for

What would you recommend as a process for a company to enhance their Wikipedia page? I am an employee of said company that meets the notability guidelines set by Wikipedia and that currently has a rather short (and factually incorrect, in some places) Wikipedia page created by our previous PR agency. I reviewed the Conflict of Interest guidelines and understand that it's not considered appropriate for me to edit the same. What would you recommend be done in this case, given the backlog in Articles for Creation? Thank you for your help in advance! Riashroff (talk) 06:16, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Riashroff, the best practice for a COI editor is to post suggested improvements to the Talk page of the article, remember to include independent sources wherever possible. As the article already exists the Articles for Creation system is irrelevant. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Riashroff. In addition to what Dodger67 has said, please read my answer to Sarah Sills two sections below this. --ColinFine (talk) 07:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine and Roger (Dodger67). I will check on this and proceed.Riashroff (talk) 07:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

User name - Suitability of article - improperly sourced - editing

Hi I am new to Wikipedia and not familiar with the processes. Just wanted to work through the issues that have been pointed. I also incorrectly listed my user name as the same name as the person I am writing about. So 1/. I would like to correct that. 2/. Advised "Sourced incorrectly" what does this mean and how do I do about that 3/. Also advised "questionable notoriety". how do I satisfy that ?? I guess if no. 3 cannot be established there is not much point in the rest. Any assistance or advice would be appreciated. Cheers. StephenR (Kara Moana Healey)Stephen R (talk) 08:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen. Yes, using somebody else's name is not a good idea. You can either abandon that account and create a new one, or follow the instructions at WP:CHU.

The word we use is not 'notoriety' but 'notability', but this has a special meaning in Wikipedia. It does not mean importance, or influence, or significance: it means almost solely "Have people unconnected with the subject written extensively about them, and had their writing published in a reliable place?". Since every Wikipedia article should be based almost entirely on what independent reliable sources have published about the subject, it follows that if there is little or no such writing, then it is impossible to write an acceptable article. Every single statement in your draft should be individually cited to a published reliable source; and apart from uncontroversial factual data, it should be to independent sources. Please see WP:GNG and Referencing for beginners. --ColinFine (talk)

Speech mark list

On Constitution of Kosovo#Elementary Freedoms and Rights, I do not know how to put speech marks around a numbered list. Thanks, Rubbish computer 17:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Per MOS:BLOCKQUOTE, "Do not enclose block quotations [quotes of more than 40 words] in quotation marks". I've had a go at formatting the lists for you: to create an automatically numbered list, just include a hash sign (#) at the start of each line. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 21:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Thank you. Rubbish computer 09:43, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Wording question

On the article Television advertisement, I worked on wording and grammar a bit and part of this was changing the word 'ad' to 'advertisement'. I feel this is unnecessary now but do not want to revert everything else I have done in order to change it back. Do I need to change it back or should I leave it? Thanks, Rubbish computer 09:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I always considered "ad" too informal for encyclopedic writing, and therefore I think you should leave your changes in place. Online dictionaries seem not to say so, apart from one, which defines it '1841, shortened form of advertisement. Long resisted by those in the trade, and denounced 1918 by the president of a national advertising association as "the language of bootblacks, ... beneath the dignity of men of the advertising profession."'

If you had wanted to change it back without undoing every other change you made in an edit or series of edits, one way to do this would be to edit the page, copy the source into an external text editor, and then carefully search and replace the word you wanted to change back. Then you would copy the changed text back from the external text editor into the Wikipedia editing window, and save the page. You would also need to check the history afterwards to see if you were over-writing any changes made by someone else in the meantime. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Arthur goes shopping: Thanks, I think I will keep it as 'advertisement' as this seems more formal. Rubbish computer 10:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Statistical analysis on a Wikipedia dump

Hi, thanks for the invite! How can I find someone who knows how to do a statistical analysis on a Wikipedia dump? I would like to have a list of the most frequently used words on Wikipedia that contain more than x characters. I think x=6 should be enough. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 17:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi The Quixotic Potato, you will find the technical experts at the Technical Village Pump. The Teahouse deals with beginner-level editing help so your request is outside our field. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! The Quixotic Potato (talk) 10:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

My new article was deleted without notice...

Hey there, I just wrote an article, with citing sources, and not using the same words (copy-pasting), but it seems it wasn't good enough.

Of course I wanted to improve it if it was not perfect, but instead - it was just deleted - not taking into account the time I have spent in sincerely creating it.

Its so frustrating... I can't believe I've done this mistake and didn't save a copy of it on my computer. so... hours of work are gone...

What can I do? How can I convince the Eraser to bring it back (if she can...)?

Thanks, Roi Roi.eco (talk) 08:15, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Nothing that's written on Wikipedia is ever gone for good — your article is just hidden rather than completely removed. See WP:REFUND: on this page you can ask for your article to be "userfied", so you can slowly work on improving the page without others rushing to delete it. However, please bear in mind that there are some topics which are just not notable for inclusion on Wikipedia because reliable secondary sources just don't exist. I can't see what the article you wrote was about, but there's a chance it won't ever make it into Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:54, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Roi,

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! As you have not specified the article in question, I presume that your are referring to the the Draft of Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards. (However, do note that articles at the Articles for Creation page are not published articles yet)

In Wikipedia, deletions also follow a process, which is explained in detail in this guide. Most deletions require a discussion, but in your entry's case, it comes under what is called a "Speedy Delete". The reviewer has found that your article was copied from a couple of sources, and thus judged it as a copyright infringement. This is a perfectly legitimate reason to speedily delete an article.

You should first contact the reviewer on his or her talk page to find out more about his or her decision. Perhaps there was some misunderstanding? Or you could ask for suggestions so that if you recreate the article, it would not be deleted again. Other possible solutions can be found here.

As for undoing deletions, I have not heard of such a thing but it might be possible for certain users who are given special rights. (see Bilorv's explanation above) In future, perhaps you could save your draft before submitting it so that your can have a copy to work on?

Best of luck in your future editing!-- Lionratz (talk) 10:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

If you are talking about Draft:Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards it was " deleted page Draft:Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: from http://rt.wildasia.org/responsible-tourism-awards/about-the-awards/)". As it says in the notices above the editing box "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." so, you were "given notice."-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the detailed answers.

It does feel good to see that you really care and want to help :)

Yes, it was the Wild Asia Responsible Tourism Award.

I will look at the links you two provided and will re-write it.

I think it is notable, but I'll re-read the regulations.

Thanks, Roi Roi.eco (talk) 11:10, 7 July 2015 (UTC)