Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 781

< Wikipedia:Teahouse‎ | Questions
Archive 775 ← Archive 779 Archive 780 Archive 781 Archive 782 Archive 783 → Archive 785

Editing misinformation on a subject - problems adding 'references' and 'external links'.

I am new as a contributor and I have found misinformation, some of which I have been able to successfully edit. I have spent considerable time trying to add the external link properly and as yet have been able to properly place references. I am not finding the process very user friendly and I am asking for help in adding references and external links. I am sending a request to the historical society that has researched and published a more accurate account of my relative's life (the subject in question) to see if I can put that account, verbaatim on Wikipedia . . . if they agree, will that be allowed? I have pictures and much more to contribute, details that have been in my family for over 100 years. I just want an accurate account on this site since many take it to be 'the matter of fact'. I would appreciate any and all help. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholas Sheran relation (talk • contribs) 19:26, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Nicholas Sheran relation, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia that all information in it should be verifiable from a published source. If the historical society in question have had the information published in a reliable source (or if they have published it themselves, and have a reputation for editorial control in their publications), then the information may go into the article, and should be cited to that publication. If they have not published it, then it may not go into the article. Unfortuately, this may mean that certain information which you know to be factual can never go into the Wikipedia article, if it is not verifiable
Once the society have published it, by default it will be copyright and you may not reproduce it directly in Wikipedia (apart from explicitly quoting short passages, and citing the source). It is possible for the copyright owner (the writer, unless they have specifically assigned it to the society) to release the copyright in such a way that it may be reproduced directly in Wikipedia, but doing so will grant anybody the right to reuse the material in any way for any purpose, and they may not be willing to do this. See donating copyright materials for more information on this.
In any case, it is possible that material that they publish will not be suitable for direct use in Wikipedia, because it may not be neutral in tone. It might be - it depends on the intention of the writer. But it is very much more common in Wikipedia to write in one's own words, summarising what is said in the published sources.
As for the photos - these would be welcome, but again the question of copyright arises. If they are old enough, they may be in the public domain, and you can then upload them and use them in an article. But if they could still be in copyright, Wikipedia will assume that they are copyright in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. See Help:Upload. --ColinFine (talk) 20:14, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Movie studio

I'm trying to write an article about a movie studio that is not very well known. Due to this there is barely any information about the studio. I wrote a draft and sent it in for submission. Almost immediately, they rejected it due to lack of information and refrences. What should I do know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvanr (talk • contribs) 20:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@Dvanr: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If this movie studio is not written about with in depth coverage in independent reliable sources, I regret to say that it will not be possible for their to be an article about it on Wikipedia at this time. Its mere existence is not enough to merit an article here, it must be shown to meet the notability guidelines for companies written at WP:ORG. I am curious as to how you came to write about this studio if it is not well known. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, I recently saw a movie with the studio's name in front of that movie. I researched it not finding a lot of information on it. Nevertheless, I still wanted to attempt writing an article about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvanr (talk • contribs) 20:54, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

page deleted

hello ....so there was a page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Banat,,,, which i helped to contribute too.,,,now when i try to access it it seems to have been deleted, i only can read it in cached mode( on google page right click URL and click cache) why is the reason a page gets deleted??? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farid999111 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Farid999111. As mentioned in the red box at the top of that page, it was speedily deleted because, in the opinion of the administrator who deleted it (User:DGG), it was unduly promotional and didn't indicate the significance of the subject. – Joe (talk) 17:19, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Farid99911. I do think it needed to be deleted for the reason specified, but I made an error. I was deleted it without giving another administrator the chance to review it. I am permitted to do so--we call it single-handed deletion. But I have always said that it is not a good idea to use this ability except in really extreme situations, so I am instead going to restore it--but restore it as a draft, where it would have some chance of being improved into an acceptable article. DGG ( talk ) 22:56, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I am Huff-Slush 17:33, 3 June 2018 (UTC) (Huff slush7264) and I would like to know how to make a proper link. If I try www.*source*.com, it doesn't work. I would like to know how to make a proper link. Thanks, Huff-Slush 17:33, 3 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huff slush7264 (talk • contribs)

For the formatting of references, please read Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:37, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Homophones

Lase and laze are two different words that sound alike, but have different meanings. I heard the word in a news broadcast about Hawaii volcanos. I wanted to learn more, so I entered "lase" in the Wikipedia search box, which brought up the article on lasers, but no mention of volcanos. After searching in many other places, I finally found the Wikipedia article on Laze (geology).

I thought I would help others by creating a disambiguation page called Lase (disambiguation), giving readers a choice between lasers and Laze (geology). A few days later the page was deleted, with the log entry:

21:41, 30 May 2018 Anthony Appleyard (talk | contribs) deleted page Lase (disambiguation) (G6: nothing is disambiguated. "Laze" has no relation to "Lase" whatsoever) (thank)

My question is, "What can be done to help readers, who know what a word sound like, but don't know the spelling, especially when the word has homophones? Do they have to rely on Google?"

I will watch this spot for a reply. Comfr (talk) 19:46, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I think homophones are really the province of our sister project Wiktionary. See wikt:lase and wikt:laze for details. There is no need to rely on Google. I suppose we could have a note on each page if this is a common confusion, but what about lays?. I don't think Wikipedia needs to give spelling lessons. Dbfirs 20:12, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Does that mean we can't do anything within Wikipedia to help readers find these types of articles? Comfr (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
{{Distinguish}} could be used in this case. kewlgrapes (talk • contribs) 20:33, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I couldn't remember what the disambiguation note was called. Since these are technical terms, I think the disambiguation notes would be appropriate. Comfr, would you like to add them since it was your idea? Dbfirs 21:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
If {{Distinguish}} is used on Laser then it should lead to Lazer. {{Redirect}} is used for other meanings of a redirecting term but Laze could be added to Lazer#See also. I also discovered Laše which should be findable from Lase. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
I added {{Redirect}} to Laser. Thanks for your suggestion. Comfr (talk) 03:34, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

references

Hi, I'm a new editor and I've got a problem with my page. I translated the Dutch page of the Montessori Lyceum Amsterdam into English. But they say that I have to add reliable sources. I used the same sources as the Dutch page even two more. And I don't see a template at the Dutch page about adding more reliable sources. Can somebody help me to remove this template? Because I'm afraid they remove my page. Mabelwieman (talk) 15:27, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Mabelwieman. All information on Wikipedia needs to be directly supported by a reliable sources. You should cite everything in the article, not just a few things. Failing that, those unreferenced bits may be removed (this doesn't necessarily mean that the entire article should be deleted). – Finnusertop</(talk) ⋅ contribs) 17:45, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Mabelwieman. It's important to note that each language version of Wikipedia has its own rules and policies, and there is arguably greater scrutiny on the English Wikipedia than the average edition - although it sounds like the article on the Dutch Wikipedia could do with flagging in the same way that Montessori Lyceum Amsterdam has been here. Please also note that when you translate a Wikipedia article, you need to credit the original version by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Translation. ;Finnusertop</(talk) 18:05, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Finnusertop, thanks for your respond! Now I understand why the Dutch page hasn't got the same problem. And if I'm correct, is my page already linked to the Dutch one. But maybe you can check that? There is only still one problem, because I translated it I don't know from which sites the information is coming from. I tried to research but that didn't always work. Have you got any tips to find the references? Mabelwieman (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes Mabelwieman, the pages are linked to one another (in the sidebar), but that's not enough. You should use the following edit summary when you translate: Content in this edit is translated from the existing Dutch Wikipedia article at [[:nl:Montessori Lyceum Amsterdam]]; see its history for attribution.
What you describe is often the problem with translation. Sometimes what you translate is poor quality. Then it might not be worth it to translate. Content comes under scrutiny in the English Wikipedia more often than elsewhere, so you should only translate referenced material.
As for finding references, it can be tricky to find out what sources (if any) were used to write an article if they weren't marked down. You can try Google, newspapers, or books in the library. Sometimes the only option is to remove such material. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Oke, thanks for your tips Finnusertop! Mabelwieman (talk) 05:46, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up to Help in editing

Can I add the official web address in my Wikipedia page? If yes, how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Almesh (talk • contribs) 05:18, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, official websites are appropriate to link to in articles about companies. The link is appropriately placed in the "external links" section of your draft article (User:Michael_Almesh/TIEMCHART).
However, its subject may not be suitable for Wikipedia. Unless you can show that with sources that simultaneously (1) deal with the subject in length, (2) are independent and (3) are reliable, nothing you can do will lead to it being accepted. You used external sources rather that the company website, which is a start, but still not enough. Most current sources seem to be comprehensive directory listings or social profiles; the only one that's kind of good is [1] but it reeks to much of a press release copy-pasted into an article to really be worth much. TigraanClick here to contact me 07:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
@Michael Almesh: BTW, please do not use boldface markup ('''...''') in section titles. Section headers are displayed in boldface by default, doubling it makes the page look inconsistent with the rest of Wikipedia. --CiaPan (talk) 08:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Help editing article

Hi guys, I want to ask about this article submitted : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Reza_Visual_Academy . I see that the article only gives information in a neutral point of view (no advertisement, no compliment...) and provides reliable sources (Le Monde, National Geographic, webisite of UNDP and UNHCR, national press...) . I would like to know if there is something to be improved so the article could be approved. Thanks a lot ! Dothien0103 (talk) 09:11, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I shortened draft. Still needs work. David notMD (talk) 10:34, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Page rejection query

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Isaac_Newton_Academy

I'm curious as to why this got rejected?

I've never been particularly bothered about editing or adding content to wiki, but I'm in the process of a lot of data management with my business at the moment. It's an education based industry and I'm having to find a lot of data on school's. I've been pretty pleased being able to cross reference and check my data with wiki entries and have come across a few newly built school's which haven't been added here yet. I decided to break up my working day to add one of those schools to wiki. A good deed, community helping, giving back or whatever you want to call it. I have no affiliation to the school posted (I live 200 miles away and have never stepped foot in that part of London before) but it might help out someone else who needs to search this information down as well.

Given that the school is brand spanking new how am I supposed to find more references than I have done? I filled in the school details box which includes a link to the governments Department of Education website where it lists that school. I included an Ofcom report link (the single authority for reviewing school's in the UK) and a link to the school's website. I added a link to a news article about the school's very first GCSE reports as history and to a third party teaching platform called TES which had listed the school on it's website. And I even managed to find out the architectural firm that built the school and referenced them. I also linked to other wiki pages.

I'm very confused by the reviewing process. I was sure my first draft to be proposed would have been accepted as the first draft with further and more comprehensive edits to be made as and when they were appropriate.

Please look at some other school pages on wiki and tell me how different they are. I've seen some with less information than my first draft proposal.

(I really am hoping that my linking to those other school's won't see those extremely useful resources withdrawn from the site. Please don't do that.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adw-joe (talk • contribs) 10:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Adw-joe. Welcome to our Teahouse, and thanks for coming here with your question. I confess, myself, to not quite understanding why your draft was rejected by Graeme Bartlett. It is quite short, and not unduly promotional in my view. There has been a common-held misbelief that English Wikipedia regards schools above primary level as automatically notable. Whilst it rarely deletes not-for-profit schools at WP:AFD, please see this guidance on school notability and also a recent community consensus view (RFC) added to WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES for a bit more information on this.
So, after all that waffle, what would I do? Well, I'd carry on creating articles like these, if I'm honest. I might take care not to appear to be accidentally over-selling the school by focussing on details about its exam pass rate. It is accepted that reliable sources to local schools are often only ever found in local media, so why not add these? In history, I would put the founding and then the Education Estates Award close together. School passes are less part of its history than something that happens yearly. I think the fact that an Italian media outlet (and our own Daily Telegraph) took notice of the conceptual idea which won a national TeenTech award for colour-changing condoms is meritorious for this article. Whilst the school ws not covered in depth, it was the school and their student who were responsible for it. See here and here. You have its opening reported by the Ilford Recorder here. Whether the Daily Mail can be trusted, has already been debated. But this story appears to highlight to schools very small catchment area in an overcrowded area. Hoping this is of some assistance, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:12, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

account

how can i open up my wikipedia thanks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssebbi abraham (talk • contribs) 01:07, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ssebbi abraham, Greetings and welcome to Teahouse! Just log in at top right corner of Wikipedia web page by inserting your user name "Ssebbi abraham" and your password. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:37, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
... but Ssebbi abraham has already done this to ask the question, so I wonder what they meant by "open up"? Dbfirs 08:39, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
To "open up" can mean to start, "my" is a reference to himself, ergo this could be a rather poorly worded way of saying "How do I start a Wikipedia article about me?".If so, here are links to WP:COI and WP:WIZ. 109.146.136.16 (talk) 13:22, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

How to request a page to be protected?

Hi, how does one request a page to be protected? I want to have the page Electronic Entertainment Expo 2018 protected from ip users as recently there has been a lot of edits made by those kinds of users that are unsourced and/or unconfirmed for the expo. I noticed that non of the recent reverted edits have been made by autoconfirmed or above ranked users. Can someone protect the page? The expo will be held from June 12th to 14th, so the protection should last until at least the end of the event, as until it happens, there are still many unconfirmed things for the event and still lots of room for speculation as those participating have not all announced everything they will show off at the expo. Also, how might I request a page to be protected in the future so I don't have to ask here again next time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greshthegreat (talk • contribs) 14:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

@Greshthegreat: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Without looking at the page yet, I can say that you can request page protection by visiting WP:RPP and following the instructions there. 331dot (talk) 14:22, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

some rules missing from the Standing Rules of the United States Senate

The Standing Rules of the United States Senate page contains a link to a Wikipedia page for each rule of the U.S. Senate, but there are one or more rules for which the page does not exist, such as rule XXIII.

If you click on the link for rule XXIII, it redirects you back to Standing Rules of the United States Senate,which is a bit confusing. In fact, there is an archive of the rule XXIII page in Wayback.

The issue is evidently a little deeper than what happened to the page for this one rule. On the talk page, one person had opined that there should not be a separate page for each of the 40 or so rules, while I notice that other pages have been (as I would describe it) vandalized, the text of the rule having been deleted, with the explanation of WP:NOTREPOSITORY, though I might be convinced to agree with this rule provided that there's a comprehensive summary of the rule provided in its place.

To be clear, I have not surveyed the full set of rules, but I think that most pages either have the text of the rule or a comprehensive summary of the rule, as well as a link to the rule on the official U.S. Senate web site.

It is worth noting that Standing Rules are subject to change, though I would imagine that tracking the history of changes to any given rule would be relevant to Wikipedia. I don't know whether rules get renumbered if a standing rule is deleted. That could surely make a mess of things.

I am not looking to create a project to re-organize this, but I'm hoping to get some consensus about whether we should restore this to the state where we had a page for every rule, and what is the proper content of each page (i.e. should the text/comprehensive summary be included). Fabrickator (talk) 15:50, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Rennie Parker

Who is Rennie Parker — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.235.210.81 (talk) 14:55, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, this is a place for asking questions about editing Wikipedia, and it isn't really about understanding any particular subject matter in the articles. According to List of compositions for viola: T to Z and Ian Venables#Works list, a Rennie Parker wrote the words for a violin composition. Were you looking to write an article for that Rennie Parker? --Habst (talk) 16:31, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

is Amorphophallus Titanum a legit user?

This user has engaged defamatory editing and vandalizing a section (Fenggang Yang and the Center on Religion and Chinese Society of Purdue University) of the article John Templeton Foundation. Is this user a paid agent of some political entity? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenixhill (talk • contribs) 21:12, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

[I have taken the liberty of wikilinking the relevant article and section in your post above for the convenience of others.]
There is nothing to suggest that Amorphophallus Titanum is any less legitimate a user than you, Phoenixhill: he appears to have only began editing on 2 June 2018, but you yourself apparently only began on 23 May 2018.
You and Amorphophallus Titanum appear to disagree over article content, and I notice that two other Users have on your own Talk page criticised some of the edits you have tried make to the article, and still more Users in addition to Amorphophallus Titanum have reverted some of your edits. It is not obvious to me that Amorphophallus Titanum's edits are "defamatory", but this is a highly specialised area of scholarship, and I am suspecting that a Real World scholarly (and/or political) dispute is spilling into Wikipedia here.
Disagreeing over content is not Vandalism. You should both/all discuss the matter (calmly) on the Talk page of the article, where I notice Amorphophallus Titanum has already responded to a complaint by the longer-established User Ian Johnson (some of whose phrasing is oddly similar to yours above). You might also want to consult Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.202.160.23 (talk) 22:44, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes, Phoenixhill is probably the same Ian Johnson or Yang Fenggang himself trying to delete academic criticism from Wikipedia.--Amorphophallus Titanum (talk) 23:51, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I have to point out that while 90.202.160.23 is correct in saying that AT is not a "less legit" user than Phoenixhill, it certainly is not because of the time duration either of you has been editing Wikipedia. You both are just as "legit" at the longest-term contributors here (as long as you play by the rules). It does happen now and then that long-term contributors get away with something when newbies would not, but that is a flaw in the system. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:02, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
I see that Phoenixhill's most recent edit to the article was to delete an entire section, while leaving an edit summary describing the edit as "moving" it. That does come close to vandalism. Maproom (talk) 08:21, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
That user is becoming really disturbing. Now he clams that I made "assault on a living person" while I just quoted published information about the subject.--Amorphophallus Titanum (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
I am quite sure that Phoenixhall is Fenggang Yang himself or a person related to the Templeton Foundation. In the article Fenggang Yang he keeps adding the allegation that critics of this scholar are all communists. In the article Templeton Foundation he keeps deleting entire sections which have strong academic sources, including the Centre national de la recherche scientifique of France.--Amorphophallus Titanum (talk) 16:41, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm having trouble with my infobox, its appearing as regular text across the top of my article

What the headline says, will it fix itself?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chg1990 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

You had malformatted the associated_acts parameter. I corrected it in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:15, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank You!!! any clue how long it will take to get the article approved? I had a lot of references so i think it will be approved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chg1990 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Most drafts get reviewed within a few months, and currently nothing has waited for more than 3 weeks. While you are waiting, there are plenty of aspects for you to address. You have many misplaced external links in the body text of the draft, your references are all bare URLs, you have further reference declarations after your reflist template, you have called up a non-existent template, and a non-existent category, and ... You ought to read the advice at WP:Your first article and in the Manual of Style. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:41, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

testing Farid999111 (talk) 15:53, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

im just testing signing my name using tildes!!!!!somebody mentioned to me ,a newbie here to sign my name at end ..when i chat here at the tea house Farid999111 (talk) 15:53, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm glad it worked! In the future you can test these things out in the Wikipedia sandbox at WP:SANDBOX, tilde signatures should work on all Wikipedia pages (but remember to only use them on discussion pages!). --Habst (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
... and the signature should not be placed in the section heading, just at the end of your message. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Article that seems promotional and not notable

Hi there! This article, The PM Group, seems like it's written as an advertisement, mainly by two editors who probably have a conflict of interest since main or only contributions are to this article or to articles relevant to the surrounding geographical area of the business. I've used the links in the notability template to check if it's notable, and it seems it probably isn't. I've left the advert/notability templates on the page for now (didn't combine them to multiple issues so someone could have a chance to prove me wrong and prove it notable via the links), but I'm not sure what to do now. I don't want to scare anyone away by sending it for speedy deletion, and I don't have the experience to judge if it should even be deleted. I'd love to get some feedback/help! Thanks! originalmesshow u doin that busta rhyme? 04:14, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey Originalmess. You certainly got it right about one of the editors having a conflict of interest - in fact, I'm convinced it's an undisclosed paid editor. The other one appears to be a single-purpose account - which in itself isn't necessarily a problem - but they deleted maintenance templates and added content about awards. Not a conclusive COI diagnosis but it shows potential signs.
The referencing is also a problem. The first two references look legit but they're behind a paywall. The others are either primary sources, press releases or the sites of the business's clients. The Telly Awards look like they've been around for a long time and are possibly notable, but I'm not sure if that is enough depth of coverage to lift the article above the notability threshold. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:21, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for looking at it Drm310 - you're probably right on the paid thing. On the sources for the Awards section - I'm sure they received them, but I've checked every link and can't find a mention to the group on all but 1 of the links. The NBA article seems possibly legit, but that's also not enough to make it into the notable section. I saw you left the templates on the page/user's talk, so what now? originalmesshow u doin that busta rhyme? 05:34, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't mind getting a third opinion from one of the other contributors here before making any decisions. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:55, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Translating page

Hey! Sorry if my question is too basic. I'm learning as I go. I want to translate an article that's only available in Spanish. I'd like to translate it to English but although I read how to do it I'm not sure I understand. I tried and messed it up so I just reverted to avoid harming the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yu Jing Hao Tse (talk • contribs) 11:36, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Yu Jing Hao Tse, this is actually a good place for basic questions. The basic answer to your question is at WP:Translation. If you need further help after reading that page, you know where to find us. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello I want to understand i was thought to be maybe promoting

Hello In the name of Jesus Christ:

My Name is Bishop Chris Harris I was told what I was doing was a conflict I don't understand why I am only corrected what I did wrong I am not on here for and worldly desirer I he to help out because I found out about a spilt that happened between the one Orthodox Church from Alexandra and Know they call themselves Autocephalous Greek International Orthodox Christian Church Canonical and they are moving between countries they are partially in America I am learning this would mean I think they would be considered in full communion or where I put them in Churches unrecognized do to various deputes under Eastern Orthodox Church Organization so if anyone could help and tell me what I should do. Also I put them in Western Rite because they are doing that as well but I put them with the Celtic Orthodox French Orthodox There was three should they be put there or with the mainstream communion like Antiochian and ROCOR please help me because I not good at this yet thank you

Yours Truly Bishop Chris HarrisBishopchris35 (talk) 11:27, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bishopchris35 and welcome to the Teahouse. I appreciate that you are trying to add genuine information to Wikipedia. As explained on your talk page, you have a conflict of interest in adding your own church, so it would be better if you suggested improvements on the talk pages of articles. If you want to claim that your church is affiliated with an organisation, then you need to provide good evidence, and your own website does not count. Your church is not mentioned on the official website of the organisation you claim to be part of. We do not want to suppress the information that you want to add, but we do need WP:Reliable sources for claims. Dbfirs 12:24, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
I have the Registration Form for both Africa and as well as here in the United States I have them PDF files and tried to down loud it on the Computer because it would not down load the file. What should I do what is suggestion on that situation. I know the Metropolitan Archbishop and Exarch of all Africa Patrick Mkhize. The Archdiocese of South Africa has Put the Article in the Newspaper as he has just been received his Ordination there and the media and the Biggest Newspapers put him in there I have pictures of the newspapers as well. The papers he is in I mean these Newspapers are Inkazimulo and Umafrika they are some of the Biggest ones there is that a enough Proof for now or what should you have me do. I know the Church has the day to go in front of Constantinople I'm 3 years time for him to make a decision of which he says if we are in full communion because we splitter the Church which they had said yes of right know we are in communion and we will also receive a letter from the Exarch of Constantinople of saying we are in communion with them we should have that soon I didn't know if I should have put us in communion with them of unrecognized with various deputes. I also thank for taking the time to help me I sorry for the misunderstanding I was not trying to promote us what so ever. It will not happen again but for the proof how can I upload if its not letting me do so I can attach it. Please help me with problem I am trying to correct and I will send you all the proof. Thank you God Bless you all (user:dbfirs) thank you for the understanding I thankful you guys are here to help
your truly
Bishop Chris Harris
Ps cant I do a Page on the Patriarch Francis Christopher M Maier because I know what is best is that aloud to do because if that ok and you guys can check it Bishopchris35 (talk) 13:16, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
What would you have me do get ahold of the Patriarch French Orthodox Church and the Celtic Orthodox Church as well and get letters I write to them for there correspondence But I was asking because we are technically still in communion with them mainstream Orthodox since we split from them because of what was going to that why I asked should I put with mainstream or wait until I get the official letter from them and scan on computer and have it done then thank again God Bless you all. Bishopchris35 (talk) 13:27, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Why not just ask them to update their website to include your church? We are not able to check original documents here at Wikipedia, and anyway, these would be WP:Primary sources. We prefer WP:Secondary sources such as reliable published newspapers where the information has been published. Please read WP:Referencing for beginners. Dbfirs 16:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
I remember seeing that website that you tried to add, perhaps a year or so ago, and at the time came to the conclusion it was indistinguishable from a hoax church. No online references to the church at all. One can form a church with a few friends and meet in your living room, it can be a real church, but it's not a church that is notable, in the Wikipedia sense, if nobody independent of the church has chosen to publish coverage about it. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 18:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
OP blocked as a sock.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:45, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

help

who is michael jackson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas447058 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello Thomas447058. Welcome to the teahouse. Please ask your question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. MarnetteD|Talk 19:52, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Or read the article Michael Jackson... Beeblebrox (talk) 22:47, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject

How do I make my own WikiProject?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 01:45, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I found this page of instructions, which are mostly preliminary. They end with a link to this page.
It looks like you make sure that the project is something we do not already have and is something that people will join. Then you create a WikiProject page just like any other page, but with a template at the top to list it as a project page. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

A question regarding deletion of my page

Yesterday I added a page name "Relationship coach" and I don't know why my page has been deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangoli (talk • contribs) 06:16, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@Sangoli: The content itself was promotional of the concept, which in itself would lead to deletion, but the "article" also had the section "List of Best Relationship Coach" with several completely inappropriate links. We require all content to be entirely neutral, and to never promote anyone or anything. The page in question blatantly violated those requirements and promoted both the concept and individual practitioners of it, and so its deletion was entirely correct. We also already have an article about relationship counseling, which is essentially the same thing. We do not ever allow promotional material. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:25, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Sangoli. There is a notification at User talk:Sangoli#Speedy deletion nomination of User:Sangoli/sandbox which shows that your user sandbox was deleted per section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, so maybe this is the page you're referring to. I'm not an administrator so I cannot see the content which was deleted, but it does appear that there was a Draft:Relationship coach deleted by RHaworth for the same reason as your sandbox. Try posting at User talk:RHaworth if you want more details as to why the draft was deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:28, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Soccer player profille

How do i post my Player profile article, so when i search my name on google i find the article directly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amadou Kalle (talk • contribs) 04:19, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Amadou Kalle. It appears that you might be trying to write an Wikipedia article about yourself which is something that is highly discouraged per Wikipedia:Autobiography. It also appears that you might actually be notable enough to have a Wikipedia article written about you based upon Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Association football. So, I have posted a message at WT:FOOTY to see if one of the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football would be willing to take a look the draft you've created and assess it to see if an article can be written. Please don't create any more drafts or any more accounts (I'm assuming User:360sport) is you as well and just wait and see what the members of WikiProject Football have to say. If a Wikipedia article can be written about you, someone else should probably be the one to write it.
In addition, it appears that you have uploaded a number of images to Wikimedia Commons as your "own work". Some of these have been tagged for deletion/review because their licensing is suspect, so please carefull read through c:Commons:Licensing before uploading any more files. Just for reference, the copyright holder of a photograoh is generally considered to be the person who actually takes the photo, not the any persons depicted in the photo. In other words, just being the person shown in a photo does not automatically make you the copyright owner of the photo. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
@Amadou Kalle: / @360sport:, the footballer did not pass the criteria WP:NSPORTS as only Major League Soccer, North American Soccer League and United Soccer League are considered as Fully professional leagues in the United States. Matthew_hk tc 06:29, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Also, wikipedia is not a webhost service, draft and userpage of wikipedia had nofollow no index tag for search engines. Matthew_hk tc 06:30, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Art Solomon

Hello, I would like to have a short Wiki page created about Art Solomon, telling a bit about his life. Art was a well respected Ojibwe Elder and Activist of Native Rights. He has received several honorary Doctorate Degrees, We was selected to receive an Order of Canada award, but he turned it down, because they would not give him the time he needed on stage to say what he wanted to stay. Art has written two published books, "Songs for the People: a Teaching of the natural ways" and "Eating Bitterness: A vision beyond the Prison Walls" Art worked to getting Native Spiritual ceremony's practiced inside prisons in Canada. He also worked with many inmates including Leonard Peltier. there are many other notable things Art has done thoughout his life.

I am Arts Grandson and it says I should not create a page about family members so I would like to know how I could get a page created.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards Christian Solomon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christian C Solomon (talk • contribs)

@Christian C Solomon: You would need to present multiple reliable sources (references with a solid reputation for editorial control and fact checking) that are independent of the source (so not interviews, press releases, etc.) and cover them in depth (not name drops, brief mentions, blurbs, etc.). If such reference material does not exist, this individual is not an appropriate subject for an article. If it does, bring it to the attention of other editors to help them write the article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:30, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Ostrovul Ciocănești

Hi, is there a guideline on disputed geographical regions? Ostrovul Ciocănești is was an unsourced article that after looking into it is such a place. If there is a guideline I'll follow that, otherwise I think I might AfD to get some consensus to delete, keep or rename. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:35, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, KylieTastic. I'm sorry you haven't had a direct reply to your question. However, I see that both you and Maproom have since added citations. As a result, I've removed the 'unreferenced' template from the article. I think you've taken the correct path by not bringing the page to WP:AFD, but by working to improve the article and (as far as I can assess) show non-English language sources that support the dispute. I'm not personally aware of any guideline on covering disputed areas - though there may well be - but I would suggest the usual rule would apply. Namely, that articles should always be written in a neutral manner, presenting the sources from all sides of any disagreement, and avoiding expressing any personal opinions or bias. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:58, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
It wasn't me who added the citations, I can't read Bulgarian or Romanian. But I would oppose the article's deletion. The island exists, and its sovereignty is disputed. Maproom (talk) 07:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Logo Update

Good afternoon!

I have been asked to update our company logo as we now have a new font. Since my profile is not verified, I don't believe I have permission to upload it. Does anyone know how else I can go about this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfrasier11 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse Kfrasier11. If you are working for your company and you are being paid to do this, please read WP:PAID. Thanks!Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 01:47, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Kfrasier11, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thegooduser is right, but does not answer your question. When you have made your Paid Editing declaration, I believe you can then request an upload at WP:Files for upload. Please read LOGO first, and make sure that the file your want to upload and how it will be used meets all the requirements of the non-free content criteria (I am assuming your company will not want to license the logo with a free licence). --ColinFine (talk) 08:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Kfrasier11, I don't actually think you need to declare any paid editing if all you are doing is trying to replace a new version of this logo for the Empire Distribution article. I note the old one appears to have been uploaded to Wikimedia commons under a free (Creative Commons) licence. That seems surprising, but uploading to Wikipedia, rather than Wikimedia, can be a good way to provide an image for what we call 'fair use', as ColinFine suggests. Oh, do please try not to post roughly the same question at different help desks. Sometimes you do have to wait a day or so for a reply as we're all volunteers here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:13, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

from sandbox to article

please can move from sandbox to article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamnanakesse (talk • contribs) 11:24, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Iamnanakesse. Welcome to our Teahouse. If I understand you correctly, you want to move User:Iamnanakesse/sandbox, which is an article about yourself, from your sandbox into the main part of Wikipedia? I note you also created Draft:Nana Kesse (Blogger) which has already been declined. So there seems little point in trying to create a move a similar article, when you need to address the concerns raised on your talk page. I should thank you for declaring on your Userpage your conflict of interest in doing this. I've fixed the template for you, so that it now displays correctly. We never encourage people to write about themselves here - they are never independent, and only tend to present 'the good side' of that person. (I would do the same, too, of course!). Perhaps you would read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY to understand the issues around this. What you need to do is find sources that are completely independent of you and which have written about you in-depth, warts and all. We strongly urge people never to write about themselves, but to to wait until someone else takes notice of them and writes about them. We suggest that Facebook and LinkedIn are the best types of ways to promote oneself. Does this help? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

?

are you also a fan? — Preceding unsigned comment added by William1066 (talk • contribs) 09:40, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, William1066. Our Teahouse is here to help editors with issues about editing Wikipedia. Whilst the hosts here are definitely fans of this encyclopaedia, and love to assist people, you haven't actually asked a question we can answer. Is there any assistance you need at this point in time? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:51, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Meaning i can't create a wiki account and add content by myself?

Meaning i can't create a wiki account and add content by myself? ... I watched some tutorials on youtube ...the sandbox only serves as keeping your content then later export into article page. Anyway please can you assist me for my account not to be declined again? Please moreover what makes it autobiography? please kindly assist me. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamnanakesse (talk • contribs) 12:28, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@Iamnanakesse: You already have an account. Your account is what you logged in to to create articles. You tried to make an article at Draft:Nana Kesse (Blogger).
Since you are Nana Kesse, this is a problem, because we have rules about editing with a conflict of interest and writing autobiographies.
  • If you were going to write an article about someone else, here's what you would do:
1) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.
2) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.
3) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.
4) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.
5) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.
6) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.
7) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).
Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:33, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

iamnanakesse can't create an article for himself with the Nana Kesse (Blogger)? meaning onless someone with different does that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamnanakesse (talk • contribs) 12:34, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

It's really hard for someone to be fair ("neutral") when they write an article about themselves. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey all!

I'm having difficulty understanding why a web page used as a reference in an article can't also be included in the External Link section of the same article. I've looked at various sections of the Manual of Style and various Guidelines and I've yet to see this addressed specifically. Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcdanielm (talk • contribs) 14:03, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

It can, Mcdanielm, but as a rule of the thumb, External links should be kept to a minimum. Depends on the context, really. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
The guidance is at WP:ELDUP. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Why has my Article been rejected?

Dear Wiki Friends, My article on Flora Jane Reynolds and her involvement with The Women's International League of Peace and Freedom was rejected. Not sure why this is and which of Wiki's 5 'Pillars' might have been unintentionally violated. I'd like to improve on the Article and make another submission, but can't do this without some guidance on exactly what it is I need to do! The Article has verification from the Cornishman Newspaper, but of its' very nature, there is hardly any information about the subject, hence a submission to Wiki, in the first place. Being new to this, I would appreciate any suggestions and/or help to move forward with this... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buryshaker (talk • contribs) 15:16, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

You say "there is hardly any information about the subject", so it sounds as if the subject is not notable in Wikipedia's terms. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Covenience link User:Buryshaker/sandbox your article has not been rejected as it hasn't been submitted for review yet? Theroadislong (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
But Flora Jane Reynolds was deleted. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict)The article, Flora Jane Reynolds, with an almost exact copy in your sandox was deleted because it did not explain what was significant about her. It stated she was a president of a local chapter of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. It goes on to discuss her family. Then it discusses the origins of the WILPF but it does not state that she had any part in its formation. The article was supported by 4 citations from a local newspaper. There is just nothing that shows that she potentially meets the notability guidelines for inclusion in Wikipedia. ~ GB fan 15:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

The article "Instrumental and value-rational action" has a warning calling for more links. The article has references to half-a-dozen other articles. Please explain what is lacking. Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 17:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, TBR-qed. Welcome to the Teahouse. Although I couldn't bring myself to read through the entirety of this rather long article on Instrumental and value-rational action, at a skim through, there seems a paucity of blue wikilinks to other pages which should integrate it into the (hopefully) numerous related articles. This lack of wikilinks is what is templated at the top of the page. A related concern that is sometimes flagged on long, underlinked pages is that an article may appear to be too essay-like. This might be a concern too, but I can't say for sure. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:34, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Wording of an article's title vs. wording of subject in the article's lead

The article State University of New York at Old Westbury begins with "The State University of New York College at Old Westbury is a public college ..." (italics added). Should one or the other be changed so that the two have the same wording? I had not heard of the school before tonight, but a brief look at its website seems to indicate that it doesn't use the word "college", although the seal contains the word. Normally, a question like this one should be discussed on the article's talk page. Such a question was posted in 2005 with no response, so I thought I would ask here. If I am being to picky, please ignore the question. Eddie Blick (talk) 03:03, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I think that's an important distinction that needs clarification in the article or the title. The USA uses the words "college" and "university" to mean different things from what they mean elsewhere. So I'm with you Eddie. HiLo48 (talk) 03:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Teblick, and welcome to the Teahouse. Most of the subdivisions of the State University of New York (SUNY) (all except the four major "University centers", I believe) use the form "State University of New York, College at <place name>" as their official names. These aree known collectively as "State University Colleges" or SUCs. However, this is not always how such a school is best known. Article titles most often follow WP:COMMONNAME and so may not use the official name, but the official name is usually mentioned in the lead sentence. HiLo48 this convention is specific to the State University of NY. I happen to know it because my father taught at the State University of New York, College at Oneonta (SUCO) for many years. It is fairly easy to document, so this is not OR. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:38, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback, HiLo48 and DESiegel. I appreciate your comments. In my four years on Wikipedia, I have learned that I have a lot to learn. It's great to have people who provide additional insights. Eddie Blick (talk) 18:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Wrong Service Branch flag on the page for Daniel Daly

Hell all, I am pretty much functionally computer illiterate and am looking for someone to assist me by changing the flag next to the "Branch of Service" under his picture as that is not the flag of the United States Marine Corps. I appreciate your assistance. Thanks and have a wonderful day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.17.143.198 (talk) 17:49, 5 June 2018‎ (UTC)

The infobox code says |branch = {{Flag|United States Marine Corps|1914}}. Do you believe that this is inappropriate? --David Biddulph (talk) 17:57, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
The flag in question is File:Flag of the United States Marine Corps (1914-1939).png. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:02, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi 31.17.143.198. It appears that Daniel Daly's years of service were 1899-1929, the flag in question was in use during the years 1914-1939. That particular flag was first used during Daly's service time and used until at least two years after his death. The red flag that you may be familiar was adopted in 1939 when the blue flag was retired, the blue flag being the one Daly would have recognized and most likely the most appropriate. I don't believe Daly would have ever seen the current red one. Coryphantha Talk 19:58, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_781&oldid=845071948"