Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 980

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 975

←

Archive 978

→

Profile feature on Wikipedia

Hi, just wanting to know when I sign up on Wikipedia is there a feature that allows me to create a profile or would my User page be considered my actual profile in Wikipedia?

Thank you,

Carolyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.133.158 (talk) 02:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Carolyn. Yes, your userpage is, effectively, your profile, though we never really use that term because it's too suggestive of social media sites, whereas this is an encyclopaedia, not Facebook. If you'd care to look at this guidance on userpages you'll see what is and isn't acceptable to have there. In essence, say a few words about yourself and your interest in editing Wikipedia, without revealing any personal details you might later regret. We can offer extra advice to very young (underage) editors, or point newcomers to projects that might interest them. We don't have nearly enough female editors helping to create this grand encyclopaedia, so do please sign up form a free account. Once you've done that, do try out The Wikipedia Adventure, which is an interactive tour of the basics of article editing. Then come back and seek any further help you may need. I'll pop by and drop a welcome message on your IP talk page, but creating a user account is generally preferable, though by no means essential. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, one thing to add: Please don't ask the same question in two different help venues. This waste volunteer effort, and isn't helpful. By all means wait 24 hours before reposting somewhere else. These are conventions that new editors can't be expected to know, so, like signing a post, you'll find people keen to tell you the right way to do stuff. Don't be intimidated - it might come across as blunt sometimes, but we love it when we see new editors doing their best to build this amazing encyclopaedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Occasionally, new editors spend more time creating their User page (slews of userboxes, photo-of-the-day, banners, etc.) than contributing to Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 15:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Very true, David notMD. I'm sure Carolyn isn't going to be one of them, but this is my favourite thus far. As of today, 903 edits in total, yet only 22 to the main encyclopaedia by that particular user. Can anyone beat that, I wonder? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:56, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Not on that exact category, but I can beat you on a very related one, with this. Don't get fooled by the pie-chart, the deleted edits were on the userspace too. Maybe, this one gives a better idea. Also, mine's almost seven years old, while yours is hardly one. But we probably shouldn't be discussing other users like this, huh? Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 17:33, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Adding Photo of Book Cover to Authors Cricket Club

I know that Wikipedia allows photos of the covers of books in articles that are specifically about those books without getting copyright permission from the original photographer. But I am unclear on whether or not I can use a photo of the cover of a book if the book is the subject of a section of a larger article?

The Authors Cricket Club collectively wrote a book about their first season together and the article about the Club has a subheading specifically for the book. Can I include a photo of the book there, or is it not allowed because the entire article is about more than just the book? Thanks for your help. Lilipo25 (talk) 03:01, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Lilipo25. This is dealt with at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the section on images. Book covers can be used in main space articles that give coverage to the book, which must include critical commentary. That seems to be the case here. Please follow the guideline carefully. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lilipo25. Book cover art is generally allowed for primary identification purposes in at the top of or in the main infobox of a stand-alone article about the book in question, but such files are much harder to justify in other articles per WP:NFC#cite_note-3. Generally, it’s not the book per de, but the book’s cover which needs to be the subject of sourced critical commentary in order to provide the context for non-free use required by non-free content use criterion #8. Simply mentioning the book by name or even discussing the book in a bit of detail is almost never considered sufficient to justify using the cover art since a link to the article about the book can pretty much serve the same encyclopedic purpose per WP:FREER as well as items 6 and 9 of WP:NFC#UUI. In some cases, non-free use might be justifiable in an article about the artist who created the cover art if it’s often referred by a reliable sources as representative example of the artist’s particular style or of the artist’s entire body of work, but the same almost never applies to articles about authors or genres, etc. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:54, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Sigh. I checked first and was told it was justifiable. Can you please remove the deletion tag and give me a chance to edit the article to meet the criteria? I may be able to find sources that specifically refer to the cover art due to it being photos of the players on the team. Please don't have the photo deleted before I have a chance to try, thanks. Lilipo25 (talk) 15:45, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Lilipo25. I'm not sure Cullen328's post was an unequivocable endorsement of the file's non-free use in that article. Often Teahouse answers are meant to be specific enough to provide some general guidance, but avoid going into too much detail since threads can get bogged down and the reader overwhelmed. Moreover, different hosts may have slight different takes on a particular situation. I don't totally disagree with what Cullen328 posted, but just want to clarify the in cases of this type of non-free use it's almost never considered sufficient for there simply to be critical commentary about the work (i.e. book); what is really needed is critical commentary about the cover art itself. For example, perhaps it generated some controversy or there was something else directly related to it which was discussed in reliable sources. Moreover, simply adding statements "describing" the cover (e.g. it's color, what it looks like, who appears on it) is also almost never considered sufficient because those are things which can be more than adequately understood through text WP:FREER. I prodded the file for deletion, and you WP:DEPRODed it; the next step for anyone who still feels the file's non-free use doesn't meet Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is typically to discuss the file at WP:FFD, where others can weigh in and help sort things out. For future reference, it might be a good idea to as for help about non-free images at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC since those are pages where you're likely to have a better chance of getting an answer a little more specific than ones typically given at the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly I read the rule you posted here about it and it specifically says that the cover art should be significantly mentioned in the article - it doesn't specify anything about it needing to be the subject of critical commentary? I must disagree that I merely "described" the appearance of the cover - the book, rather than being a single work written by joint committee of all the team players, is made up of individual essays by the eighteen players whose photos are depicted on the cover (there are other players on the team, but they are not on the cover and therefore had no part in writing the book). I believe these are significant facts about the book itself. I appreciate your input here and suggestions about where to ask questions in the future - thank you. Lilipo25 (talk) 21:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

My article was declined, what can I do to get it approved?

Hello, here is my article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:MOVE_model it was declined, and I am not sure why?

( — Preceding unsigned comment added by DailyDilemma (talk • contribs) 21:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, DailyDilemma. Judging from the lack of independent sources cited, I guess that you have made the same fundamental mistake that many new editors make, and written from what you know, rather than from what independent sources say. What you would need to do is to find reliable published sources, not written, published, or commissioned by Chen or any of his associates or any organisations that he is affiliated with, that discuss the model at some length. (They also need not to be based on interviews or press releases from him or his associates). Make sure you include sources critical of the model, if there are such (as you have implied). Then write the article entirely based on what these independent sources say (but summarised in your own words: it mustn't infringe their copyright). If that gives you a reasonable article, you can then add in a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information that is from non-independent sources (for example, dates and places). Almost nothing in the article should derive directly from what Chen or his associates say. Please see WP:YFA for more inforamtion. --ColinFine (talk) 22:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, DailyDilemma. An explanation as to why your draft was rejected can be found at the top of the page, and was left for you by an experienced editor. It states: "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." What this means is that to get your draft onto the encyclopaedia you would need to provide citations to good, reliable sources which are independent of the subject. In other words, what evidence is there that the world has taken notice of this coaching concept. I Googled it and found nothing of note. I also tried to read and understand what you wrote, but found it nowhere near approaching the style of an encyclopaedia article. But style is irrelevant if Notability (q.v.) can't be demonstrated. And here I suspect you may fail. I'm sorry to disappoint you by this reply.

By the way, I did spot that your username bears rather a striking similarity to the organisation behind that MOVE website. If you have a connection, or are being paid to promote it, or are Niv Chen, you would have a clear conflict of interest and would be obligated to declare that COI and any payment received, according to our policy at WP:PAID. I note you attempted to place another COI notice on your userpage. To make it go live, you would need to edit out the bits of 'nowiki' text, including all the chevron brackets. I would have done this for you, but ChangeTheInvisible doesn't appear to exist yet, so I left it alone for now. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:21, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Article I played with on Drafts has been rejected, not declined

Hi all,

User:RoySmith sent me a kind invitation to here after rejecting an article I found in the Draft space and then resubmitted Draft:Ron Kalifa. I got a bit attached to this as a previous draft I had fixed and resubmitted (of someone less obviously notable) got accepted, so I want to know how to bring this article into the light ... I have messaged RoySmith to ask if there's anything which can be done to fix it rather than have it completely rejected (not declined).

The sourcing is likely easy enough to fix, but what I want to know is how can you question an WP:NBIO assessment on a draft? They aren't as visible as mainspace articles, so it seems hard to get the same level of consensus. I disagree with RoySmith's assessment of notability, but I don't want to be rude, I want to improve Wikipedia :)

Thanks!

No pineapple on Pizza (talk) 17:41, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

The main thing you can do, No pineapple on Pizza, is to pick out two or three references which are clearly places where people who have no connection whatever with Kalifa have chosen, unprompted by Kalifa or any organisation he is connected with, to publish at some length about him. To be honest, I haven't looked at the long list of references in your draft: the fact that several other editors claim to have done so and failed to find any of them suitable, added to the fact that you have given multiple references for many statements, leads me to think that the other editors are probably correct. RoySmith has gone further and rejected your draft: this suggests that he has looked for suitable sources and failed to find any. :If you cannot find at least a couple of such sources, then give up. If you think you have found some, I suggest either RoySmith's User talk page, or WP:AFCHD. --ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to answer! There's definitely a problem on sourcing, but I think this is definitely fixable ... some of the complaints are directed at the sourcing from before I took a look and removed the obviously affiliated ones, but I take your point on the 'at length' issue; he seems low-profile considering his history. I'll keep looking to see if there is anything.

Can I ask what actually happens after rejection? It seems strange that people are still editing the article but then again I'm a little new to some of these processes. No pineapple on Pizza (talk) 19:12, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't remember exactly, but what I probably did was look at the changes since the last time it had been declined, and came to the conclusion that they didn't significantly change the situation. If you want to point out the WP:THREE best sources here, I'll take another look. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:17, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for answering - here are the three best sources in my opinion: Megaw, Nicholas (14 March 2019). "Network appoints ex-Worldpay chief as chairman ahead of IPO". Financial Times., "UK FinTech 'ripe for opportunities". UKTN (UK Tech News), and Field, Matthew; Boland, Hannah (2019-04-02). "The companies making trillions as the world goes cashless". The Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. I agree that the sources are not in depth, but they do point to him being notable in his industry and a regular commenter.

Agree to disagree on the pineapple! No pineapple on Pizza (talk) 20:37, 11 July 2019 (UTC)No pineapple on Pizza

No pineapple on Pizza: the second of those three sources, from UKTN, reports what Kalifa himself has said – so it's not independent, and does not help to establish his notability. The other two are behind paywalls, so I can't judge. But it's discouraging that one of what you consider the best three sources in fact does nothing to establish notability. Maproom (talk) 22:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I was able to get to the Financial Times article (clicking through the link in a google search seems to bypass the paywall). To my mind, it's routine coverage of a business transaction by a financial paper, which covers all such transactions as a matter of course. The article reports that Network International hired Kalifa away from its competitor, Worldpay, along with a couple of quotes from Kalifa. Routine coverage of that nature doesn't contribute to WP:N. I was not able to get to the full Telegraph article, but the teaser I could read makes it sound like it's similar routine coverage of a business deal ("Network International, a Dubai-headquartered payments firm, yesterday confirmed the price of its London listing in a deal that could value the company at up to £2.3bn") -- RoySmith (talk) 22:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Is DealerRater Notable?

I was trying to look up the company https://www.dealerrater.com/ and did not see anything in Wikipedia. Before I create a page of it, do you think it is notable enough? I see other car-related companies on here, so I think the answer is yes, but I wanted to make sure. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hurwith2 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Hurwith2, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that whether or not Wikipedia has articles on other similar companies tells you absolutely nothing about whether Dealerrater.com is notable. The question is, have several people wholly unconnected with the company chosen to publish material about the company in reliable places? If not, then it is impossible to write an acceptable article about them. See WP:NCORP for more. --ColinFine (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hurwith2 - I'm going to say no, based on the limited coverage I could find about them. I added them to parent Cars.com's article, but I don't see much more being necessary. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

How to add a Map to the Infobox?

Hello, I am a novice wikipedia editor working on an article for a park and having a difficult time understanding how to add a map to an infobox. I following the information on the Template infobox Park page, but it didn't work. I have copied inboxes from other Wiki's and that has not worked. I am sure I am overlooking something obvious but I cannot see my error.

Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thank you in advance!-Mightymize (talk) 17:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, I think that the easiest way to add the map is to look for an article with the Infobox about a park. Copy the template and replace the information with that of the park you are writing about. For the map, look up an image of the park map. Take a screenshot, save it, upload it as a non-free file, and use it for the map. LPS and MLP Fan (LittlestPetShop) (MyLittlePony) 18:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Mightymize Take the infobox from Golden Gate Park. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:38, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@LPS and MLP Fan and Timtempleton: Thank you!-Mightymize (talk) 02:40, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

How do I know which link is blacklisted?

Others are also having the same issue. How do I know which link is black listed in this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qaidjoher_Ezzuddin Muffizainu (talk) 10:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

You have asked the same question here and here. Please don't ask the same thing in multiple places at the same time. --bonadea contributions talk 10:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Muffizainu, Click on the link [show] just to the right of List of blacklisted links. You cannot link to files hosted on wordpress.com Vexations (talk) 10:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@Muffizainu:Just to clarify: you are looking for the sentence in the big oblong template at the very top of the page which says "List of blacklisted links: [show]" Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Vexations & Nick Moyes - Thank you! bonadea, apologies. Muffizainu (talk) 05:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Requesting a Page to be Made

Hello to all the Wikipedia editors out there! I have the draft now about the school "Childlink Learning Center & Childlink High School, Inc." in my userspace/sandbox that might be workable for editors but I don't think I could have it published as a page because I have a conflict of interest. I am confused what the next step is. Hoping there is someone out there who can help so my question is:

How do request a page to be made about the school "Childlink Learning Center & Childlink High School,Inc."? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jodi Tio (talk • contribs) 00:49, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Jodi Tio Hi Welcome to Teahouse, please visit and read Wikipedia:Requested articles and place the article and info on Schools, colleges, and universities. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:17, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

CASSIOPEIA Hello again! I have added it to the list already. Thanks for the help! But it seems like a very long list indeed. May I also wonder if the page I made about Chidlink Learning Center in my sandbox can be used in some way? Can I still submit it for publishing? Jodi Tio (talk) 08:01, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Jodi Tio Greetings. The list is always long in request for article. It would better you dont as it is hard for an editor who has COI to write the effected article's content in neutral point of view. cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

My user name was automatically changed.

How can I change it back to the one I created and delete this one? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weinstockjcw (talk • contribs) 16:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Weinstockjcw and welcome to the Teahouse. If you created an account with the username you want to use, then stop using this account and use the other one since it is not possible to delete accounts. Otherwise, request a user name change at Special:GlobalRenameRequest or Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple. Interstellarity T 🌟 16:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@Weinstockjcw: It think the only automatic changes of an entered username is capitalization of the first character and maybe changing underscores to spaces. If you want lowercase weinstockjcw then it is not possible but it can be displayed in your signature if you enter it at "Signature" at Special:Preferences (don't enable "Treat the above as wiki markup"). PrimeHunter (talk) 09:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Another company-related query

Hello! I want to get advise about the article for a company. The goal of it isn't advertising and I wrote the text myself. There are an article on Russia in Википедия and I want to translate it in English, but it deleted by moderators and I don't know what to do to publish it. The article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:SPUTNIX

Help me, please! Alena.svinareva (talk) 10:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alena.svinareva (talk • contribs) 13:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Draft declined, not deleted. I did a bit of copyedit clean-up. You could go to the Talk page of the last reviewer who declined, and ask what parts of the draft in particular are not appropriate. David notMD (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Alena.svinareva: I also went and improved the article, added an English source, fixed the grammar, and tried to reduce the promotionalism as much as I could. I suspect the concerns were just as much about the quality of sourcing as the language. With a few more English language sources it should eventually be accepted. Despite the site policy to allow non-English sources in the English Wikipedia, it's hard for non-Russian speakers to help you determine notability without English sources. (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) 18:44, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@David notMD: and @Timtempleton:, Thank you both! I have added an English source on your advice! Alena.svinareva (talk) 10:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

User:DanChr79/sandbox/Moonwhale Ventures

I only WIKIed my company. It is only information, not promotion. Help me to change the wording to get publishing approved pls. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanChr79 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@DanChr79: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. What you call 'information' is considered promotional on Wikipedia. You seem to have a common misconception as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a forum for merely providing information. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(for companies, that is written at WP:ORG). Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself.

Further, you have what we call a conflict of interest in editing about your company, and are probably also a paid editor. You will need to review and comply with those policies I have linked to, as you must make some required disclosures. As you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid directly editing about your company. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

(ec) @DanChr79: I agree the page is was (the verb fixed – the page got speedily deleted while I was writing this reply) a highly promotional information. It was completely unsourced, hence unverifiable (WP:VER), it didn't cite any independent sources (WP:RS), the only reference used was the company's own website URL. The page contained nothing suggesting notability (WP:N), no documented influence on anything, just claims about the area of activity. This could be an entry in a directory, which Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTYELLOW). Additionally some important parts were written in Future tense (‘Businesses will be served with...’ or ‘Investors will be presented with...’) which suggests the company does not even work yet! (and Wikipedia is WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL).
As a whole, the page offered purely NO information about the company's history, current state and correlation to the rest of the world, but just an info on their (intended?) business area – which clearly is an ad. Incomplete (no address or contact details), anyway an ad. --CiaPan (talk) 11:58, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Are there any Wikipedia events in Australia?

I've been looking around for events and things that might happen in Australia, ideally in Victoria because anywhere else is too far away from me. I'd really love to meet other Wikipedians, especially ones that are more experienced than me, because I really really enjoy contributing to the wiki, but I don't know anybody else in real life who has any interest in it. So yeah, that would be super cool. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.5.115 (talk) 11:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. (Doh - you forgot to sign your post!) Anyway, keep an eye on Wikipedia:Meetup/Calendar which seems the best venue for advertising meetups, though I'm sure far more get organised than appear there. Looks like the last Australian one was in Canberra last April, though there was one in Sydney last month not on that list (see Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board for general information relevant to aussie editors). Of course, you could always try contacting editors who have self-announced that they're from Victoria, and seeing what interest there might be for a social event near where you live. See Category:Wikipedians in Victoria (though check their recent contributions to see which ones are no longer active). You could look at other events worldwide to see how they tend to be run, and I'd suggest creating a user account and saying a bit about yourself if you decide you fancy contacting others. You might also want to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Victoria to help out there. Does any of this help? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:54, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Just to add to the above - Wikimedia Australia conduct regular events around the country. The next one in Victoria is at the Richmond Public Library on 20 July, 1-5pm. That is a "winter wiki edit-a-thon" on women's art. Pru is managing that, and she is always good. If you are interested you can RSVp. You might also want to follow Wikimedia Australia as they advertise their events, and/or join their mailing lists. - Bilby (talk) 10:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Bilby. If you've got contacts with the Australian contingent, perhaps you could have a gentle moan at them and get them to add details of their events to the Wikipedia:Meetup/Calendar. As far as I'm aware, that's the central place for finding details of public gatherings, so it's a shame when these events are hidden away from newcomers. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:25, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

annotated link

Thank you for the "welcome"! In this article: Runamo there is a “See also” section that contains one item, which is: "Pareidolia – Psychological effect of observing human faces in inanimate objects”. If you click “Edit source” (in order to edit that section) you don’t find the content of the article, but instead you find this: annotated link|Pareidolia (along with an asterisk and brackets). My question is: How can an editor edit this particular “see also” content and where is it? Thanks. Wråbonkståhziggå (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@Wråbonkståhziggå: The {{annotated link}} template picked up, as the annotation, the content of the {{short description}} template in the Pareidolia article. I've edited that short description to more accurately reflect the general description in the lead of the article. (If "seeing faces in inanimate objects" were the only meaning of pareidolia, the relevance of the concept to Runamo would be unclear.) If you can think of a better wording of the annotation, you can edit it in the short-description template at the top of the Pareidolia edit screen. Deor (talk) 16:24, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate that.Wråbonkståhziggå (talk) 12:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Nice to meet you

Hello, another user and me have made two extended edit protected requests on a recent event, yet nothing has changed, will I know we all must be patient as in the Spanish Wikipedia, I think Wikipedia should up to the news. --CoryGlee (talk) 12:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a news source, but I'm sure someone will look at your requests. I know little about the subject so I will leave the requests to more knowledgeable editors. Dbfirs 12:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Perfectly understood, Thank you. --CoryGlee (talk) 12:11, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@CoryGlee: See this: WP:NORUSH. :) It sometimes sounds offensive and sometimes humorous, but it helps to keep a steady attitude to editing. --CiaPan (talk) 12:27, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

CoryGlee, Hi, as a template editor I sometimes handle edit requests (particularly to templates). This is basically done through the Watchlist, which means it can be a bit hit and miss. Either people watching the page in question, or people watching User:AnomieBOT/EPERTable will review the request. Anyway, the request looks good, so I'm probably going to make the edit. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 14:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Changing a User Page to An Article

Is it possible to change a User page to be listed as an Article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BiffyLana (talk • contribs) 14:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi BiffyLana - why do you ask? It would be an unusual thing to do - the content on most user pages would be unlikely to be suitable for an article; indeed, a user page that was written to look like an article would probably be a violation of the guidelines on user pages. Are you perhaps referring to a user's sandbox, where draft articles can be written? GirthSummit _(blether) 14:04, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

BiffyLana, following on from what GirthSummit says, there is Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles - a list of notable Wikipedians. You'll notice that, for example, Jimmy Wales and User:Jimbo Wales are quite different. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 14:28, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wiki stalker?

Hello, thanks for the invite.

I have noticed someone following me on Wiki, undoing my additions to pages for no good reason, other than what I can only assume is mischief. It is too much of a coincidence for them to have casually stumbled on all of my pages, so I can only assume they are stalking/trolling me.

Does this sort of thing happen on Wiki? Is there a supreme council of wikipedians I can report this to?

Thank you in advance. Lloydmayer (talk) 10:47, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

You will have to be more specific. I look at some of your past edits and did not see any evidence of and editor subsequently reverting same. Which articles? Which editor? I will add that it is a not uncommon practice for an editor to find and revert an edit, and then search for other edits by the same person to see if the same type of errant editing is found. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it is not stalking when an editor looks at your recent contributions. If you are referring to the removal of embedded links, then this is following Wikipedia policy. Removal of unsourced statements is permitted. Rather than edit war by adding the statement back again, you should discuss the addition on the talk page of the article. I see only good reasons for the reverts, but perhaps I am looking at the wrong edits? I can see more than a dozen of your recent edits that have not been reverted. Dbfirs 11:04, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lloydmayer - just to add to the points raised above, it is possible to make a complaint of stalking or harassment by raising a report at ANI - however, as other editors have pointed out to you, you should only do that if you are sure that this is being done maliciously. If another editor is reverting you, you should start by asking them why they are doing it. Hopefully they'll probably engage with you constructively and explain what they think was wrong with your edits. If you are sure that it is malicious stalking, you can raise a report at ANI, but be sure to provide diffs of the reverts and your attempts to resolve the problem amicably. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks all for your helpful comments(User:David notMD |User:Dbfirs GirthSummit _(blether)) 14:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC). On the whole, I have found most of the edits from wikipedians valid and helpful; some I have disagreed with, and agreed to disagree; others are just downright petty and unnecessary. But, such is the nature of the online world. Lloydmayer (talk) 14:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Taboo" on FX. Are they filming any new episodes??!!?

I see where FX picked up a second season of the show, but has any filming started? When will it ever come back?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.13.62.26 (talk) 15:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to ask questions about using or editing Wikipedia, and is not meant as a general question asking forum. You could try the Reference Desk. 331dot (talk) 15:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

(ec)Hi! The Teahouse is a place to discuss issues one may encounter while trying to use and/or edit Wikipedia. The place that's equipped to handle your query is WP:RD/E. I am sure they'll be able to help you. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 15:16, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

1. Edit articles & 2. New article

1. My cousin Randy Lerch (has article) and I just released his autobiography. I would like to update (edit) his article with that info but I cannot figure out how to insert (cite) the references. 2. I truly have no ego but would like to have a two sentence article about me as I am both co-author of this book and am lead author on 115 other published books.

I guess I should sign this as... Harold Lerch, the Old and Dumb -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harold Lerch (talk • contribs)

@Harold Lerch: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Information on adding references can be found at WP:CITE; however, since you have what Wikipedia calls a conflict of interest, you should avoid directly editing about your cousin. Instead, you may visit the article talk page(Talk:Randy Lerch) to make a formal edit request for any changes you feel are needed; you will need independent reliable sources to support them. Please review WP:COI as well as WP:PAID, the paid editing policy, for information on formal disclosures you need to make. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Please also note that your user page should be written in the first person, not third person to look like a fake article. It's fine to tell us a bit about yourself, but see WP:Userpage for guidance. Dbfirs 16:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Trying to write an article about recently deceased family member

I'm trying to write an article about a recently deceased family member, the information is going to come from my families memories. Is it possible to publish this on wikipedia without any outside sources other than perhaps a drivers license? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MunozMachine (talk • contribs) 19:17, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@MunozMachine: No, that is not possible. Information in an article must come from published sources. RudolfRed (talk) 19:25, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, MunozMachine, and welcome to the Teahouse. My condolences on your loss. I'm sorry, but the answer to your question is No. Every single piece of information in a Wikipedia article must be available in a published source (and ideally that source will be cited). Unpublished information is not acceptable. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a memorial site: it is an encyclopaedia, which contains neutrally written articles summarising what reliably published sources say about a subject: nothing more. Sorry again. --ColinFine (talk) 19:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

MunozMachine I would add to the good answers above that you should never post copies of personal identity documents here, even for a deceased person, as they can be used for identity theft. My condolences for your loss. 331dot (talk) 20:33, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Ultra Beast worlds

I want to create articles about the worlds of the Ultra beasts, but I dont know how. Can you help me, please? Porygon-Z (talk) 05:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Porygon-Z474 Welcome to Teahouse. Do visit WP:Your First Article on how to write an article in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CASSIOPEIA (talk • contribs) 08:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Consider if it's better to write about this on another wiki, like Bulbapedia, there's probably less rules and more freedom there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:34, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I have the information, I just don't know how to format an article. Porygon-Z (talk) 15:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Porygon-Z474 Start with Wikipedia:Article_wizard. Look at good similar articles and try to "copy their style". Check Help:Referencing for beginners, Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:23, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't know how to start, format, or anything but editing. Could you help me start to create and format the article like other articles? Porygon-Z (talk) 22:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wiki subject wants to provide updated information and photo

Hi, Im a subject on wiki, with a previous high profile job. The information about my history and work is all fine, but Id like to update it a bit with a few more links, and with a photo thats more recent. How do i do this without breaching any wiki rules?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metiria (talk • contribs) 04:37, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Metiria. If you take a high quality selfie, then you can upload that photo to Wikimedia Commons under an acceptable free license, which can then be used on Wikipedia in various languages. If someone else took the photo, then that person, as copyright holder, must upload and license the photo. As for changes to the article, please read Wikipedia:Edit requests and follow that procedure carefully. Propose very specific changes on the talk page of the article about you, and provide references to reliable sources that verify the new content. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:49, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

How to add AfC draft code back into Draft Article

I created a draft using the Article Wizard but requested a name change and in the process I think the code for AfC draft was removed from the article. So... I am requesting for the code to be placed back into the article - or - if provided I will place it there. I looked at another draft article I have and it looks like there are other numbers included (perhaps the date created and one other number). The article is Draft:Susan Aaron-Taylor. Thank you!LorriBrown (talk) 19:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: Just click the blue "submit" button at the top of the article, and it will go into the queue to be reviewed again. RudolfRed (talk) 19:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

RudolfRed I'm not sure that it matters but this draft has not ever been submitted for AfC approval. I created a draft thru the Article Wizard for Draft:Susan Aaron Taylor and then realized it should have been Draft:Susan Aaron-Taylor (with the hyphen)... so I requested in the Teahouse for help to rename draft and in the process the AfC draft code disappeared.LorriBrown (talk) 20:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: I think I cleared the mess. The submission didn't work properly due to a broken HTML comment at the bottom. I've fixed that now, so your draft is now submitted for review! Note:The backlog is currently about 4 months. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 06:14, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Problem with table placement

==Previous season==
The [[2018-19 USC Trojans men's basketball team]] finished the season 16-17, 8-10 in [[2018-19 Pac-12 Conference men's basketball season|Pac-12 Conference]] play. As the No. 8 seed in the 2019 [[2019 Pac-12 Conference Men's Basketball Tournament|Pac-12 Conference Tournament]], the Trojans defeated the No. 8 seed [[2018-19 Arizona Wildcats men's basketball team|Arizona Wildcats]] in the first round before losing to the No. 1 seed [[2018-19 Washington Huskies men's basketball team|Washington Huskies]] in the second round. The Trojans were not selected for any postseason play. 

==Off-season==
===Departures===
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Name
!Pos.
!Height
!Weight
!Year
!Hometown
!Reason for Departure
|-
| [[Kevin Porter Jr.]]
| SG
| 6 ft. 6 in.
| 216
| Fr.
| Seattle, WA
| Declared for [[2019 NBA Draft]]
|-

==Schedule and results==
{{CBB Schedule Start|time=|rank=|ranklink=[[2018-19 NCAA Division I men's basketball rankings]]|rankyear=2018|tv=|record=yes|attend=yes|gamehighs=yes}}
|-

This is the code for the 2019-20 USC Trojans men's basketball team On the page, however, it has the thable for off season departures under the Schedule and Results section. I don't know how this is and I believe it is a glitch. Is it a problem with the code and what do I need to fix?— Preceding unsigned comment added by USC BASKETBALL (talk • contribs) 05:15, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

You seem to be the only one working on that article; so obviously if you aren't achieving the results that you expect, there's something that needs fixing. I think the table needed closing in the section itself. I have gone ahead and done that. See if that's what you were trying to achieve. If it is, you can compare my edit from the history page of the article to see what was missing. If it isn't what you wanted, we can undo it, and discuss the matter further. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 07:44, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Need help editing an article?

Andrewstroth (talk) 01:06, 13 July 2019 (UTC)User:Andrewstroth|AndrewstrothAndrewstroth (talk) 01:06, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

We are a group of people that recognize stroth as a civil rights attorney for the work we have seen him do on TV. We are currently adding more citations that are extensive in length and legitimate. We do not understand why everything was taken down before checking the legitimacy of the sources we inserted which are good. The entire page ( Andrew Stroth ) needs an overhaul. How can we do this?

Courtesy - article is Andrew Stroth. Editor Andrewstroth is blocked until change User name, as AndrewStroth is the person these people are trying to edit. Also each person needs their own account - there is no allowed "we". David notMD (talk) 02:02, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Under unintended consequences, this article now at AfD. The original creator, who has also been recently actively editing the article, has been notified. David notMD (talk) 10:18, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

CC licensing for image

Hello I want to use an image in an article about a deceased painter. I took the photograph of a painting myself and I have the permission of the owner who is the heir of the painter. On https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Marking_your_work_with_a_CC_license paragraph Example: Image it is stated that 'It is also easy to publish your image on an image sharing platform that has built-in CC licensing, such as Flickr, 500px, or Wikimedia Commons.' as a way of getting the CC license for this image. I could easily upload this image to Flickr but how should I do so? Have the owner set up a Flickr page in their own name? Have a Flickr page under my Wikipedia username EctopicOnSchedule? How else can I avoid the OTRS path which seems complicated and lengthy? --EctopicOnSchedule (talk) 01:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but most people here can't help you with Flickr. However, since Flickr isn't affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation, your account data from here will not work there, unless you create an account there with the same credentials (Which isn't recommended for security reasons). Jannik Schwaß (talk) 05:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you - I am really asking about CC licensing so I can upload pictures onto Wikipedia and it appears from https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Marking_your_work_with_a_CC_license that one way to obtain this is through first publishing on Flickr. Anyone has experience of this? --EctopicOnSchedule (talk) 10:51, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

EctopicOnSchedule, Hi, the best method is proably to upload the file to Wikimedia Commons, since it is a creative commons license (I assume that's agreed with the heir). You will likely also need to follow the steps at Donating copyrighted materials. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 10:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

How do i own a wikipedia user account?

Please what and how can i become a wikipedia account user? i need help

@Dr Samuel Kwadwo Frimpong: I see you already created an account. Could you please elaborate more on what you need with specifically? Interstellarity T 🌟 16:44, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

How do I report a "sockpuppet"

I think I found some. :-o 5JVL9 (talk) 21:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@5JVL9: You can follow the guidance at WP:SPI for this. RudolfRed (talk) 21:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) 5JVL9 (talk) 22:00, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I reported the sockpuppet. The response I received: "All three account have been blocked long time ago. Nothing to investigate here". Since then, I found another sockpuppet from the same user. That would make three sockpuppets from the same user z554: 1_Z554 2_Z554 and now Z554-1. According to WP:SPI and WP:BAN the lead account and the sockpuppets are to be banned for repeat violations. I'm just trying to be a good citizen here. Thanks. 5JVL9 (talk) 14:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@5JVL9: I do not see anywhere in Wikipedia:Sock puppetry that sockpuppets should be banned rather than simply blocked. Nor should they be: opening a full community ban discussion for every run-of-the-mill sockpuppet would be extremely cumbersome. (Non-blocked sockpuppets should still be reported to SPI, though.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

According to the policy I read, accounts that have repeated block violations are to be banned. That would be all offending accounts including the sockpuppets. 5JVL9 (talk) 15:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

For the archives, I'll note Vanjagenije provided an answer in this edit: See WP:THREESTRIKES. Retro (talk | contribs) 18:52, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

New pages needed for "Philosophies of Alek Sigley"

There have been many articles about the detention and release of Alek Sigley, yet there is little information available for the intellectual standing of Alek, about his philosophies of life, particularly regarding socialism. it seems the world is bend on Capitalism, and there is to be a greater acceptance and appreciation for socialism as a phiolosophy, especially if we are to understand and potentially accept the rationale of the Chinese political party approaches. Seeems we can not find devision, we must find common. Apppreciweating and understanding that may come from the likes of Alek, he may bridge the devide of these philosophies. Believe this is important work and there will be people knowledgable and able to facilitate this knowledge need, for the world. It is not only a challenge here in Australia, it may assist overcome the differences of trade concepts by the americanos. Maybe it could overcome the friction and the threat of going to blows over issues. Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8000:1585:A700:A19F:B2CC:C1A:B27A (talk) 02:38, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which summarises knowledge that is already published out there. We can not let our contributions get tainted with our own worldviews and beliefs, nor can we cover subjects that we think deserve covering but have been ignored by other influential publishers. All information that's added into Wikipedia has to be independently verifiable. If Alek Sigley's philosophies have been noticed and published by reliable secondary sources, there is no reason that his philosophies can not be covered in Wikipedia. You can do it yourself by registering as an editor here. Alternatively, you can also drop a request for article at WP:Requested articles. Please note, however, that no one person can dictate what is covered in an article. The content is shaped by community consensus on due coverage of all facets of a subject as covered in reliable secondary sources. Not even Jimmy Wales, the co-founder of Wikipedia, has a single veto (except a minor vote as a fellow editor with a conflict of interest) on what goes into the article on him. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 07:13, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

He’s mentioned at List_of_foreign_nationals_detained_in_North_Korea#List_of_detained_Australians Courtesy link for others who are interested. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:34, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

His having been held briefly by North Korea in my opinion does not warrant an article about him, and definitely not a forum for his philosophies of life. David notMD (talk) 19:22, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

User talk

Can I block IP users from editing my talk page? Just ip users. Cambial Yellowing(❧) 09:38, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

You can post a request at Requests for page protection or ask an administrator to semi-protect your user talk page. Sorry you have been having those problems - the IP user who has been bothering you is actually a sock puppet of a blocked user, but since the IP changes it might not be worthwhile to ask for it to be blocked. --bonadea contributions talk 09:55, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bonadea and Cambial Yellowing:: You know, this is a really annoying problem, and in the wake of discussions on civility and harassment re WP:FRAMBAN, and having experienced a multiple IP-hopping sock posting unpleasant remarks on my own talk page wishing me dead recently, I've been considering how it could be dealt with. I've concluded that one solution could be if every registered editor had the ability to self-protect their own talk pages against edits from non-autoconfirmed users for a period of up to, say, 24 hrs. It would auto-expire, but could be reactivated again. It would not need a page protection request to an admin, and I'm sure it would reduce the level of hostility from blocked users coming back as deranged or abusive IPs, yet still enable more genuine editors from posting as it wouldn't block autoconfirmed users. I can't really see any down side to it, so I wonder what you think to the idea, or whether it's been discussed elsewhere before, but summarily dismissed? Nick Moyes (talk) 14:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I did a quick look around and found this has indeed been discussed before, and is actually a subset of a perennial proposal. Wikipedia:Perennial proposals § Grant non-admins admin functions within their user space says:

Proposal: Allow non-administrators to administer their user space, with the tools technically limited to that space only. This has been proposed in a number of different ways, ranging from individual abilities (such as deletion), to full admin abilities.
Reasons for previous rejection: Lack of need; admin workload is not high enough to justify this. There are possible security concerns; if users could delete pages in their namespace, they would be able to move pages to their user space and delete them. Gives the impression of user space ownership and has been rejected by the developers and the Wikipedia community.

It is my understanding that requests for page protection are generally answered within a few hours so I'm not sure if there's a large need for regular users to have this ability. Retro (talk | contribs) 19:41, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

help me

help me through to make my company name and articles shown on every research and result — Preceding unsigned comment added by Betterseed119 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

@Betterseed119: That's not what Wikipedia is for. This is an encyclopedia, not a venue for advertising or promotion. If you are editing any pages related to a company you work for, you must follow WP:COI and WP:PAID. RudolfRed (talk) 19:23, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

PS: the article American Seed Trade Association already exists.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Autobiographic content

What is the correct line of action when you suspect that an article is being written by the subject of the article? --Hecato (talk) 17:11, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Here's what I do: Go through the history of the page and see if the content that they've influenced has lost neutrality. If it has, that's enough evidence to raise the issue on their talk page. Leave them a cordial message saying that Wikipedia has a policy against undisclosed COI editing and that it is recommended that users do not edit their own article but request edits on the talk page of the article. Tag the affected article with NPOV tags if there's doubt, tag it with COI and AUTO tags if there's reasonable certainty. If they do not acknowledge the concerns and continue to edit the page, or engage in disruptive behaviour, report them at WP:COIN or WP:ANI.

No matter how far it goes later on, the first course of action is to bring it up with the user at their talk page, cordially. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 17:34, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. --Hecato (talk) 19:58, 13 July 2019 (UTC)