Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 951

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 945

←

Archive 949

→

why my editing submission was deleted?

Yesterday I added a small section about compass errors in the Air Navigation page. However, my submission was deleted because I did not include the sources. I resubmitted the topic, including two reputable sources, and it was deleted again. Why?

My submission was in context to the page topic and in the correct section in that page. No explanation was given. Yaronhad (talk) 16:33, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Yaronhad. You added your references to the section header rather than to the text you wrote. I suggest that you try again, placing the inline refererences in the proper location. The editor who reverted you, Jan olieslagers, should have explained their revert in their edit summary. You should discuss the matter at Talk:Air navigation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:01, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

@Cullen: thanks for drawing my attention. I responded at the user's talk page, where the same question had been posted. Your further comments are most welcome, either at the user's talk page or, as you suggested, at Talk:Air navigation. Jan olieslagers (talk) 18:16, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Message box gallery

I know there is a gallery for different uses for userboxes, but is there gallery for different uses for message boxes (ombox, fmbox, etc.)? ⠀—‌‌ Glosome‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ 💬 15:30, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

It seems as if my post was disregarded. ⠀—‌‌ Glosome‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ 💬

Your post was not much more than an hour ago. You need to remember that contributors to the Teahouse are volunteers, so please be patient. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:48, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Glosome. Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup shows many message boxes. For the difference between ombox, fmbox and others, see Template:Mbox templates see also. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

School block

My school makes our laptops connect to a server farm in California run by amazon to host securly. But this means that since we have the same IP as a server I get blocked by the anti proxy anti vpn blocks? Doublethink1954 (talk) 20:14, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Doublethink1954, if you need one, you can ask for an IP block exemption. Eman 235/talk 20:21, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Facebook-hosted copy of a certification?

I'm working on a new page for a rhum agricole distillery, and found a document on the company's Facebook page certifying their sugar cane farm as organic. (Here's the post in question: https://www.facebook.com/rhumneissonofficiel/photos/a.285748604818672/1652920698101449/?type=1&theater) Unfortunately, this certificate does not appear to be online anywhere else. I'm aware that references to Facebook posts are discouraged -- is there a good workaround, or would this be considered an acceptable exception? Swordswfriends (talk) 19:22, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Swordswfriends, is the organic status perhaps mentioned in an offline published source such as a magazine or news article? Sources do not need to be online, but they must be published. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:27, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Publishing new article

How long does it normally take for a new article to be published?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:c3:180:d5:5457:6ec3:80ab:6d8e (talk)

I was originally unclear how you are referring to the term published, but an article is searchable on Wikipedia as soon as it is saved. If you were referring to how long it takes to show up in search engines, that depends on when it is patrolled (reviewed). I saw you also posted at the help desk Wikipedia:Help desk#New Page Request. No need to post in both places - it just makes more work for the help desk and teahouse editors. What is your user name - I don't see any editing history for your IP address? (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:26, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It all depends. I'm not sure if you are speaking hypothetically or if you have submitted a draft(the contribution history of your IP does not list any other contributions) If you are using Articles for Creation to submit a draft for review, there is no set timeframe, as reviews are conducted by volunteers who do what they can when they can. There are thousands of drafts awaiting reviews, which are done in no particular order. A draft could be reviewed in five minutes, or three months.

If you become autoconfirmed and as such have the ability to create pages on your own, it is "published" as soon as you save your edits by clicking "Publish changes"(note that 'publish changes' simply means 'save changes' regardless of the page you are editing, including this one). However, if you do this, the article is immediately part of the encyclopedia and will be reviewed and edited by other users, who may suggest it for deletion if the page does not meet the relevant criteria for inclusion. Because of this, I strongly recommend that you use the Articles for Creation route, as you can get much friendlier feedback before the article is in the encyclopedia, instead of afterwards. You may also find it helpful to review Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 21:31, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

YouTuber Page Criteria

I would like to make a page on a popular YouTube star. What is the criteria that a YouTuber needs before a page is dedicated to their YouTube channel?— Preceding unsigned comment added by EmilePersaud (talk • contribs)

@EmilePersaud: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would like to correct your terminology- subjects do not have "pages dedicated to" them here; article subjects have articles about them here. Those articles contain and summarize information found in independent reliable sources that indicate how the "YouTuber" or their channel meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. I don't believe there is more specific criteria than that(unlike for athletes, politicians, etc.). What matters is what reliable sources have chosen on their own to write about this channel(or the individual). It doesn't matter if they have 5 followers or 5 million followers, or post videos every day, it only matters that independent sources have written about it. 331dot (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Notability (people). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Copyright

I had included a statement from the Copyright holder giving permission for the material to be used (at the bootom of the pages) but this appears to have been ignored and the article deleted. What do I need to do differently?Nigel Nigel GardnerNgard11476 (talk) 21:57, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

@Ngard11476: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You included a statement, but we have no way of knowing if it is authentic or if you simply wrote it yourself. You (actually, the person who owns the copyright) will need to follow the instructions for donating copyrighted materials. In addition, Wikipedia is not for merely republishing what appears elsewhere; the text does not read as an encyclopedia article, but simply a summary of 'Bowen Systems Theory'. Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources state about potential article subjects, not in what the subject wants to say about itself(or its own work). 331dot (talk) 22:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Contested deletion

How do I move my draft from speedy deletion to production? PartsBase, Inc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdutypb (talk • contribs) 2019-05-08T18:16:40 (UTC) Jdutypb (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Jdutypb. I'm afraid you probably don't. I can't find a current or recently-deleted version of that article. Articles called "Parts Base" have been deleted three times, most recently in Septebmer 2017. The middle time, in August 2017, there was a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PartsBase, which concluded that the company was non-notable (in Wikipedia's special sense of that word). I suspect that you have a (very common) misapprehension that Wikipedia has anything at all to do with telling the world about your company. It does not. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which contains neutrally written articles summarising what independent sources say about a company. If we had an article about your company, it would not be your article, you would have no control over its contents, and the great majority of its contents would be based on what people who have no connection with the company had chosen to publish about the company. It follows that unless somebody can find such independent sources, it is not possible to write an acceptable article about the company. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 18:13, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

@ColinFine: You may not have noticed that Draft:PartsBase, Inc. has been deleted twice today, and now salted. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!

I am simply trying to reference PartsBase, Inc. (one word) as the online marketplace and community that it is. Can I move forward in that light? https://www.bbb.org/us/fl/boca-raton/profile/airplane-parts/partsbase-inc-0633-27002548 https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20030221005385/en/PartsBase-Merger-Transaction-Closed#.VZU1BflViko http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~anhai/wisc-si-archive/data/company_profiles/yahoo/instances/company-index/Technology/Computer_Services/instances/http:%5E%5Ebiz.yahoo.com%5Ep%5Ep%5Eprts.html https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/partsbase-inc-7500-member-companies-on-pace-for-1-billion-in-quotes-for-2015-2015-06-24 https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/03/13/1752545/0/en/Solodev-Debuts-PartsBase-API-Integration-at-PBExpo-2019.html https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/partsbase-launches-new-aviation-parts-procurement-industry-tradeshow-300441815.html https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180326006189/en/PartsBase-Introduce-%E2%80%9CBlockchain-Aviation%E2%80%9D-Concept-April-Conference Jdutypb (talk) 18:52, 8 May 2019 (UTC)Jdutypb (talk) 18:55, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Jdutypb Press releases or similar stories are not acceptable sources as they are not independent, since they are written by the company, directly or otherwise. Please reread the advice above. If you are affiliated with this company, you need to review the conflict of interest policy. 331dot (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

"Salted" means that the coffin is closed and the lid nailed shut. Any an Administrator can consider reviving this proposed article. David notMD (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you all for your clarifications and assistance. I have other references"

https://www.iata.org/publications/Documents/BIPAD.pdf http://opmresearch.com/cyberbook/dl/Report%20Outline%20-%20Overview%20of%20the%20Key%20Websites%20and%20Marketplaces%20Which%20Facilitate%20the%20Trading%20of%20Aircraft%20Parts%20-%20Final3%20Oct2012%20-%20Copy.pdf https://www.aviationtoday.com/2000/03/01/e-commerce-what-it-is-how-to-claim-it/ Please assist. Jdutypb (talk) 20:57, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, Jdutypb, but No. the BIPAD documents mentions PartsBase in passing. The Aviationtoday article quotes a VP from Partsbase, and so is not independent and cannot establish notability. The opmresearch document lists Partsbase among the "Company profiles" in its contents list. The copy I downloaded does not contain those profiles, but it is very unlikely that a "company profile" will be produced independently of the company. Read what I said above. Wikipedia is not interested in what the company, its employees, or its friends say or want to say about it (whether in their own publications, or in interviews or press releases). Until you can find at least three places where people who have no connection with the company have chosen, without any prompting or input from the company, to write at some length about the company, it will not be notable in Wikipedia's sense, and your attempts are wasting both your own time and that of the editors who deal with your attempts. That is why it has been salted. --ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Can IP editors be pinged with Template:Yo?

Sometimes I edit while logged out, and friendly editors reach out on my IP address' talk page (for which I do get a notification). I was curious about what would happen if they were to try to ping me with a template or simply by mentioning my username - would I get the same kind of notification, or something different, or nothing at all? 103.213.35.104 (talk) 03:32, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so. Nothing comes up. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 03:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Testing this, you will know if you were notified I suppose. @103.213.35.104: -A lad insane (Channel 2) 04:00, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, they can't; see WP:ECHO: Registered users can be notified by other users and by IPs, however, an IP cannot be notified by any templates or links. Eman 235/talk 04:04, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks folks. I guess WP:ECHO should be updated to say IP editors can still be notified through talk page messages if it doesn't already (I didn't look.) 103.213.35.104 (talk) 04:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

The change the IP proposes is WP:BLUESKY, totally unnecessary. FYI, anyone can opt out of Echo. It doesn't replace notifying editors of any variety on their talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 04:37, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts

Thread copied over to WT:TEAHOUSE, which is where discussion of the inner workings of the Teahouse belongs. John from Idegon (talk) 05:12, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

pageview

hovering over a name showed a page linked to the page...the pop open window has a setup icon I clicked it and it said enable and disable then I clicked disable, now i can't enable.

So how does one enable ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.239.49.222 (talk) 06:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

(FTR, these are called Page Previews.) Scroll down to the bottom of any page. Next to the links that say "Privacy policy, About Wikipedia", etc., there is an "enable previews" link. Eman 235/talk 06:54, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Edit help

How do I create an info box for my user page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:XTMontana

--XTMontana (talk) 14:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, XTMontana, You can use {{Infobox Wikipedia user}}. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:15, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much Ammarpad!, --XTMontana (talk) 14:16, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Your User page verges on looking like an article. Minimally, I suggest deleting the Photography section, as all you are doing is naming brand products. David notMD (talk) 20:37, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

I do not see a problem with their userpage. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:13, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Struggling with impartiality in Geisha article

I'm re-writing bits of Japanese arts and culture articles, and I'm looking at updating the 'Non-Japanese Geisha' section of the Geisha article. The references used for Fiona Graham ('Sayuki') are overkill, and more than that, they're one-sided and inaccurate in places. This is something I'm struggling with.

Firstly: they all erroneously refer to Graham as 'the first Western geisha', something she herself has stated, and something that is just not true. I would need to dig up sources on it, not a problem for me to find those, but she's about, what, the 7th, now? Maybe not the most recent, but certainly not the first, and that's excluding Liza Dalby as well, who never entered the profession formally.

The second problem links into the first - the 4(!) sources used to reference her working in Fukugawa are technically all from her. She's the first Western geisha, she wasn't allowed to stay in Asakusa because she's a foreigner, she's a brave soul working tirelessly to update the profession, etc etc. Here's an elevator pitch of the problem:

- I see the references used are killing this section faster than I'm killing my houseplants

- I go to examine the references to find more external sources on what she's currently doing now and why she left Asakusa, still unclear if she's technically even a geisha anymore, because I can't find sources at 1am on whether or not you have to be affiliated with an okiya to be a geisha

- All the references are from 2011, from interviews with her, only talk about what she says she's doing and why she says she left, paint a one-sided picture for the reader

- I find other sources about why she left, but they're all practically hearsay - yes, here's a nice Telegraph article, and here's some anonymous 'you didn't hear it from me' quotes within it from geisha who will not go on record, making them unverifiable and therefore contestable

- I try and write these reasons into the article

- They sound like pure partial bullshit, even though no geisha worth her tea leaves would ever go on record with this, ever

- Whatever, try and find sources on Graham that aren't technically just a re-hash of the same PR stuff so I can have something that's not just [more citations needed]

- Realise the sources I trust the most with the best explanations and information are also just. forum discussion threads. from people that I trust, but still, unsubstantiated forum threads. and take that big [citation needed] stamp and figure out where on this idiot cap I'm wearing it's gonna look best

It is hard to find substantial information on any one geisha. Code of honour in the profession means that you don't go on record as bad-mouthing your peers and sisters, no matter how you feel about them. So everything, everything that I could use, is nearing gossip, even though I trust the people it's coming from. Finding information on her legitimacy as an "independent" geisha, about if she technically is one anymore, and if she's even involved in the wider geisha community, is just not possible in some ways, not if I want to hit editorial standards.

So, I've got a few questions I really need guidance on:

1. How do I indicate to the reader that it's understood, if not really verifiable, that there are perhaps other reasons as to why Graham left Asakusa?

2. How do I indicate to the reader that it's likely impossible to completely verify these claims? Graham claims one version of events happened, everyone else claiming otherwise is a geisha speaking anonymously to a reporter or people in the know going 'yeah, I heard such-and-such a thing from so-and-so'

3. Is it even standard to include sources that are general consensus in the field of study, even if they can never be verified due to the nature of the profession, if they are the only and most reliable sources there are?

I've been in this world since I was 14, I know these are consensus views, and I trust the people writing them, but I can't take the approach of 'if no-one has an issue', as I'm not entirely unconvinced she didn't write her own Wikipedia article, if the number of citations and writing style is anything to go by. 51 references and a list of media appearances. Wowie. The edit history's a mess, too - spin the wheel as to just which crossed-out entry is breaking impartiality the most.

The reader cannot come away with a half-baked impression, is what it boils down to. If I leave the sources as present in, leave them in as the only sources, then I'm not doing my job to present all the necessary and relevant information to the reader to improve the quality of this article. Fiona Graham's Wikipedia page is not close to the standards required for a biography of a living person, and neither is this section.

I am planning on extending out the information in this section for each non-japanese geisha, so as to give the reader more information about the circumstances in which they entered the profession, when they may have left and where they worked.

I just think Graham's section needs work, but I need help with the sources, as for the time being, the ones I want to include are the ones the editor within me oh god it's inside me oh god get it out get it out is telling me are contestable at present. I don't think I'm going to find very many better sources than the ones I can recall to hand.

The admins of the group I'm in no longer permit discussion of Fiona Graham, publicly or with them privately, since every thread turns into a dumpster fire of the highest degree. I need some advice. When all the sources you've got are kinda shit, how do you go from there? --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 01:23, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

For those disinclined to visit the article, the relevant text: Sayuki (Fiona Graham) was an Australian geisha who debuted in the Asakusa district of Tokyo in 2007.[60] In February 2011, she left the Asakusa Geisha Association and is currently working in the Fukagawa district.[61][62][63][64] Why this needs five references, I don't know. My opinion, however, is that Non-Japanese Geisha does not need to become a larger part of this article, especially if reliable source are lacking. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

It may have to do with that Fiona Graham has been a problematic article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:57, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

I wasn't considering making it a large section, necessarily, just expanding on the list that's already present - seems if we're going to include more information on Graham, we might extend the courtesy to the other geisha wherever possible. The profession is quite closed-ranks, so though it wouldn't really be necessary to include these things for another profession, for geisha, I think it's pertinent.

There's a lot of misconceptions around as to how one becomes a geisha and why. I think it's applicable to include information on this in the article for this reason, and not leave it up to whatever one can remember from a late-night read of Memoirs of a Geisha. A quick one-paragraph run-down of each geisha wouldn't go amiss, I don't think. I'll be updating the article to add information on Kimicho later on, too.

And this is the issue, Graham's article doesn't really meet standards. A lot of the references used are the same interview re-hashed, making the article lop-sided. I can find sources I trust, and I don't think I'll be including forum posts unless I'm at my wits' end, but I don't think my judgement on less-than-professional sources is completely inaccurate, if that is what I end up using.

I generally don't think she was kicked out of Asakusa, door slammed and shoved onto the street, it's more likely that she was politely asked to leave for behaviour diplomatically put as 'unprofessional'. It would be par for the course for the geisha profession to maintain standards, but close ranks and save face. I can find references to the standards of the profession in some of the better sources I have, actually - Liza Dalby's Geisha definitely talks about this a few times, so it's not inconceivable.

I noticed that at the ~~Wikipedia:Teahouse#Alternatives_to_sourcing_third-world_journalist_pieces_for_wiki_articles?~~top of the Teahouse someone else seems to be having the same problem. I'm kind of left with a choice between a rock and a hard place. I'd like to put the ^{[better source needed]} template after some of the sources currently used, and figure out something similar for anything to the contrary that I can find. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 10:29, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Still comes down to what to do in the absence of reliable sources. Writing about Mizu shōbai usually means being on thin ice. David notMD (talk) 10:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Template for getting help with tables?

Is there a tag or template to add an article to a list of articles that need help formatting, improving or otherwise modifying their tables? I realize I should fix it myself if I can, but if I don't have the time or skill to do so now, is there a way to let other editors know that the article could use the help?

I'm looking at Love, Death & Robots, and something like the {{copy edit}} template which adds the article to Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit. Thanks! Elfabet (talk) 12:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Elfabet: I haven't looked through them myself, but there's a rather large collection of cleanup templates at Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup which may be helpful. Maybe that will have something to suit your needs. --Jayron 32 13:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jayron32: Thanks for that. Surprsiningly, nothing in there for tables besides roads with markers and intersections. Maybe I'll generic {copy edit} and specify table clean up. Cheers! Elfabet (talk) 15:06, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

If articles exist in another language?

Hello, If you are working on creating pages for a project (Women in Red by Occupation/Artists) and the biography exists in another language - what is the proper protocol? Do you create and English version and put the existing information into the article and add if you can - or - is there a redirect created to the google translated version of that article - or what happens? Curious to know as I have located several instances, for example here is one: Chantal duPont (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chantal_duPont). Thank You! LorriBrown (talk) 16:10, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Advice is at WP:Translation#How to translate. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:21, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

problem

how do i delete the list of local accounts i have made by Accident please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patient support (talk • contribs) 19:23, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

This was crossposted to the help desk, see Wikipedia:Help desk#How to delete. Eman 235/talk 20:05, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

I've used other MediaWikis but not Wikipedia, and I need help

Hello! I'm a member of the Scratch Wiki, another MediaWiki-based wiki page. I got used to it and I know it inside out. My questions:

How does Wikipedia compare to other MediaWikis such as Scratch Wiki?
How do I upload pictures?
Do you typically compress images on Wikipedia?

Any other helpful tips are nice, too. Thanks
Dominic035 (talk) 21:42, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Dominic035. Wikipedia should be pretty similar with regards to software, though of course due to the different skin some things will be in different places. Some pages detailing Wikipedia rules are Wikipedia:Notability (what can be included), Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Reliable sources (how and what to cite, respectively), and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (how to write prose on Wikipedia; check out Wikipedia:Simplified Manual of Style if that's tl;dr).

For uploading pictures, see Wikipedia:Uploading images. Basically, free (as in freedom) images should be uploaded to Commons (only compress these losslessly, if at all), but nonfree images (which should only be used according to this policy; definitely shrink them) should be uploaded locally to Wikipedia. Eman 235/talk 22:24, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the advice.
Dominic035 (talk) 22:27, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Talk page

On every article I noticed there's a "Talk page", what's the purpose of this? 97.90.47.253 (talk) 22:32, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

To discuss improvements to the article. See Help:Talk pages and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for details. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:33, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Coordinate_footnotes

Which reference is used to add coordinate_footnotes and elevation_footnotes for Indian villages and towns ?--Vin09 (talk) 06:05, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Vin09: I believe the idea is to add a reference for where you found the coordinate and elevation data, similar to references you would use to cite information in the prose part of the article. So, if it is listed on a website somewhere or a book, then you would cite that. Does that clarify? --Jayron 32 13:37, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jayron32:Should it be a reliable source? Is Fallingrain.com be used, as I saw in many village pages?--Vin09 (talk) 02:01, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

How to save guard our uploads on Wikipedia Commons on the deletion process by someone ... Pls explain how to solve the problem and help me to get out of that problem ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by YugendarAMMK (talk • contribs) 01:32, 10 May 2019 8UTC) (UTC)‎

Hi YugendarAMMK. English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons are sister projects and there is some overlap, but they each have their own separate policies and guidelines. This means if you've uploaded some files to Commons which have been tagged for deletion, then you're really going to need to discuss them on Commons. You can ask for help at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright or c:Commons:Help Desk if you want.

Looking at c:User talk:YugendarAMMK, a notification has been left by a Commons editor named Bukaroo bob 91 about a discussion at c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by YugendarAMMK which has to do with some files you uploaded. The main issue seems to be that it's not clear whether the files you uploaded are your own work. Please refer to c:Commons:Licensing for more specific details, but basically "own work" implies that you are person who originally created the work in question and are the person who holds copyright ownership over it. Anything you didn't create yourself (e.g. a photo taken by someone else found online, a political party's logo/flag found on their official website) cannot be uploaded to Commons without the explicit permission of the original copyright holder. Now, if you're really the copyright holder of these files, then you should clarify this in the Commons discussion about the files and then send an email to Wikimedia OTRS for verification purposes as explained in c:Commons:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?. If there are no problems and your copyright ownership over the files can be verified by OTRS, the files will not be deleted. You can send a single email for all three files; just make sure you include the file name for each file so that the OTRS volunteer reviewing the email knows it's for more than one file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:10, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Lost movie needs to be included in the list of lost movies (1970)

The film Willy & Scratch (1974) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0227819/?ref_=tt_rec_tt is a "lost" movie and needs to be included in the 1970's section of lost films https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lost_films#1970s . I have messaged the director of the movie Robert J. Emery and he confirmed that the movie is "lost" and has been since the 1970's. I also spoke with a son of one of the executive producers on the film and he also confirmed that the film is now "lost." In addition to Willy & Scratch being lost 2 other films by Robert J. Emery are also lost, The Bittersweet Night (1968) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0225187/?ref_=nm_flmg_dr_26 and Dare the Devil aka David, David (1969) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0216660/?ref_=nm_flmg_dr_25 . Would someone please update the lost films Wikipedia page to include these movies? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kadath9969 (talk • contribs) 00:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@Kadath9969: Fell free to add it yourself! Do your best to follow the existing formatting and it should stay. As a side note, please sign your comments on talk pages with four tildes (~) <-- these things, as it lets us know who said it. Happy editing! -A lad insane (Channel 2) 01:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@Kadath9969: before you add it you will need to find a source other than IMDb. Per WP:RS/IMDB they are not reliable and they have had numerous films listed on their website that never existed. You can probably find other websites listing the films of Mr Emery that will work as references for Wikipedia. MarnetteD|Talk 03:58, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Escape characters

I can't for the life of me figure out how to escape the "[" character that appears in the following URL, causing the reference link to break between "operator" and "0": http://collections.cinematheque.qc.ca/recherche/oeuvres/?operator[0]=+&q[0]=%22Chantal+duPont%22&field[0]=Realisation_r. The link in its broken form can be seen in the references for Chantal duPont. Thanks in advance for any advice.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey, TMIP, percent-encoding will generally do you right for escaping characters in URLs. https://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_urlencode.asp is the reference table I use; [ is %5B and ] is %5D, so replacing teh brackets with those percent combinations should work. I went ahead and did it for you here. Hope that helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 04:53, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Perfect! thanks so much for taking the time to answer.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:33, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Greetings

Can someone help me to create a progressive page to get started as a productive administer?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mittjohn11 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mittjohn11. It's not clear from your post what you're asking. Do you want some help on how to create an article? Do you want some information on how to be come an administrator? You appear to have started a draft for an article at Draft:Forrest Animation and in User:Mittjohn11/sandbox. Is that what your question is about?

It will be easier for a Tea House host to help you, if you can be a little clearer on what you need help with. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

New article review

Hi If I publish a new article how much time will it take to get reviewed and get live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupeshbhojne (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rupeshbhojne. There is no straightforward answer to this question. It can take between half an hour and two months for an article submitted for review to be approved. The simpler the article (and the less promotional and the better references it contains) the more likely it is to be reviewed immediately. Clearly notable topics (species, geographic features) may be approved very quickly, but with a c.7,000 article backlog, and around 1,000 reviewed each week, there may still be quite a wait for some people. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:33, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rupeshbhojne. Just want to add that it's not really a requirement that you submit a draft for reveiw to Wikipedia:Articles for creation, but it is something which is highly recommended, particulary for new editors who may not be very familiar with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. Although it's not impossible to do, most new editors typically find it quite hard to write a proper Wikipedia article from scratch; so, submitting a draft for review gives other more experienced editors a chance to look it over and provide suggestions on ways to further improve it. There's no limit placed on the number of times a draft can be submitted as long as it keeps being improved; in fact, many drafts end up being declined a couple of times before they are accepted.

Some editors, however, askew the review process and directly create articles themselves. Sometimes this works out OK, but many articles (particularly those created by new editors) end up being deleted each and every day for one reason or another. These articles may end up being deleted rather soon after they are created or quite some time after they are created, but they are all basically deleted because they are not up to Wikipedia standards and there's no way to "fix" them to bring them up to Wikipedia standards.

You've been an editor (at least using your current account) for only a few days, and many new editors get discouraged when an article they create is declined or deleted by the Wikipedia Community for some reason. So, perhaps it might be better for you to try and familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines by working on improving existing articles for a little while before trying immediately trying to create a new article. This will allow you to gain a little more experience and a better understanding Wikipedia which will help you when you decide to start writing a new article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Help??

Hi, I’m new to editing pages here at Wikipedia and I don’t understand some stuff for example as to creating pages and etc.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Radi Machete2 (talk • contribs)

@Radi Machete2: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may be interested in using the new user tutorial to learn more about using Wikipedia. Successfully creating new articles is probably the hardest task on Wikipedia; you may want to start smaller and edit existing articles and gradually work your way up to creating new articles, users who do that are much more successful than if they immediately started creating articles. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Assignment issues, please help

I am currently a student studying a BA in Writing and Publishing, and for an assignment we have been tasked with creating Wikipedia articles 'from scratch'. However I have experienced an issue with another user.
I submitted an article for creation which was denied for promotional language (I have never worked on a company-based page, so appreciated the user feedback, even requesting more specific feedback to help correct my errors), however the reviewer has mistaken my efforts and thinks I am being paid for advertising, which I most definitely am not.
I even decided to focus on other articles so as not to cause any problems or upset/another other users with an article that is not strictly fact or backed up with reliable sources.
I am quite concerned as I worry this could all affect my assignment even though it is just a misunderstanding, and was wondering if anyone could help?

Thank you, GoldVine5 (talk) 10:48, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@GoldVine5: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We cannot tell you what will affect the assignment you were given in terms of the assignment; in terms of Wikipedia, as long as you learn from your errors, you will have little issue as far as we are concerned. Does your instructor/professor work with the Education program? 331dot (talk) 11:01, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@331dot: Thank you for the speedy reply! I'm unsure if my tutor, user Cbderbylib, is a part of the educational program but I have emailed to ask, and has our course attached to the Outreach Dashboard. My major issue is that user Robert McClenon believes I am doing paid advertisement work for the House of Marley page I submitted, though I assure you I am not, and since his feedback I have focused my attention on articles that seem less controversial and prone to promotional language (my aim was never to cause issue or offense). However he is now suggesting a 'conflict of interest' and harrassing my other page(s), the Skin Books trilogy draft page made before the article was created. Is there anything you could help with/ suggest?

Thank you, GoldVine5 (talk) 11:45, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@GoldVine5: Robert did respond to your post on his user talk page; your instructor should not be requiring you to create an article by a set deadline. I see your instructor does have a page about the course. I would suggest that you ask your instructor to comment on the COIN discussion. 331dot (talk) 11:51, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia page creation

Hi,

I am looking for Wikipedia page creation specifications and process to follow for the same.

Please provide guidelines to create and manage Wikipedia pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.156.100.130 (talk • contribs) 12.28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

IP, please sign with four tildes after talk page comments and on discussion pages like this: ~~~~ (minus the nowiki tags). Some links that might be useful to you are our notability policy, our policy on sources, and finally a guide on making a new article. Do note that as an IP, you cannot directly create new articles. However, you are fully able to create a draft, and submit it for "article status" using Articles for Creation! Happy editing! -A lad insane (Channel 2) 13:07, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

How should I spell?

I've been editing on Wikipedia for a few days now, and I'm a little confused about one thing. If somebody has written the word "colour," should I actively go out of my way to change it to "color?" Or is the British way of spelling it okay? ChipotleHater (talk) 00:32, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@ChipotleHater: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Policy in this area can be found at WP:ENGVAR; but in short, the version of English used in an article depends on the subject matter. If you were editing Elizabeth II, you should use British spelling. If you were editing Donald Trump, you should use American spelling; Justin Trudeau, Canadian spelling, and so on. If the article is about a broad subject or involves multiple national versions of English, you can ask on the relevant article talk page. 331dot (talk) 00:37, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

ChipotleHater, there is also frequently a template displayed at the top of the page and only visible in edit mode telling you what English variant is used on that page. John from Idegon (talk) 01:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@ChipotleHater: I would add that an editor who goes "out of their way" to change article spellings from one valid form to another without justification is very likely to receive a formal request to stop doing so (warning) from other editors. There are so many articles with genuine spelling area in them that are far deserving of attention. If this area of work interests you, try loading WP:LUPIN's spellchecker for live-checking of new edits, though I'd observe that installing special scripts is not something all new user may be comfortable with. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Nick Moyes that you should definitely not go through articles changing one variety of spelling to another, but we do expect each article to be self-consistent in spelling. If you are in doubt about which variety of spelling is appropriate, then the usual compromise is to use the variety chosen by the earliest contributor to the article who used a regional spelling. Dbfirs 08:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Alright. Yesterday I was working through Wikipedia:Typo Team to fix spelling errors. I’ll look into installing that script. ChipotleHater (talk) 12:21, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@ChipotleHater: If you decide you like it, your welcome to use my slightly modified version. Mine runs for c.3 times longer before timing out, and also leaves a better edit summary. I used to use it at work, leaving it to run all morning, then I'd address all the reported errors in my lunch break, or after work. See User:Nick Moyes/recent2test.js for my version. Two things to say about using it: Beware false reports in hyperlinks - never change those! And be willing to deploy the {{notatypo}} template whenever you encounter seemingly-wrong spelling in quotations or non-English phrases. That stops you or others on the future from changing words that shouldn't be changed. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

creating a page

Hello. I'm trying to create a page for myself as I am an experienced and accredited screenwriter, script editor and producer. People in these roles don't tend to get interviewed in the mainstream press unless they are very famous, but I have referenced my IMDB page and my page on the BFI which list my credits (though the BFI page isn't comprehensive at all). These are both reliable sources, independent of me, but my page has been rejected? Many thanks for any advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filacious70 (talk • contribs)

@Filacious70: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was rejected because it does little more than list your accomplishments like a resume. It is not written as an encyclopedia article. Please note that IMDB is not acceptable as a reliable source because it is user-editable. Unfortunately, if you are not written about in independent reliable sources, you would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. If you just want to tell the world about your accomplishments and credits, you may want to indeed contribute to IMDB or other places where this is permitted. It is true that requiring independent reliable sources does leave out some subjects, but Wikipedia's mission is to summarize independent sources and not necessarily be a comprehensive list of all member of a subject(such as screenwriters).

Also please review the policy on autobiographies; while not forbidden, writing one is highly discouraged, as people naturally write favorably about themselves, and Wikipedia tries to have a neutral point of view. While it is technically possible for someone to write about themselves in the manner required by Wikipedia, it is rare; I've been here many years and yet to see it successfully done. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for coming back to me - I understand re IMDB, but the BFI (British Film Institute) webpage is not editable and is an eminent, independent body, surely that would do as a reliable source? I was encourage to add my own page by other female screenwriters as there are so few women (let alone female screenwriters) listed on Wikipedia. I avoided writing a description precisely because I don't want to be biased and there seem to be lots of entries on Wiki that do just list credits etc? Many thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filacious70 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@Filacious70: The BFI page simply lists the films where you are script editor or producer. To show notability you need in-depth coverage in multiple independent sources (please have a look at that page to get an idea of what is required). Creative professionals such as yourself may also be notable if they meet these specific guidelines - which again would need reliable independent sources. An encyclopedia article should not be just a listing of credits - there may be some such articles in Wikipedia now, but that does not mean that it is appropriate for new articles to be created in that format. Hope that makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 14:50, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Need help gathering sources, due to the fact that I would need money

I am trying to find sources for this draft, and I am struggling to do so due to lacking money needed to purchase potential sources. Any suggestions on what I can do? Invalid^OS (talk) 17:55, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey InvalidOS. There are a number of resources available at Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library. Some of them free for everyone, and others you can request free access to, though I don't know how many would have information on contemporary video games. You might also try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. They have a pretty active community there. GMG ^talk 18:01, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

There's a project at Wikipedia called the Resource Exchange, where you can go and request people to provide you with help accessing difficult-to-access sources, including those behind pay walls. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. If anyone can help you, they can! --Jayron 32 18:02, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I will be sure to try these. Invalid^OS (talk) 18:02, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Give Mercy to Bobby Deol

To the admin of 'Bobby Deol Page' on the Wikipedia:

Sorry Sir/Madam. But you are "I N D I R E C T L Y" insulting Bobby Deol on his official Wikipedia page by giving introduction about him which is superficial in its depth. Sorry.

He is a multi-talented star "I N D E E D".

He flopped in the Bollywood, "O N L Y & O N L Y" due to his lack of fitness.

So, that major reason behind his failure at the second half of his career must be known to everyone.

Please, give mercy to him & publish regarding this on his Wikipedia page (esp. in the end of his introduction).

Otherwise, many folks will think that he is a talentless actor.

In fact, in India, some shallow people mock at him, thinking that he is a very unskilled actor.

But, genuinely, he is the most "S K I L F U L" actor.

I am Bobby Deol's biggest fan (really).

So, please add this information on his Wikipedia page for the God's sake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inderpratap79 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Bobby Deol - for convenience. I'll just comment that none of the editors there are "indirectly insulting" the person - they are required by WP:BLP to remove unsourced content from biographies of living people. As the final warning says on your talk page, you are liable to be blocked if you do not cite your additions to that article. theinstantmatrix (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Notability Question - Robert Horwich

Hello! I am wondering whether a draft article about Dr. Robert Horwich would pass the notability test. He is...

1) the inventor of the "puppet system" of hand-rearing crane chicks (which was a big breakthrough in helping crane species) https://www.savingcranes.org/honoring-rob-horwich-pioneer-in-costume-rearing/

2) the founder of a nonprofit conservation organization called Community Conservation http://communityconservation.org/who-we-are/

3) the co-founder of the Community Baboon sanctuary in Belize and is mentioned in that Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Baboon_Sanctuary

4) a published scientist/primatologist who specialized in both people-focused conservation initiatives and primates

He passed away in 2017 and my instinct is that he is definitely notable enough to have a Wikipedia page - especially because of #1 and #3.

I would appreciate any thoughts or advice about this - is Dr. Robert Horwich notable enough for a Wikipedia page? Thank you so much for your time!

Shelly Torkelson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radiofishie (talk • contribs) 2019-05-10T17:15:23 (UTC)

Hello, Radiofishie, and welcome to the Teahouse. Horwich may well be notable, but I don't think what you've give so far establishes it. Notability in Wikipedia is something different from its normal interpretation - it doesn't mean famous, or influential, or important, though figures that those words describe are often notable. It means that there has been enough material published about them that is both independent of them and published in a reliable place, to ground an article. So the first reference you give above may be relevant - it is not clear to me how independent Saving Cranes are from him: if he was ever an officer, for example, I would be dubious. Again, Community Conservation are clearly not independent. The Wikipedia links, on the other hand, are simply not reliable: while it is strongly encouraged to wikilink other articles to help the reader explore, a Wiki article cannot be used as a reference, and therefore cannot contribute to notability. If Community Baboon Sanctuary itself had any reliable independent sources that mentioned Horwich as the founder, they could also be used in an article about Horwich; but only one of the references there even works for me, and that one does not mention him.

What you need to find is more places where people completely unconnected with Horwich or any of the organisations he is affiliated to have chosen to write at some length about him, and been published in a reliable place such as a book from a reputable publisher, or a major newspaper. Altenatively, as he was a scientist, there may be alternative criteria that are relevant here - they will still need reliable sources, though. --ColinFine (talk) 17:12, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Radiofishie I had a look around, and there might be enough independent material on him to write an article- its mostly about his work with monkeys and community conservation. You may have to dig a bit for it though. Curdle (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Editing a pre-existing entry

I do not understand what happened to the extra information I, somewhat laboriously, added to the Wikipedia entry on "Pteroplax." I did not know I had to sign any entry. Has my work all been lost?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Jonathan Boyd (talk • contribs) 19:58, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Answered above. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 20:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

This appears to be the response, from the Teahouse history.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:43, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Editing a reference list

Greetings,

Our group technical editor has strongly encouraged me to expand the "et al."'s in the reference list on a page to which I've contributed. (I assembled the list and my boss pushed it up.) Is there a mechanism that will allow me to do this? Selecting the "edit" link on the reference section of the page doesn't access the existing references. Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertgutter (talk • contribs)

Hey Robert! In the editing window, references are listed in the running text beside the citation itself. If you click the little number in the "references" section, it will bring you BACK to the section where the reference is made. Edit that section, find the reference, and then you can edit it there. I hope that helps! --Jayron 32 16:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.70.186 (talk) 17:47, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Just a note here Robertgutter, If you are getting paid for editing Wikipedia, you have to declare this on your talk page. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 20:08, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Why I'm not able to edit Student of the Year 2

It says only view source, I can't see an option to edit the article, Am I blocked from editing that article? --WikiLover97 (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Dear @WikiLover97: Your account should be able to edit it now. Try again. Let me know if it still says “view source”. Zingarese talk · contribs 21:17, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for the quick answer, and yes it still says the same, I just wanted to add the Box office information to the article, as people might start looking for that in a couple of hours. --WikiLover97 (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@WikiLover97: Student of the Year 2 is semi-protected. That means you can edit it when your account is four days old and has ten edits. You have enough edits but the account was created today. You can submit an edit request after clicking "View source". PrimeHunter (talk) 21:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh Okay, Thank you @PrimeHunter: I got it! I'm submitting an edit request! this tea house is actually helpful <3 WikiLover97 (talk) 21:28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Editing a pre-existing entry

Hallo, Barbara! Thanks for your comments. I am completely new to Wikipedia, so do not know how to contact you other than here. Please excuse my ignorance. I edited rthe Pteroplax entry very thoroughly, citing 5 or 6 scholarly publications at the end to justify my edit. I did a Masters thesis on Pteroplax and wanted to improve the lamentable Wikipedia entry, which was just a stub. Btw, yes, I *am* Michael Jonathan Boyd. Feeling a bit out of my depth here, though! :)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Jonathan Boyd (talk • contribs) 20:14, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, MJB. To contact Barabara, you can write something here, or you can use her talk page at User_talk:Barbara_(WVS). Whichever you do, it'll make things easier for us if you sign your postings (but not your contribtions to articles) by ending them with four tildes, preferebly preceded by a space, like this ~~~~. Maproom (talk) 21:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Template for directing IP's to Write the Article First?

I've got an IP that's trying to add links to a page that doesn't exist yet to several articles. For future reference, is there a template or handy guide besides linking to WP:WTAF, and maybe suggesting they don't skip too many steps on WP:YFA to give them that might let them know their editing is causing disruption? Thanks! Elfabet (talk) 18:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

@Elfabet: It is OK to add red links to an article that may exist in the future WP:REDLINK. Can you explain more the problem you are trying to solve? RudolfRed (talk) 18:40, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Hmmmm, might have been over eager in my suggestions then. Policy trumps Essay, I'd imagine. And they were being changed in article body. Alright, I've removed my warning. Thanks for enlightening me.

PS: Is there a way to see the deletion history of a particular page that may have been submused or renamed to a disambiguation page instead? In this case it's Ladies First. Elfabet (talk) 19:54, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

@Elfabet: Click on "history", in this case you already see at the bottom that Ladies first was moved to Ladies First (Ms Scandalous album) leaving a redirect, and this redirect was then converted to a disambiguation page. Generally you can also click on "history", and then at the top of the history on "view logs for this page", that covers protections and moves.
I don't know what happens at the source for a page moved without leaving a redirect, i.e., if you're looking at a red link. IIRC for an ordinary red link you can just click on it to get a deletion info (or not.) You can also go to Special:Log and specify the page or user you're interested in. –84.46.53.127 (talk) 21:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)