Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 522

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 515

←

Archive 520

Edit warring in formerly god and buddhism article

there has been edit warring in formerly god and buddhism article. the problem begins with the new article title. creator in buddhism is a misleading term because it is too specific. its a title that does not cover all ideas regarding faith and the divine. its perfectly possible for a religion to consider the universe a source of enlightnment and to have faith in aspects of the universe (pantheistic elements). buddhism rejects the idea the universe was created by a god in a specififc point in time or that there is a supreme creator being, but it can not be denied that buddhism has clear pantheistic elements (specially mahayana buddhism) since buddhism divinizes certain aspects of the universe and consider that the natural laws of the universe are the ultimate source of enligthnment. however , perhaps god in buddhism is also an innapropriate term because it may possibly give the idea that there is an equivalent concept to the abrahmic god in buddhism. but there is not. these are different religions with very different concepts.

there is actually nothing contentious. what is happening is a bunch of editors forcing their POV in the article. the very own title of the article became misleading and over-specific. and they discarded tons of sources (including academical ones and interviews with the dalai lama) in order to make the article suit to their perspectives. these guys are making the article into a stub and forcing POV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashtekaros (talk • contribs) 15:43, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Buddhism and the God dea is a more appropriate term for the article in my opinion. since it has a more general and less specific tone.

(edit conflict) This posting is no more appropriate here than it was on the Teahouse Talk page, Ashtekaros. Content disputes should be discussed on the article's talk page, and then, if necessary, follow the procedures in dispute resolution. --ColinFine (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)x2 and sorry for those 4 page breaks my keyboard malfunctioned while moving! maybe... — RainFall^Hey! 15:52, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

How to get a bibliography infobox based on wikidata appear on the EN page (it already is on a FR page)

I would like to get the personal data (biography) from https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Pascal_van_Ypersele_de_Strihou to appear on the equivalent english page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Pascal_van_Ypersele I am confused because the page already appears on wikidata https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q165870#sitelinks-wikipedia I tried to copy the code referring to it from the FR to the EN page, but this had no effect so I didn't save it. Are those EN and FR pages correctly linked in wikidata ? If not, what should be done to ensure this ? Pmarbaix (talk) 12:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

They are properly linked, but enwiki has limited support for Wikidata-based infoboxes at the moment and, as far as I know, there isn't a way to create a Wikidata-based biography infobox like the one on the French article. I'm afraid you'll have to manually copy it. Joe Roe (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I couldn't believe that some computer-related thing would work better in FR than EN... ! Copying does not seem very easy, as the wikipedia page does only contain a reference to the infobox, and I do not want my lack of experience to cause trouble with code that I did not write (by clicking on edit for the infobox's parameters or something like that). Furthermore, being a colleague of the cited person, I asked for peer-review of the page by others, so maybe that will be fixed. If not, I will do my best to ensure that FR->EN copy.

Pmarbaix (talk) 16:08, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Converting BibTeX to wikipedia references.

Hello,

Wikipedia uses its own syntax for bibliographic references, which is different from BibTeX, the de facto standard for academic articles in TCS and Maths, to which I am used.

Here is an example BibTeX ref to a classical textbook: http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bibtex/books/daglib/0011126

Is there a way to automatically convert a BibTeX ref such as the above into Wiki format? Doing so manually seems soul-crushingly boring.

The closest I found was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Citation_tools, but of the only 2 entries that mention BibTeX, one is Mac-exclusive -- I use Linux, so that's out -- and the other exports to BibTeX.

(Beyond that, I'm interested in any documentation that facilitates / automates the transition from LaTeX-based documents to Wiki format)

Regards, Gamall Wednesday Ida (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Gamall. Interesting question. Other than BibDesk I haven't been able to find anything either. You could perhaps ask at WP:VP/T, which is the best place for technical questions. It does strike me that if such a tool doesn't exist it should be fairly easy to create one, since there are lots of BibTeX parsing packages out there and the {{Citation}} templates are pretty straightforward.

I see from your user page you've already thought of using Pandoc for LaTeX-to-Mediawiki conversion, which would be by only suggestion. Joe Roe (talk) 18:03, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try my luck on VP/T, then. Gamall Wednesday Ida (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't know whether this is helpful or not, Gamall Wednesday Ida, but if you can't find a way to do this, then an alternative might just be to use this tool to generate citations based on a DOI or ISBN. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:58, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

It is quite helpful, Cordless Larry; it is actually mentioned in the tools page, but I had overlooked it (I saw "Daily Mail", but not "ISBN" in its description). Cheers, Gamall Wednesday Ida (talk) 20:07, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I just saw it on that list and was reminded of it, Gamall Wednesday Ida. Having tried it out, the results are far from perfect. This one appears to be better for journal articles (based on a sample of one). Cordless Larry (talk) 20:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: Based on that and the answers on VP/T, Zotero seems like the most general method. When I get time to try those out, I'll put a note of it someplace accessible, like the tools page. It's probably a semi-common need. Gamall Wednesday Ida (talk) 21:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Added references but did not show up on article after logging out

Verbal Plenary Preservation. Added references, saved and appeared on article's references. However, upon logging out, the references were not on the article. On logging in, the references could be seen on the article. Are the added references rejected? If not, why are they not showing up. Watchman1234 (talk) 01:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

There are several possibilities:

1) Someone is concurrently editing the page as you so there could be a save conflict and your references were rejected because you might not have chosen it to merge properly.

2) I see the page was moved to a new page which drops the caps on the last 2 words. The save conflict could have happened during this time. It should no longer persist.

3) If you are using Chrome as a browser, use Incognito Mode (not logged in, no user login session) to view the article as it could be a cache issue.

Always double check the Edit Source to make sure your <ref></ref> are in.

Cheers Bpc.sg (talk) 03:28, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hana Pestle and HANA

Both pages are nearly identical, what does one do to begin a merge ? Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 00:49, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

@Xb2u7Zjzc32: See here: Wikipedia:Merging#Proposing a merger. Happy editing, Wiki Pancake ^{✉ 📖} 08:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

accidentally didn't follow guidelines for my wikipedia page and it's now locked out

A few months ago, I tried to establish a page that covers my life as a professional international artist of DC comics and Marvel for 20 years. I was asked to provide proof of some of the information to back up my claims of my accomplishments and when I did, I was told that was not the way to go, but I wasn't informed how else to guide someone to my source material. I got labelled as using this page as a host site or something like that, and that was never my intention. Is there anyway I can wipe the slate clean and start over? Because I admit to being ignorant of how to post my professional name (which I'm told is s nickname already in use). Please help.Drew Geraci (talk) 03:57, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back, Drew Geraci. Judging by the messages on your talk page, it appears that you attempted to create an article about yourself at User:Drew Geraci, which is your user page, rather than at Drew Geraci, which is where an article about you would be. Writing about yourself is strongly discouraged but not prohibited. If you are insistent on doing so, the best way is via the Article Wizard. See Wikipedia:Your first article. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:39, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Need help for adding citation in my article as it was declined due to inline citation not used.

Hello,

My article got declined due to not using inline citation, I tried to read about citation and wanted to apply it on my article, but I can't understand how to use and where to use. Can anyone help me to edit the article and make acceptable for wikipediaNooruddin.etcs (talk) 06:41, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Nooruddin.etcs: you should start by reading Referencing for beginners, as you were advised when the draft was declined. Maproom (talk) 10:58, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I will see to it and go through the linkNooruddin.etcs (talk) 11:13, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

question regarding notes, quotes and external media

Hello Wiki community

I would like to ask a couple of questions. The subject I am writing about appeared in TV news over 20 times and all the content of the article (almost every single information) can be verified by these news items. Many of the news though were not transcripted into text and many are not available on their source websites any more, but are available on the youtube channel where he uploaded the videos. How could I add such news as something more credible than just a regular youtube channel? I was thinking about one option I saw on the page of one of his fellow rower: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erden_Eru%C3%A7#Early_life you can see the "external media" banner there. And I was thinking about placing a note on the banner: "Most of the content of this article was referred to by various Icelandic and international TV news items or documentaries, which can be used for verification purposes. Many of the videos are not accessible through the original websites any more but can be found on these youtube playlists: Sports News Art News" (please disregard the style for now). Perfect example could be the work he did with Faroese Horses very well documented in TV news but poorly in terms of online publications.

I would appreciate any advice.

P.S. Are the questions I post here later seen in google search?

Svedlundp (talk) 12:40, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Svedlundp, and welcome to the Teahouse. The problem with the note you propose is that it wouldn't be clear how much of the article content is supported by those news items. What you should do instead is use inline citations to each of the sources, as and where they support material in the article. Sources don't need to be available online, and I presume that applies to TV programmes as much as it does printed sources. I'm not sure whether this page is indexed by Google or not - I think it probably is. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. Would you mind pasting a link to any example of such solution implemented?

Svedlundp (talk) 13:53, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

If you look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Cite episode, Svedlundp, you'll see articles that make use of the citation template for TV and radio programme episodes. The Alfred Hitchcock, for examples, cites The Dick Cavett Show without providing a URL. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:36, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Can anyone explain these sub templates?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/Template:Latest_preview_software_release/

Marvellous Spider-Man 04:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Marvellous Spider-Man. See Template:Latest preview software release. They are often used by Template:Infobox software#Moving release data outside the article. If this does not answer your question then please be more specific. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:08, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Templates link articles. The templates in articles, link to similar articles. In categories we have to click the category link to view all pages in that category. In templates they have an expand option. And links marked as V, T, E. view, discuss and edit. I can understand infobox software. If those sub-templates are created, then how are they used in any article? They are transcluded in 1 article. Marvellous Spider-Man 15:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@Marvellous Spider-Man: Templates are used for many purposes. You are apparently thinking of navigation templates which are just one type of template. Some of the software release templates are used in many articles so the information only has to be updated in one place. See for example Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Latest preview software release/Firefox where uses of Template:Latest preview software release/Firefox are marked "(transclusion)". The infobox in Firefox uses it and has "[±]" links to edit the template. It's also used by several list articles. Many other types of templates dont display any link to edit them when they are used. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thanks, I understand now, as you gave examples. Wikipedia sometimes become difficult. Marvellous Spider-Man 17:20, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia page issues

When reviewing this Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Corporation), there is a list of issues that comes up.Below is the list of issues. How am I able to help resolve these issues? I periodically review the LORD page to ensure it is accurate. Am I considered too close to the source because of this? I made some changes to it a couple of weeks ago to reflect a new boilerplate that the company has because of acquisitions. Could this be the reasoning as to why this is noted on Wikipedia's template?

Thanks so much! Tina

[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (August 2016) The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. (August 2016) This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, potentially preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral. (August 2016)73.247.68.220 (talk) 00:07, 3 September 2016 (UTC)73.247.68.220 (talk) 00:13, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Tina. If by chance you are an employee of the company or being paid in any way to edit the article, then you must comply with the mandatory disclosure requirements at WP:PAID. The tag at the very top of the article encourages discussion on the article's talk page and there has been no discussion there since 2010. A large percentage of the content is based on the company's website and a commissioned book about the company put out by a PR firm, Albrecht & Associates. These are not sources which are independent of the company. A Wikipedia article on a company should be based almost completely on what reliable sources unaffiliated with the company have written about it. The tags should stay on the article until it is either deleted or brought into compliance, which would require a complete rewrite, in my opinion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:27, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Looking for a certain template

I was looking over a few pages that were lacking in information, and I felt that their foreign language counterparts had info that could be translated and edited over to the English article. I remember that there was a template that fit the issue, but I can't seem to remember it. Verified Cactus (talk) 18:30, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

@VerifiedCactus:, is it {{Expand language}} you're after? Nthep (talk) 18:50, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi VerifiedCactus. You'll want one of the templates in Category:Expand by language Wikipedia templates, depending on the language. Joe Roe (talk) 18:51, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

@Nthep: {{Expand language}} shouldn't be used directly, it's for constructing other templates (see the docs). Joe Roe (talk) 18:53, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I know but it's the core you use depending on language. Nthep (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, VerifiedCactus. You will probably find the template you are looking for at Wikipedia:Template_messages/Translation. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:51, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I got the one I needed. Verified Cactus (talk) 18:53, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

never mind

I've tried on several occasions to understand how to create a page of my public professional life as a comic book artist, but it doesn't seem like I can navigate the site properly, so I'm letting my name expire and will stay away from Wikipedia. I was asked for proof on several questions, I provided links to prove my case, then I was accused of self-promotion when I just wanted to prove all the questions of my veracity. But I've wasted countless hours trying to figure out the proper thing to do by your rules and guidelines. So please delete any info on meDrew Geraci (talk) 04:04, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Drew Geraci and welcome to the Teahouse. It appears that all information from your userpage has already been deleted, however it is not possible to delete user accounts. If you do not wish to edit Wikipedia any more, then you can simply not use your account. Joseph2302 11:05, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid the "proper thing to do by your rules and guidelines" is not to write an article about yourself in the first place, Drew Geraci. Wikipedia is a volunteer-edited encyclopaedia, not a web host or place to set the record straight. Autobiographies are strongly discouraged under our conflict of interest policy. Joe Roe (talk) 18:59, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't being sarcastic about the 'proper thing to do'. In all frankness, I'm overwhelmed by attempting my own page. I'm still fuzzy on the 'write an article for myself' aspect while leaving large chunks of well-established (in print and in media) periods of my career.

I don't understand how to put data in about myself without it being considered an article. That said, this could be the end of our discussion and you can close my page entirely if you're not able to delete it. I made a mistake in trying to put my name on Wikipedia in the first place.I can't waste my time and your volunteers' time, so I understand you have strict rules and guidelines, and that is for the best, as some stranger can't write anything slanderous by taking another person's identity. That all said, this is my final contact. My ego doesn't need to go through all this just to get my name on the site. Good luck in the future and I'm sorry it turned into a mess and I know you have other people to assist who understand this page better than I do..Drew Geraci (talk) 20:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Your user page has already been deleted, Drew Geraci. It's your account that can't be deleted or "closed". There is no way to write about yourself (or anyone or anything else) on Wikipedia without it being considered an article, as articles are what Wikipedia is made up of. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:01, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Problems in Wikidata-based tables

I saw some issues in List of women linguists and started to write them up on the Talk page as Sorting, correcting, robot wars. But the more I wrote and looked, the more problems I found, like continual edit-warring between two bots. I pinged some relevant Wikipedians as I was writing, and very shortly I had received a couple of replies.

The problems here are clearly not confined to this article, but may be present in any sortable table that is updated from Wikidata by a bot or (even worse, see previous paragraph) bots. The discussion belongs at a higher level than the single article. Can anyone suggest where? Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --21:09, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Thnidu (talk)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Thnidu. I suggest that you report this at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), and to the bot operators. Edit warring among human editors is all too common, but this is the first time that I have heard of bots edit warring. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:57, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Cullen328, I'll do that. I've already told the bot ops; that's who I meant by "programmers". --Thnidu (talk) 22:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

@Thnidu: Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars#(Ro)bot wars has some examples of bot wars. The bot war with two Wikidata-based changes in [1] should be stopped for now by [2] and [3]. It may resume with other changes if something happens at Wikidata. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:27, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

article in German, not English

There's a page on Maria von Wedemeyer in German; I'd like to create a page on her in English. Is that allowed?

Thanks,

Diane ReynoldsDiane Reynolds (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Diane Reynolds. Yes, not only is such a translation allowed but it is encouraged. You must properly attribute the German article as your initial source. Please see WP:TRANSLATE for details. I took a look at the German article and it cites only two sources. A Google search shows that plenty of sources are available, so I suggest that you summarize more sources and reference them as well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:40, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I was not planning to translate the page but to do a new page in English, with more sources, as you mention. I can cite that page but what I create would not be a translation unless we consider it a very loose one. Is that OK?

Thanks,

DianeDiane Reynolds (talk) 00:02, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

If you translate from the German Wikipedia article in any way, then it must be attributed. If, on the other hand, you write an entirely new article with no translated content, then there is no need for attribution, Diane Reynolds. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:32, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Great. Thanks!!Diane Reynolds (talk) 00:35, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

And to clarify, you can't cite Wikipedia (in any language) as a source in a Wikipedia. Doing so creates a circular reference, and Wikipedia is not a credible or authoritative source. If you are taking information from the German Wikipedia, you should cite the sources it cites – and while you're at it, check that the sources actually back up what they're supposed to back up. Joe Roe (talk) 12:02, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

My userpage

I am using the Template:DISPLAYTITLE to change the color of my username. I want to change the font. I tried in preview and failed, as it showed template error. Marvellous Spider-Man 16:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Can you show me what you used that failed? If I say, add <span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva"> just after {{DISPLAYTITLE:, it will display the title in monotype corsiva. Changing your use of displaytitle to

{{DISPLAYTITLE:<span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="position:absolute; top: -9999px">User:</span><span style="color:LawnGreen">'''Marvellous'''</span> <span style="color:SpringGreen">'''Spider-Man'''</span></span>}}

should put it in Georgia like your signature. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 16:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Help with Citations

Hello. I recently uploaded an article which was declined because the reviewer said that I relied too much on blogs for citation. None of the articles that I cited were blogs. Unfortunately the newspaper's website puts all of its articles under "blog dot" Any advice on how to resubmit using the same sources? SouthernSquire (talk) 16:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Richard S. Jaffe seems to have been accepted now, so presumably this question is closed. --ColinFine (talk) 17:22, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Incorrect Producer credits on documentary mentioned under Louise Dahl Wolfe page.

The wrong Madeline Bell is listed as the Producer for a documentary on the famous fashion photographer, Louise Dahl Wolfe who has a Wikipedia page. I am the correct Madeline Bell. How do I get this corrected? The famous black singer is not the Producer and I, the correct one, am listed in IMDb with Location Manger and Producer credits. This documentary is listed in my credits.

Also, under Red Grooms, the famed artist, who has a Wikipedia page, the Academy Award nominated film, "Red Grooms, Sunflower in a Hothouse", is not mentioned. I am the Producer of it as well. Is it possible to mention this documentary on Red Grooms' Wikipedia page?

Madeline Bell 76.206.12.181 (talk) 17:16, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Madeline. Thanks for pointing out the error in Louise Dahl-Wolfe. I have removed the link, so your name is still in the article, but it is not linked.

As for the article Red Grooms, it already has a "hatnote" pointing to Red Grooms: Sunflower in a Hothouse, though it doesn't mention it in the text. As you have a Conflict of interest, you should not be editing that article directly, but you are welcome to post a request that it be added at the talk page Talk:Red Grooms. If you add the template {{edit request}} (with the double curly brackets) it will bring the request to more people's attention; and if you can cite an indedendent reliable source (such as a newspaper review - iMDB is not regarded as a reliable source) that will make it more likely that a volunteer will pick up your request. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

If database needs search terms, can it be used as source?

I'm improving article that could probably use some "hard" data(that said, numbers) to support claims in it. Is source credible enough if one can't direct-link to it, but must do separate search using said database to get numbers mentioned in article? Fruitmince (talk) 20:34, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Fruitmince, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, although it is certainly preferred, you do not have to provide a direct link to a reliable source in order to use it in an article as a reference. Some kinds of sources may be difficult for ordinary users to access, and some sources—such as a database—require a subscription or a payment to access. These can still be used, provided that they are otherwise still considered reliable sources. Make sure you provide the name of the database you are using in your citation so that users who do have access to the database can verify the information. With that being said, there is one important issue to keep in mind. One of our core content policies is that Wikipedia must not contain original research. This means that when you use "hard data" to support a conclusion, you must cite a source that explicitly draws the conclusion from the data. You cannot use hard data to support a claim where the source does not explicitly make the claim you're making. If you can provide examples of your case, we can offer more specific advice. Best, Mz7 (talk) 21:28, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Humm... Okay. Well, the article I'm working with is about ban-ei. Japan Equine Affairs Association lists number of horses born annually and those accepted to racing. (Accepted horses names are kept in database even horse has stopped racing and ceased to exist.) The claim article has: "Only a small amount of foals born yearly are registered for racing-"(Said claim made in source by ban-ei-association.) The "hard data" to prove this said 'small amount' can be gotten with search and sorting(so it shows only horses with 'racing name', instead all those born at certain year). I already made background research for this while ago, and at one year(at example) 1753 foals were born while 245 started on track.

Or does normal wiki user need these numbers of hard truth?

Fruitmince (talk) 22:09, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Fruitmince, Interesting. Reminds me a bit of the Oxen team pulling contests they have at county and state fairs here in New England (probably elsewhere, too, but these are the ones I've seen).

I hope you can read Japanese; when I look at the references for those statements in the article, Google translate is not really adequate to verify that the sources indeed state what the article is citing them for. For instance, there may be some interpretive difference between "selling for meat" and "selling for human consumption".

You can certainly provide links to databases whose URLs are not expressed as searches as "External links" or otherwise as references for the use of readers who want to dig deeper into the subject than the WP article goes.

Making an explicit case about 1753 foals born and 245 registered to race, where you are doing your own research and extracting data from the database to support your research is contrary to the no original research policy.

The other problem with URLs with search terms is that the underlying data may change in the interval between when the article is written and when, possibly years later, a reader goes to use them. These links typically cannot be archived by webcite or the Wayback Machine, either, which just increases the unverifiability of any statements citing these URLs as references.

Hope this helps. —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:39, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

A Wikipedia editor should not be concluding that 245 foals out of 1753 is a "small amount" or even a "small percentage", which is probably better English. Only an expert commenting in a reliable source can make such a judgment. For all I know, that may be a "large amount" as compared with other types of race horses. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:50, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Cullen328You're right. Considering the source(ban-ei-association) I used had edited their own page at some point to remove several important claims(like 220-230 from 1200 pass the test or their meat is considered gourmet), I shouldn't be backing too much to that one either. I edited article as less "blunt".

(And what comes to discussion considering database, I consider my issue solved. Thank you all.)Fruitmince (talk) 17:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Subtitlers

I'm trying to create a set of categories for film and television subtitlers, as there are quite a few relevant pages already in English Wikipedia and there's no existing category. I would like Category:Subtitlers to have the parent category Translators and in turn to have subcategories by nationality (so far I've used American subtitlers; UK subtitlers; Japanese subtitlers; French subtitlers). I don't seem to be able to create the category page right so that it lists these different subcategories. All help gratefully received! Bristol Irish (talk) 22:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. If you want Category:American subtitlers to be a subcategory of Category:Subtitlers, you need to change its contents from '''<nowiki>[[Category:Subtitlers]]</nowiki>''' to [[Category:Subtitlers]]. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bristol Irish: I have made the change.[4] I see you use VisualEditor. Most documentation is written for the source editor. You cannot write source code directly with VisualEditor which will place it in <nowiki>...</nowiki> to deactivate the code and only display it. You must instead find the right menu to perform the corresponding action. Categories can be added uder the Page options icon with three horizontal bars. Categories are placed in parent categories in exactly the same way articles are placed in categories. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:03, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks indeed! This is hugely helpful. Bristol Irish (talk) 00:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Two pages about the same topic

Hi! I am Peterye2005. I recently came across these 2 pages: List of reportedly haunted locations in the Philippines and List of reportedly haunted locations#Philippines. They are both about reportedly haunted locations in the Philippines. Should List of reportedly haunted locations#Philippines have the "main article" template added to the section or should anything else be done? Thank you. Peterye2005 (talk) 00:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Yep, just add {{Main article}} to the top of the section. There's nothing else to do. Joe Roe (talk) 01:36, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Need advice about creating a new article vs extending a section

Please refer to the following section: Gurgaon#Sports. This section states that Gurgaon has 9 golf courses. My questions:

If I was to list all these 9 golf courses, does that add value to Wikipedia?
If the answer above is yes, then would it make sense to add these as a table in that section, or should I make a new article Golf courses in Gurgaon and link to it from that section.

Thanks for your help. Amiwikieditor (talk) 09:22, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I think listing them would be a useful addition, yes, although other editors of Gurgaon may not agree. The only way to find out is to be bold and add them! However, I definitely would put them in the existing article and not a new one. Assuming that none of the golf courses are independently notable, it's unlikely that a Golf courses in Gurgaon article would have any scope for expansion beyond a short list. Joe Roe (talk) 11:59, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Joe_Roe What if I made a new article called Sporting in Gurgaon or something like that. And then made the list as a section in that page. Would then a new article make sense? Amiwikieditor (talk) 03:06, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

I am of the opposite opinion for Joe Roe, Amiwikieditor: I don't think that sort of list belongs in Wikipedia unless somebody has written an article about the nine golf courses in an independent reliable source. Neither of us is right or wrong: as Joe says, try it; but only if you have a reliable published source that lists them, not just from your own knowledge. --ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine. Actually, the original section I linked to cites a source which has described the 9 golf courses. Amiwikieditor (talk) 03:06, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

sentence in lede shouldn't maybe

i hollered on my talk page & everyone's busy ao i'm pasting my question: hay there help. its a bit late for me to edit & i'm not sure what to do but in the follow article (address pasted below) i've also pasted the last 2 sentences of the lede paragraph. i'm don't think it belongs; at best the research is divided. i've not read everything on pub med but i'd want to say the opposite is more correct.

Please help me with...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_catastrophizing#cite_note-3. However, we cannot yet rule out the possibility that at least some aspects of catastrophization may actually be the product of an intense pain experience, rather than its cause. That is, the more intense the pain feels to the person, the more likely they are to have thoughts about it that fit the definition of catastrophization.[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15288400

Mausbug (talk) 01:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC) Mausbug (talk) 03:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

if it matters, i've found the point at which the offending sentence was added. i've been reading more at pub med. the link at the end of my initial post is merely one link.Mausbug (talk) 03:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

oh, it seems the editor who added this hooey has also been gently reminded of policy on chronic fatigue & unexplained medical symptoms. perhaps ... Mausbug (talk) 03:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

i'm sorry. did you read the opening line? its very late for me but i didn't want to leave this. i dont think the final 2 sentences of the referenced article should be included. someone will need to trust that i am not able to attend to this & accept that i'm doing what i can. thnx. Mausbug (talk) 04:42, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Changing email address

I'd like to change the email address associated with my WP username, but can't find how to do this. Sorry if this a simple question.

Gravuritas (talk) 22:26, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Email options at the foot of Special:Preferences. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Got it, thanks

Gravuritas (talk) 04:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Can I reference page in another language?

Some of the websites I need to refer to are in Chinese. Can this be accepted on an English page's reference list? MOconcept (talk) 03:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, MOconcept.

There is no restriction on citing references in other languages. Doing so on the English WP may hamper the ability of English-only speakers to verify your references, so citing English resources, when they exist, is preferred. —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! —jmcgnh MOconcept (talk) 04:55, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Picture size

I added a picture (from 1898) to an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olive_Higgins_Prouty); but it is too big for the size of the section, how can I decrease its size? GinnevraDubois (talk) 17:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

See MOS:IMGSIZE. It's best not to change the size of images directly, because the Mediawiki software automatically adjusts it based on the size of the reader's screen and their preferences, which you would be overriding. If you're referring to the image at the bottom of Olive Higgins Prouty, I'd simply move it further up the page so it fits alongside the text. Joe Roe (talk) 21:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much!GinnevraDubois (talk) 17:06, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

How do articles get rated?

I put a few Wikiproject templates onto several appropriate articles, and I was just wondering what had to happen in order for them to be assessed. Verified Cactus (talk) 19:27, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

A small number of WikiProjects have formal review processes for the top classes (B and A), and GA and FA obviously have their own processes, but other than that anyone can assess an article and most WikiProjects will appreciate you doing so. Most (all?) WikiProjects use a standard scheme, so an assessment for one can safely be copied to any other in their scope. Joe Roe (talk) 21:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Joe Roe: Thanks. How would I go about rating a page? Do I edit the template after I've assessed the article? Verified Cactus (talk) 00:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@VerifiedCactus: That's correct. You would edit the template and insert a |class= parameter. For example, if it is the {{WikiProject Biography}} template, you would edit it to read {{WikiProject Biography|class=C}} to add a C-Class assessment to the article. Mz7 (talk) 01:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@VerifiedCactus: And if you find yourself assessing a lot of them, there's a gadget you can install to make it a bit easier. Joe Roe (talk) 01:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

VerifiedCactus, in my experience, many articles rated as stubs have subsequently been improved and expanded. I frequently upgrade such articles from stub to start class without hesitation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Getting a bit off topic here, but "Start" also seems to be chronically misused by people too afraid to assign C or B class (the standards for which are pretty low, written as they were in 200x). They see it's longer than a stub, call it "Start", and there it stays forever more... Joe Roe (talk) 11:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, Joe Roe, B-class in particular comes with pretty high standards. In comparison to C which requires "more than one reliable source", B calls for more or less total conformity with WP:MINREF. Even FA articles may fail this criterion when they are "improved" by editors who are not mindful of sources, and can remain so for a long time. The completeness criterion of B is also ambitious. It even wants you to compare the completeness of an article with the requirements of an A-class article. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

verifiable sources

hi! my article was rejected because it lacked verifiable sources, which is peculiar because most of what i mentioned in my article is already supported on wikipedia. any help you could provide towards a solution would be great. Thanks! pittmankarenPittmankaren (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Pittmankaren, "supported on Wikipedia" is meaningless because Wikipedia itself is not an acceptable source. You need to reference independent reliable sources such as mainstream media, news or magazine articles, commercially published books or academic articles, that provide significant in-depth detail about the subject. Then you need to prerly reference those sources. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

This is true; you can't cite Wikipedia itself. However, if you see a statement on Wikipedia that you would like to repeat in another article, you can check to see if the original statement is properly sourced. If so, you can check the source and reuse it in your new article. I say that you should check the source because you don't want to propagate a misreading of the source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Naming a reference when using CITE WEB template

I named a cite web reference successfully (at least it seems so), but when I try to use that name it does not work. Clearly I'm doing something wrong! :^/

The article is Certified Acceptance Corporation. The named citation is currently the third footnote. It is located in the first phrase of the first sentence of the second paragraph:

Coins which CAC deems solid or high-end for their grades receive green stickers,[3]

I named the citation as follows:

I tried to use this named citation in the last sentence of the second paragraph in the [Overview] section as follows:

<ref=CAC_FAQ />

What am I doing wrong?

Thank you! - Mark D Worthen PsyD 03:40, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Markworthen The second use of a named citation also uses ref name=, it just adds a closing slash.

So it's not:

<ref=CAC_FAQ />

but

<ref name=CAC_FAQ />

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh silly me. Sometimes the error is so obvious once one 'sees' it! Thank you for helping me see it. :O) Mark D Worthen PsyD 04:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Mark, when I wrote that answer I was betting it was a slap your forehead issue; you just couldn't see the omission because it was your own.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:57, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

My Talk page post deleted by a new IP.

I added a comment about a recent journalistic report with a link to the original article. I received a notice via email that there was a change. Another Wikipedian had replied. I didn't realize until later that this person had found that my post had been deleted by an IP - the WP restored my post.

I know there are cases when a post may be edited (maybe even deleted?): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable , but I do not see where my TP post crossed any of those lines.

How can I tell in the future if one of my TP posts is edited or deleted since I only got one notice? How can I prevent this from happening in the future?

Article's Talk page: Talk:Trump Model Management
The IP address: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2601:186:4300:6AC:19C7:705A:DAF0:EEA2

Thank you for your advice, Wordreader (talk) 03:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Do you have Edit revert checked for web and/or email notification on your Preferences page? Mark D Worthen PsyD 04:00, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Not all changes to the page that touch your edits will be noticed by the notifier. You just have to put the page on your watchlist and check changes. Everything we do on WP is subject to revision by other editors, including editors who are not logged in with a username. And, if nobody has done so already, "Welcome to the Teahouse, Wordreader". —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

I did not know that about the Notifier. Thanks —jmcgnh! Mark D Worthen PsyD 04:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

If you are asking how to respond to improper deletion of a talk page post, the usual procedure is to warn the editor and restore the post. If an editor persists in deleting talk page posts without explanation, you may treat it as a form of vandalism and report it at the vandalism noticeboard. It is also possible to request semi-protection of a talk page. This is seldom done because unregistered editors normally should have the right to comment on an article, but if a talk page is being disrupted by shifting IPs, semi-protection may be the least disruptive approach. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

—jmcgnh: I know that about the WP articles (ie: that everything is subject to editing, though there are certainly Wikiers who don't seem to believe that), but my Talk page post deletion to be unexpected. It seems like a real "dirty trick". I went to preferences and switched on "Edit revert" (I already had most of the other items switched on.) Thank you, talk, for the follow-up steps to take, should they become necessary. All the best, Wordreader (talk) 06:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Admissibility of a draft?

In Draft:Mount Olives Hospital I've added two external references and two photographs. The second reference, present when first reviewed, is fairly independent. For comparison, please have a look at Vancouver General Hospital. VGH is operated by Vancouver Coastal Health. Except for "Leo Awards, All Winners 2014", all of the references and external links in that article refer to sites belonging to Vancouver Coastal Health or an agency thereof. Ie. "Leo Awards" is the one reference independent of the subject. Exclusion of the Mt. Olives draft while the VGH article is allowed is fair? Is the Mt. Olives draft any better now? likely to succeed? Thanks, PeterEasthope (talk) 22:08, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, PeterEasthope. Please remember that Wikipedia has 5,232,035 articles at this moment and probably well over a million of them have significant problems. This is not an excuse to create new articles with significant problems. Those other articles should either be improved or deleted, and experienced editors work on that constantly. As for these two hospitals, the one in Ghana that you are writing about has less than 120 beds while the one in Vancouver has over 1,000 beds and is a teaching hospital. Our core content policy Verifiability requires that we build articles by summarizing what reliable, third party (independent) sources say about a topic. So, please find more independent sources and format them as explained in Referencing for beginners. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@PeterEasthope: I believe a Wikipedia essay someone wrote, Other stuff exists, would apply in this case. Note that the essay is not a rule, but it generally describes the way we act here on Wikipedia. -- Gestrid (talk) 00:40, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome, PeterEasthope. The Vancouver General Hospital article was created in March 2006‎, long before the drafts process was introduced. Lots of articles from that time period need to be improved, but we don't use that as a reason to allow new articles that don't meet the appropriate criteria, otherwise the quality of the encyclopedia would never improve. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:46, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Images

Hi. I wonder wether it is possible to use foreign language Wikipedias' images on an English Wikipedia article. More specifically, I refer to images that cannot be found in neither Wikimedia Commons, nor the English Wikipedia. Thanks. --Nauajos (talk) 01:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Nauajos. There is only one Wikipedia Commons and all the images there are freely licensed or copyright free, and can be used on any language Wikipedia. They can also be used by anyone for any purpose, without payment or asking for permission, although many require attribution. Each language Wikipedia may also host its own images, and the usage of those images may be restricted. You need to look at the file page for the image in question, and understand any licensing restrictions there. For example, here on English Wikipedia, we host many non-free images, which normally are used in a single article under the legal principle of Fair use.

Markworthen, I appreciate your effort to help, but unless you are very confident that your answer is accurate, it is best to refrain from answering. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt response, Cullen328. My question is of a more technical nature. Assuming there are no licensing/usage restrictions/issues, is it technically possible to use a foreign language Wikipedia hosted image on an English Wikipedia article? And vice versa, an English Wikipedia hosted image on a foreign language Wikipedia article? And how? --Nauajos (talk) 00:01, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

No, and no. To use an image in a Wikipedia article it must be hosted either on that language's Wikipedia or on Commons. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:10, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Nauajos. I hate to disagree with my colleague David Biddulph, but yes, there is a way if there are no licensing restrictions. You can download the image to your own computer and then upload it to Wikimedia Commons as a new file, correctly reporting the original source of the image and the licensing status. Once uploaded, you can then reuse it anywhere as you see fit. Similarly, with an image hosted here on English Wikipedia under the terms of WP:NFCI. If another language Wikipedia has a comparable policy, you can download that image to your computer and then upload that image to the other Wikipedia as a new file. You must use it only in compliance with that Wikipedia's image policies. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both. Frankly, Cullen328, I don't see where you and David Biddulph disagree! --Nauajos (talk) 03:02, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Nor do I. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:03, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Picture gallery

Hi, I'm having some issues. I've been trying to create an image gallery section on the article Captain (United States O-3) like I did in the article Six-star rank but it doesn't seem to work. The pictures just disappear instead.*Treker (talk) 12:30, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi *Treker. Galleries have quite a simple syntax:

<gallery>
File:Image1.png|Caption1
File:Image2.png|Caption2
File:Image3.png|Caption3
</gallery>

I think the problem you were having was from writing out the full image syntax (i.e. [[ ... ]]) within the gallery tags. I've taken the liberty of fixing it on Captain (United States O-3). Joe Roe (talk) 12:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Joe Roe. I was getting really frustrated when it didn't work.*Treker (talk) 13:25, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Query about references

I have submitted a new page/entry for a new company which is due to launch in the coming days. However, my submission has been rejected because it does not contain any references.

My question is, if you are a new company and you have no references yet, then how can you overcome this obstacle and manage to get your submission accepted?

Christian McKee (talk) 08:09, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Christian McKee - the only answer (which you will not like) is wait until the company is notable and has been written about, at some length, in reliable, independent, sources. Untill then it is too soon for a wikipedia article. We are not here to promote new companies, but to record what has already been written by independent observers. - Arjayay (talk) 08:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Christian McKee. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have a misapprehension that Wikipedia is a channel for telling the world about your company. It is not. Nobody (and no organisation in the world) either "has" or "deserves" an entry on Wikipedia. Wikipedia has articles on millions of subjects that have already been noticed and written about. If, in time, your company is written about in some depth by people unconnected with it (the Wikipedia jargon is that it will have become notable) then we may have an article about it. The company will have no control over the contents, and Wikipedia will have little interest in what the company either says about itself or wants said about itself. --ColinFine (talk) 13:27, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

My article was rejected on the basis on lack of notability...

And I don't understand because the person I am writing about has accomplished feats in his field. Anyone who can help provide some insight, so I know what edits/changes need to be made? Thank you in advance!

13:21, 6 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilary Lauren (talk • contribs)

Draft:Ryan Stewman was started by Ryan Stewman himself. Are you now editing it on his behalf? (@Hilary Lauren:) Joe Roe (talk) 13:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Please read WP:GNG, Hilary Lauren. Feats don't make notability, in Wikipedia's terms. Nor do fame, influence, importance, significance or popularity. Notability is about whether people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to write about the subject, and publish in reliable places. (And part of the reason for this is that Wikipedia has essentially no interest in what any subject says about themselves, so unless there is truly independent copy about them, there is literally nothing which can go in an article). Several of the references in the draft are obviously not reliable (Facebook) or obviously not independent. But the couple I've looked at which are in reliable sources are clearly based on interviews or press releases, which means that they're repeating Stewman's words, and so cannot contribute to notability. I haven't looked at them all, so some may be both reliable and independent; in which case you need to base more of the article on those sources and less on non-indpendent sources.

I note that the majority of the references are to support the statement "he has been featured in ... ". Wikipedia isn't interested in where somebody has been featured, unless it is somebody completely independent that is saying so. In the context of the draft, that entire paragraph is advertising puff, and should be removed. --ColinFine (talk) 13:39, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Style to use for numbers in Table cells

I have been going over the style guides on Tables Help:Table, Manual of Style, and Advanced table formatting - but I can't find a few answers:

Should numerical values in a table be right-aligned in their cell, or left-aligned?
Should percentage values in a table be suffixed by the percent sign (%) or should the percent sign just be present in the header for the column denoting values are in percent?

I think I am not able to find the right article on Wikipedia that covers these aspects. Can someone please help me?

Thanks, Amiwikieditor (talk) 14:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Amiwikeditor. The fact that the style direction you are looking for is not there may be a sign that this is a subject where the person creating the table is assumed to know best how numbers should be formatted in their table, there's no hard-and-fast rule that applies to all cases. In the overwhelming number of cases, where a column has numbers of different widths, you'll want to use right-justification. Percent signs in cells are fine, but someone looking to squeeze their table may choose to indicate that numbers are percentages in the column header instead. If you find a table that looks incorrectly formatted, you can boldly fix it or ask on the talk page of the containing page whether there's an explanation for what looks incorrect to you. —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:00, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry Amiwikieditor, someday I'll learn to spell better, or at least check preview more carefully. —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:02, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your input jmcgnh. I guess I will define a style for the page that I am trying to bring the changes about. And I will borrow from best practices elsewhere outside Wikipedia for the alignment topic. Amiwikieditor (talk) 13:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

How to verify and document death of a recently deceased person?

Question: How do I change the article of Ralph Goings, the photorealist painter from living to deceased? His death has been announced by a friend on Facebook, but I need to verify and get the facts. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 18:02, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

There's a policy on it, but I can't find it ... News coverage is the gold standard. The idea being that hoax death announcements are a common form of comedic vandalism, annoyingly. So if a recent death doesn't have a cite, people may look askance at it.

I've cited in the past to a non-news source that's a reliable official website. e.g. when David Gaiman died I figured citing his rather famous son Neil Gaiman's blog would be pretty solid, though it was replaced with a newspaper article as soon as one was available. Andy Dog Johnson's death was first cited to his brother's band's official Facebook (he was the band's artist) and that was then replaced with a cite to the band's official site. In such cases I'd suggest noting why the source is a good one on the talk page.

So if Goings has an official site that notes it, that would probably count.

Of course, we have recent counterexamples like the hacker who hacked Jimmy Wales' Twitter and announced his death, which also forwarded to his Facebook ... - David Gerard (talk) 18:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)