Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 396

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 390

←

Archive 394

→

Add image

Hi, I uploaded an image (free image, a photo I took) on Wikimedia Commons. I'm attempting to add it to the article Stephanie Bond (author), I copied and inserted the file name, selected alignment,etc. but when I click to "insert", nothing happens. Southerngal23 (talk) 16:41, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Southerngal23 - You haven't saved any attempt to alter Stephanie Bond (author) since 5 May 2015, so we cannot see, and therefore cannot comment on, what you might be doing wrong
Please note that image file names are both case and space sensitive, so you must copy it exactly. - Arjayay (talk) 16:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Arjayay, I copied it exactly from Wikimedia....it simply won't insert,

nothing happens, the box just sits there. Do I need to place the cursor in a specific location?Thanks Southerngal23 (talk) 16:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what "box" you are referring to. Please save what you are trying to add, so we can see what you are trying to do - Arjayay (talk) 17:02, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I note there is no User:Southerngal23 on commons, as seen here, so I can't find your uploaded file - Arjayay (talk) 17:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Southerngal23, I see the image now, so it looked like it worked this time.--S Philbrick (Talk) 17:08, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

@Southerngal23:, at some time you might want to including an infobox. One that seems appropriate for this article is: {{Infobox writer}}. You might look at a different article about an writer to see how it is used. For example, see A. A. Milne--S Philbrick (Talk) 17:13, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, S PHILBRICK...yes, I had to add it the old fashioned way. I definitely want to add the infobox so I will check your link. Thanks! Southerngal23 (talk) 17:20, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia suffering a bug?

Today when I logged on to edit off my mobile device, the entire format of the site appears changed. No 'pencil' appears to allow me to edit any article; to get the edit window I had to go to desktop view, which is much more difficult to read on a small screen. Also, rather than being able to open up sections at will, they are all opened all the time. What is this?White Arabian mare (Neigh) 15:29, 4 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

Hi White Arabian mare. It's a known issue discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 140#Watchlist stars and section buttons missing on mobile and phab:T114599. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:13, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Primehunter. Hopefully it will be fixed soon; several people at the Village Pump have commented on the trouble they're having with it.White Arabian mare (Neigh) 17:42, 4 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

Year of Birth and Death of people mentioned in articles

I was checking the contributions of an account banned for non-constructive edits. One of the things the user was doing was adding years of birth and death after the names of people mentioned in articles that are not about that person. I can't find anything in the MOS regarding that, so I'm not sure whether to remove them or not.

My feeling is that they're out of place in the body of an article - it's not information about the subject itself. For example, someone reading about a building doesn't need to know when the architect died, or if they do, can click through to the architect's page, if one exists. If a page doesn't exist, is the dates of birth and death really that relevant?

Just after opinions: I've been away from wikipedia for a while, trying to get back into it now.

Rich^(Contribs)/_{(Talk to me!)} 02:39, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, RoadieRich. I agree with you. In general, an article should not include birth and death dates immediately after the mention of a person, unless that person is the subject of the article. It may sometimes be appropriate to mention such information in a chronological context. For example, the subject of the article married his wife (name) in this year, and their daughter (name) was born in that year. Otherwise, I would support removing such factoids from articles. If any other editor objects, discuss the matter on the article's talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:18, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Whilst agreeing with User:Cullen328 for most articles, I can see some (limited) merit in adding an architect's, or other designer/artist's, life-span, especially if they do NOT have an article, as it allows the reader a quick assessment of whether this design was in their early, middle, or late career. One specific exception I would add is in lists, be they stand alone lists or lists in articles, many such lists include the DoB and sort the entries accordingly - Arjayay (talk) 16:26, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

In articles on historical events, particularly events that took place several hundred years ago or more, indicating a person's life span or perhaps death date may in some cases add context to the events being described, particularly when the person mentioned is significant to the events but does not have an article, so the user can't simply click and get this info. As with the inclusion of other info, this is a judgement call and no one answer fits all cases. DES ^(talk) 17:46, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

In such limited cases, a reference to a reliable source should be provided that verifies the dates. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:19, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Resolution for "The neutrality of this article is disputed"

Hi,

Would someone help me resolve the "The neutrality of this article is disputed" issue that keeps popping up in some pages. I am working on Odisha page and would like to resolve the pending issues. I am unaware as to what should be done to resolve the same.

Thanks in Advance and Happy Editing.. Sanket Edits Wiki (talk) 14:08, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Sanket Edits Wiki, and welcome to the Teahouse. You appear to have come across a maintenance tag: users can add these to articles if they think they have found a problem, which will hopefully encourage other users to fix the problem. The tag says it was added in September 2013. Usually, users should write messages on the talk page of an article to explain why they put the tag there if it is unclear, but I cannot find any place where the neutrality tag was explained. Anyone can remove these messages by removing some code at the top of the page (in this case, {{POV|date=September 2013}}) if they do not think the issue is still present. However, at the moment I am writing this, it appears that GrammarFascist is currently making some changes to the article so it may be best to wait until they are finished before editing the article yourself. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 15:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Bilorv, as sometimes happens I went to the article for one purpose (to prepare to answer Sanket Edits Wiki's question) and got distracted by grammar in need of fixing.

Sanket Edits Wiki, the neutrality tag seems to have been put on in relation to whether the article title and text should say Odisha or Orissa. Going by the archived talk page conversations, this was quite contentious for a while after the name of the state was changed legally, but the edit warring seems to have died down since the page move (renaming) finally happened. The recent history of the article shows no sign of the dispute, though one user does keep putting mention of Telangana in as bordering on Odisha. (My reading of the map suggests this is not really accurate, so I removed the mention again.) As for the additional-citations-needed tag, I have not evaluated the article for that, but I have noticed that there are many sources cited in the article. Some of them may not be reliable sources, and there may be some facts stated in the article that need citations.

On a related note, Fuhghettaboutit has discovered that there may be some plagiarized content in the Economy section of the Odisha article. A tag related to this possibility may thus be added to the article, or the suspect section simply deleted or replaced.

I have finished working on the article for the time being, having copy-edited up to the Economy section. After the copyright issue is resolved, I will use the "in use" tag again to copy-edit the second half of the article. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 17:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@GrammarFascist: There are a few edits in the page history that I'm quite sure are copying and pasting but unfortunately, the sources are so old that I can't find them (they may no longer exist). (I wish I could see further back than this in the Wayback Machine. However, the specific section I thought might be a copyvio actually appears clear (was made over multiple separate edits showing it developed organically – was not a cut and paste job). The site I found that looked like a possible source actually post-dates, so it's a backwards copyvio. Please go ahead and edit that section if you wish to edit further of course.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:21, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much Bilorv, GrammarFascist and Fuhghettaboutit. Things seem to be so clear because of users like you around. Thanks again for the quick and clear responses. Look forward for your help in future too.. Happy Editing.. Sanket Edits Wiki (talk) 21:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Pages with hCard and pages lacking oldid

Talk:Caitlyn Jenner is categorized (hidden) as an article missing an oldid.
Caitlyn Jenner is categorized as an article containing an hCard.

How do I fix the oldid issue? Teach me, don't just do it. LOL.

Where is the hCard? I can't spot it. Many articles are in the hCard category but I don't see the hCard. Isn't hCard a sly way of spamming? Why is hCard allowed on WP? Cheers! Checkingfax (talk) 19:11, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Checkingfax, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure about the hCard as I'm not familiar with what it is, but the oldid hidden category displays because the {{Copied}} template on the page is missing the |from_oldid = and |to_oldid = parameters. I don't think the issue requires immediate fixing, since the oldid parameters don't have a very important purpose beyond letting readers know what the page looked like when content was copied within Wikipedia. Fixing it is a fairly complicated and confusing task if you're not sure what you're doing, so I'm not sure if it is worth the effort.

If you really want to fix the issue, you would have to dig back through the article's edit history and find the revision where content was copied into the former Gender transition of Caitlyn Jenner article. Once you find the revision, you would have to look closely at that revision's URL and find the revision's ID number and paste that into the |from_oldid = parameter. The Copied template's documentation subpage shows you where to find that number. Once you've done that, you then have to go to the former Gender transition of Caitlyn Jenner article's edit history and find the revision where the content was originally pasted, and copy the ID number into the |to_oldid = . Once again, the fix is a bit complicated, and I'm sincerely sorry that my instructions aren't better. If you really really want to know how to do it, I could make a step-by-step guide in my sandbox for you. Just ask. All the best, Mz7 (talk) 22:43, 4 October 2015 (UTC), revised 22:51, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Checkingfax. I have neither interest nor expertise in microformats, but you can find an explantion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Microformats/hcard. Good luck. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:22, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Effect of magic pipes in categories?

I've seen magic pipes in categories. Why? I could not find a help page documenting it.

[[Category:Planned Parenthood]]

vs.

[[Category:Planned Parenthood| ]]

Thank you. Checkingfax (talk) 04:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Checkingfax. Can you provide links to a few articles where you have seen this? Context is always important in evaluating things like this. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:24, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Caitlyn Jenner Checkingfax (talk) 05:49, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Checkingfax, I do not see that category in that article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:28, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: Pipes are used in categories for sorting purposes (it works kind of, but not entirely, like a wikilink). If you look at Category:Caitlyn Jenner, you’ll see that the parent article, Caitlyn Jenner, is listed as the very first entry, above the alphabetical listing. Btw., you can find more details at Help:Category#Sort_order. Rgds ✦ _hugarheimur 10:06, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I only see this tangentially mentioned at that page. Checkingfax, see Wikipedia:Categorization at the shortcut WP:SORTKEY at the seventh bulletted point: "Use a space as the sort key for a key article for the category."--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:12, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you @Cullen328, Torana, and Fuhghettaboutit:.

What is the upside of having a category be first on the category list?
Does there have to be a space after the magic pipe?

Thanks. Cheers! Checkingfax (talk) 18:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey Checkingfax. In order to explain this, I'd like to try to shift your perspective away from the pipe. The "magic" attribute, the thing of significance here, is the space; the pipe is the prosaic aspect.

When a page is placed in a category, say by adding to the page [[Category:Exploding animals]], that page then automatically appears in the category page by the first letter of whatever its title is.
However sometimes we don't want a page to categorize alphabetically by its title. For example, for most people, we want the title listed by surname, and for titles starting with The, we often want it listed by whatever the second word is. To do this, we pipe the category to whatever we want to page to display by. Thus:

[[Category:Atheist philosophers|Russell, Bertrand]] will make Bertrand Russell appear in the category under "R" – rather than under "B", as it would if we did not pipe how we want it to categorize.
And [[Category:American satirical films|King Of Comedy, The]] will categorize under "K" instead of "T".

That was the normal way to do this until January 2007, when {{DEFAULTSORT}} was introduced. Using it, instead of piping each category to what we desire in articles that needed it, like the above two, adding this above the categories and with what we want to sort by added, e.g., {{DEFAULTSORT:Russell, Bertrand}} would make all the categories below it sort by that. So in articles like these, we no longer needed to separately pipe ten categories.
Once defaultsort came in, most articles began using it, so that piping the category is not seen nearly so often. But one more thing to know is that if you have defaultsort in place, but you also pipe one of the categories, it will override the defaultsort, and the page will be sorted in the category by what you piped.
So, in Caitlyn Jenner, where most of the categories are being sorted by {{DEFAULTSORT:Jenner, Caitlyn}} Category:Caitlyn Jenner is piped and so it overrides it.
It is being piped to a space: [[Category:Caitlyn Jenner| ]] That makes it appear at the very top of the category, because it is the parent article for the category. Why? Because it makes sense that the parent article of the entire category, Caitlyn Jenner, in Category:Caitlyn Jenner should be the first thing that people see, set apart from all the others, as the category's eponymous article.

Hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:19, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you @Cullen328, Torana, and Fuhghettaboutit:. Checkingfax (talk) 07:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

neutral tone in my draft

Hi! I am attempting a resubmit for my draft of Blenheim Art Foundation which was rejected for sounding like an advertisement. I've cut it down quite a lot and gone through it with a fine tooth comb as well as speaking directly with the person who reviewed it. A shorter version of the foundation has now been accepted onto the Blenheim Palace page so I am very hopeful, but I was wondering if anyone on here might also be able to give it a quick look over and tell me if there are any concerns? It's my first wiki page so all ears! Thank you! This is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Blenheim_Art_Foundation Belh89 (talk) 16:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Belh89: welcome to the Teahouse!

I read to here: "aiming to give the greatest number of people access to world-class contemporary artists in the context of the historic setting of Blenheim Palace " and, well, Advert. People from marketing backgrounds have a terrible time writing appropriately for Wikipedia - they are two entirely different and non-complementary skillsets. Have you been directed to WP:PEACOCK and WP:NPOV? They give advice and the policy language that helps govern the tone of how we cover content as an encyclopedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

And please remove all the WP:External links from the bodytext, reduce the over-praising newspaper quotations, and include some criticism - someone must have said something less laudatory - we need balance, not overt promotion. - Arjayay (talk) 19:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @TheRedPenOfDoom: and @Arjayay: ! Thanks so much for your help. I had not seen WP:PEACOCK very helpful! It definitely takes some getting used to the language! I've made lots of changes to get rid of any peacocking so hopefully it'll now pass! Thanks again Belh89 (talk) 11:28, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

My science advance may be too good

Hello Tea Room Host, My scientific advances are so new that my Periodic Table of Units of Measure may not be allowed. User:Lug-Unit/sandbox

My discoveries about mass have started a revolution, which BIPM.org needs to believe before authority figures at NIST will condone my wiki page.

Should I abandon my work on my Wiki page? Lug-Unit (talk) 22:21, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Lug-Unit, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not the place to publish new theories. In fact our policy No Original Research forbids doing so. Until and unless reliable sources independent of the creator have written about a new theory in some detail, it cannot have an article on Wikipedia. DES ^(talk) 22:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC) @Lug-Unit: DES ^(talk) 17:48, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

The answer to whether you should abandon your work on the Wiki page is probably yes. You say that your discoveries about mass have started a revolution. What reliable source has your work been published in? If it has in fact started a scientific revolution, then can you provide a link not only to the journal in which it was originally published, but to a source oriented to the scientifically literate layman (such as Scientific American or the Science section of the New York Times, or any equivalent in another Anglophone country) describing the revolutionary impact? Also, having read your sandbox article, and being familiar with physical dimensionality, I don't understand what the article says, which, aside from original research, makes me think it is not even wrong. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Having actually taken the trouble to read your discovery, it appears to be a standard aether theory, in this case with the aetheric substance named "herenowium". I appreciate that "This book was mailed to The Max Planck Institute in Germany and the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in France. Old Science is being informed, whether they want to read new science or not.", but Wikipedia doesn't cover original research; unless the theory in question has already been published in a peer-reviewed journal (and preferably multiple journals) it's not something we can include. ‑ iridescent 16:16, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Also, please note that whatever text you write here based on your scientific work is relinquished of your exclusive copyright to it and published under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License. For this reason too, Wikimedia sites are perhaps not ideal platforms for novelty research. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 16:20, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Help with my page

Have I put up too many references on Cry For Silence (band) and would anyone please help me get it up to Wiki standards? i'm using the help documents but getting a bit lost. I don't want the page to be deleted.

Thank you in advance!! Majorityverb (talk) 06:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Majorityverb. The first thing that I noticed is that your references are bare URLs. Please flesh them out as described in Referencing for beginners. You also need to pay attention to which sources are reliable. Facebook isn't and YouTube rarely is. Wikipedia itself should never be used as a reference. Far better to have just a few truly reliable sources than to pad an article with unreliable sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:08, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Majorityverb, and welcome to the Teahouse (and to Wikipedia). I have formatted a couple of example citations for you, to show you what they should look like when fully populated with all the relevant information. The second one I added mainly so you could see how to format a news citation as opposed to a web citation. Strictly speaking you can use "cite web" for anything you find online, but it's best to use "cite news" for newspapers and magazines.

There's a handy trick for citation formatting that means you don't have to do as much remembering or typing. The four most commonly-used citation templates are included in Wikipedia's article-editing toolbox. To use one, place your cursor where the citation <ref> should go, then look at the blue bar at the top of the edit window. On the right, click "Cite". Then, at the left-hand side of the second blue bar that appears, click "Templates" and choose whichever of the four is most appropriate. (Cite books is for books, of course; cite journal is for scholarly journals, though you can also use it for regular magazines.) This opens up a form which you can type or paste all the information available about the source into. Note that in order to enter publication dates with the Cite web template, you need to click the "Show/hide extra fields" button. For access date (when you viewed the source) you can just click the icon next to the field and it will fill in automatically. Note that references should be placed after punctuation and before spaces.

I made several other edits to the article, including adding a lead section, adding some missing punctuation, removing some capitalized letters that should be lowercase, changing the html headers to Wikimarkup (done with == around the heading title), and removing the flag icon (which is supposed to be used only for people who are representing their nation officially, such as Olympic athletes). Finally, I removed the reference to Alessandro Venturella being in Slipknot from the first sentence that mentions him, since it had implied that he was in Slipknot first and then formed Cry For Silence. Information about him later joining Slipknot is now at the end of the article.

In terms of how many refereces you should have overall, it's really based on what factual claims the article makes. Anything that's likely to make a reader think, "what, really?" should be referenced.

Feel free to come back with any further questions you may have. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 11:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you soo much for your help! it is very much appreciated! I will get better with time and practice! I promise!Majorityverb (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

NB I have moved the article to Cry For Silence - no disambiguation is required.--ukexpat (talk) 17:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

How do I change the title of my draft article?

I can edit the body of the article very easily, but I'd like to make a small change to the title and can't figure it out. Thanks in advance for any help.

Libraryheather (talk) 16:32, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Libraryheather: Editing a title is a special case. See Wikipedia:Moving a page for more information on how to accomplish this.--S Philbrick (Talk) 17:15, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Libraryheather: Note that the submission was declined so it should not be moved to main article space until the issues have been addressed. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:09, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Infobox image keeps getting deleted from Commons.

I'm trying to add the key art for the video game Grey Goo from here:

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2414013696/tt4499428?ref_=tt_ov_i#

to here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_Goo_(video_game)

but it keeps getting deleted. I've set the License to Non-free Fair Use Video Game Cover.

Any help would be appreciated.

Regards, Samuelcobalt (talk) 21:18, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Samuelcobalt:

I cannot see what is being deleted, but Wikimedia Commons only accepts free use media and " key art for the video game" is almost certainly going to be WP:COPYRIGHT material that is unacceptable there. You might be able to make a WP:FAIR-use claim for loading the image at Wikipedia, but until you are more familiar with copyright and being able to follow the instructions posted, I would suggest that you don't personally do so. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Samuelcobalt. Commons does not accept non-free materials. If your proposed use of the image meets all the conditions in WP:NFCC, then use the Upload wizard to upload it to English Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 21:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Worthy of a wiki page?

I am looking to start a page about a mythical person/character that has previously no written document with information about said character. This character is loosely known throughout multiple circles of people within towns and cities in clusters that span around an almost 300 mile radius across England and Wales. This mythological character is gaining some ground in the urban legend scene with people in an unnamed university spreading stories amongst new students with this character as the lead. My question would to the community would be as follows; is this enough ground to start a wikipedia page, as I understand the material must be completely neutral and follow no promotions of topic, I feel that with an official wikipedia page to document all known information of this character that people would become more aware and a modern day urban legend/myth could really gain some kind of following or appreciation. Knowledge of any topic helps to authenticate its existence and other than word of mouth this information is extremely hard to come by. If approved I will consult the community throughout the articles construction to complete it to the best quality that wikipedia demands.

Any help or suggestions or statistics to aid in the fulfilment of this goal would be greatly appreciated and constructive criticism is heavily encouraged. 92.3.239.2 (talk) 18:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi 92.3.239.2 - In a word - NO, such a page would not be within our guidelines.
All articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
You have stated that there is no written document with information about said character, so it fails at the first hurdle - Arjayay (talk) 18:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 92.3.239.2. Unfortunately, the second half of your first sentence pretty much sums up what we can't cover on Wikipedia according to policy - that is to say, subjects about which nothing has previously been written. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

You can start such a page on your own web site, and on Facebook, and many other sites; but not on Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 21:37, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Or if you could convince a respected magazine or newspaper (preferably more than one) to document the subject, that would work. And the subject might then be appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Whether it would be accepted with only one source, I couldn't say.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Editing a page and someone again undoing my eidts

Hi Team,

I am trying to make some changes on my friends page and addinig links and citis as well but someone is undoing my eidts. how to talfk to the person and ask him not to do this.?is there any way you can help. Gaurav1209 (talk) 19:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Gaurav1209: and welcome to the Teahouse.

I am the one undoing your edits because they do not comply with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. They are not verifiable as coming from reliably published sources (for example, you citing his blog for a claim that his blog is popular) and are gratuitously non-neutral in their tone being full of "peacock terms" and other manual of style issues and basic English grammar flaws. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:32, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response but there were some part which was verified and was taken from news paper line DNA, you removed that part as well. and i am not editing his page for publicity of something i have worked with him and know that he is way more successful than his Wikipedia page says taht was the reason of edits.nothing more. Gaurav1209 (talk) 20:05, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

We are not here to say "someone is successful". We are here to present what third party reliable sources have said the subject has done and what the sources sayd the subject's impact has been. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Gaurav1209: To reply your original question, you can see who is undoing your edits. You have to click on option "View history" which exists on upper right side on each article. After clicking on "View history" you will see "XYZ undid Gaurav" or "XYZ reverted Gaurav", then by clicking on talk page of that XYZ you can contact him/her or you can also discuss that issue on article's talk page, XYZ editor will reply you there. Regards.--Human3015^TALK 22:10, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gaurav1209 - As you are "trying to make some changes on my friends page", you have a clear conflict of interest (COI).
Please read and follow our official guideline on conflict of interest, here or the slightly easier essay at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide.
In general, you should not be editing that page at all, but suggesting changes on the article's talk page by using the {{request edit}} template, to attract attention and supporting your proposed changes by references to reliable, independent sources. An uninvolved editor without a COI will then consider your suggestion, and include it, if they think it is suitable. - Arjayay (talk)

ANI Discussion archived with no administrative consensus or closure

Can I get some help contacting the right person? Administrator Dennis Brown among others had commented, but there didn't seem to be a resolution. It is now archived...Did I miss something? [1] Thanks for the tea :-) Darknipples (talk) 02:20, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Darknipples This unfortunately does often enough happen with ANI discussions. There was no clear agreement on any particular administrative action, so talk peters out once everyone interested had expressed a view, and nothing happens. The problem is that there is no one person or group responsible for solving such issues. It would be possible to just go ahead with the GA review, on the grounds that talk page discussion plus the ANI thread showed at least some consensus for the current name, and clearly no consensus to move it. Or a formal RfC could be held on the issue. This would get lots of heated comments, probably, but it might result in a clear close after a 30-day discussion period (or a closer could close it sooner, but on a contentious issue quite possibly not). Of course there is no telling how such a discussion would wind up, and I couldn't close since I've already expressed a view on the issue. DES ^(talk) 02:43, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

[2] I have made a note on the Talk Page (SEE-GA Review) at Gun show loophole. Advice is welcome. Darknipples (talk) 06:19, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Cullen328 - Any advice? -- Darknipples (talk) 06:29, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Darknipples. The best advice I can give is to stay the course and do your best to respond to any legitimate concerns about the article, continuing to build consensus. As you know, an article must be reasonably stable to pass a Good Article review. It was unlikely that the conversation at ANI would lead to administrative action about a matter that was probably more of a content dispute rather than an incidence of editor misconduct. However, you did receive significant suppport for your point of view as a result of that discussion, so I think that you can consider it a net positive. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:46, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Darknipples: It happens many times. Back in time when I was new that time one very experienced editor opened ANI against me, but that ANI was archived after few days without single comment by any admin or other uninvolved editors.

--Human3015^TALK 22:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Can't get the Wikipedia Adventure working :(

was hoping to improve my knowledge of editing rules and processes by taking the Wikipedia Adeventure for new/rookie editors. It doesn't work :'(

CheckersBoard (talk) 01:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC) CheckersBoard

Hey @CheckersBoard: Welcome to the Teahouse! Sorry to hear you're having problems. It seems to work fine for me when I try it out at Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Adventure. Could you describe what exactly isn't working? ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:51, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

cites

Ok I thought so thank you but the article I was following had all the cites "corrected" by a user inside the quotes.Plasticisme (talk) 02:45, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

How do I contact my deleting administrator?

I don't think my article should have been deleted, and I'm looking to repost with more third-party sources. How do I contact the user who deleted the articles so we can discuss how to avoid being deleted again!

Thanks!

Johnsonclaire770 (talk) 20:54, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Johnsonclaire770, and welcome to the Teahouse. According to the record, the administrator who deleted the Version One Ventures article was NawlinWiki. You can contact them at their talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:05, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

But while it may indeed by useful to contact NawlinWiki, Johnsonclaire770, the best way to avoid getting your draft deleted is to create it in Draft space: if you use the article wizard, it will help you do that. --ColinFine (talk) 21:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Johnsonclaire770 (talk) 04:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Help

How do I correctly change my references for source 6, do I just delete the 'better source needed' entry with http://www.setlist.fm/setlist/cry-for-silence/2007/earls-court-london-england-53cf17e9.html I also want to update 'source 7' with http://www.setlist.fm/setlist/cry-for-silence/2008/donington-park-castle-donington-england-63c0a64f.html

This page shows both - http://www.setlist.fm/setlists/cry-for-silence-3bdb7c7c.html

Can someone please help me :-/

The page is 'Cry For Silence (Band)'

Thanks in advance (Majorityverb (talk) 05:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Majorityverb, and welcome to the Teahouse. To replace a reference, you just need to delete the text of the existing one and insert the new one. There is some general advice on referencing at Help:Referencing for beginners. However, I don't think that www.setlist.fm can be considered a reliable source, because it is a site that anyone can edit (like Wikipedia). See WP:USERGENERATED for more information about this. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:45, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

STiki

I have clicked to download STiki but I can't get it without purchasing an app. It is also unclear where the log of edits that are seen as nonconstructive actually is. Please advise. Thanks, Rubbish computer 22:22, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey @Rubbish computer: Are you trying to download STiki via the first link here? If so, did you manage to download and unzip the file? ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs

@SuperHamster: Yes, I made a Microsoft account and got the app without paying anything, then unzipped the file. My computer was playing up, but this was as it initially scanned the file. --Rubbish computer 11:23, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Does anyone know where the log of nonconstructive edits is? Thanks, --Rubbish computer 12:37, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

cites

Hello thank you for invite. May be a stupid question but should the cite number be included inside the quotes or parenthesis or outside ? Plasticisme (talk) 02:27, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

@Plasticisme: Welcome to the Teahouse. Usually, the citation is placed outside of the quotation marks/parentheses. Zappa 24 Mati 02:32, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

ZappaOMati is correct, Plasticisme, when it comes to quotations denoted with "quotation marks". Note, however, that when using <blockquote>, the reference should go before the blockquote's close tag:

<ref>(citation details)</ref></blockquote>, not </blockquote><ref>(citation details)</ref>

Otherwise the citation's footnote anchor (the little ^[4] number) would be pushed onto a new line. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 14:36, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Working in Wikipedia

Hello forces of Wikipedia, I have a small question. When placing edit banners on pages, where can one find a more comprehensive page filled with them to utilize in diverse situations in articles that one may need to put them upon pages for further review by others? Thank you so much for your help!

CoolInu43 (talk) 04:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi CoolInu43, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is Wikipedia:Template messages what you are looking for? Cordless Larry (talk) 06:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, CoolInu43. To add to what Cordless Larry said, while it's true that Wikipedia has many template messages available to be placed on articles that need specific types of edits, it's generally preferred for editors to perform needed edits themselves if they are able. Adding template messages should be your second choice. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 14:44, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Notability requirements

I have edited my article Draft:AVS Video Converter, please check if it meets the notability requirements and can be resubmitted. Thank you for your help. NeviRom (talk) 06:43, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I see nothing that remotely shows notability, NeviRom. What do you think shows notability? John from Idegon (talk) 06:51, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I think this converter is notable for its usability and differs from many other converters: it converts videos, edit them with big list of effects, create disks, upload videos to web sources. Almost all the Wikipedia user can professionally process his\her videos for its user friendliness. Can this be the argument to the article notability? (talk) 06:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

No. Please click on notable to see how the word is used here. Maproom (talk) 08:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I have read there, but still cannot understand, could you explain in simple words why my article is not notable, and in what case it can be notable. Thank you very much for your help.(talk) 07:37, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

The notability guideline can be summarised as follows: Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

It is not the article that fails to be notable, it's the subject "AVS Video Converter". You have provided no evidence that it is notable, and it seems most unlikely that there is any. Maproom (talk) 09:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, NeviRom. To be acceptable, a Wikipedia article should be close to 100% based on independent reliable published sources. If there isn't enough content in independent reliable published sources to write an article entirely from them, then it is impossible to write an acceptable article. That, and nothing else, is what we mean in Wikipedia by "notable". --ColinFine (talk) 17:32, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Linking mention of TV episode to article of same name explaining the concept

If (for example) there was a TV series with an article about it, including a list of episodes, and the title of one of the episodes was the same as a concept that also has an article about it (and there is currently no article about the episode itself), would it be acceptable to link the mention of the episode in the main article to that of the concept? For example, if there was an episode of Doctor Who titled Alien Space Bats that was actually about Alien Space Bats as a deus ex machina device for creating an alternative history (there isn't, AFAIK !), it seems reasonable to link the episode to the article about the "Alien Space Bats" plot device. If an editor later decided to make an article about the episode itself, it could be named something like "Alien Space Bats (TV episode)". Mungefuddler123 (talk) 15:31, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Interesting question, Mungefuddler123. In my opinion, the answer is No: if a user chooses to follow a link apparently to an episode of a series, it is not usually going to be helpful to send them to an article which is not in the slightest about that episode, but just about something that the episode is called after. --ColinFine (talk) 17:35, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Writing about myself

If there is a historical significance to my accomplishments, how come I can't write an article about myself since one does not exist? GilbertGibley (talk) 17:52, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

GilbertGibley, It is almost impossible for anyone to view his or her own action or projects with sufficient objectivity to write about them neutrally, and to limit content to that supported by reliable sources. Please read our conflict of interest guideline, and our guideline on autobiography. If there truly is "a historical significance to [your] accomplishments" then someone else will write about them, sooner or later. There is no deadline. See also the golden rule of article basics.

If after reading all that, you want to go ahead, use the article wizard to create a draft that will be reviewed via the articles for creation process, please. Even so, you are apt to find it frustrating. DES ^(talk) 18:09, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

To add to DES's comments: Users are not forbidden from writing or editing articles about themselves, but they are strongly discouraged from doing so, because it's difficult for people to be objective about themselves. There's also the issue of forgetting that only facts which can be cited to a reliable published source should be included in Wikipedia articles; exact birthdates, for example, often cannot be included in Wikipedia even if users who know the correct date could theoretically put those dates in.

A very quick peek in Google did not turn up any results for "Gilbert Gibley" in news sources or books, which are generally where we look for reliable sources at Wikipedia. You should read Wikipedia's definition of reliable sources and then Wikipedia's policy on notability to determine whether you are eligible to have an article about you on Wikipedia. If you are sufficiently notable, another user may be willing to write the article; I myself recently wrote an article about another user at her request, which you can see here. If after reading the pages DES and I suggested you still feel Wikipedia needs an article about you, you can request help getting one written either here or at Wikipedia:Requested articles. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 18:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Updating page for Nyack College

Any advice on how to improve this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyack_College

I've added over 40 citations and new text but the indication box at the top of the article still says that the piece needs work. Advice? Thanks, MR1882 (talk) 18:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse, MR1882. Template messages at the tops of articles are placed manually by editors like you, and only go away when other editors (or the same editor) remove them. If you believe you have added enough sources, then you can just delete the template. But be sure that the sources you cited are what Wikipedia considers reliable sources — there is a specific definition. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 18:26, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I have removed the tag, MR1882, but added a number of {{cn}} tags on specific points that i think still need sourcing. DES ^(talk) 18:29, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

As for how to improve the article, MR1882, I suggest striving for a more neutral tone. Sentences such as "Current President Michael Scales has crafted and honed a vision for Nyack to become a university committed to educating men and women to be Christians who minister to society in relevant and meaningful ways" and "This program has grown quickly and offers a rich and diverse context to study Christian leadership" are too promotional for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Please see WP:NPOV for guidance on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:32, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

User page?

My account does not have any real user page. When or how will I get one?*bite* 20:26, 6 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WaterViper (talk • contribs)

You do have a user page, it is right here. If you would like to style your user page, see the UPDC. —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 20:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

sharing text from one wiki pg to the next

Heynow, I'm wondering if one can copy & paste bits of text from one wiki page to another (related) one without it being considered plagiarism(?). I'm careful in all other cases to put things in my own words, & hence the q. Cheers! EdFerrario (talk) 16:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi EdFerrario, and welcome to the Teahouse. I presume that when you say "wiki page", you're talking about pages on the English Wikipedia? If so, this is covered by Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. You can copy material directly from one article to another, but in order to comply with the licencing requirements, you need to attribute the text. The easiest way to do this is to specify that you have copied the material from another Wikipedia article and to include a link to that article in the edit summary. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Beauty -thanks for the assistance! EdFerrario (talk) 22:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

When does company history become too long?

Hi! My name is Irene and I have been hired by a company that is trying to post on Wikipedia but has been rejected twice. I am a translator with no personal WIKI publishing experience, so basically I am just following the hints given by Matthew Vanitas, namely

"for a company existing over a half-century there are much more serious discussions of its long-term career and impact to use. Here's just one example of a section of a book you could cite, and you can find more by checking out GoogleBooks, and skip over the basic tour-guide stuff and pick out serious books discussing the history of the Galapagos, international touring business, Ecuadorian economy, etc" (VAnitas comment)

So I have researched on the history and expanded the sources, and I have reached 900 words in history alone. Is this too much? Would this be a reason for rejection? Irene from Ecuador186.46.18.215 (talk) 23:44, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Irene from Ecuador. I highly recommend that you open a Wikipedia account and declare on your user page that you have a conflict of interest as a paid editor. Our Terms of use require that you refrain from direct editing of articles for which you are paid. You can work on draft articles or make suggestions on article talk pages, but you must disclose your paid status. Please provide a link to your draft article. The length of a company history section is a matter of editorial judgment that needs to be determined by consensus among all interested editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I love how people make contracts to do work in areas they know nothing about! Capitalism at its finest!

You need to read and follow the Terms of Use regarding paid editing [3] .

But in general, other than a very few companies like Coke or Ford. will there be sufficient third party content about the organization's history that would be WP:TOOLONG . In an article about a company that is padding its article with paid promotional bloat, 2 sentences is too long. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

How to handle apparent copyright violation

Hello, Teahouse colleagues. I am one of several editors who have been trying to fix up Kadam (clan), which was (and remains) a mess of formatting and grammar errors. In the process of copy-editing the article, I discovered a paragraph which appeared to have been copied from elsewhere. I have marked it with a copyvio template, hiding the suspect section from view.

Normally when I find copyvio, I simply rewrite the plagiarized text so that it is properly paraphrased. In this case I don't feel qualified to paraphrase, as the paragraph in question is highly technical and I don't fully understand it. At the same time it seems to be serving as a necessary segue between the preceding and following paragraphs, so I'm loath to just delete it. Could I get some suggestions for what else I can do? —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 00:21, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Article denied because of references, wondering if someone could take a look?

Hello,

I am currently working on the article Phekoo (musician), the article was denied 3 days ago because my submission references did not show the subjects notability. There was was also a helpful bit of text that stated that I needed to add citations.

At the time that it was denied I was just referencing the URL and nothing more. After going over the article on citations and learning that my references required them, I cleaned the article up and learned quite a bit in the process.

Would someone mind looking over the article and letting me know if there is anything that I need to correct?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time.

Justinstripling (talk) 22:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

The only reliable source I see (note tho that I do not read Japanese) is Billboard, and the article cited there only mentions your subject in passing. Justinstripling, are any of your Japanese references books, magazines, newspapers, or trusted academic journals that discuss this fella in detail? If not, then I am afraid you have not shown notability. John from Idegon (talk) 22:51, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello Justinstripling. I took a quick look at Draft:Phekoo (musician). It seems that you added citation metadata (title, author, publisher, date, etc.) to all or almost all the citations that had previously been in the draft. That is very good and helpful, but it is not quite what is meant by "adding citations". The reviewer was saying that additional sources needed to be cited to show a greater depth of coverage. It doesn't look as if any actual sources had been added since the review. If there are other relaible sources that discuss Phekoo in some detail (at least a few paragraphs) and do not simply duplicate the sources already in the draft, adding them might help. Also, most of the sources cited appear to be in Japanese. That is fine, but it makes it harder for a non-Japanese-speaking editor to evaluate. Could you supply translations of article titles and publication names? {{cite web}} includes the |trans-title= parameter for this purpose. It also includes the |language= parameter to explicitly indicate what language a citation is in. Please consider using these. Documentation will be found at Template:Cite web. There is even an example labeled "Foreign language and translated title" in the Examples section there.

If you can find an experienced editor who reads Japanese to take a look at this, that editor might be able to provide further assistance. I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 22:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I added another indent to DES's comment above for clarity. Justinstripling, I might add that if your article is approved, the parenthetical "musician" is unneeded as a part of the title. There is no need to disambiguate as there is no other article titled Phekoo. John from Idegon (talk) 00:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

STiki

Where is the log of nonconstructive edits used by STiki users? I have STiki and can't find it anywhere. Thanks, Rubbish computer 16:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

You also asked this question at the Help Desk Please only ask in one place. RudolfRed (talk) 19:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer. What kind of log are you looking for? I poked around in STiki and I also couldn't find any form of log or queue. In STiki, you review diffs one at a time; there isn't a list of recent changes you can pick from as there is in, say, Huggle. STiki automatically provides the diffs and presents them in the application. You then classify as "vandalism", "good faith revert", "pass", or "innocent". If you are not sure how to classify a diff, click "pass" to go to the next diff. I'm not sure whether STiki keeps a central log of all nonconstructive edits reverted with the tool—try asking at Wikipedia talk:STiki if that's what you're looking for. Best, Mz7 (talk) 22:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

@Mz7: Thanks. --Rubbish computer 10:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

How to create a talk page for RMOS Consultancy ?

Hi I want to Create a talk page for RMOS Consultancy in my wikipedia account but not able to do so plz guide.

(RMOS Consultancy)RMOS Consultancy (talk) 04:14, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rajnitsharma. Here is a step-by-step guide for you:

Stop using "RMOS Consultancy" as a signature, as that implies this is a company account rather than an individual account. We do not allow company or organizational accounts. Each account must be for one individual human being, acting on their own behalf.
Start the article as a draft through the Articles for Creation process.
When you write your draft article, do so in full compliance with our three most important content policies, which are the Neutral point of view, and No original research and Verifiability. This is essential, and any deviation from these policies will result in your draft article being declined. Build your article by summarizing what Independent, reliable sources say about this company, not what it says about itself.
Once you have started your draft article through the AFC process, there will be a talk page associated with it. You cannot create a talk page independent of an article, user page, draft article, template, or Wikipedia page. Talk pages back up other pages.
If your draft article is accepted into the encyclopedia, and if you are paid by this company, you should then limit any further input to suggestions and recommendations on the talk page. It is a violation of our Terms of use for you to edit such an article directly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank You for your sane advice mam. I will follow the steps suggested by you (Rajni)RMOS Consultancy (talk) 10:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Adding a "Userbox" combo box code. do you know how?

Greeting everyone. There were some quite relief time i've spent. but now, i decided to collect my own Userpage and i need a pattern which makes a combo box for userboxes.

there is a Persian one:

{{پاک کن}} {{بالای جعبه کاربر|}}

دربارهٔ این کاربر بیشتر بدانید

{{کاربر اصفهان}}

{{پایین جعبه کاربر}} {{پاک کن}}

Do you know what english version is? I am Ameteur in wikipedia.

Amir R. Pourkashef 07:16, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Amir R. Pourkashef and welcome to the Teahouse. The codes you are looking for are {{userboxtop}} and {{userboxbottom}}. You can read all about it on this page: Template:Userboxtop. Happy organizing, w.carter-Talk 10:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC)