Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 37

< Wikipedia:Teahouse‎ | Questions
Archive 30 ← Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 Archive 39 Archive 40

Youtube Videos and Wikileaks ...

Questions regarding verifiability: What's the Wikipedia policy regarding Youtube Videos? Same question regarding blogs, does a blog written by the subject of a Wikipedia biography have any weight? Dgharmon (talk) 02:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Youtube videos and blogs are only useful as "primary sources", which means they can only be used as sources for what they directly say, not for sources meant to establish that what they say is "true". Sources which analyze statements for their veracity (as opposed to merely making them) are called "secondary sources" and are what are preferred for the bulk of information at Wikipedia. To put it in practical terms, a primary source like a blog can only be used to verify what the blog says. If I write a blog that says "The moon is made of green cheese", then you could use the blog as a source for saying that "Jayron32's blog states that the moon is made of green cheese", however you could NOT use as a source for the statement "The moon is made of green cheese". The former merely reports the fact of what the blog states, without analyzing it for veracity. The second statement would require a secondary source, such as a well respected journal, text book, magazine, or other similar source. Thus, a paper published in the journal Nature which stated that the moon was made of green cheese would be sufficient source, but not my blog. In summation, blogs and the like and other primary sources should only be used to report exactly what they say, but cannot be used to draw conclusions about what it means, or even if it is true or not. You need better sources for that. That's why many blogs have limited utility, because they mostly don't have any reputation for fact checking and editorial control. Does that make sense? There's more reading at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. --Jayron32 02:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
What about Wikileaks? It wasn't asked in the question but...I am a bit curious and never really thought about it. I guess because it's a primarily source you can't, but I do think there are some ways around with government sources? Or..maybe not? :) SarahStierch (talk) 03:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Again, it can be used to basically source quotes, but not to source the meaning of those quotes. That is, if some document is reproduced at Wikileaks, you can only use the document to verify what the document says, but not to analyze what it means, and even that is tough, because to say that any particular document released on Wikileaks is significant or "proves" something, you'd need a secondary source (like a newspaper or magazine or something) which says that it means that. Otherwise, there's not much to do with it, since analyzing a primary source (like a government memorandum) would be original research, which is not what we do at Wikipedia. We wait for others to analyze primary sources and report what they find, then we aggregate and report those findingins in our own words. That's basically what Wikipedia does: find stuff other people have already figured out and re-report it here. If no one figured something out before Wikipedia did, Wikipedia shouldn't be the first to report it, including the importance and meaning of government memoranda leaked through Wikileaks. --Jayron32 03:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

That was a quick response, one more thing, I've noticed defunct URLs in the references sections of some articles, is there a tool to automate finding them Dgharmon (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, we aim to please! Regarding dead links, the page Wikipedia:Link rot should be able to answer your questions. Toodles.--Jayron32 04:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Editing for first time

Hello, I am a Graduate Assistant (working on my MLIS) well our library is wanting to put together a pizzapedia night :) a night of pizza and editing wikipedia. Before i could have sworn i saw a category where there articles that needed to be edited, and I thought that would be a good way to start the whole editing or finding citations process. Anyone have helpful hints on how to get this done? Or will i just need to have everyone register with an account and do their own thing?

GASchustermanGA (talk) 23:19, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Shusterman. Yes there are a number of such categories.
Category:Articles with unsourced statements and Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit are two that may be if interest. Rich Farmbrough, 00:31, 21 August 2012 (UTC).
Hey SchustermanGA. I have many a "beerpedia" nites myself, though it isn't really anyone here except me and the Yuengling family. As far as your second question, Wikipedia has a basic "one person to an account" policy, so each person who wishes to use an account to edit needs to have their own personal account. However, you don't actually need an account, just a computer, though having an account does have its benefits. --Jayron32 01:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Reference problem

I was updating Stuart Broad Summer 2012 when I was using a reference which went wrong causing his personnel life getting put in the same section, can someone help? JohnWoodPack (talk) 19:08, 20 August 2012 (UTC)JohnWoodPack

Hi JohnWoodPack and welcome to the teahouse. I appreciate that you are helping Wikipedia. So the way to seperate the Personal Life section is to remove 1 equal sign (=) from the two sides of the section, so "===Personal life===" will become "==Personal life==" Again, thanks for contributing to an article. ~~Ebe123~~ → report 21:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Adding context

Hello! Looking to add some context for my page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Praescient_Analytics

any guidence on how to do this? The company's website would not be a reliable secondary source, I think. Please let me know some alternative ways I can expand on the subject for the lay person.

Thanks! ScottPraescient (talk) 15:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

More information would be good, and better evidence of WP:Notability, but I am not clear what context is required. I have left a qiuery on the article's talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 00:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC).

Creating an Article

Hello,

I am new to Wikipedia and was wondering how a company can go about creating an article on the site (similar to Pepsi or Facebook). Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You,

Jon 67.164.176.121 (talk) 16:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Currently, only registered editors can create articles. You can go to the signup page to register. Or you can stay unregistered, which is fine. The only way IP addresses can create articles are through the articles for creation process. An experienced editor will review your submission and will move the article or decline to. You can read Wikipedia:Your first article for more information on creating your first submission. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 17:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Jon, in response to "how a company can go about creating an article" there are quite a few issues around creating an article about yourself or your own company. Some of the key points are mentioned here. There is a lot of other information about editing with what we call a "conflict of interest" (COI) so please read up a little before you begin. Good luck! heather walls (talk) 20:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

how to cite when there are not references

My mother and aunt were session back up singers - there are really no online, book or journal citings. They kept records and there is a singer's union that will have it on file, but back up singers are not widely published. My page documenting their career was rejected because of lack of citings...any tips?Mollygilbert35 (talk) 15:09, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Apart from sourcing, they must be notable enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Notability (music) and Wikipedia:Notability (people) are the relevant notability standards in this case). For instance, did they perform on any famous records/albums? benzband (talk) 18:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello Molly, the thing about Wikipedia articles is that all of the information needs to be verifiable, and that there needs to be enough verifiable information to write an article about. The existance of most people is verifiable, for example, you can prove that I exist, and prove where I was born, what jobs I held, etc. However, there isn't much published information about my life beyond my vital statistics. Because there is very little verifiable information about me, I am not considered notable enough for an article. At Wikipedia, notability is determined by the amount of credible, published information about a person's life. So, if your mother and her sister have lots of writing about them already published, they may be notable enough for an article. If, however, all we have is union records and a few notes on album liner notes and things like that, but no one has written anything in-depth about their lives or careers, then they are probably not notable enough for an article. That isn't a slight against them, they may have been very good singers. However, we want to make sure that if we publish an article about a person, that it is accurate and we can trust what is written. If there isn't anything interesting or detailed about the lives and careers of these singers, then anything you write cannot be verified. That's the threshold for writing an article at Wikipedia. Good luck. I hope I answered any concerns you may have. If there is anything else I or anyone else can help you with, feel free to ask. --Jayron32 22:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

My article reads like an advertisement, can someone help me neutralize it please?

I'm trying to create an article that describes a certain body of cancer research, the development of a technology called "NanomAbs". There is an article already on the technology from which this one has branched, a page called "Antibody Drug Conjugates". The page I submitted, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/NanomAbs, definitely does sound like an advertisement as much as I tried for it not to. And I'm having a lot of trouble changing that. My best idea now is to incorporate even more references but I already cite 10 published scientific journal articles so I don't want to drown it. Please advise. Thanks.

Eli Mlaver (talk) 09:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I would say to just paraphrase to make it not seem like an advertisement. For example, "NanomAbs are a key feature of the pipeline of IMMUNE Pharmaceuticals, but other companies are developing ligand-conjugated lipidic or polymeric nanoparticles for cancer therapy including Merrimack and BIND" can become "NanomAbs have been made by IMMUNE Pharmaceuticals." The last part of the sentence seemed unessesary, and for another article. I hope you get what I mean. ~~Ebe123~~ → report 10:33, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Encyclopaedic style?

Hi!

This is my article İ am trying to publish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Caligola_(group)

First the sources were not accepted as it is about a group well known in central Europe and mz links are in german, and there are no secondary sources yet; now this is sorted out İ think but İ still have a problem with my style which is seen as too much of an essay. As İ am no native speaker İ don't know anymore what to change. İt would be nice if someone offered a little bit of help :-) And another thing - İ would like to change the name of the article from "Caligola (group)" to "Caligola (music project)" for this is the better description and the artists call themselves by this name. Thank you very much for your help! Andrea Schweinberger (talk) 08:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andrea, I moved the article to the requested name. Rich Farmbrough, 14:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC).

thanks a lot! maybe someone can tell me what exactly is wrong about my style?Andrea Schweinberger (talk) 15:00, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Uploading an image (specifically a company logo)

Thanks to Sarah Steirch for answering my initial question, but her answer has thrown up another one...

I have now sought and gained permission to upload a company logo alongside my description of a manufacturer (JK Lasers). Apparently it is available to download on their website - so is therefore freely available.

It is to appear in the same format as on this manufacturer's page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rofin-Sinar. Could someone tell me how I should go about uploading this image and linking it to the appropriate page. I am pretty new to Wikipedia and am finding the process somewhat baffling! Louise online (talk) 07:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Louise! Although company logos are copyrighted/trademarked/etc, you can upload a it as fair use for use in an article. First, make sure it's not to high resolution. You can upload the image at the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. Start the upload form, then follow the steps:
  • Step 1: Choose your file: select the file from your computer
  • Step 2: Describe your file: choose a descriptive name for the file (e.g. JK Lasers logo) without forgetting the file extension; then enter a description of the file in the box below.
  • Step 3: choose "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use" then follow the instructions:
    • Type the name of the article (JK Lasers, presumably) without the [[ ]] brackets or anything
    • Choose "This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc."
    • Fill in all the fields (enter the url where you downloaded the image as "source"; check the box labeled "This image will be shown as a primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the entity in question."; etc.)
  • And finally, upload!
Cheers, benzband (talk) 08:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Is this photo acceptable for use (rights)?

Greetings

I've been working on my first contribution, a bio of the security specialist Alec Muffett. The photo that I would like to use was taken by someone called Doc Searls, and is published under Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0). It is acceptable to use this photo as part of a Wikipedia submission?

Melodien (talk) 00:54, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Melodien and welcome to the Teahouse! (CC BY-SA 2.0) are acceptable submissions to Wikimedia Commons. Basically, you can distribute and remix the image in question, but you have to attribute the work to the original author or licensor and release it under the same license if you do remix it. You can read more about Creative Commons licenses over at Commons:Creative Commons copyright tags and Commons:Licensing, for a more general view on licensing on Wikimedia Commons. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 01:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Luke. I've have uploaded the photo to Wikimedia Commons, filled in all the copyright details, and added the picture to my article. Could I ask you to have a look, and tell me if what I have done is correct? If so, I would like to publish the article.

Melodien (talk) 01:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I looked over the file, and everything looks great. Good work! -- Luke (Talk) 02:30, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Here goes my first attempt at publishing an article. Melodien (talk) 07:25, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Changing the Wikipedia logo in the top left hand corner to something else on our talk pages

Hi all, I would like to know how to change the Wikipedia logo on my user page and talk page to things such as a national flag etc. An example of what I am asking is the talk page of the user 'HJ Mitchell'. Please kindly note that this is not a personal attack. Thanks for your assistance(whoever you are)! :) Arctic Kangaroo (talk) 14:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi there! Welcome to the Teahouse. I clicked the "Edit" tab at top of User:HJ Mitchell and saw this code:
<div style="position: fixed; top: 18px; left: 0; transparency: 1; z-index: 100;">[[File:Flag of England.svg|160px]]</div>
You can copy the code but replace the file name. If your chosen image has another width to height ratio than File:Flag of England.svg then another width than 160px may look better. The code works when you hit the "Show preview" button so it's easy to experiment. The image is placed on top of the existing logo. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
My talk page also has the same sort of coding, you can have a look at that if you like and adapt it. Make sure to put it at the top of the edit box, or it will get archived! Rcsprinter (babble) @ 19:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your assistance, once again! :D Arctic Kangaroo (talk) 14:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Publishing information box alongside an article

I have just published my first article about a laser manufacturer (JK Lasers). I have noticed that another laser manufacturer has a side bar with details such as turnover, key staff, its website and logo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rofin-Sinar). How do I add this to my article? Louise online (talk) 11:23, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Louise! Welcome to Wikipedia and congratulations on your first article. When I was first figuring things out, I figured out the best thing I could do to add content to my Wikipedia articles - just copy and paste! :) So, go to the article that you shared, for Rofin-Sinar, and click the "Edit" button at the top of the page. Then, at the top of the edit box (where the wikitext is) you'll see this:
 {{Infobox company
 | name             = Rofin Sinar Technologies Inc.
 | logo             = [[Image:Rofin Logo.svg|200px]]
 | type             = [http://quotes.nasdaq.com/asp/SummaryQuote.asp?symbol=RSTI&selected=RSTI Public - NASDAQ:RSTI]
 | [[ISIN]]         = US7750431022
 | foundation       = 1975
 | location      = [[Plymouth, Michigan]], [[United States]]
 | area_served      = Worldwide
 | key_people       = Günther Braun (CEO), Ingrid Mittelstädt (CFO)
 | industry         = Industrial Lasers
 | revenue        = {{Increase}} US$ 597,763 million (2011)
 | net_income        = {{Increase}} US$ 60 million (2011)
 | num_employees    = 2,108 (2011)
 | homepage         = [http://www.rofin.com rofin.com]
 |footnotes        =<ref name="form 10-k">{{cite web |url=http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312511032930/d10k.htm |title=Form 10-K |author=U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission |authorlink=U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission |year=2011 |publisher=United States of America |location=Washington, D.C. |at=Part II, Item 6 |accessdate=April 24, 2012}}</ref>
}}
Copy and paste that into your own article, at the top of your article. Then, just replace the information and delete anything that doesn't belong. Feel free to let us know when you've given it a go and we can review it. Congratulations! What do you want to edit next? :) SarahStierch (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey, you could use <pre style="overflow:auto"> … </pre> instead to avoid bulging out the side of the page ;) benzband (talk) 08:23, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I've been working on an article and I was using the same source several times so I condensed the source but now the actual link has disappeared and I can't make it "clickable". Any suggestions? MissJulie 79 (talk) 20:25, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Miss Julie. If I am understanding your question, I think I fixed it. You were missing "url="
Did my edit accomplish what you wanted?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:09, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

No the reference links at the bottom are still not clickable. Where do you add the "url="?MissJulie 79 (talk) 22:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

You also need to physically make a link clickable. Either use a citation template inside the reference tag which will auto-link for you, or put things in brackets like you would to make a link anywhere else: [[this would normally be a link]] Banaticus (talk) 01:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps I forgot to save my fixes. I tried again.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 11:44, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello Miss Julie and welcome to the Teahouse! To create a link, go to an article's edit page and on the top you will see buttons like Bold or Italic. You will see a small chain-like button and when you put your mouse over it it will say Link. Click on it. A message will appear asking the URL of your link. Copy and paste the URL from the website and click "To an external webpage." Click Insert Link and you should see it on the page you added a link to. I hoped this helped and I understood your question. sophie (talk) 20:16, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

baby death

I am looking for similar cases I can relate to66.159.117.20 (talk) 02:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

If you're looking for information and references on a topic, the best place at Wikipedia to find them is at Wikipedia:Reference desk. However, please be more detailed in your question when you ask it there, because it will help people to provide answers for you. --Jayron32 05:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Dissappearing help question

I was at the Help Desk already about creating a article. When I go to My Talk, it says that I have a reply to my post, but when I go to the Help Desk, my post was gone! And I really want to see the replies being that I haven't sorted out the whole 'navigation of Wikipedia' yet... Thanks! SweetandSadistic (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Hey Sweet, and welcome to The Teahouse. Don't worry, your post isn't gone. The Help Desk has a habit of getting backlogged with questions, so topics quickly get archived so as to limit the number of topics on a page at a one time. You can find your question in the archive here. In the future, you can search for the topic or your username to find your posts on the help desk main page. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 23:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Stubs

Where can i find a list of stubs that i can start work on?

canobasebalk Canobasebalk (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Canobasebalk! It depends on what you're interested in. For example, if you want to work on fantasy stubs, you would go to Category:Fantasy stubs. I'm glad to see you have an interest in expanding Wikipedia. Brambleberry of RiverClanmeow 18:40, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Canobasebalk, hi and welcome to the Teahouse. There are a couple of places to start Category:Stub categories contains a list of the 11039(!) various stub categories - pick a subject that interests you and go from there. Alternatively you can find a similar list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types. NtheP (talk) 18:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you User:Brambleberry of RiverClan and User:Nthep — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canobasebalk (talk • contribs) 18:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Template question

I noticed that in some templates there are {{#: }} things (e.g. {{#if: {{{1|}}}| 1 |}}). I know there are more than "#if", for example there's also "#switch", "#ifexist" etc." Can someone explain all of the {{#: }}s to me and what they do? thanks Koopatrev (talk) 15:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Koopatrev. They are called parser functions. You can read about them at Help:Magic words#Parser functions with more details at the first two links there. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:10, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Created article but can't view progress

Hello,

I submitted a new article a week ago via my SandBox, and at the time, it said I was number "793" in line. How do I check the current progress of the article?

Thanks! Matt Mattpbuzz (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mattpbuzz. Welcome to the Teahouse. If you click the "My sandbox" link at top of pages then you go into edit mode for your sandbox. To see how the sandbox looks, click either the "User page" tab at top to see User:Mattpbuzz/sandbox, or click the "Show preview" button below the edit box if you have made changes and not saved them yet. As you can see, the submission was unfortunately declined because it is not adequately supported by reliable sources. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) or Wikipedia:Notability (web) for conditions you should try to satisfy. I don't know whether reliable independent sources have written enough about PollBuzzer to satisfy Wikipedia's requirements. Most companies and websites do not satisfy them. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Examples and standards

I tried to publish a article about the history of my high school. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Ho%C3%ABrskool_Voortrekker

It is now rejected for the 3rd time. The first two rejections was a result of lack of reference and the third for it being too much like an advertisement. Why don't the editors highlight the statement(s) sentences that results in the rejection so that it can be referenced rewritten or deleted. To make sure that my article meet a certain standard I randomly looked up school in Australia,United Kingdom, South Africa and the USA. All the school have the same basic outline, history, alumni, location colour and songs. In my subjective opinion the articles are plus minus of the same standard. How do you get published, is it a question of resubmitting until you get lucky wit a editor? Pduplessis1 (talk) 12:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Pduplessis1! There are some difficulties about the AfC process, but at a glance the place that needs adjusting is the section on Nobby's Bar. I have raised a query on whether this is enough reason to prevent the article going live, on the talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 13:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC).

Thank you, this is helpful. Nobby Bar is not in existence anymore and I make the changes accordingly

New place

How to create a wikepedia page for a new place? Sushilp66 (talk) 10:18, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello Sushilp66! Welcome to Wikipedia! Creating new articles is covered at the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:Your first article. The short-short version is:
  1. Make sure the article doesn't already exist under another name
  2. Gather reliable sources you can use for the information you intend to use in creating the article. (don't skip this step. It is by far the most important part of creating an article)
  3. Create the article using the information you gathered, being sure to cite the sources where you found the information.
That's it! Wikipedia articles don't need to be perfect as soon as they are created, but they do need to be about subjects where there is enough good reliable information that can be verified in reliable sources. Good luck, and if you need more help, please feel free to ask. --Jayron32 12:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm writing a new article...

I'm trying translating an article in my sandbox, but it may take a few hours. I'm afraid that somebody may translate the same article as they don't know I'm doing so. What should I do to avoid this?Professorjohnas (talk) 04:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Hey Professor, welcome to The Teahouse. I think one way to let others know you are translating the page is to leave a note on the article's talk page. If it's an article that gets a lot of attention, it will be seen. If not, well, you probably don't have to worry about someone else translating the article. What article are you translating, and is it from another-language Wikipedia? I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 08:01, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Haha, don't call me Professor. It's just a stupid name:) Indeed I'm a Chinese Wikipedian and I'm translating an article from English to Chinese. As it's easier to seek help, I ask the question here instead of doing so on the Chinese Wikipedia. The article is Culture of Singapore, in Chinese zh:新加坡文化. Professorjohnas (talk) 08:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Nearly forget to thank for you help XDD=) Professorjohnas (talk) 08:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Anytime! I should also note that whenever you post your translation to the English Wikipedia, you might also want to make sure you note that you post this this template with appropriate info on the talk page on the English Wikipedia version. This will establish what version of the article on the Chinese Wikipedia you used to do your English translation. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 08:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Indeed I'm translating from English to Chinese. But thank for you reminder as I have to do so on the Chinese Wikipedia. Professorjohnas (talk) 08:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Reply for sandbox submission

After preparing my first article in my sandbox, I clicked on the following command:

"If you are writing an article, and are ready to request its creation, click here."

It is not clear to me what happens next. Can I expect notification of a reply to appear fairly soon when I log on to my user page? Oldhegelian (talk) 14:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Hey Oldhegelian, welcome to The Teahouse. I checked out your sandbox, and it doesn't look like your article has been submitted yet. When you click that link ("if you are writing an article..."), it takes you to an edit page with some stuff you'll need save to your page. It won't erase your article though, it'll just tack on a section to the bottom that indicates that your article has been submitted into a to-be-checked list. So, you'll need to do that first before it gets checked. I've been told that the Articles for Creation page is pretty backed up, so you might need to wait a week before you hear back. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 16:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
I did the same and the box has been added at the bottom but it also throws a warning and I don't know what the warnings means

the warning text is "Warning: This page should probably be located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox (move)." The Stub is in my sandbox can you explain this warning further to me? thanks Fox2k11 (talk) 20:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Fox2k11, hi and thanks for stopping by. All the message is saying is that at some point your draft article needs to be moved from it's current location in your sandbox to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jessica Nicole Ghawi. I've made this move for you so now the draft is sat in the queue of articles awaiting review. You can carry on working on it at any time you want. NtheP (talk) 21:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thanks for your help I appreciate it Fox2k11 (talk) 21:31, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Why you moved it to the talk section and not in the "project page"? Fox2k11 (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Help for a user

User:Telecineguy has been around for quite a while but still does not seem to grasp some basic Wikipedia concepts. See for example User talk:Telecineguy#Your actions have been brought up at the Administrators notice board. Can someone perhaps help guide him? -- The Red Pen of Doom 23:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

needing assistance

I submitted a one-page Wikipedia page and was denied, so wondering if there is someone who can help this novice?99.63.169.2 (talk) 19:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Advice

Hi! I just need some guidance on what to do.

An established COI editor (User talk:BIT2012) has been editing Bethel University (Tennessee) and I have been watching the progress of the info that is being re-added as an earlier version had serious promotional and copyvio issues.

Now, I just left note on the editor's talk page that the info (from the "current president" section) was a copyvio from the university website and asked if it could be reworded. The info was re-added, slightly altered, but I don't think just shifting around the order of phrases clears the issue as it is not totally reworded or put into one's own words (or am I just too nitpicky?).

I just want a third party, uninvolved opinion on how to proceed.

Thanks, LlamaDude78 (talk) 19:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey LlamaDude, thanks for coming back to The Teahouse. Dealing with COIs is sometimes not that straightforward. As you suspected, simply switching around phrases in a different order is not good enough to avoid issues of copyright violation. If the editor fails to comply, you can either 1) Attempt to reword the section yourself, or 2) Remove the infringing material. If there is continued disagreement over content, you might want to formally request a third opinion from an uninvolved editor regarding the specifics of the content. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 19:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree that it's a copyvio of this page, I've removed it and put a single sentence in instead. Copyvio or not, to me the section as it stood was too much about Dr Prosser's biography. NtheP (talk) 20:00, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Articles_for_creation/Peopleperhour

Hi there, I've been working on an entry for PeoplePerHour - one of the references I'm using is from the Financial Times, so before I submit to Articles for Creation I wanted to check that I'd noted correctly that a subscription may be required to review this reference?

Also, I want to make sure that I've got it right in terms of notability of the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Peopleperhour

G2003 (talk) 15:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi G2003, i have formatted the references and the {{subscription required}} template. To determine whether or not the subject is notable, this may help. benzband (talk) 15:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi there G2003 :) (Ben: I made a minor fix and moved the template to the end of the relevant reference: outside of the final two brackets in the citation template and before the </ref> tag.) Now, as to notability...well, I'll be honest. I wouldn't accept the article, as it is. Your current references aren't bad at all, but they also aren't enough. First, note that the last sentence is not really necessary. That material should go into an article about freelance markets, not Peopleperhour. I can't see the FT article, of course, so I'm going on the other three sources. The first ref doesn't really tell much about the actual company, other than a glowing sentence one might see in a brochure. The second is better, but the third is extremely short. Unless the FT is a really in-depth look at the company, I don't see how those sources constitute significant coverage in multiple independent sources. I hope this helped somewhat -- Nolelover Talk·Contribs 15:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Bear in mind also that The Mirror (your meatiest online article) seem to be a sponsor of PPH, so I would question whether they are truly presenting news, or simply promoting the product. Sionk (talk) 16:00, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, that's really useful - think I'll need to put this on hold until I can source some additional reference material. G2003 (talk) 16:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

How can I put one table next to another?

I have two tables in this article section: Catalan_grammar#Definite. By default, tables are placed one below the other. I would like to place them one next to the other, to save place. I tried to nest them, but I couldn't. How can I do it? Thank youFauban 12:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, that's an interesting one. I'm not even sure if tables can be placed next to each other but I've copied the tables to my secondary sandbox where I'll tinker with it. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 13:31, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I removed a space between the tables, which did nothing, and left just one space (no new lines) between each table, which broke the second table. I'm sorry I couldn't help you. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 13:39, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I forced it using {{div col}}. [1] benzband (talk) 14:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
There's still a problem though, in that the title of the second table is split (below the first table and above the second table). A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 14:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Fixed. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 14:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!!--Fauban 14:24, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

How do I find an Editor who is an expert in helping me to write the biography of a successful businesman?

I recently wrote a lengthy biography of a very noteworthy businessman about whom little has appeared in any form of print thus far. His career has spanned 45 years of action and activities, including many praiseworthy successes in a wide number of fields. The difficulty is finding references for him. I sent the unreferenced article into Wiki (entitled "Robert Sandford Stewart") and received a curt rejection from DGG without any offer of help. DGG or David Goodman lambasted the article as "puffery" and "promotion". I pleaded that we needed reference material and asked for his help, not his condemnation and violant rejection. He proceded to thrash both Mr. Stewart and my efforts as frivolous. I asked five times if he would send just one example of a biography of a similar businessman, as he said "he had written hundreds". He refused to send one, after repeated efforts to seek a benchmark and how one goes about finding reference material. I am dealing with a man who exposed the discovery of AIDS to the world in 1980 and helped in funding solutions by setting up Global Funds Fighting AIDS with contributions over $50 billion. He also introduced the greatest single invention in modern telecommmunications (VoIP) in global long distance telecoms. And yet, he works quietly, without fanfare and no public attention. David Goodman continues to trash him as someone not worth writing about for Wikipedia. I believe DGG may harbour serious academic preferences and violently dislikes businessmen, thus is being extremely unco-operative and very unhelpful. He is the quintissential academic librarian who lives in his bubble and doesn't recognize the contributions made by other non-academics who rise miles above his station, but without printed references or public fanfare. How do I find another editor, or someone who can help with routing out references on people with small egos yet substantial contributions to humanity? Dawlatbaba (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Dawlat Baba. 13:41 CET 22 August 2012Dawlatbaba (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello Dawlat, sorry that you are having problems getting an article written. One major problem you are likely to run into is when you say "about whom little has appeared in any form of print thus far". You see, Wikipedia articles need to be built on reliable sources. Anything written at Wikipedia needs to be cited to earlier sources. If a subject is not written about elsewhere, it shouldn't be written about at Wikipedia. The inclusion criteria at Wikipedia is known as the general notability guideline (GNG) and what the GNG says, in a nutshell, is "unless other people have written extensively about a subject first, Wikipedia shouldn't either." That's because Wikipedia's own reliability depends on the reliability of the information we host here, and that means that ultimately it requires the information written here to be verifiable. If we can't verify what is written about, then we can't know if what is written about someone is true or not; and that is a real problem. So, we first require that there exists enough source material about what we write before we write about it. These standards are not based on the quality of a person's character, or how rich they are, or how successful they are, it is merely based on what sort of information we could find about their lives in order to build a Wikipedia article using that info. If the information doesn't exist first (as you imply) then the Wikipedia article shouldn't exist either, because how can we trust what is written in it if we can't check on the sources? Does that all make sense? --Jayron32 12:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello, Dawlatbaba, and welcome to the Teahouse! It seems that the reason that your submission was rejected was because it did not adhere to a neutral point of view; specifically that it presented a positive view of the subject. I don't see DGG "[lambasting] the article" or "[trashing the subject] as someone not worth writing about for Wikipedia" but inviting you to improve the article so it does meet requirements. Unfortunately, I don't really have the time to write articles, but I'm sure someone else can come along and help you with it. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello to all of you, including David Goodman. None of you are answering the question: How does one find references on a difficult subject person for whom little has been written? I asked for a similar biography showing references as a guide to how these may be unearthed. No one has replied to that. Your arguments are all fair about needing references. I agree. Now how does a non-professional biographer find them? I am not wildly endowed with funds to travel the world as the subject did, digging up hundreds of references for all of his accomplishments, but I do know that he contributed them, in substance, in material and in the absolute reality that they exist for millions of people and without his inputs, they wouldn't be there. He just didn't have an ego or or a biographer recording them every time with words.

It leads me and many successful people like Mr. Stewart to want to scream from the rooftops that "Action speaks louder than Words" as a sufficient benchmark in life. That separates those whose contribution to the lives of others can be judged by more than just "words". We are struggling with the age old academic notion that "publish or perish" contributes anything to civilization. We have all met people who have sat in their university ivory towers or libraries all their lives writing books and thousands of articles about which no one reads or is interested. Yet there are people who invent, initiate, contribute, invest, introduce, connect and improve the lives of millions of people in one action in their lives, for whom nothing is written.

I am asking for the last time: How do we reference and verify these people so that their lives can be even more useful by exposing their rich contributions to the advancement of civilization? Please give specific examples, not more words of palaver that fail to address the question. This is a legitimate concern for many people. I am not alone.

Otherwise you are creating an obstacle for the advancement of learning and the spread of useful information by restricting it to purely academic treatises about "references" in which most people have little or no interest. 99.9999% of the human race are not editors at Wikipedia. But many people use these pages to learn from others who are more successful or knowledgeable than them. Why create barriers and roadblocks to opening up your resources and allow others to read about successful business people (and their amateur biographers) who don't know how to acquire these strict academic codes? A person's worth and contribution to knowledge is not how many references he acquires in his lifetime, but how many actions he contributes that genuinely improve the lives of others. For the last time: Help! Dawlat Baba 15:08 CET 21 August 2012

Finding references is a bit of a skill, like anything else, and it takes some practice using availible online tools to do so. Google is a wonderful tool, but it takes some practice to know how to use it well. You could just use the main Google front page to search for the person's name, but that tends to turn up lots of unusable stuff (lots of webpages that aren't necessarily good references for Wikipedia, false positives, etc.) At the top of Google is a black bar that contains lots of good ways to modify your searches to be more useful. The best ones I have found most useful are "News" (which searches newspaper archives even back to before the internet existed!), "Books" (found under the "More" tab) which searches the millions of scanned books that Google has in its library, and "Scholar" (under the "More" tab, click "Even more" then page down to the Specialized Search function) which searches peer-reviewed scholarly journals and things like that. For business people, there is a tool called "Finance", which is under the "More" tab, and which is a modified version of the "News" search, but confined to finance and business. That may help. If you know the person directly, you could try asking them if they have an archive of anything written about them: very few people are so lacking in vanity that they have no recollection of any actual writing done about them. They may be able to set you onto some sources. Even if you've never met the person, if you can email them, and explain that you're trying to write a biography of them and are looking for published information, they may be able to provide stuff. You can try any and all of these methods. I hope that helps you exhaust all avenues of research. It is a noble and wonderful thing to wish to contribute to Wikipedia, but it is hard work to do it well, and you should be commended for trying to undertake it properly. Be prepared for the possibility that the sources may not exist, but if they do, I wish you nothing but success in finding them. --Jayron32 14:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Dawlatbaba, welcome to editing Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions (section)! In answer to your request for an example of a biography of a similar businessman, Dan Borislow would suit. Like Stewart, his business career has been mainly in the second half of the twentieth century, and like Stewart, he's been involved with VoIP. The Borislow article is one of Wikipedia's "Good Articles", so it's a good model to follow in terms of language use, tone, neutrality, and supportive referencing.
I will mention briefly that notability on Wikipedia does not demand the existence of printed sources; web sources are also acceptable, provided that they are reliable, independent, and provide significant coverage of the subject.
Finally, I think you should tone down your comments about other editors and their perceived motivations, biases or behaviours, as continuing in that vein is likely to cause you a little trouble while editing here. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 05:47, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Resubmitting an article that was rejected

Hi, My article did not have enough valid sources. I clicked "edit" and added sources for most sentences, but when I click "save" my changes are not appearing and I can't tell if it's been resubmitted for another review. This is the page

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hope for the Hills Dwuebben (talk) 05:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Dwuebben, welcome to the Teahouse. It's just a small formatting error. The last set of references you entered as <ref reference text</ref/> so they didn't show up as the software wasn't detecting them. The correct format is <ref>reference text</ref>. I've changed them but you might want to check that they are now correct. NtheP (talk) 07:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

First article, short, would like feedback

Hi to all the hosts at Teahouse!

I was referred here by friend-of-a-friend and veteran wiki user Voceditenore, in the hopes that I could get some much needed feedback from the experts, before my first article goes live later this week.

Some specific concerns:

  • Is my language not objective enough, as I found no relevant negative information on the subject?
  • Should I take the time to interlink every single artist name (it is a recording studio with a long list of known artists)?

Thanks for what you do here, and I hope to hear back soon! Warm regards, Ace6255 (talk) 15:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Just FYI: the article is at User:Ace6255/sandbox Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ace! Thanks for writing an article and coming to the Teahouse. For a quick start, I would remove words like "boasts", just keep it plain and simple to defend your neutrality. You also need to reference your information, two of the sources in your notes can be used for that (not Smash's own website, and not Youtube). That long list of sponsorships can probably be reduced to a select half a dozen. Maybe make a few changes and hosts can comment again? heather walls (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
The verb "boasts" is inherently promotional, and should be avoided.
There is too much peacockery; and too much about "globally renown" musicians and the like who have been their customers, or companies which are their sponsors. I have sold books to Tony Danza, Tony Bennett, Charlton Heston and William Rehnquist: that doesn't give me any of their renown, because notability is not contagious.
Mere mentions in publications don't satisfy our standards of substantial coverage. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Heather and Mike, thank you kindly for your suggestions. I have taken them to heart, and made changes to the article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Smash Studios. A new concern of mine is my trouble in submitting the article for review. I am receiving contradicting messages at the top and bottom of the page. I am sure you both see many situations like these, so any suggestions in how to simply submit the article for review would be very appreciated. Thanks again!Ace6255 (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi there Ace: can you clarify on how you are having trouble submitting your article for review? What contradictory messages are you referring to? In the red box at the top, click the link in the sentence "When you are ready to resubmit, click here." Then, save that page, and your submission should be added to the queue. Does this help? (Note that I wouldn't advise resubmitting until you have some more reliable sources though.) Nolelover Talk·Contribs 16:01, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

problem with multiple articles

I found a problem with two articles that are linked to each other but they are incorrect.

The article on the Fries's Rebellion <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fries%27s_Rebellion> is linked to Millerstown, Pennsylvania <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millerstown,_Pennsylvania> The problem is, this is the wrong Millerstown.

The Fries Rebellion article should be linked to Macungie, Pennsylvania <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macungie,_Pennsylvania>. Macungie changed it's name from Millerstown to avoid confusion with the Millerstown in question.

Anyway, the articles in question were changed on Aug 12 2012 by a ElkanahTingley. I tried to undo the edits that were incorrect but the system says: "The edit could not be undone due to conflicting intermediate edits; if you wish to undo the change, it must be done manually."

I know next to nothing about editing, but want the articles fixed.

Can anyone help? 128.103.251.161 (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello, 128.103.251.161, and welcome to the Teahouse! The Fries's Rebellion page is completely open to editing by anyone, but I have made the edit and changed the text to "Macungie, then known as Millerstown..." to prevent confusion. Next time, just change the text by itself and disregard the [[square brackets]] around it, as they are links. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 16:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

citing personal interviews

How do you cite personal interviews, if you know the person about whom you are writing and have gotten information from him/her? KMORGAN125 (talk) 15:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello KMORGAN. Thanks for stopping by again. The answer is, for Wikipedia, you cannot. An unpublished personal interview is not a reliable source. Interviews which have been published in a reliable source (as ennumerated at the page Wikipedia:Reliable sources would be cited as any other source is, but you cannot merely use information you got from asking somebody questions yourself which cannot be verified in a source which has already been published and which has a reputation for reliability. That is because we want all information at Wikipedia to be easily verifiable, and people can't verify information from an unpublished interview. Does that help? --Jayron32 16:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

posting a first article

How do I create a page for a new article? KMORGAN125 (talk) 12:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello KMORGAN125! I'm glad to see you interested in contributing to Wikipedia. Creating new articles is covered at the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:Your first article. The short-short version is:
  1. Make sure the article doesn't already exist under another name
  2. Gather reliable sources you can use for the information you intend to use in creating the article. (don't skip this step. It is by far the most important part of creating an article)
  3. Create the article using the information you gathered, being sure to cite the sources where you found the information.
  4. If you are asking about the technical method of creating a new page, the way to do that is to type the name of the page in the Search box above. If an article doesn't already exist, you can create it by clicking the red word in the sentence "You may create the page "NEWPAGENAME", but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered." that appears on the search page when you perform a search.
That's it! Wikipedia articles don't need to be perfect as soon as they are created, but they do need to be about subjects where there is enough good reliable information that can be verified in reliable sources. Good luck, and if you need more help, please feel free to ask. --Jayron32 12:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I cannot find out any detail about why my recently submitted text for a new Wikipedia subject, Lynch Architects, was rejected?

The submitted new text for Lynch Architects was apparently rejected because of uncertainty about sources. But the sources (all given links) are very straightforwardly factual, so I'm puzzled about this as a reason for rejection. When I attempted to link to the Wikipedia editor involved, I got a "not available" message. I can find no way to re-open the subject with Wikipedia for editing purposes, no obvious way for me to find out exactly why this potential Wikipedia subject entry was rejected, and therefore no way for me to make suitable adjustments to the text.

How can I find out how to make the text acceptable?

Jay Merrick

Jay Merrick (talk) 11:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Jay! Welcome to the Teahouse! The reviewer of your article submission, David FLXD, left a note: "There are far too many of the sources originating from the subject of the article, and far too few independent sources. The one statement that would clearly have verified notability has a reference which does nothing to support it." In a nutshell, he's recommending that you add more independent sources to the article, and then resubmit it. Does this help? Theopolisme :) 11:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

What to do about section blanking?

Hi there!

A couple of users (one registered, one IP) have blanked sections from the article on Human Terrain System recently - once in the last few days, and once about 2 weeks ago. I reverted the edits both times, but what else should I (or someone else) be doing about this? I'm assuming this probably does count as vandalism, but I know that's a much debated term so wanted to check before I jumped to any conclusions... And even then, I don't really know what the proper process if for dealing with it...

Thank you!

Lorelei (talk) 21:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Lorelei,
Good question.
Section blanking is often an innocent error, although that doesn't seem likely in this case. However, it is an extremely new edit (only five edits) who hasn't been welcomed, so my suggestion is to AGF, add a welcome, and urge the editor to use both edit summaries and the talk page. Maybe there's a reason the editor thinks that section and images don;t belong. They don;t get to make that call by themselves, but again, they don't know how this place works, so maybe they think they are supposed to edit however they wish and someone else is supposed to ask them about it.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Lorelei! Indeed, unexplained or bad-faith blanking of content can be considered vandalism. As well as reverting, you could approach the user who performed those edits by leaving a note on their talkpage (if you don't know what to say maybe use {{subst:uw-delete1}}). Just relax, be civil, assume good faith, and you'll stay on top of things for sure ;-) benzband (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Brilliant - thank you both! Have done as yous suggested and left a welcome and a friendly explanation. Teahouse is so brilliant - thank you for responding so quickly and helpfully :) Lorelei (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Help on a File!

Hello

I have a Question the file i uploaded (File:Jessica Nicole Ghawi.jpg) has Been taged because it lacks evidence of Permissions the Picture is a handout picture for the media and is widely used on many news sites I sourced the file correctly however i don't have an evidence of permission so what can i do to keep the file in the english wiki? I believe the image meets WP:NFC or Wikipedia:Publicity photos it's also not possible to obtain a Free image since the person depicted in the image is deceased! so what can i do? Thanks =) Fox2k11 (talk) 19:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

It is often assumed heatthat files provided as handouts for the media can be freely used. This is rarely the case. Such files often are intended for use by "legitimate" media, who expect a one-time use and a credit, but we require a free license which is often inconsistent with their licensing. The right thing to do is what you did, fill out a non-free rationale; I have no opinion on whether it will succeed.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
thank you for your reply I came along many news sites covering a news article about this person and saw various credits (most i have seen was a credits for the AP or Reuters) so yes the best i could do was to add a non-free rationale obtaining a free image would be tough (or even impossible) --Fox2k11 (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_37&oldid=1146466639"