Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 868

Archive 865

Archive 866

Archive 867

Archive 868

Archive 869

Archive 870

→

Archive 875

Create wikipedia Page

Hello! actually, I am trying to create a Wikipedia profile of my own, but I do not how to it will come under search my Wikipedia user profile. Please help me out. My user-Profile link is Sanjay Awasthi —Preceding undated comment added 05:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Awasthisanjay: Wikipedia is not a directory, nor a place to list resumes, nor a place to promote one's career. Editing articles about yourself is strongly discouraged. User pages are for explaining one's interest and purpose on the site, not for job hunting.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. All we do here is cite, summarize, and paraphrase professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary.

If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything besides yourself, here are the steps you should follow:

1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.

2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find. Google Books is a good resource for this. Also, while search engine resutls are tnot sources, they are where you can find sources. Just remember that they need to be professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources.

3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.

4) Summarize those sources left after step 3, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer. Make sure this summary is just bare statement of facts, phrased in a way that even someone who hates the subject can agree with.

5) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.

6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.

7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.

8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 3 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:42, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

How to create a subpage?

I want to create a subpage to keep a track of my list of vandals but please tell me how can I create a subpage?Denim11 (talk) 11:46, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Denim11, how about saving it at User:Denim11/vandals? I created that subpage name in the edit window. Or you could enter it in the Search box, and it will give you a link to start the subpage. —teb728 t c 12:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Denim11. Just curious as to why you feel the need to create such a list and what pages these editors are supposed to be vandalizing. My experience is that generally lists of this type don't really serve a good purpose and might even be seen as a violation of WP:POLEMIC. If you're having problems with vandalisim, then it's best to just try and deal with it as explained in WP:RVAN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:14, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly I made this list to keep track of the vandals who have atleast got a 2 level warning to see their recent contributions. If it is a violation please let me know.Denim11 (talk) 12:22, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Even though I'm sure you're intentions are good, I'm not sure if creating a list like this is such a good idea since listing editors such as this might be seen a inappropriate per bullet points 2 and 3 in WP:POLEMIC. Other editors might feel differently about this, but it seems the potential for error outweighs any benefits you might get from such a list. User warning templates are not always in accordance with relevant policy and sometimes might actually be used where no vandalism as occurred; so, it could create some bad feelings among other editors if they find out you've added their names to your list. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:45, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Please remember that you recently blasted a new user with a vandalism warning for what was only an inappropriate question at TeaHouse. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 24 November 2018 (UTC) Hi David notMD I remember that incident but I have also apologised on your talk page and it will never happen again.Denim11 (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Denim11, Keep this list offline as suggested in the link on user page advice provided above. For a short time I kept an html file on my desktop of problematic users and quickly found it to be useless. True vandals have a pretty short half life, owing to both their drive-by nature and to the diligence of admins restricting their privileges if they decide to stay. Everyone else deserves to have you assume good faith if you can manage it. It's not always easy, I know. Listing someone (even privately) as a vandal will lead you to the inflexible preconception that people who have caused problems on various pages are here with ill-will. In my experience, most people I've seen edit-warring bitterly on one page are contributing positively and benevolently somewhere else on another. Hope that helps. Edaham (talk) 05:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Page for Sam Wineburg

I recently went to a lecture by Dr. Sam Wineburg from Stanford. There are lots of pages Google finds but no page here. Where do I put in a request? Keith Henson (talk) 04:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

PS. I have started pages for people, but they were involved in subjects I somewhat know about. What Wineburg does is beyond my knowledge. Keith Henson (talk) 04:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mr. Henson, you can request new articles here: Wikipedia:Requested articles. It's a good idea to review the notability requirements for Dr. Wineburg. Here is a list of different types of notability requirements: Wikipedia:Notability. It might take a long time before you get one though. I'm a new editor but like to chime in now and then, since I have fast fingers and know how to find information on here rather quickly. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 06:26, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Samina Naz

I tried to create a biography page named https://en.wikipedia.org/saminanaz and submitted it somehow. However, my heart is broken to see that it was declined with the following message

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia

I do not know how to how to add more references and what are/ will be those references. The subject is a public figure of international repute, currently working as the Ambassador of Bangladesh to Vietnam. I posted pictures of her ambassadorial duty along with the president of Vietnam. what other ref/proof we need to put forward? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkturban (talk • contribs) 21:14, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Looks like this is about Draft:Samina Naz. Issue is not whether she is an ambassador. What is needed are references to articles written about her. David notMD (talk) 21:19, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@Pinkturban: don't despair. Writing a new article is one of the most difficult things to do on Wikipedia, and many drafts are declined the first time. Looking at Draft:Samina Naz, I agree with David notMD above. At the moment, there are two sources, both of them very brief (probably press releases, in fact probably the same press release minimally rewritten by staff reporters) talking about her appointment as ambassador and mentioning a few words about her education and earlier career. Unfortunately, this is nowhere near enough - and there is quite a bit of information about her early life, her family, and her career that is not sourced at all. Where did you find that information? In a biography about a living person the requirement is particularly strong for sources that meet these requirements. Information that cannot be sourced should not be included in the article. Note that sources do not have to be in English, and they don't have to exist online, but they do need to meet the sourcing criteria. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Created company page for a known company but its deleted in 24 hours

Mt educare (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Hi there,

I had created a page few days called mt educare but this page had been deleted in 24 hours and the reason was that its a promotional thing but its a company page and I hadn't included any promotional link or references I want to for a company page how is possible to write it as encyclopedia i have seen other pages of companies which even using promotional weblinks but got there approval

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syed zaryab (talk • contribs) 21:58, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Syed zaryab. I can’t see the deleted page, but probably the reason it was found promotional was that it was not written from a neutral point of view. The deletion rationale also indicates that the article did not indicate why the company is important enough to have an article in an encyclopedia. —teb728 t c 09:13, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Syed zaryab. As an administrator, I have the privilege of being able to see the deleted article, and I can confirm that wording such as the following is far too promotional: "The organization gives proficient preparing and instructing to the understudies over all streams from standard eighth to twelfth and placement tests for the focused and expert courses. MT Educare has versatile mobile application Robomate+ for giving computerized content through videos, recordings". If you would like to try again, please create an article as a draft for review by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Your first article. Please note that if you work for or are in any way being paid by the company concerned, you must declare this by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:21, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Zehra Neşe Kavak

Hello there. There's an article I've been working on for a long time. But still no confirmation. I've got everything I need. I'd appreciate it if you could help. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anilaydin (talk • contribs) 15:08, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Anilaydin, and I'm sorry that you've had to wait such a long time for a response here. Draft:Zehra Neşe Kavak was last submitted for review just over four weeks ago, which is a reasonable amount of time but not unusually so. Unfortunately, with so many drafts awaiting review and a limited pool of experienced volunteer reviewers, you might have to wait a while longer. Incidentally, and for future reference, you shouldn't resubmit a previously rejected draft without making any improvements first, as you did here. Yes, you later made some changes, but if a reviewer had seen the submission before you made those, they would have been well within their rights to simply reject the draft as unchanged. The correct procedure is to make the changes and then resubmit the draft. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

bot

What is a bot ? And how do you nominate a featured article ? 223.176.85.28 (talk) 10:44, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Bots are created to automate the performance of routine, repetitive tasks. The process for choosing featured articles is at WP:FAC. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

See WP:BOT ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 11:11, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Any article worthy of considering for nomination to become a Featured Article is (almost always) already a Good Article. Nominators should have hundreds - better thousands - of edits and years of experience, including getting articles to GA status, before attempting a FA nomination. David notMD (talk) 12:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Userbox

When I create an userpage , how do I make an userbox showing I support Bayern Muenchen ? Khockbot (talk) 11:23, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

First, you need to be unblocked first. Then you may ask me to make one for you :) ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 11:53, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sports/Football/UEFA/Germany#Bundesliga shows three userboxes for Bayern Munich. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:54, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

I have been unblocked , changed my username . 223.176.85.28 (talk) 12:02, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

You need to log in ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 12:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

From this question and the one immediately above it, appears you just logged in as Khockbot and also edited while not logged in, from IP address 223.176.85.28. My guess is that you were advised to stop using a name with 'bot' in it. If this is true, stop! Log in under your new user name and never use Khockbot again. David notMD (talk) 12:13, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

My new account - Grunthog (talk) 12:39, 26 November 2018 (UTC) What do I do to show on my userbox , I hate Borussia Dortmund . Grunthog (talk) 12:41, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

wp:userbox offers general help and guidance. For creating custom user boxes see here WP:CREATEUBX Edaham (talk) 13:33, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Grunthog: Wikipedia:Userboxes#Potentially divisive words includes "hates" in words to avoid and says : "Express what you do like, rather than what you don't like". PrimeHunter (talk) 14:12, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

this article is not abusive

this article is not abusive and they are deleting it because they say it is. it explains who boniques artiques is and personally im tired of trying to get my article published and told it was abusive or promotional its ridiculous — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beiselbon (talk • contribs) 14:44, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Beiselbon: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry you aren't having an easy experience. What is happening to you isn't meant to be offensive to you personally; but you do need to be aware of how things work here. Please understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a business directory. Wikipedia articles must do more than merely tell about a business or its existence. Businesses only merit articles here if they have extensive coverage in independent reliable sources that indicate how the business meets the notability guidelines for businesses, written at WP:ORG. Please click that link and review the guidelines. Not every business merits an article here, even within the same field. The sources you provided all seem to be Facebook posts; Facebook is not usually considered an independent source like a newspaper, TV station, or other form of media.

You may want to read Your First Article to learn what is being looked for in new articles, and you may also wish to use the new user tutorial(click that link) to also learn more about Wikipedia before attempting to create an article(which is probably the hardest thing to do here, so don't feel bad). 331dot (talk) 15:14, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Question

Is it OK if you join multiple wikiprojects in the same user? --Thewinrat (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that's no problem at all. Maproom (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Translations

Hi there, I have a question regarding articles that require proofreading and better translation, in this case from Spanish to English. I was wondering if the translation can be reflected exactly as in the Spanish article (in the event that there is one) or if you can vary your words since some of the articles that require revision have different paragraphs. Thank you for your time. --Anon_york (talk) 16:02, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello Anon york and welcome to the Teahouse.

Once an article is translated into English and accepted into en-wiki, there is no expectation that later editing will result in a faithful translation of the original article from the other edition of Wikipedia. The original source should be acknowledged on the talk page with the {{Translated page}} template. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:59, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

References

Hi, do we have to cite and reference wikis sources in the references also? Awesooome92 (talk) 20:58, 25 November 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesooome92 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Awesoome92, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I don't quite understand your question. Wikipedia articles should have wikilinks to make it easy for readers to go and find out more about things that are mentioned; but these are not references. Wikipedia, like other user-generated sources, may not itself be used as a reference. You may find referencing for beginners helpful; or else, come back here and expand on your question a little. --ColinFine (talk) 18:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

New article

How do I create a new article for people to view? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjoiner1914 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello Cjoiner1914 and welcome to the Teahouse.

New users cannot directly create new articles. You can use the article wizard to create a draft and submit that draft for review.

Creating a new article is difficult and most new users who attempt it find the process very frustrating because of the many potential pitfalls along the way: you need to understand referencing, the concept of notability in the peculiar way that WP uses the term, adherence to neutral point of view and a large array of other details from the manual of style and other policies and guidelines. It may seem counter-intuitive, but it may well be faster to spend a month or two improving other articles and "learning the ropes" before attempting to create a new one. Reviews of new drafts can take a long time and the decline notice may only point out a couple of the most important reasons when there may be many more problems with the draft that would also prevent it from being accepted.

For getting started, the information at your first article and at Help:referencing for beginners is probably the most helpful. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Please advise: I'm a new editor and not sure how to deal with retributive spite.

Here is the relevant closed discussion on my talk page: User_talk:Shashi_Sushila_Murray#Other_accounts.

Since I've never had another account before, what processes or fora am I supposed to take this up in? Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 01:24, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

No action needed. An editor asked if you had previously edited under another name and you replied not. David notMD (talk) 03:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, David notMD. It felt like a Spanish Inquisition moment with mafioso-like questioning with the intention of spreading some fear and uncertainty (if you read the discussion above the linked one, you'll see what's even prompting this editor to interact with me). Sort of a "what are your sins?" like question that you'd expect from certain cults. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 03:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hyperbole is very rarely useful in discussions among Wikipedia editors, Shashi Sushila Murray. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't see what the intention of the question is in context otherwise considering that they have no reason for the speculation. In fact you know, Cullen, from your interactions with me so far (and your role as an admin likely makes you able to look behind-the-veil to check the veracity of their otherwise purposeless speculation). Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 03:22, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Although I am an administrator, I am not a checkuser. And even if I had that power, it would be inappropriate to use it in this situation, Shashi Sushila Murray. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:04, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

S - To borrow from The Godfather, "It's not personal, it's just business." Editors who have here for a long time have seen damage done to Wikipedia by sock puppets, meat puppets, undeclared conflict of interest and paid editing. I myself have been grilled about potential COI, so I have a statement on my User page and when appropriate, add one to the Talk pages of articles I edit. David notMD (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

David notMD thank you for the reply and reassurance. Contextually it doesn't read like business. I could understand if I was saying or doing something that references some prior account, but I even have a discussion on my talk page where I talk about getting frustrated with an editor edit warring with an ip without reading the ip's source prompting me to make an account in the first place. So in context I'm still reading it as a growling dog sniffing another dog to intimidate it. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 19:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

William R. Smith, MD page

I created a page for William R. Smith, MD and I thought it was in review but I just found out that that title page is available. Does that mean my page was declined? How do I find out the state of a page that I submitted? Julie Kling (talk) 22:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Julie, and welcome to the Teahouse. The fact that there are already pages about other William R. Smiths does not cause any problem for your draft Draft:William R. Smith. If the drft is accepted, the reviewer who accepts it will handle the naming: it will probably be called something like "William R. Smith (physician)", and an entry will be added to the disambiguation page William R. Smith.

The message at the top of the draft (I gave a link to it above, and you can always find it from your contributions list: pick "Contributions" at the top of the screen) says it is currently being reviewed. --ColinFine (talk) 22:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Colin!Julie Kling (talk) 22:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Browser Extension for grammer/spelling check

I edited some pages today and sometimes I just want to quickly check if the grammer/spelling is correct (because the spelling/grammer related message on top of the page (NOT the banner which can be removed by editing) doesn't go away even after the edits). Is there any plugin/browser extension for Firefox (or Chrome) to check this?

Greetings new user and Welcome to the Teahouse! BTW, it's a good idea to sign your comments so people know who you are. You can leave the following characters: --~~~~ or if you use the edit tools click on the icon at the top that is the third one over after B for bold and I for Italic. I'm sure you can also do it with the Wysiwyg editor but I'm old school and don't use it. Back to your question, if you look in the Settings for your browser you should find a setting for spell checking. I'm working in Chrome in Windows right now and the setting there is under Settings>Advanced>Languages. Navigate to there and make sure the button for "English (United States)" is turned on. Then you should see any word that Chrome doesn't recognize highlighted with a red underline. The spell checking in Firefox and other browsers is similar, turned on or off somewhere in the settings, usually in the advanced settings. There are probably plugins that give more of the functionality you have in a Word Processor so you can do a Check Spelling and have it walk you through each word it doesn't recognize but I like to keep my plugins to a minimum so I just get by with the default spell checking. Regarding that banner, it won't go away automatically. It was placed there by some editor and can be removed by any editor once the problems are fixed. If you are confident you have fixed all the spelling errors you can just remove it yourself. What I usually do is first make all the changes that address the problem and then in a separate edit make the change that removes the banner making sure to write detailed descriptions for each edit so other editors who look at the history have a clear idea of what was done. Hope that helps. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

adding a article

I tried to put in an article. First i wrote the text Then it was deleated as i had not had time to get the sources. I then put in the sources but they were deleted as there was no text. All this was done in a sandbox where i thought i could get help. Any suggestions???? Arydberg (talk) 02:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello Arydberg and welcome to the Teahouse. Is Draft:Jackson Carter Murder Stone the first article that you mentioned? If so, then the draft wasn't actually deleted, it was just declined. Declining a draft happens frequently and all it means is that the article in its current form is not suitable for mainspace, typically due to tone, sourcing, and/or notability issues. Users are encouraged to fix the problem the reviewers noted and resubmit the draft once they have. The other article seems to be Jackson-Carter Murder Stone, which was deleted per WP:A3. Unfortunately, I can't view the details of this article as non-admins can't view deleted articles, but I will say that editors are expected to add actual content to an article within a few minutes after creating it. We generally like to give readers at least 15 minutes to add actual content before tagging pages for deletion for this criterion; again, I can't tell whether this guideline was followed by the tagger due to not being able to view deleted revisions. I think you're mistaken that you created this one in a sandbox; you actually created it as a mainspace article. In the future, creating it in your actual sandbox or as a draft is a good idea if you don't plan on adding content and sources at creation or soon afterwards, and once you have a good amount of content, are sure that it meets our notability guidelines, and the article is well-sourced, submit the draft for review. Remember, if you do create it in an actual sandbox or draftspace, then as long as it doesn't have any serious issues, you can incubate it as needed with no disruption. I hope this helps you out a bit and please let me know if you have any other questions. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 03:32, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Re-naming a Wikipedia Page

Hello,

I need to change the Vox Solid Communications article to The Vox Agency, as they have recently re-branded and are no longer called Vox Solid Communications. I see that you need to select the "Move" option, but it does not appear in my window.

How can I make this change?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voxsolid (talk • contribs) 02:28, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Voxsolid, and welcome to the Teahouse! Articles can only be moved by autoconfirmed users, which are users who have made at least 10 edits (and have used their account for at least 4 days). It looks like this is your first edit, so you don't quite meet these requirements. However, you're still able to request a move here.

Of course, before you do this, you'll need to change your username and agree to make useful contributions outside of your business. The instructions on your talk page tell you how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!​ — Newslinger talk 04:27, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Voxsolid. Before answering your question, I think you should be aware of a couple of things. First, you're going to have to change your username because usernames which imply they might represent a particular company, group or organization, etc. are not allowed per Wikipedia:Username policy#Promotional names. In some case, your account may be temporarily blocked until you change your username to something more appropriate.

Next, your choice of username is giving impression that you might be connected to the company in some way. If you're connected to Vox Solid Communications, you would are also likely going to be considered to have a conflict of interest regarding anything written about the company on Wikipedia. Although Wikipedia doesn't expressly prohibit conflict-of-interest editing, it does highly discourage it because it can sometimes lead to some serious problems; so, you're going to be expected to follow the guidelines laid out in Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide when you edit. You need to pay particular attention to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Paid editing because there are some fairly stringent requirements in place regarding paid-contribution disclosure and failing to comply with these will almost certainly lead to your account being blocked (regardless of your choice of username).

Now, back to your question. To change the name/title of an article, the article and its corresponding talk page need to be WP:MOVED. You'll find the "Move" button in the dropdown "More" menu at the top the page next to the search window. If you click on this, a new window should up with instructions for you to follow. However, moving a page can sometimes be a tricky process; so, you might instead want to follow Wikipedia:Request move and post something on Talk:Vox Solid Communications to see what others think. This is also probably a good thing to do if you have a conflict-of-interest. You can make an edit request explaining why the article should be moved. You should also provide links to reliable sources which show that the company's name has changed. Someone will eventually get to your request and make the move if everything is in order. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Raji orire

How long would it take for my article could raji orire to be on the Internet please can you let it be there by next week — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ademolaorire (talk • contribs) 04:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ademolaorire. I'm afraid that there's pretty much no way the draft you're working on is going to accepted as an article based upon its current state. None of the content is supported by any citations to reliable sources and there's no indication that the subject is Wikipedia notable enough to even have a stand-alone article written about him. You appear to be quite new to Wikipedia, so it's understandable that you might not be very familiar with its various policies and guidelines. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:Five pillars for a brief introduction or Wikipedia:About for a more detailed overview. If after looking at those pages, you still would like to write an article, please take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article for some suggestions on how to do that. You might also want to take the Wikipedia:Adventure because you can learn more about Wikipedia by actually making some edits. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Editing a heading

I have corrected the spelling of the name of Weeden Osborne in the text on the page that tells his story. However, I cannot seem to change the title at the top of the page, which still reads "Weedon" (not "Weeden") Osborne.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weedon_Osborne.

For 100 years, all references to him have spelled his name incorrectly. The cross on his grave in the American cemetery in France spells his name correctly. His enlistment documents all show his name clearly spelled with an E, not an O, as do letters from his sister to the Navy in her attempts to get details of his death in WW I.

Anyone searching his name will perpetuate the misspelling if their search comes up with the title page "Weedon Osborne".

Can you please change that title on his page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taos705 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Taos705: Hi and welcome! I undid your edit for now since your edit broke the code of the page. Also, more importantly, while you might be correct, Wikipedia has a strong policy of verifiability. reliable sources use a different name and even the medal has "Weedon" on it, so there is a chance that the cross might be wrong, not the other records. I cannot find any enlistment documents or letters from his sister online, so I cannot check those claims. I will, however, raise this with our Military History WikiProject so that people who know more about such things can take a look. Please be patient. Regards SoWhy 06:14, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Taos705. The change you made to Weedon Osborne has already been undone by another editor named SoWhy. Now, your best chance of having the name change incorporated into the article is to start a discussion about it at Talk:Weedon Osborne per Wikipedia:Bold, revert, discuss cycle and explain why it's needed. You should also try to provide as much support as you can (including any links to reliable sources) which show that the spelling of Osborne's first name has been incorrect for all these years. If you're not familiar with using article talk pages, please take a look at Help:Talk pages and Wikipedia:Talkpage guidelines for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:20, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Image for article about Jim Thompson's Wild Town novel

I'm planning on writing an article for the Jim Thompson novel Wild Town. There isn't even a stub for it right now. I think Thompson is an important enough writer that every book of his should have an article but that one's always been a favorite of mine even though it's not one of his most popular. I want to include one of those book info boxes but I looked in the Commons and didn't find an image for the book. So two questions: 1) Is it OK to use a picture I found already in the Commons for the time being? It's a picture of an Oil Town which is just what the Wild Town in Thompson's novel is. BTW, you can look in my sandbox to see what the draft looks like, although don't pay attention to the text, I copied and am altering the page for a different Thompson novel so most of the text still talks about that novel and 2) Is there an easy way to find an image of the novel on the web that I can use? I know there is some form I have to fill out to get special use for an article about a work of art, if anyone could point me to the page that does or tells me how to do it and where to find legal images I would appreciate it. The simpler the better, I like to write but hate to spend time on artwork. Thanks MadScientistX11 (talk) 05:29, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi MadScientistX11. The infobox image for a book article is frequently a scan of the front cover of the book. This would be a non-free image; so it is uploaded to English Wikipedia and not to Commons. Since it is non-free it cannot be used in a draft until the draft is published, and it cannot be uploaded until there is a use for it.

The file description page will have a {{Non-free book cover}} tag instead of a license tag. And it must have a {{Non-free use rationale}} (see the file description pages of other book covers for examples of how to format that.)

Ordinarily using non-free content is difficult, but using one cover image or logo for identification in an infobox is pretty easy, aside from what I said above. —teb728 t c 09:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks teb728, I think I get it. Is it acceptable to use just a picture from the commons (as I have now in the draft in my Sandbox) when the article is first published? I might like to have the article go live before I go through the work to get an image of the book cover. Also, as I look at the Commons picture, to be honest I think that picture would make a better picture than the actual covers I've seen for the book and if it's not a requirement to have an image of the book cover I might like to stick with that picture for now, it really is a perfect representation of the kind of place, a town that is essentially built around a bunch of oil wells, that Thompson describes in the book, where as the covers I've seen are pretty generic. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:18, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

That might be OK. But consider going without an image; an infobox does not need to have one. —teb728 t c 10:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Barbara Orbison

Roy Orbison first set eyes on his future wife, Barbara, at the Intime Club at the Merrion Centre, Leeds in 1968. He had been taken there by his road manager, Gerry Maxin, after appearing at the Batley Variety Club. They were staying nearby at the Merrion Hotel. Barbara an 18 year old student at Leeds university was from Germany and was working as a drinks waitress at the club. Roy asked Gerry's nephew, Robert who was with them in the club, if he could meet her. Robert arranged with the manager for her to be introduced to Roy after her stint had finished.Riabra (talk) 14:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Riabra. The Teahouse is a friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question, or need help with editing Wikipedia? Cordless Larry (talk) 15:06, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

TV Channels and WP:GNG

I feel weird as a power user of Wikipedia coming here to ask a question but I don't know the answer and hopefully someone does here. I put a prod on this article Rengoni. Which was removed and the references fixed however IMDb isn't a reliable source and the other is a primary source. I wasn't able to find anything besides primary sources with a quick Google search. Are all TV Channels inherently notable? Or do we still have to uphold WP:GNG? Thanks. Whispering^(t) 15:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

It isn't an English-language channel. What did you find when searching sources in its native language? --Jayron32 16:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

User Page Acceptance

How long, on average, would it take for someone to either validate or reject my User Page draft so that everyone can see it? Or yourself can provide me with a precise duration of time.

Bashurman100 (talk) 22:29, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bashurman100: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If what you are trying to do is simply post content to your user page, there is no need of a review, you can just do so. User page content is not reviewed as draft articles are. 331dot (talk) 23:03, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

And, Bashurman100, everyone in the world can see any page in Wikipedia; but User pages do not get indexed by search engines. --ColinFine (talk) 23:16, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bashurman100: I noticed that you don't currently have a User page (because your name was shown in red) so I took the liberty of creating a very basic page for you (now your name is no longer red because the page exists). Your use page is here: User:Bashurman100 You can edit it pretty much any way you want as long as it's not offensive and the things you put there are relevant to your Wikipedia editing. Some people put a lot of work in their User page, others just throw in a few things, I take the latter approach, here is my user page: User:MadScientistX11 You could also get to my User page by clicking on my name here: --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:48, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bashurman100:I looked at your Talk page after posting the comment above and I think I see now why you were confused. You were trying to publish your user page as if it was an article. That is why it was rejected. If you took the same text you had in that rejected page and put them in the basic page I created for you, that would be fine. The difference is that user pages aren’t indexed by search engines and aren’t considered part of the encyclopedia. Creating a published article about yourself in the encyclopedia is a conflict of interest according to the policies of Wikipedia (it’s hard for anyone to be objective about themselves). But creating a user page that describes your editing interests and experiences is, fine, that’s what user pages are for --MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:56, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Saving the content of the sandbox

I am a mathematician who wants to contribute my first article to Wikipedia. My question is: how do I save a partial draft of the article in the sandbox? I do not see a "Save" button or something equivalent... Thanks,

Miro Benda Seattle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirobenda (talk • contribs) 04:00, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Mirobenda: There should be a button that says "Publish changes." See Help:VisualEditor/User_guide#Publishing_changes for a picture of it. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Mirobenda: And it doesn't matter that the save is only partial, you can "publish" things in your sandbox half-way through – it's just your sandbox anyway, you're welcome to draft there, half-finished sentences and everything. Don't worry about that. /Julle (talk) 18:42, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

uploading a new image. Evan Boehm

I need help to upload a new image.[Evan Boehm at Center for Indianapolis Colts - November 28th, 2018 vs. Miami Dolphins ]

The link doesn't work, but we can only use images under a free license for living people. RudolfRed (talk) 18:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Urgent to Stephen Hillenburg's page edit

Please edit the wikipedia page of Stephen Hillenburg as soon as posible, it has been vandalized with a NSFW and very disgusting picture at the very top, so its the first thing that an user sees. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.167.18.132 (talk) 19:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Reverted now and the page has also received a higher protection level. Thanks for reporting; it was vandalized by a long-term vandal who has added hardcore pornographic images to the top of a ton of high-traffic pages, frequently compromising accounts to do so.--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 19:15, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

When is an article not a Family History project or a Conflict of Interest?

How far back in time can we go to write an article without it being considered a Family History Project or a Conflict of Interest? If there were no articles say on Roger Bigod, Magna Carta Surety, could I write an article on him although he is my 20th Great grandfather, per wikitree, how about Edward I, my 22nd great grandfather (same source). So why them, and not a 9th or 10th great grandfather? And why is writing an article about such a person considered a Family History Project?Oldperson (talk) 15:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

A conflict of interest is where you, or someone you know, or someone you work for, has an interest (financial gain, advancement of a political position, giving credence to some psuedoscientific baloney, increased personal exposure, etc.) which is in conflict with the goals of the encyclopedia, which is to be a well written, neutrally-presented compendium of well-documented human knowledge. You need to, in good faith, be able to assess if the purpose of your writing is to promote your family history, or just merely to add information to Wikipedia. There is no magic number of relations to determine what is and isn't allowed. There are some bright lines (writing about ourselves, parents, children, siblings, employers, organizations we belong to, people who are paying us to write about them, etc.) but outside of those, it's really something you need to assess for yourself, and use as guidance to "check" whether or not the text you are writing at Wikipedia meets our purpose, or whether it is being influenced by your own interests. --Jayron32 15:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Understood, so basically it is a judgement call, and one made by the person writing the article. What if the article is written because another ancestor has had an article, published some time ago, in which a spouse is mentioned, and the spouse has more claim to notability,than the person in the article. And even though the article written is about a long dead relative, there is a valid reason to write the article. Additionally it appears that there was once such an article, but apparently some exclusionist, deleted it. As regards the concept of promoting family history. That can be said about anyone in one's family tree, should they write an article about them, though the article meets the standards of notability, and I am not talking about recent family. IN a way it does get back to a question of generations, when one can no longer be accused of promoting a family history. I realize that I might sound argumentative, but I have difficulty with judgement calls, even my own. And one persons judgement can be reversed by anothers. Thus the need for clear cut guidelines as to what is, or is not considered promoting family history. Your example of immediate family is just the ticket. Reaching back into the distant past to claim"promoting family history" or a COI, is not. ThanksOldperson (talk) 16:26, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Oldperson: Unfortunately, this project abhors clear cut rules for a reason (see WP:IAR). I might be writing about John O'Nobody, my 10x-great-grandfather because I want Wikipedia to list all my relatives, no matter how insignificant or I might write about him because he is actually notable but I'm the only person to care about it. After all, having a COI does not mean the subject is not notable or the text is not neutral, it just means you are less likely to correctly assess these things than someone without a COI. As such, if you believe an article should exist and it was deleted previously, you can check the records why it was deleted (should be shown on the page in question). If it was speedy deleted, just recreate it with some reliable sources or ask the deleting admin to restore it. If it was deleted via deletion discussion, see why and try to address the concerns raised before recreating. If you are unsure, you can always submit a draft using the article wizard to allow others to check your work before publication. Regards SoWhy 16:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

This did not come from nowhere. User:Alvanhholmes changed name to Oldperson. Does not appear to be using the old name anymore. My two cents is that having a COI (disputed or not) does not preclude editing. What it calls for is a declaration to that effect on one's Talk page, and perhaps at the Talk page of articles being edited. However, in addition to successfully creating articles about William Farrar and Farrar's Island, Alvanhholmes/Oldperson has been working on drafts of articles on William's father and son, both named John Farrar, and both so far declined. There has also been some minor work on other Farrar-related articles. And no non-Farrar topics. We all have ancestors (mine might include the 16th century Rabbi of Prague who created a Golem), but that's not the only thing I edit. David notMD (talk) 16:47, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, but lots of people have narrow interests. That itself is also not a problem. The issue is only when it becomes an issue. I'm sure I could find people who have rarely, if ever, done anything except edited articles about train stations in Switzerland. That itself doesn't mean anything, so long as they are in good faith, trying to follow Wikipedia rules and create good content. --Jayron32 17:25, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

User:David notMD User:Jayron32 User:SoWhy - Just to confuse things, I created an article on one of my documented ancestors, but we can be reasonably certain that she never existed. See Clothru. If one is able to trace a reliable ancestry back to times that were literate but less scientific than the nineteenth or twentieth century, one's documented ancestry will then go back to mythological figures. One of the objectives that a noble family had with its genealogy was to prove descent from gods, heroes, and mythological figures (and whatever branch of the family has well-documented records is almost certainly a noble branch). Since the family tree expands upward while the world's population is decreasing backward in time, you are likely to get everyone who existed, and some of the ancestors never existed. No one has a conflict of interest for descent from Charlemagne, let alone Clothru. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: To add to your point. If we go back to say th 21st generation, counting oneself as generation 1. We have 8,388,608 million ancestors, double that for 22 generations and double that for 23 and we are getting into impossible numbers. I doubt that there were 8 million people in The British isles in the 1th, 12, or 13th centuries. We get to the time of Charlemagne and there are over a billion ancestors.The result is that most of us with any European ancestry are related, and if we could trace all of our lines back, the numbers would decline considerably because so many lineages lead to the same person.And by that token it is said, don’t know by whom, or as Bill Maher says, I know it is true, that 1 in 4 persons with ancestry to England descend from Wm the Conqueror. It is more entertaining for Carlos Magnus, Charlemagne, he had four wives, a quadimist all sanctioned by the church (don’t know if that is in his article, and don’t care), he also had so many concubines that no one has bothered to count or name them. Like Genghis Khan in the Ukraine, Russia and the “Stan’s, and many a descendant or migrant from that region he is the ancestor of millions.Oldperson (talk) 19:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@David notMD and SoWhy: A little more background is needed. First I changed my user name because another editor told me to, he said that it was a COI to use the user name Alvanhholmes. I did not change out of a subterfuge. Second my biggest error here, and if I had known better, was to be up front in my creating my user page, where I admitted up front that my user name was an homage to an author. I deleted that portion of my user page as it was no longer relevant. The original article on William Farrar was deleted years ago, I don't know when, but at least 7 year ago, maybe less, that article was posted. I had actually copied most of it into a document. It was then pointed out recently that it was deleted, strange because his spouse's article was still there, and though notable she was less notable than her husband, her claim to fame being an Ancient Planter and the subject of the first Breach of Promise suit in America. Someone, apparently an exclusionist, deleted her husbands article. When I inquired via the info mail link, I was told it was deleted and that I should resubmit. So I joined wiki with that purpose in mind. I am not an expert in anything, and don't claim to be, but I do know quite a bit about some subjects. And I have edited a few non relevant pages, which I stumbled upon.

Some admin found the deleted article, but all that was left was the headings, the contents had been scrubbed, so basically I am editing a deleted article. No reason given for the original deletion and scrubbing, it appears to be the work of an exclusionist. My error was in being upfront when I created my original user page. I stated that my user name was an homage to an author and that was the mistake of naivete, not knowing who and what awaited me, so it was used against me and was told to change my user name, and now having done that, DavidnoMD appears to accuse me of subterfuge, otherwise why mention it. For SoWhy. In reference your comment about the only person interested, if that was the case then much of wikipedia would be an empty slate, for surely many articles, not just biographies are written about persons or things that no one has the slightest interest in. I see so many articles on living persons, persons usually singers, artists, maybe a non descript author, even arcane or specialized subjects which no one but the author has an interest in.Oldperson (talk) 17:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

No intention of accusation of subterfuge. It is clear that you stopped using one User name and started another, so no accusation of sockpuppetry either. My intention for mentioning two names was that for people who drop in on TeaHouse - as I do - sometimes it helps to get some history when a new question appears. As to working on multiple Farrar articles, as long as each topic has stand-alone notability, not an issue. David notMD (talk) 18:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Question about inline placement of cite, given parentheses

When you have an entire sentence surrounded by parentheses, with the ending punctuation of the sentence going within the parentheses, where is the proper placement of the inline cite (superscript) that supports the sentence? Should it go before the ending parenthesis, or after? Thanks. Kekki1978 (talk) 17:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello Kekki1978 and welcome to the Teahouse.

It would seem most logical to place the ref after the period but before the closing parenthesis. But parenthetical sentences might not be considered encyclopedic writing. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:54, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance. Kekki1978 (talk) 02:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kekki1978: I'm a bit late to the party here, but I think it's worth pointing out that this is covered in our Manual of Style (at MOS:REFPUNCT): "Where a footnote applies only to material within parentheses, the ref tags belong just before the closing parenthesis." Deor (talk) 19:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Charles Fadley

I did write a recent update to the stub in my name, Charles Fadley. This entry was put together by Mark Daly, a frequent editor, and I only did some trivial edits to correct dates and add a few useful links. So how can we get this entry back up again? Charles Fadley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csfadley (talk • contribs) 17:30, Today (UTC+0)

@Csfadley: At Charles_Fadley you did not add only a few links. You added a very large amount of text that reads like a resume. You really should not try to edit an article about yourself, since it will be difficult to remain neutral. You can read WP:AUTO for some guidance. RudolfRed (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Csfadley: Sorry, I misread the history. You did not add the bulk of the text. Please discuss at the article's talk page wth the editor that removed the material. RudolfRed (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

The article Charles Fadley still exists. On Nov 26 User "Richard C Craft" (whom you identify by name, above) added a very large amount of content to the article. You then made a few minor changes. Whispering deleted all the new content as inappropriate. While some of it may have been valid content worth adding, the easiest path chosen was to dump all. Personally, I agree. For the entire article, there was only one reference. Listing awards and honors does not belong. Listing some of your publications does not belong. And so on. Craft has been asked on his Talk page what his connection is to you, as it is a very good guess that this is someone who knows you, perhaps has worked with or for you in the past/present. Craft needs to read WP:COI, perhaps also WP:PAID, and you are advised to not directly edit an article about you. Standard process for the subject of an article is to identify mistakes or omissions as an entry at the Talk page, so that an non-affiliated editor can see and decide to act upon or not. David notMD (talk) 22:22, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

official actor stuff

hello I am an actor that is listed on multiple shows I've done, wiki posts, ie. wikilost, wikitrueblood, wikigreysanatomy, wikimadmen, etc but I don't actually have a page created on myself personally so I don't show up in BLUE only black. Can anyone help to fix this for me? John Henry Canavan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JATT69 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hey @JATT69: thanks for stopping by to ask this question! The threshold for a Wikipedia article is that a topic has been the subject of multiple, reliable, independent, substantial sources. That is, have people written books about your life? Have there been reliable, mainstream, well-known magazine articles about you, your background, or your work? Can I find TV shows which cover your life's history and work? That sort of thing. In order to write a good Wikipedia article, we need source text beyond just a resume. You'll note that your name is already in the correct articles where you are listed as having participated in the work you have. If all we have is your name and a list of jobs you've held, that's not sufficient to write an encyclopedia article. We need good, in-depth, reliable, independent source texts we can research through and use to build a narrative about your life and work. If you can direct us to that, we can start something for you. See Wikipedia:Requested articles and please provide the sources people will use to write an article about you. If the source text doesn't exist, however, there won't be any article forthcoming. I hope that explains why there are articles on some topics, but not all possible topics. --Jayron32 20:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Also, actors are evaluated against WP:NACTOR inclusion criteria. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:30, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Username

Simple question: Can you change your username?

Bashurman100 (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

There's some detailed info here: Wikipedia:Changing username. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bashurman100:, you can see the request process at Wikipedia:Changing username. For future reference, many questions like this can be answered by typing "Wikipedia:" followed by the right keywords into the search box on any page. In this case, I just typed Wikipedia:Chang and the predictive text filled in options which started with Changing username. Best wishes, †dismas†|^(talk) 23:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm dumb, I should have thought of that...Bashurman100 (talk) 23:36, 27 November 2018 (UTC)