Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 786

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 780

←

Archive 784

→

Word count app

I have tried for ever to use the word count app and someone miss the mark. Can someone help?2605:E000:9149:A600:38D0:9A58:B64D:5E21 (talk) 06:01, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Please ask your question in any known variant of the English language. If we can understand what you mean, we can do our best to answer. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Since it took you several times to pick the right words to convey your attitude I guess I should as well. Thank you for going out of your way to exhibit what I would consider someo=thing attributable to disrespect and disregard. It really was not necessary but I guess internet anonymity suites a need. I have tried forever to use the word count app and somehow miss the mark. Can someone help with something less critical and more explanatory about just how it is suppose to go.2605:E000:9149:A600:38D0:9A58:B64D:5E21 (talk) 10:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

It is very hard for us to help unless we know what you are talking about. What word count app are you talking about? How has someone missed the mark? ~ GB fan 10:25, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Is this a joke? I never said in the second response someone, I said somehow. Am I under the wrong impression that there is a way to count words in a WP article?2605:E000:9149:A600:38D0:9A58:B64D:5E21 (talk) 10:46, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

No there is no joke. I missed that you changed the word from someone to somehow from the first post to the second post. There is a way to check the word count. Pull up the article, then click history. Near the top there is a link called Revision history statistics. The word count is near the bottom. ~ GB fan 10:59, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Just to clarify, you seemed to be talking about some specific word count app that you have been trying to use forever. Not the generic question, is there a way to count the number of words in an article. ~ GB fan 11:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

From what I remember there is an app where you can count a particular segment of an article. What has been suggested is not that. And, no I d not remember where I say that as it has been some time since I last attempted it.2605:E000:9149:A600:38D0:9A58:B64D:5E21 (talk) 11:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I can't help any more. That is the only function to count words in an article that I have ever seen. ~ GB fan 11:14, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

There are user-defined scripts such as User:Dr pda/prosesize.js; if there are any problems with those they should be addressed to the user who developed the script. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:19, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Could someone explain how to do the following as I have tried it many times and seem unable to get it right. Thank you: Wikipedia:Department of Fun/Word Count 2605:E000:9149:A600:38D0:9A58:B64D:5E21 (talk) 16:11, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello anon. The file you've stumbled upon is a template used in playing a game: Wikipedia:Department of Fun/Word Association. (A game I had never heard of before.) It does not count words at all; it is used to display a word count in a consistent fashion while playing the game. If that's not a good enough explanation, please help us understand better what you are wanting to do. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

user:jmcgnh, I am not anonymous and have never been. I am (talk) and well endorsed by that ID usage according to WP. I accept your apology for having displayed the wrong and often confused idea about IP identified WP users. I would advise in future that in order not to endorse the view that IP identified usuers are not fully qualified to participate in WP be avoided. Again, I accept your apology for the misperceived statement.2605:E000:9149:A600:38D0:9A58:B64D:5E21 (talk) 20:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Take a bow, guys. I so would not have the right temperament to be a teahouse host! ;) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Why are people so insistent on removing infoboxes from peoples pages if they have correct information? They do not detract from the page, they add to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenann1401 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Laurenann1401, welcome to the Teahouse. We have around three million articles with infoboxes and more than 95% of them have probably never been removed except as vandalism like blanking the whole page. If you seek help about a specific page then please always name it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Laurenann1401. Is this about Colleen Ballinger? You commented on Talk:Colleen Ballinger# Infobox edit war, in response to a thread about removing an infobox started on 9 December 2016

Not everyone agrees that an infobox always adds to an article. Some editors think that an infobox is usually redundant, and in some cases editors think that an infobox will tend to over-simplify complex issues, and thereby distort them. This is a matter to be decided for each separate article, and there is no rule requiring or forbidding an info box on any particular article. Posting on the article talk page is the way to seek consensus on adding an infobox. Or one can simply make a bold edit as long as you are prepared for the possibility that someone might revert it, in which case you should follow the bold, revert, discuss cycle and start or join a discussion on the article talk page. In any case, do not edit war by reverting back and forth. That can get everyone involved blocked from editing for a time. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Oh and in future, please sign posts to article talk pages and discussion pages such as this with four tildes (~~~~). The Wikimedia software will replace this with a link to your user page (or your custom signature if you have one set) and a timestamp. This helps other users keep track of who wrote what. It also helps archiving scripts. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

want to add a foto of mine to my profile

want to add a foto of mine to my profile..how do i do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iddocniyas (talk • contribs) 17:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Iddocniyas and welcome to the Teahouse. If you took the photo and thus own the copyright, you may release it under a free license, and upload it to Wikimedia Commomns. Then it can be used on Wikipedia pages. See Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/1 and the following tutorial pages, and Help:Files for information on how to upload an image and use it. See also User:DESiegel where I have an image of myself displayed. Note that Wikipedia does not have "profiles". It has user pages, which are about people in their roles as editors, and it has articles about notable people. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Kalank 2018 Movie

Is there a valid source that says that Pritam is the one who will be composing music for the film. I believe Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy will continue as a successful combination again after 2 states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.99.198.240 (talk) 12:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Can you please mention the link where Pritam is the composer and not Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy. I am unable to see your comment. Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikZee (talk • contribs) 12:28, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, WikZee, and welcome to the Teahouse. The place to ask such a question is on the article talk page, in this case at Talk:Kalank#Source for music?, where I have raised it. I have also places a {{cn}} (cite needed) tag in the infobox on the issue.

Also, please sign posts to user and article talk pages, and to discussion pages like this, wiht four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

add a picture or 2 to an article

I CAME ACCROSS 2 PHOTOES CONCERNING THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE OF WORLD WAR 1 ERA. HOW CAN I SUBMIT TO WIKIPEDIA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by YESHIAM (talk • contribs) 21:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, YESHIAM. Please do not type in all capital letters, as this can be perceived as shouting. You first need to determine the copyright status of the photos. If the photos were published before 1923, then the copyrights have probably expired and the photos are probably in the public domain. The details matter. If that is the case, then the photos can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and used by anyone for any purpose, including Wikipedia in any language. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, YESHIAM, and welcome to the Teahouse. See Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/1 and the following tutorial pages, and also see Help:Files for information on how to upload an image and use it. If a picture was published during the WWI era, it should be in the public domain by now. However you must check the actual date of publication to verify the copyright status of any picture. Pictures first published after 1923 (whenever they were taken) will still be in copyright under US law, and can only be used under Fair use, see our guideline on the use of non-free content. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:35, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Forgot password

So I have forgotten the password to my account User:WikiImprovment78 and stupidly didn't put an e-mail on there. If I can't recover my account I'll have to use this one which is annoying since I was extended-confirmed which will take awhile to get back now. Is there anything I can do? ImprovedWikiImprovment (talk) 22:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ImprovedWikiImprovment. If you do not have email activated on the other account, the only thing that you can do is to wrack your brain and try to remember the password. You have no other choice. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:42, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I guessed that just trying anything I can think of really; I will have to do a move request for my user page. Thanks anyway. I was on the "remember me" tick box and I guess the time ran out. It's 365 days I think so I'm not going to remember a password I made a year ago or more. Thanks anyway. ImprovedWikiImprovment (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, ImprovedWikiImprovment. I advise users never to check "remember me" and always to register an email here, to avoid this sort of thing. You should probably edit User:WikiImprovment78 to note that you are now editing as User:ImprovedWikiImprovment, and copy the old user page rather than move it. Also add a link from your current user page back to your old one, please. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:56, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

My own fault. Been a long time since I couldn't edit a semi-protected page lol. Anyway I will do that, thanks for the help. ImprovedWikiImprovment (talk) 22:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

If you're using "remember me", is there a chance that your browser may have the password stored in the list of passwords? I use Chrome and if I click on the settings menu there's an option to view my passwords (after my laptop's password) and after searching for the website in the list of saved passwords... there it is. I hope this helps. Coryphantha Talk 23:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

HOW TO GET STARTED

just a bit confused as to where to create pages

it appears the sandbox is just for doodling around in

I started a draft page - but was told its best to work offline first

not sure I understand why or how or where to do so

I would like to be able to test the pages as I make progress

I wish to create a set of pages for the architect C. N. Otis I thought it best to clone the Frank Llyod Wright pages as that structure of pages seems well-suited to the task

cloning his page as a draft page seems to be a no-no

so where do I start - all very confusing

here are the first three pages I wish to clone of Wright's and then edit to contain the content for C. N. Otis

please advise

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Lloyd_Wright

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Frank_Lloyd_Wright_works

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_D._Martin_House

Lewis Buttery — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewis buttery (talk • contribs) 05:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Sphilbrick advised on your talk page to edit offline, but I do not agree with their advice. You can duplicate Wikipedia content, online, as long as you provide proper attribution as described in WP:COPYWITHIN (a simple content copied from page XXX, see that page's history for attribution is sufficient). The only point is editing offline until every bit of the article has changed is if you absolutely want to avoid making that attribution. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 06:08, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Lewis Buttery, and welcome to the Teahouse. One bit of advice I would give is that creating new pages is absolutely not the best way to get started: it is a difficult and challenging process, and attempting it before acquiring an understanding of how Wikipedia works often leads to frustration and confrontation. I always advise new editors to spend a few months learning the ropes by making small improvements to existing articles before they try creating new ones.

Then, I would advise studying Your first article. While it can be useful to look at existing articles for ideas on layout, if you do, it's worth making sure you choose one that has been through the Good article process. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Frank Lloyd Wright; but if you choose Dan Dworsky, for example, that is an article about an American architect which has been reviewed and rated as a Good article. (I have never heard of Dworsky: I found that article using Petscan on "Good articles" and "Architects").

In any case, the layout is not the best place to start, and nor is what you know: start with the sources - reliably published sources, wholly independent of the subject of the article, and write it based only on what those sources say. When you have got the bones of an article, you can flesh it out with non-independent sources, images etc. But an article stands or falls on its published sources. --ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I have a 45 page article on C.N. Otis that I wrote and have decided to create wiki pages based on that info the Wright pages have a structure to them that I like and I'm trying to determine the best way to clone those pages and make the needed edits for C.N. Otis

where is the best place to make these clones/edits ???

this should be "easy" to do and yet I find myself frustrated and confused by all this complexity of "working environment"

I spend 30+ years as a systems analyst/programmer for mainframes having bought my first computer in 1978 totally self taught in multiple mainframe languages and VBA and Windows Script Host etc I guess my brains are fried as I start to go down the wiki road and I find myself halting and saying I'm really don't want all this hassle

Does anyone want a job setting up the structure of these pages for me ? I can handle making the content edits - but the structure hassles are beyond my interest levels at this point

I have a museum to run and other tasks to tackle in my research and cracking the ways of wiki don't seem enticing to me at all :(

Lew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewis buttery (talk • contribs) 16:01, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello again, Lewis buttery. How useful your 45-page article is for writing a Wikipedia article depends on many things. If it has been published by a reputable publisher, then it may be used as a source for a Wikipedia article - but you are discouraged from writing a Wikipedia article based on it yourself, because that is seen as a conflct of interest. (If it has been published then you may not reproduce large chunks of it directly in Wikipedia unless you have specifically licensed it under a suitable free licence, which would allow anybody to reuse it for any purpose). If it is an unpublished work then you obviously cannot reference it, but you might find some of the material you wrote useful in writing a Wikipedia article. Please be aware, though, that writing for Wikipedia is very different from most academic writing. The text should contain no evaluations, judgments, arguments, or conclusions, unless these are individually cited to a single source each. Even a deduction from information in two sources is not permitted, if it is not itself from one of the sources: see the policy on No original research. So it is very likely that the sources you used to write your article are extremely pertinent for a Wikipedia article on the subject; but the content of your article probably not, unless you happened to hit on a similar set of guidelines to those used in Wikipedia.

Many people share your belief that it should be easy to write a Wikipedia article. Unfortunately, it isn't (and in my personal opinion, steps to make the technical part of the process easier would be counterproductive, as they would encourage more people to try it without understanding the nature of the task).

A systems and programming background is really not much help - again, it can make it easier to acquire the technical skills, but those are not where the meat of the task lies.

I would strongly advise you to do as Your first article suggests, and create a draft with the Article wizard; then you can tinker with it as much as you like before submitting it for review. If you wanted to copy an existing article into that draft in order to replicate its structure, that would be fine (there are rules about copying within Wikipedia, but as long as you say in the Edit Summary where the material was copied from, those are met). But as I said above, it is the sources, and summarising what they say, that is the important part of the task, not the structure of the article.

And I will reiterate that I always advise new editors to do a fair bit of editing existing articles before they attempt to create a new one. --ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Asterisks

Colin: with all due respect why would I want to edit other existing articles when my sole goal is to create pages for the architect C. N. Otis ?

I have a decent amount of content on the architect C. N. Otis and his 36 buildings done in the 19th century but I am getting the impression that doing Wiki pages for him is going to be a major PITA

I find all these hoops and rules and regulations to be approaching the ridiculous level so I give up

I understand citing sources etc and I have that info from when I did my research

I'll create a set of webpages for him and his work and if some enterprising sole wants to create wiki pages for him - bless them - better thee than me :(

I don't have the time or energy for all this BS :(

Bye

Extended content

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewis buttery (talk • contribs) 19:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Lewis buttery I have created a stub article for Calvin N. Otis you are welcome to add to it. Theroadislong (talk) 21:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I found Wikidpad as an offline editor and I may try that but I am also exploring creating a set of webpages for Otis and leaving Wiki alone http://franklloydwrightsites.com/sites.html

BTW: I was focused on the technical side and forgot to mention that I have a Masters in American History and Politics and have my own museum in Niagara Falls (website down for relocation)

Lew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewis buttery (talk • contribs) 00:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Colours

I am new to all this editing code, with my user logo i coped and edited from other people, because the colors are so hard to learn, I cant understand "#faaa40"

can someone put a sprite or a color plate under this line thanks C A T Talk

Hi C A T, Welcome to Teahouse, Check outWeb colors, Help:Using colours and [1] for the associated Hex code with the colours. Thanks. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:14, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Personal edits

I just sent 2 days updating my personal Wikipedia page and it was deleted by Wikipedia. What are my resources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebford2 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey Ebford2, and welcome to the Teahouse! I understand and apologize that this happened. However, in a nutshell, Wikipedia is not the place to write an autobiography. Nearly all autobiographies get deleted from Wikipedia, as 99.9% of people aren't notable or significant enough to have a Wikipedia article. See WP:YOURSELF. Hope this helps, and please let us know if you have any further questions! =)--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 18:58, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I apologize - I misread your post. But about what you were saying, writing about a subject where you have a conflict of interest is discouraged, see WP:COI. If you think something should be changed, it's better to request this on the talk page. Also, if you do edit the page, you will still need to always source your statements - e.g., if something happened in your personal life, you can't just add it because you know it happened to you, you still need a reliable source stating that it happened. Hope this helps!--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 19:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Oh, and one more thing. If you do have a conflict of interest on a certain topic that has Wikipedia page, you should disclose this on the article's talk page. See WP:DISCLOSE for details.--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 19:08, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Why does someone I don't know have the authority to change the changes I have made to my personal Wikipedia page.

I thought we lived in a Democracy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebford2 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ebford2: You don't really have a personal Wikipedia page as all pages here are collectively part of Wikipedia. Tradition dictates that you have more control over your user page, but you don't have one yet. To which page do you refer?--S Philbrick (Talk) 19:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

The page is Edsel Ford II. While it may be about you, Edsel Ford II ‎, it is not your page to do with as you please. See WP:OWN. Meters (talk) 19:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Ebford2: See WP:OWN, WP:COI, and WP:FACEBOOK. Your line about "I thought we lived in a Democracy" is a non-sequitur, especially considering that would mean that other people should be able to edit the page about you (however, see WP:NOTDEMOCRACY and WP:FREESPEECH regarding this consensus-based private site's interactions with the principles of democracy and free-speech). This is a private website which you do not own. We have an article about you, but it is not "your" article, you do not own it. If you see some way it violates our polices such as WP:BLP or WP:RS, then you can point them out on the article's talk page. Do not edit the article about you again. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

To rephrase that last piece of advice - as the article is about you, you should not directly make changes. You should create content at the Talk for that article, with citations. If another editor considers the suggested changes (additions, subtractions) valid, that person will initiate the changes. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Can i submit my startup story in wikipedia

Hi, I just want to post my startup story in Wikipedia. How can I create that one? We have started a small startup but we are growing very fast. we want to present in wikipedia. So can you help me for that?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhaskar Kosuri1992 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

You can't. Wikipedia is not for promotion; it has articles only on subjects which are already notable. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bhaskar Kosuri1992. You have a conflict of interest about your startup, and should be very careful with your edits here. Please comply with our mandatory Paid editing disclosure. Does your company meet our notabilty guideline for businesses? If so, you can draft an article through our Articles for Creation process. If not, do not try to draft an article. Please be aware that your contributions will be scrutinized carefully. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Another User Repeatedly Removing My Content

I'm relatively new, so I'm still learning. I've abided by referencing content I've included on a wiki page but 1 user in particular has repeatedly deleted my content. Is there a way to stop that? Thank You! (2PacKidada (talk) 05:05, 14 June 2018 (UTC))

2PacKidada, first off, if someone reverts your edits, don't just put them back and insist you are correct. Instead, go to the talk page and discuss it. Content is decided by WP:CONSENSUS. See WP:BRD for the proper procedure to follow when your new addition is reverted. And above all, don't take it personally. Although sources are required, merely having them is no guarantee that your content is going to be in the article. On the subject of sources, if you are the one who added the Vanity Fair source for that paragraph, that isn't an acceptable citation. VF is a periodical. Without the issue date, the reference is useless. The editor reverting you should probably remove the entire paragraph. John from Idegon (talk) 05:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

If I need the release date for this article that I'm referencing, I will redo it. I was informed by an administrator or someone who checks validity months ago that I did it correctly. I will repost with all that is needed.(2PacKidada (talk) 06:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC))

Please use the article's talk page to discuss your content instead of simply restoring it. The text about wanting a baby looks like trivia that shouldn't be in an encyclopedia article, but if you bring it up on the talk page and get consensus in favour of including it, that's a different matter. Please don't start new sections for your new comments, by the way - it's better to keep the discussion in one section as long as it is about the same thing. --bonadea contributions talk 06:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Question regarding "Trivia" section/information

Hello, I think I need help in understating certain Wikipedia's definition/policy, particularly regarding the "Trivia" stuff. I've made an edit in an article about certain person, adding certain information about subject's Cosplay activity with the hopes that either myself or someone else will expand this further. However, before someone had the chance to expand on this, that edit was simply reverted with comment about "removing trivia"... My question is, how exactly this information can be considered as "trivia" since it is a well-noted fact, covered by reliable sources such as Newsweek here, ESPN's video here, one the Polygon's section here as well as other less popular (but I believe still usable) sources such as here and there and also being prominently presented in subject's own Twitch channel as well as subject's dedicated Patreon account related to this specific activity? Is all of this still considered as "trivia" even though it's a major, well-known part of subject's online personality?Omgwtfbbqsomethingrandom (talk) 19:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Definition of trivia is subjective, of course. You may read more in Wikipedia:Handling_trivia (stand-alone trivia). Ruslik_Zero 20:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Omgwtfbbqsomethingrandom! I received your email asking for assistance with this question. See this guideline for more information. Generally, we want to avoid adding "trivia" sections to articles, which generally contain random bits of information. Instead, you'll want to add this to a previous section if it fits in order to make the information relevant, or a new section that discusses the information you're adding. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else and I'll be more than happy to do so. Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Sandbox Problem 2

All of a sudden the sandbox said: "your edits are abusive and pure vandalism". I regretted the message and 'trotted' back to the home page, nervously staring at the page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bondboy9756 (talk • contribs) 07:54, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

It appears you inadvertently (?) made changes to someone else's Sandbox rather than the general Wikipedia Sandbox or your own personal Sandbox. And yes, you were making many, many, many, many edits at Wikipedia Sandbox. If you want to experiment privately, use your own Sandbox. David notMD (talk) 08:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Bandboy, you can find your own personal sandbox here User:Bondboy9756/Sandbox, good luck. --DBig Xray 14:23, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@DBigXray: The default has the word sandbox uncapitalised (although the link to it at the top of the page has the word capitalised), so User:Bondboy9756/sandbox is what the user has already been using. Hopefully he won't try submitting it for review again unless he eventually uses it for a draft suitable for article space. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

White supremacy

This topic you discussed about, White supremacy, is biased to political hatred on Christianity. That's consequently mislead and can manipulate society mind to put Christianity into bad realm as bad behavior as White Supremacy. And at that point Wikipedia is a fake! You wrong if you try to make sense that White Supremacy is a part of Christianity decree. Better you edit it, and let the core topic only related to satanic philosophy base of White Supremacy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:15D0:51A0:ED8C:4B7F:5D33:245F (talk) 17:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

The place to discuss this would be Talk:White supremacy.

While I agree that someone truly saved by Jesus cannot be a racist, a lot of white supremacists claim to be Christian. Even if I agree with you that that claim is false, Wikipedia does not say what is true or false for religion (because there are a lot of beliefs that that lots of people say are true and we're just looking through a mirror darkly) -- Wikipedia just says what people say about their own religion. This works with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you," because we wouldn't want Muslims to rewrite the Christianity to only say that Christians worship three different gods, we wouldn't want Richard Dawkins fans to rewrite the Christianity article to say that Christians to only say that Christians are delusional and superstitious, and so on... Right? So we have to grant the same privilege to other religions, even if we disagree with them. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:19, 14 June 2018

Can you make a Wiki profile about Esport Players?

Hey my name is Sindre Roalkvam more commonly known as Zid or Zidius. I am Play Esports and I play in many different gaming tournuments. My friend asked me an interesting question and gave me a challange of sorts. Is it allowed to make wikipedia profiles about esports gameers? And if yes is there a limit? Do they have to be world known or can you write about someone like myself. I am a Norwegian Esport player and I am not exactly world known but I hope to be one day :-)

Basically I want to know if it is allowed for me or someone else to make a wiki profile about esports players including myself. And if so what would the rules be for making a profile like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zidius (talk • contribs) 17:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@Zidius: See WP:Conflict of interest, WP:Autobiography, and WP:NOTPROMO.

If you want to try to point to any existing articles on esports players as a counter-argument, see WP:Notability, and, again, WP:Conflict of interest, WP:Autobiography, and WP:NOTPROMO.

Basically, Wikipedia may have (but is not required to have) articles about any individual who has been featured in professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are independent of the subject and not affiliated with the subject. So your team's website would not work. We strongly discourage anyone from writing or even editing articles about themselves, as they almost never do so from a neutral perspective.

It is possible to be "world known" but still not be notable. The Internet makes it very easy for people from all over the world to know of you, to have hundreds of thousands of followers -- but if professional academia or journalism does not notice, it doesn't matter. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Desktop

Can I use the desktop version of wikipedia on a smartphone/tablet ? Kpgj hpjm 12:00, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes you can, I do it. At the bottom, of any mobile page is a link called "Desktop", click it and you will be taken to the desktop version. ~ GB fan 12:08, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Is there no way to go to the desktop mode without clicking ? Kpgj hpjm 14:56, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kpgjhpjm: I believe the only (but rather straightforward) way to ensure this is to make sure that when Wikipedia is called, it uses the "en.wikipedia.org" address rather than "en.m.wikipedia.org". If you can configure that on your mobile device, you should be good to go - but unless you are actually using a bookmark in a browser, I don't know if it's easily done. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kpgjhpjm. I edit Wikipedia using an Android smartphone 99% of the time. I use the desktop site. I stay logged in and have one or more Wikipedia tabs open at all times. I just click one of those tabs to return to the desktop site. If I come to a Wikipedia article as a result of a Google search or a Facebook post, I need to click the desktop site link, but that just takes a second. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kpgjhpjm: Depending on the browser you're using on your mobile device, there may be an option to always request the desktop version of the site. BegbertBiggs (talk) 17:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

I want to change website URL

Hi, I want to change website utl which is not being possible through source code setting, please help me out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srivastava Shweta (talk • contribs) 05:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Srivastava Shweta. welcome to our Teahouse. There should be no problem changing a url by editing the source code unless the page has been 'protected'. This only happens to a tiny minority of pages which either see a flurry of sudden abuse, or are so popular that they attract constant vandalism. In these cases they may be protected for a period of time, allowing only registered users to edit them or requiring edits to be pre-approved before they go live here. Unfortunately your account shows only one edit - this one here, at the Teahouse. So I have way of helping you. Your best bet is to leave a note on the Talk page of the article, stating the changes you would like to make, and why. Alternatively, come back here and tell us which page you are having problems with. Sorry I can't help more without further information from you. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Are you attempting to change the title of a Wikipedia article? In that case, a WP:MOVE is what you're looking for. Please familiarise yourself with the guidelines on WP:MOVE and the Wikipedia naming conventions before moving and article though. BegbertBiggs (talk) 17:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Infoboxes question

What do the triple brackets {{{}}} mean in infoboxes? I see them sometimes but am unsure. Test No 1 (talk) 17:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Test No 1, and welcome to the Teahouse. In infoboxes, and in templates generally, those indicate the use of a template parameter. See Help:template#Handling parameters for more details. (Infoboxes are pretty much always implemented as templates.) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Block me

Pls block me 4 1 min ☎️ 2602:306:8BB9:4E20:BCC8:28BD:1E4B:93BB (talk) 18:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

aggressive counter-editing

i think i might have encountered a marketing assistant trying to counter my valid edits for the purposes of ensuring that the brand names they are being paid to promote appear in the short summary which is displayed on Google search results when our wiki appears. What should I do and how can i make a formal complaint about the user, who when i researched, was using a fake name from an obscure novel titled, "The Man Who Used the Universe" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimmyAU (talk • contribs) 16:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@TimmyAU: Your user name is not identical to your legal name, either...

And if we're going to have an article on a book, movie, or show, we generally do explain who publishes or produces that media, especially when the production or publishing company is notable enough that we already have an article on them. That's not advertising, that's completeness of information, and I'm saying that as an admin who loves blocking PR accounts.

Go read WP:Assume good faith until you understand the problem here. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

This is at WP:ANI#Bizarre edit summaries / hounding on 13 Reasons Why. Doug Weller talk 19:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

i want to know about infobox and userbox

i want to know about the template : infobox and userbox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IVCofficial (talk • contribs) 17:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

If you're looking about general information about infoboxes and userboxes, WP:Infoboxes and WP:Userboxes may be helpful to you. If not, please clarify further what you're looking for. BegbertBiggs (talk) 17:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, IVCofficial. I don't think there is a rule against using an infobox on your user page, but do you really want to be revealing that kind on information on a very very public site? Infoboxes are intended for summarising the (reliably cited) information elsewhere in an article. Your User page is somewhere that (if you choose) you can share something about yourself as a Wikipedia editor: userboxes are a way for people to display their interests, origins, or affiliations.

I would really encourage you to put aside working on your User page and get stuck in to improving the encyclopaedia, which is what we are all here for. I suggest trying The Wikipedia Adventure to strt with.I am also a little dubious about your username: it looks as if you are claiming to be an official of something called IVC (whatever that is), and usernames which look as if they are editing on behalf of an organisation are not allowed: please see WP:UN. --ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Need to initiate page -- but have COI

Hi all. I'm hoping to add a page -- or inspire someone to initiate a page -- re a TV show called "Matter of Fact with Soledad O'Brien." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcampo123 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

There is a page currently about the host, Soledad O'Brien, which fleetingly mentions this particular show: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soledad_O%27Brien

There is also a page regarding an Australian TV show called "Matter of Fact": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=%22Matter+of+Fact%22+TV&go=Go&searchToken=5nm7lqbx9bzh4a8sqretomcvi

As you might imagine, this has the producers (Hearst) behind the US "Matter of Fact" concerned about having their own Wikipedia page.

There is also a page re a comparable TV show, "Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Measure_with_Sharyl_Attkisson

The reality is that pages like these are at least initiated by interested parties.

Here's where my COI comes in: I'm the "PR" guy for Hearst Television, the show's production company. Much of the publicly available detail about the show was originally developed by me.

So I'm following the protocol here in alerting the editorial team up front.

Please advise me of next steps? Should I go ahead and initiate a page -- strictly facts / sans hype -- for editorial-team review?

Thanks!

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcampo123 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Tcampo123 (talk) 20:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Tom. First of all, thank you for being up front about your COI. Please start by reading PAID, and make the mandatory declaration.

Then - you are strongly discouraged from creating a page where you have a COI, but not forbidden. The formally recommended way would be to post a request at Requested articles - but your chance of somebody choosing to pick up the request is not high. You can probably improve it a bit by finding and citing some high-quality sources, but the prognosis is still not very good. (Remember that Wikipedia is entirely created and edited by volunteers, who choose what they want to work on).

So most people in your position will try to create the article yourself. Please start by studying Your first article, and create a draft as advised there. (I always advise people to spend a few months editing existing articles before even trying to create a new one, but I suspect you won't feel you can take that time. Be prepared in that case to find the difficult task of creating an acceptable article made more difficult by your inexperience in the ways of Wikipedia, and more difficult still because of your COI).

You also need to have a look at TVSHOW and check whether the show is notable in the special sense that Wikipedia uses the word. This means finding reliably published sources wholly independent of the writers, actors, producers, broadcasters etc involved in the show, that cover it in some depth - ignoring anything published by anybody associated with the show, anything on blogs or social media, and anything which is based on an interview or press release. If you cannot find any such sources, then give up. Wikipedia will not accept an article on a subject which does not meet these criteria.

If you get past that, you will need to write an article based almost entirely on what those indpendent sources say - and if it happens that some of them are critical of it, you must give those due weight. Wikipedia has very little interest in what anybody connected with the show says or wants to say about it, and no interest at all in what the producers would like the article to contain. If you succeed in getting an article accepted, it will not be your (or their) article, and you and they will have no control whatever over what changes are subsequently made to it - your role will be limited to making suggestions on the article's talk page.

If this sounds discouraging, well, I'm afraid to a degree it is meant to be. This is an encyclopaedia, and not a promotional tool for anybody. "X wants to have an article about them/their band/their show/their company" is never an adequate reason for adding an article to Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 20:49, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Tcampo123, and welcome to Wikipedia. Several points:

The reality is that pages like these are at least initiated by interested parties. In fact they are often created by fans, not people involved with the show itself.
You clearly fall into the category of "paid contributor" and must disclose this in accord with our policy on paid editing. I would advise doing this by placing {{paid}} on your user page, with the appropriate parameters filled out. See Template:paid for documentation. Do this before you take any other steps in the matter.
Best would be if you did nothing at all, and left it to a fan to eventually create a page. Failing that, you could use the article wizard to create a draft, subject to review. Note that the backlog for review is long, up to 8 weeks. Note that you will be held to a strict standard of establishing the notability of the topic, in this case the show, with independent published reliable sources.
The anxiety of the producers is not of much interest to anyone here.
There really isn't an "editorial team" here. There are many volunteers, each of whom works as he or she sees fit, sometimes working together, often independently.
Note that per WP:OSE the existence of an article on a similar topic does not guarantee that a page on your preferred topic will be created.

I hope that is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:58, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

DES This section was a duplicate of the one above. I've removed the copy and kept your contribution at the end. Rojomoke (talk) 21:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Rojomoke. I must have made an error in handling a misplaced section header. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:32, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Got a warning that an image will be deleted

I got an alert that a photo will be deleted from this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Press_photo_2_Brothers_on_the_4th_floor_A-700x998.jpg#Summary

Something about "rationale," which I don't understand. I have permission from one of the artists to post this publicity photo to Wikipedia. I have updated the file description, at least I think I did.

Can someone help me ensure this photo won't be deleted? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albanymike (talk • contribs) 21:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Albanymike and welcome to the Teahouse. The photo in question is claimed to be copyrighted, meaning it falls under Wikipedia's non-free content policy (see WP:NONFREE for more guidance on that). In order to use a copyrighted image on Wikipedia, the image must be accompanied by a fair use rationale explaining why its use meets the non-free content criteria. clpo13_(talk) 21:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, Albanymike, and welcome to the Teahouse. The warning is because it appears that this image has been published and is under copyright. permission from one of the artists to post this publicity photo to Wikipedia is not sufficient. The release would have to be from the copyright holder, who is nornally the photographer, not the person shown in the photo. And it would need to be a release under a free license such as CC-BY-SA. This means that anyone, anywhere in the world, is free to reuse the image for any purpose, including for commercial purposes, without paying any royalty or license fee, as long as the work is properly attributed and the same conditions are imposed on further users. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:52, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

If the image is not released under a fully free license, it can only be used on Wikipedia under fair use. This means it must comply with wikipedia's Non-free content criteria. In that case, a "rationale" is a statement explaining how an image fits those criteria, and how it is used in a particular article. Such a rationale is required for each use of a non-free image.

You would need to either have the copyright holder follow the steps in donating copyrighted materiel or else make a claim of fair use, supplying a satisfactory rationale. Note that pictures of living people only rarely can satisfy the fair use criteria here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:52, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

DES, looks like we got caught in dueling edit conflicts. I was going to add that very information to my original comment but you beat me to it. clpo13_(talk) 21:58, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

It happens, Clpo13. Now the OP can be assured that multiple experienced editors agree on their advice. This is an issue that many new editors find confusing. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:01, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Meg Cranston - should the template be removed?

I added several inline citations to the text for the article Meg Cranston. Does the list of solo exhibits need a citation for each or are there enough citations now to remove the template? Wisteriagarden (talk) 04:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure that really shows notability, as many of those references are primary. Is there any secondary biographical material about her, or just exhibition-list type stuff? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:32, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Starting a discussion and asking users to join the discussion

Hi, I was wondering how I can start a discussion on a WikiProject talk page and ask other users to join that discussion? - LionCountry25 (talk) 07:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

LionCountry25 Welcome Teahouse. Be Bold and go for it. You could invite the regular contributors by just look through the the history page of (1) the particular WikiProject talk page (2) history page of the affected articles of the WikiProject. For example, if you would like to start a discussion on WikiProject Football, then look through football clubs, leagues and players article history pages and find those regular editors to join the discussion. Do drop by if you have further questions. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Question about editor linked to edited page

Hi,

I saw that an editor is making changes to Rhys Nicholson, using Rhys' partner's name (Kyran) as their username. I looked at the real name/similar name help section, but I'm not sure how to suggest for them to confirm their identity?

Thanks for your advice! SunnyBoi (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@SunnyBoi: Wikipedia editors are anonymous (unless they choose to declare their real-world identity). You can ask on their User Talk page, but they are not required to disclose who they are.--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Looking over the history of Rhys Nicholson, Kyranwheatley has only ever made one edit, on 28 May 2018, and it was relatively minor. Is there an issue with that edit?--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@SunnyBoi: Hullo, Sunnyboi and welcome to the Teahouse! As Gronk Oz mentioned above, editors are rarely (if ever) asked to disclose their real identity and the Wikimedia Foundation's Privacy Policy guarantees the right of editors to preserve their anonymity while editing. That being said, Wikipedians can disclose their identity of their own choosing and editors with a history of edits that show a conflict of interest. If the user only has one minor edit, it's probably not going to be a huge deal. If you have a concern about a conflict of interest, you should handle the situation as described in this Wikipedia article. I hope that helps! Feel free to follow up here with any more questions or place {{help me}} on your talk page. Thanks for editing Wikipedia! —zfJames Please add {{ping|ZfJames}} to your reply (talk page, contribs) 12:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Frank C. Jones not notable??

My subject Frank C. Jones was an editor of the magazine Radio for eleven years. For four of those he edited their Radio Handbook. He invented a transmitter, a receiver and a loudspeaker. In his career he published 3000 articles. How do I establish that he *is* notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chipveres (talk • contribs) 12:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Chipveres, and welcome to the Teahouse. The primary way is to show that he meets the general notability guideline, by citing several independent published reliable sources that discuss him in some detail, say several paragraphs each at a minimum. (Follow the links for more detail.) Note that this requires sources about him, not citations of works that he has written himself. Self-published sources, blogs, press releases, interviews with eh subject, fan sites, and the like will not count towards this. Establishing that a person has held a particular job does not always establish notability. If you cannot show that the GNG is satisfied, you could see if those of WP:CREATIVE can be shown with citations to reliable sources. I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:12, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

(e/c) Hello Chipveres, and welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Notability (people). You need reliable sources, independent of the subject, that discuss him in some detail, not just mention him. If there are such sources, a WP-article that survives can be written. If not, not. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:15, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

How to add photos to an article

I am writing a Wikipedia article on General Juan Francisco Morales of Ecuador, South America.

I have some photos of the General that I would like to add to the article.

Wikipedia rejects the uploading the photos because it thinks that the photos are copyrighted.

These photos are family photos and were the properties of my mother and grandmother, which were bequeathed to me on their death.

How can I use these photos of the General in his formal dress uniform and a photo of the General in his campaign uniform?

These photos were taken 123 years ago.

Thank you.

Bodvar Antonio Gregersen

Bodvar Antonio Gregersen (talk) 11:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

This is a matter for Wikimedia Commons, rather than for here at English-language Wikipedia. I see that you have already discussed it at their Help Desk, and received an unhelpful answer. I suggest that you ask there again, and this time make it clear that the photos were taken before 1923 (which is a significant date for copyright in many jurisdictions). Maproom (talk) 13:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)