 | 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 830 | Archive 831 | Archive 832 | Archive 833 | Archive 834 | Archive 835 | → | Archive 840 |
Need help with changing name of page and redirect
Hi,
I created an article that was meant to be named— "Bullionville, Nevada", and I mistakenly named it "Bullionville". I usually can change names, but this time I am not able to. I also think there is a redirect page involved, because this page: List of ghost towns in Nevada, redirects the name "Bullionville" to Panaca, Nevada. Could you help me with this? thx MauraWen (talk) 18:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Reusing same ref - How?
Having trouble getting a previous reference to appear on the named references list. Subsequently have a list of the same reference repeated below. I have looked at the help files and they weren't much help to me. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hxfan1918 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- I think I fixed the ref error. Has to be an EXACT match. You used Stehman and stehman. David notMD (talk) 19:48, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Articles About Published Literature On Wikipedia?
Hi again. I know I had an earlier section, but it's getting long and I was kind of afraid if I was to update it at this point someone scrolling through the Teahouse might not see it. Anyways, my question is about another topic entirely. Basically, I'm interested about creating an article eventually, and I was thinking I would like to write an article on a published book that doesn't yet have an article on Wikipedia. I was wondering some basic do's and don'ts users at the Teahouse might suggest on an article like that. I'm thinking that I should mention stuff like publication date, publisher, and the funding involved in helping research and write this book. I remember seeing Wikipedia articles with tables before... how would I include them? Or should I just be bold and try to start my initial draft first and get some advice here after writing it? Clovermoss (talk) 19:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hey Clovermoss. I've written a few articles on books, like There There (novel) and Death Traps. The biggest thing is, just like any other Wikipedia article, do you first have enough sources to write with, without including any original research. Usually the types of things you're looking for are interviews and reviews in major publications. Technically, the plot of a book (if it is a novel) can be sourced to the book itself, but I still personally prefer to rely on reviews for that too, because it ensures that I'm not giving an inordinate amount of relative weight to comparatively unimportant parts of the book. As to tables, they're not really required, but Template:Infobox book, which I use on both those articles can be handy, especially for identifiers like ISBN and OCLC. GMGtalk 19:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you! The template seems useful... I'm not quite sure if I'll be able to figure out how to use it, but I really like knowing it exists in the first place! Clovermoss (talk) 19:53, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Clovermoss, you can look at the articles I linked to above for examples of how to use it. If you don't have the information for one of the parameters, for example, if there's no
| website =, then you can just leave it blank and the software will ignore it. GMGtalk 19:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)- Alright... I will try, I just sometimes doubt myself! Thank you. When I finish my draft, could I post a link and maybe get some advice on here? Or would there be a different place I'd want to ask for advice like that? Clovermoss (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- No worries Clovermoss. You're always welcome to ask here, and you can always pop on over to my talk page and I'll try to get to it as soon as I can. GMGtalk 20:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Alright... I will try, I just sometimes doubt myself! Thank you. When I finish my draft, could I post a link and maybe get some advice on here? Or would there be a different place I'd want to ask for advice like that? Clovermoss (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Clovermoss, you can look at the articles I linked to above for examples of how to use it. If you don't have the information for one of the parameters, for example, if there's no
- Thank you! The template seems useful... I'm not quite sure if I'll be able to figure out how to use it, but I really like knowing it exists in the first place! Clovermoss (talk) 19:53, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
please tell me how to uninstall the Opera program
please tell me how to uninstall Opera — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:52D0:1620:7835:4A5:A469:BC7E (talk) 20:51, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- The Teahouse is a place to learn about editing Wikipedia. Try the Reference Desk. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Questions
|
If I type in ALL CAPS, what does it mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.253.162.192 (talk) 10:13, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Which is considered a personal attack? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.253.162.192 (talk) 10:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
What happen if I add a spam link in wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.253.162.192 (talk) 10:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
But if I log in from another wikimedia project, what will happen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincent Setiawan Gout (talk • contribs) 10:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
If I put a blocking template to another user, what will happen? Is this also considered a personal attack? - Vincent Setiawan Gout (talk) 10:53, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
How can I create an article? - Vincent Setiawan Gout (talk) 11:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Vincent Setiawan Gout
What does it mean for abuse of editing privileges? -Vincent Setiawan Gout (talk) 11:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Which actions that trigger "An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, so it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error. Disruptive editing may result in a block from editing."? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincent Setiawan Gout (talk • contribs) 11:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Which actions that trigger "An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, so it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error. Disruptive editing may result in a block from editing."? — Vincent Setiawan Gout (talk) 11:43, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Vincent Setiawan Gout |
How to fix?
A vandal at Madonna singles discography. Been there 4 days. I don’t know what will happen if I click undo. And what about any other crap he’s done?
How many vandals are female? MBG02 (talk) 06:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, MBG02, and thank you for drawing that non-constructive edit to our attention. I'm surprised that over-chatty addition (not really vandalism) remained there for so long. Anyhow, I've taken the normal action and have 'undone' the edit. Nothing bad would have happened had you undone it yourself. Had you made a poor judgement call, someone else might just as easily revert your change. This is how we operate here, albeit not by constant revert-re-reverting -reverting again. I undid the edit by going to 'View History' and selected that edit and the one before in order to view the difference. Having appreciated that it was not really appropriate or helpful to the page, I 'undid' the edit, leaving an explanatory edit summary, suggesting that this was opinion and over-chatty in tone, and not appropriate to the encyclopaedia. I didn't feel there was any need to warn the editor, as it was probably done in what we call 'Good Faith'. What I then tend do do is visit that editors userpage or talk page, and select 'User Contributions' from the link at the far left of the page. That displays a list of their recent edits (see here), and I can click 'diff' from each of the ones shown as current and make an assessment of each. I also look at their Talk page for signs of past and especially recent warning and blocks (there are quite a lot (see here), but I also note this is an IP address of Frontier Communications, so no doubt innumerable different users have edited from this one IP. My conclusion is that the recent suite of edits from this IP are not vandalistic in nature, but have reverted a couple of minor additions made in good faith, and was happy to accept others they'd made. Oh, I don't think there's any way we can answer your question about the breakdown of vandals between the sexes. Very few vandals announce their gender, though we do know we have historically had more male editors here than female ones, and that we do need to redress the balance and to work to attract more women editors and to create more articles on notable women, hence the Women in Red WikiProkject. I hope this breakdown is of some relevance. Next time, why not have a go at undoing a bad edit yourself -you'll gain in confidence that way, and can always come back here and seek further opinion from us. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
obsessed
Just how is it that this the use of this word is a "by" explanation and not "with" as the person with n infactuation is the active partner and not the intended "victim"?2605:E000:1301:4462:B12C:D9EF:8299:5A76 (talk) 07:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. The Teahouse is for asking and answering questions about the details of editing Wikipedia. For general knowledge questions, please try the Reference desks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- If you do take your question to the WP:REFDESK, you might like to consider rewording it. I've read it three times now, and it still makes no sense to me whatsoever, I'm afraid. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes, I believe that the OP is asking about the different connotations of "obsessed by" as opposed to "obsessed with". But I could be wrong. They OP may not be a native or fully fluent English speaker. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:03, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Ah, that could explain this small edit. I think I prefer the original version, but probably wouldn't have felt the need to revert it back to 'fascinated by' from 'fascinated with', as both seem to work in that context. My apologies if my reply came over as rude, IP editor. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes, I believe that the OP is asking about the different connotations of "obsessed by" as opposed to "obsessed with". But I could be wrong. They OP may not be a native or fully fluent English speaker. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:03, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- If you do take your question to the WP:REFDESK, you might like to consider rewording it. I've read it three times now, and it still makes no sense to me whatsoever, I'm afraid. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
A question about Talk:Jeon_Jung-kook
Hello. I previously asked about two articles being created for the same artist here in The Teahouse (see here). Recently Talk:Jeon_Jung-kook was approved as a redirect that ends in BTS probably because it's start-class. Just a day before I wrote to the creator and we were in discussion to work together to merge and improve our articles just before hers was approved. What I wanted to ask is can I merge my work draft:Jungkook with hers? What should I do considering it would be more appropriate for the artist to have his article under his stage name instead of full name knowing there's no other Jungkook on Wikipedia.
Is it possible for her to change her approved draft to "Jungkook"? I hope we can have some help in how to solve this. Thank you and I'm sorry for disturbing here so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiovannaG (talk • contribs) 18:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- @GiovannaG: First of all, the purpose of the Teahouse is to ask questions, so it is not disruptive to ask anything in good faith (except maybe in extremely large volumes, think 10/day).
- You should ask yourself "what" before asking "how". Here, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jungkook seems to show pretty clear consensus that no article should be devoted to the artist. The problem is not that the quality of the article was low (start-class or else), but that the topic should not have an article by itself. (Please ask again if you do not understand why after reading the discussion I linked).
- I believe the way to go is to redirect the stage name to the band, just as for the real name, and posted a request to that effect.
- You may edit the article about the band (BTS (band)) to add some biographical information about the members, but probably not as much detail as is currently in your draft, I am afraid. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
a little help editing ?
Hello everyone, Is it possible to get a little help editing ? I am still in the draft stage of course, but i am trying to add a picture and other important information to my page, but the picture will not show up ? The photo is on wiki media commons. Any help or advice would be most appreciated. I have read a ton today regarding uploads, but sometimes we all could use a little help from another human :-) Thank you all, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Derek_Reese_American_singer-songwriter_and_musician Carolcappetta (talk) 22:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, Carolcappetta, welcome to our Teahouse. Normally, it wouldn't be too hard to explain how to add an image such as one of Derek Reese to a draft article. Unfortunately, it appears that an editor on Wikimedia Commons has nominated all images recently uploaded by Derekreesemusic for deletion, as "Promotional spam, not educationally useful and as such, out of project scope." You should comment on the deletion nomination at this link. Once images are nominated for deletion, they cannot be inserted via a quick 'insert file' link into pages. But normally you would look just above the image on Commons for a link with a W logo which says "Use this file". Click on that and you get a line of text to copy and paste into a page (though it has to be modified if you want to insert it into an Infobox).
- Since posting my first version of this reply, I've corrected your draft so that the infobox works, and so it displays his image until such time as it gets deleted. I was unable to automatically copy the link to insert his picture into my reply here, but have done so manually.
- At first glance your draft on David Reese seems unlikely to be accepted as it seems to fail to meet our notability criteria for musicians. Nor is the title appropriate - it simply needs to be 'David Reese (musician)' That said, the retention of at least one such image on Commons would seem justified -so do argue for that. Maybe it's a coincidence that one user has uploaded images, whilst another user has started an article on the subject at precisely the same time. But I see no reason for at least one image to be retained on Commons. Unfortunately, Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia are two separate bodies, and we have no influence over their oftentimes weird, wacky and wonderful ways of handling image concerns. Does this help? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC) '
Yes that was extremely helpful, thank you. I managed to upload a new photo and have replaced the photo that is up for deletion. I also followed your instructions on appealing the deletion, so we will see. Im not sure where i can change the Derek Reese American singer-songwriter and musician to simply, Derek Reese Musician. That tittle was a bit long lol. Anyway i will keep plugging away, thank you for your help, Carolcappetta (talk) 00:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Derek Reese (musician) is what should be used as the replacement title, as that would distinguish him from other people with the same name. David notMD (talk) 02:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, Carolcappetta. You can rename the draft by moving it; but you won't be able to do this until your account is four whole days old. But I would not worry too much about the title of the draft: when you submit it for review, the reviewer who accepts it will move it to an article with an approprite title. Just note for future reference that we only use a qualifying expression where it is necessary to distinguish the subject from others of the same name; and then we put it in parentheses, and make it as general as we can. --ColinFine (talk) 17:24, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
From draft to article
I just finished a translation and I wanted to publish it but I just managed to create a draft... how can I convert it into a proper article? here the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stefano_Cucchi#Note — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nakatacat (talk • contribs) 10:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Nakatacat: That article is very clearly a machine translation, and bears many of the flaws of machine translation (improper verb tense, inconsistent and at times incoherent language, etc.). For that reason, we ask editors not to use machine translation, as it is not up to the task of translating complex prose like an encyclopedia article. Translations should be done by hand, by an editor fully fluent in both the source and target language. Please do not attempt to "publish" it in its current form. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:35, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, Nakatacat. What Seraphimblade says is right, but there's nothing to stop you using your draft as a basis and improving the English. If there are sources in English, it would be preferable to use those, but if not, the Italian sources are acceptable. (If you do change the sourcs, make sure the article reflects what the source actually says!) When you think the draft is suitable, you can submit it for review by inserting {{subst:submit}} (with the double curly brackets) at the top. --ColinFine (talk) 17:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Bot requirements
| WP:DENY |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
I am really creating a bot which reverts personal attacks.And his name will be AttackBot.And those who make fun of other's work they are not eligible to edit Wikipedia.Kigagan (talk) 16:24, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
If you all really want to help please suggest me few names of a bot which will be approved.Kigagan (talk) 16:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC) |
Youtube videos
Can youtube videos be posted to wikipedia pages? My understanding is that videos on Youtube are in the public domain. 18:11, 18 September 2018 (UTC)~
- Most videos there are protected by copyright. See the guidance at WP:YOUTUBE. RudolfRed (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Question
If a user vandalises Wikipedia and I revert the edit how can I talk to him? Kigagan (talk) 03:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Kigagan: Someone reverting vandalism can either just leave an explanation within the edit summary if they wish, or they can take it a little further by going to that person's talk page and creating a new topic, perhaps entitled 'your recent edits', or something similar, ensuring that you link to the article or to the diff showing their edit. Those of us with Twinkle enabled can make the process much easier as it facilitates the automatic posting to an editors talk page of a serious of escalating warning templates for repeat vandals, finally allowing us to report the editor to WP:AIV for an administrator to block if necessary. Often times I re-edit the warning notice to better explain my concerns
- That said, anyone reverting vandalism really needs to know how to recognise it, and the best way to do that is to gain experience of editing articles. Despite all your questions here, you have so far only made this one tiny edit to the encyclopaedia itself, which was soon reverted. I suggest worrying less about vandals and other matters at this moment in time and simply focus on gaining that personal experience of improving articles on topics that interest you. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
User indef blocked as sock. David notMD (talk) 18:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Controversial Structure for a drug under Clinical Trial
Today I found discussion about a drug Balovaptan in a social media. I checked its Structure on PubChem and Wikipedia. But surprisingly the structures are whole lot different. See talk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Balovaptan#CHEMICAL_STRUCTURE_CONTROVERSIAL. Requesting Dispute resolution and scientific review. RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 17:52, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia shows the following image:
Whereas PUBCHEM search result shows a whole lot different image
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/46200932#section=2D-Structure
RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 18:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- I have responded to your comments at Talk:Balovaptan and made some updates to the article. It looks like you are correct. Any further discussion is best continued on the article's talk page. Thanks for catching the problem and reporting it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
@Edgar181: Thank you for your response; but this controversy was shocking. RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 18:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
How to handle undiplomatic participation in a discussion.
I am writing to ask what recourse one has when, in a discussion about whether to delete an article or not, an editor gets fixated on one's input/participation even if not directed at them, specifically. The editor seems to be questioning my intentions and mischaracterizing my responses to two *other* editors.
I voted to "Keep" the article (which I was one of the original creators for, four years ago), and stated my reasons. The editor in question responded to my "Keep" vote on why they think it should be deleted and I responded to let them know why I disagreed with their response (which circumvented the substance of my reasons to "Keep"). I feel that was the end of discussion with this editor on the substance of the piece and I moved on.
My brief responses to two OTHER editors since have been in the form of dialog as to what might improve the article (so they don't carry a connotation so much in favor or against it as it does addressing how the article could improve). This includes two posts toward the end of the discussion where I illustrate what I edited to help improve the article based on what the last voter articulated in their own comments.
The problem I am having is the person who had initially responded to my "Keep" vote in disagreement continues to respond to comments that are not directed at them but to the other editor who made suggestions as to what would improve the article. It's beginning to feel as though this editor is questioning my intentions (stating I am monopolizing the dialog and discouraging others from voicing their opinion - I have done nothing of that sort) and responding to even the most innocuous and neutral comment I post - in this case what I have posted is purely technical, e.g., "posted links, did this, did that, hope this improves the article" type of response. I almost feel they are trying to do what they are accusing me of doing.
This is the "delete" discussion I am referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ahmed_Emad_Eldin.
One reason I tend not to edit a lot on Wikipedia is this type of unnecessary contention. Since making a number of edits to the article in question I had reached the conclusion I had done what I could to help improve it (and I still think it should be "kept," of course) and have moved on. So I don't have more to say about the article deletion debate itself but do find it undiplomatic dealing with this type of unnecessary response: this person stated why it should be deleted, insist it should be deleted, and that's fine - I have simply responded to other editors on the suggestions to improve the piece. I'm trying to understand how what I did monopolizes or excludes others from participating. Am I missing something here?--1987atomheartbrother (talk) 17:17, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, 1987atomheartbrother. Welcome, and thank you for setting the controls to the heart of the Teahouse. To answer your question directly - I don't think there's an 'recourse' needed, nor would any particular action on your part be appropriate, apart from listening to what other editors also say. For what it's worth, I'd say don't take it personally. I've just skimmed though the deletion discussion. My (albeit rapid assessment) leads me to suggest that it's not personal - and you shouldn't take it to heart - but they might have a point that accords somewhat with the essay called WP:BLUDGEON in terms of how much of the discussion you (and also one of the other editors to a lesser extent) have occupied - but those discussions looked quite healthy and acceptable up to now. Your responses to the Articles for Deletion discussion seemed ok to me, yet I see the perspective of the other editors who simply asked you not to come back to answer every single point, and has cited that essay. Sometimes, when an article has been in existence and edited by many users over quite a few years, a seven day deletion discussion (even with a number of editors commenting) doesn't seem enough time. But sadly that's how we have to operate. I think you're probably right to 'move on' now and to let others contribute to the debate. As I say, I don't think there's any 'recourse' needed. But that shouldn't stop you from improving the article if you're able, or responding to any new concerns expressed in that debate. I hope this opinion helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:28, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes, thank you for the feedback - it is helpful. And thanks for the clever intro in your paragraph! My controls are indeed set to the Teahouse: it has served as a great frame of reference of the modicum of experience I've gained on this site! Thanks for taking the time to respond, I've taken your advice and have pretty much moved forward as suggested. Thank you.--1987atomheartbrother (talk) 01:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- You're welcome 1987atomheartbrother. I've learned a lot here, too, though I still make mistakes, of course, just as
allmost active do from time to time. Having looked at the article and the sources, I was going to leave a 'weak keep' !vote at the AfD but, as I had specifically alerted another editor to the discussion, I think it would be wrong of me to add my own voice on this occasion. I hope the article is retained, though. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:18, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- You're welcome 1987atomheartbrother. I've learned a lot here, too, though I still make mistakes, of course, just as
- Nick Moyes, thank you for the feedback - it is helpful. And thanks for the clever intro in your paragraph! My controls are indeed set to the Teahouse: it has served as a great frame of reference of the modicum of experience I've gained on this site! Thanks for taking the time to respond, I've taken your advice and have pretty much moved forward as suggested. Thank you.--1987atomheartbrother (talk) 01:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes must be over 60, but 1987- must be listening to his fathers albums? MBG02 (talk) 08:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- MBG02 Cheeky! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:03, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Nick Moyes must be over 60, but 1987- must be listening to his fathers albums? MBG02 (talk) 08:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
help
Please help me in improving this artical It is having references please help Jahnavi Ellore — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamheentity (talk • contribs) 14:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Iamheentity: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Based on the deletion discussion, where you may want to comment, there does not seem to be independent reliable sources that have extensive coverage of this actress, and she would not seem to meet the notability guidelines written at WP:NACTOR. If you have independent sources that have chosen to write extensively about this person, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 14:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
@331dot: Apoorva (actress) what about this page can you help Iamheentity (talk) 14:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Iamheentity: My knowledge in that subject area is limited, but that article appears to have the same issues as your first. You should review the notability guideline I link to above, and find independent sources with significant coverage of the person(not just press releases, brief mentions, or routine announcements).
- As you seem to be getting an idea of, successfully creating an article is very difficult, probably the most difficult thing to do on Wikipedia. I might suggest that you step back from creating articles and take some time to get a better idea of how Wikipedia works and what is being looked for in articles. I think you may want to do this new user tutorial which will provide much information to you. Reading Your First Article will also help you. 331dot (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Please help me in improving this actical Vinay kuyya(channel) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamheentity (talk • contribs) 14:26, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Iamheentity: Again, the same issues as your first two articles mentioned here. You need proper sources. 331dot (talk) 14:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
The source i lrovided is from times of india and deccan Chronicle and they are independent. Iamheentity (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:34, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- That might be, but those sources only provide a routine, brief mention. The Times of India story mentions a warning by police, something which police all over the world do every day with tens of thousands of people and organizations. That is not the significant, in depth coverage required to establish notability. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Unhelpful comment, mischaracterising policy
|
|---|
|
How to correct an error in a diagram?
I noticed an error in a diagram (an image file) in an article that I'd like to correct. I just posted a question on the talk for that page, but it's also a general question I am curious about.
Do I need to create a whole new image from scratch to fix an error in a diagram? I could do this, but it seems pretty work-intensive. Are there any recommended tools to create a diagram, and some way of posting both the final image and the file that created the image? If there is such a tool, it seems to be a good method to create new content that can be easily corrected in the future. (Can SVG files be used for this?) Thanks! SmokeyVW (talk) 23:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, SmokeyVW, welcome to the Teahouse. Well spotted! The typo is not in the Wikipedia article, but within the image which was inserted into that page. It can be found on Wikimedia Commons here]. Now, you could leave a comment in that image's 'discussion' page, or try to contact the image creator, but I note they haven't been active since 2015. The image is freely available for re-use, and you could download it, add in the correct text and upload it to replace the original via the 'upload a nnew version of this file' link lower down on that page. Having said that, the original image is not great quality. I disagree slightly that it would be a 'huge' amount of work to recreate a better version. I don't know what others would do, but I would simply create a similar version in Powerpoint quite quickly, then save it as a jpeg, then upload it. I would probably wish to credit the original image creator on which you based the revised and improved image. I used the same PowerPoint approach to create [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mont_Blanc_massif_(west).jpg this rather complex map of the Mont Blanc area. I can't comment on SVG files, but I'm sure others can. Hope this helps a bit. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 00:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Yes, it helps a lot. Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmokeyVW (talk • contribs) 00:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- This must be about File:Block diagram EN.jpg . I'll fix the error myself within a few hours, if no-one else has got there first. Maproom (talk) 07:38, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- @SmokeyVW and Nick Moyes: about SVG files: in short, if you do not know, create a SVG whenever you can. The long read is at commons:Commons:File types. As a format, JPG only really makes sense for photographs, everything that can be in a vectorial format ("infinitely zoomable") should be SVG, and the rest should be PNG.
- Diagrams such as the one at hand here should really be SVG if your software supports exporting this. I believe Powerpoint does not, but it can export to PDF (which is vector graphics) and that can "easily" be converted to SVG.
- If you intend to create a lot of diagrams and the like (say 20+), I can recommend Inkscape (which directly saves to SVG). I do realize learning a new software just for one diagram is a tall order though. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:17, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
@SmokeyVW: When you see some image needs an improvement, correction or another work, and you do not know how to do it yourself or you have no appropriate tools, you can put a request at c:Commons:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop. --CiaPan (talk) 07:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
I have created a new SVG file for the block diagram. I went over to the image page, and for some reason I was not logged in on that page. I guess that is a separate server? So I'm stuck. I feel like I'm just bumbling about here. Is there a walk-through or tutorial on the general process of editing wikipedia? Many Thanks! SmokeyVW (talk) 21:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
If I edit a page on something, will I get in trouble for it?
I don't know if I will. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bashurman100 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hey, Bashurman100, welcome to the Teahouse. It's hard for me to know what it is that you're worrying about, but providing you're not adding utter nonsense or rude words, or silly stuff like that, you should be fine. Just go for it! You can always come back and post a link to your edit if you want reassurance. We have a saying here: "Be Bold". The worst that can happen for one mistake is that another editor reverts you and might leave a gentle reminder on your talk page. The worst thing you can do it to not edit anything because you're afraid of putting a foot out of place. Have a read of Help:Getting started, or why not try out The Wikipedia Adventure? There are 15 badges you can collect along the way as you learn the basics of how Wikipedia works. Hope this reassurance is, errm, well, reassuring! Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Your recent edits to Sugarloaf Parkway look constructive. They cite a reference, but not quite in the recommended way, and the result is an error message in the article. I tried to browse to the source cited, so as to be able to improve the way the citation is done; but I can't, because I am in the European Union (for the next six months anyway), and the web site cited won't let me for legal reasons. I hope some non-EU editor can fix the citation for you.
- You certainly won't get in trouble for that. At worst, you will get advice on the preferred style for citations. To get in trouble, you would have to do something wrong (which you haven't), be told not to, and then do it again, repeatedly. Maproom (talk) 22:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- You were missing the ref close code, which is </ref>. Originally you just had <ref> without the slash. Also, the url goes in a url= field - you had it in the title= field, generating an error. I also added website, date, and accessdate parameters.TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Attn: User: Gonzofan2007
User:Gonzofan2007, Why do you keep deleting Dave Roller's well written article? It is not a stub as all information is factual and the source is straight from Dave Roller himself and taken from articles he has presented to verify. There are no links to use as sources to such information on these articles from 30 years ago as all have been archived. I have personally read these articles but have no way to link them to his Wikipedia page. It is VERY DISAPPOINTING that you keep deleting his Wikipedia information, especially since this article on Dave Roller has been on Wikipedia for over 10 years. All that changed was the format and he has received numerous compliments on the format. Everyone likes the new format as it is easier to read. He is VERY UPSET it has been deleted twice! Rather than just delete his information it would be nice to inform what exactly is wrong so it came be corrected. And how to correct it would be a lot kinder than just deleting the information altogether.
This question is directed to user Gonzofan2007 because the user deleted the information on Dave Roller but I would appreciate any help or advice from anyone. I think the information that has been provided is very resourceful and has proven over the past 10+ years to be of great interest to those that follow Dave Roller's career. Please instruct as to why this information all of a sudden (after 10+ yrs) is being deleted. All that is stated is it is a stub.
Thanking you in advance to anyone willing to help explain what is suddenly wrong with Dave Roller's information and any help or advice on how it can corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmm1313 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Mmm1313: Please discuss this on the article's talk page. Sources must exist, but they do not need to be online. See WP:REFB for how to cite sources. RudolfRed (talk) 19:09, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
I looked at the Dave Roller article at a point prior to G's deletions. It had lots of details (perhaps too many), but the essential failure was that it had no references. None. The fact that it existed for a long time does not matter. In fact, it had a needs work template dating back to 2013. This has nothing to do with format, or Mr. Roller liking the format. It is Wikipedia's article, not "his" article, and it has to meet Wikipedia standards. Statements of fact can be restored as long as references are identified. All of the deleted content is there, in View history, so not lost. David notMD (talk) 22:11, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Separately, it is clear from your comment that you have - minimally - a conflict of interest, given that you know how Roller feels about what happened. In the Talk of the article you should describe your relationship with Roller. If it in any way is paid (see WP:PAID) then you must describe the relationship. David notMD (talk) 22:11, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- I have responded to Mmm1313 on my talk page. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 23:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
NitroType Article
I recently created the article NitroType. It is a stub and I was wondering if someone could review the article and make suggestions for improvements. Thanks, mrwoogi010 (Talk) 23:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, mrwoogi010, welcome to the Teahouse. Someone has already reviewed it and found it wanting. I'm sorry, but it fails to meet our notability criteria for software/games and has been nominated for speedy deletion. You can of course contest this decision, but the only way really to save it is to demonstrate references showing that it has been written about in depth by independent sources, not promotional websites. I'm sorry about that - it can be disappointing. Maybe next time you might wish to work on a draft and then submit it when you're ready to Articles for Creation. Do have a read of Wikipedia:Your First Article. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:56, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- I just reviewed the article and unfortunately the subject is going to have a hard time meeting Wikipedia's general notability guidelines WP:GNG. I can't find any third party media coverage of the game. I thought a merge with Typing.com would work, but that article is in draft, and similarly difficult to source, so it's not likely to be approved either. The NitroType article has been nominated for speedy deletion, a process you can read about here: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#A7. Sorry for having to break the bad news. We've all (or most of us) have had early articles deleted. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 01:04, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
I need my profile page in Wikipedia
Can you help me, how to create — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.97.194.47 (talk) 03:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a social media platform and does not have profile pages. It is an encyclopedia with articles about notable subjects. Registered users may choose to generate a user page with information about their Wikipedia interests. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Editing article about my husband
Hi, Some kind person wrote an article about my husband and his new book. I have supplemented his version with factual information, but wikipedia has flagged the article as having contributions by someone close to the subject. I can add citations throughout to support the statements, but I need help with the editorial process. Where do I add the citations? What is an acceptable format? I would greatly appreciate help from any of you with expertise in this process. Many thanks, Ellen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellenoffner (talk • contribs) 01:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- Advice has been given by another editor at User talk:Ellenoffner#Your conflict of interest. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
How to contribute to Wikipedia
How can I contribute on Wikipedia to write content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morkieflash (talk • contribs) 06:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Morkieflash. There's lots of ways to contribute to Wikipedia. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia for some suggestions. However, edits like this, this and this are not constructive and are going to be seen as a type of spamming. One of the quickest and surest ways to find yourself having problems as an editor is to try and use a Wikipedia article to promote someone or something. It's OK to make a mistake once (maybe even twice), especially when you're new to Wikipedia, but please don't do that type a thing again.
- In addition, your choice of username does not comply with Wikipedia:User name policy#Promotional names, so I suggest you change it asap before your account is blocked. I've posted more specific information on how you can request such a change on your user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Article declined, need help
Hello, I was trying to write an article about Popovy Sisters, but for some reason my content was blocked and I was sent to this section. Can anyone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julia mji (talk • contribs) 05:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- hello, Julia mji - welcome to our Teahouse. The article you wrote under a correctly-declared Conflict of Interest/Paid editing statement on Popovy sisters was declined, not blocked, in 2017. An attempt to resubmit it at Article for Creation was declined earlier this year, and the draft deleted. I'm sure you've seen the notifications about this on your Talk Page which explained the reasoning? Not being an admin, I am unable to view the deleted content, but it appears that not only had you copy/pasted copyrighted text directly from your employers' website, but the feeling was that the page was purely promotional in nature, so the draft was declined. This is why we discourage anyone to take payment to write on behalf of others, as gaining neutrality is never as easy as it is with a non-incentivised editor. The only help I can give you is in the form of advice we give to everyone. If you can find a number of reliable sources that write in detail and in-depth about the subject, then you might stand a chance in creating an article. This Vogue article shows they have been taken note of by serious media, but sadly it's in the form of an interview, so we ignore the writings of the subjects themselves. Similarly, this Huff Post page is in the same format. Maybe you can source others and ensure neutral, encyclopaedia content in any attempt to recreate/review the page? If you're unable to do this then I'm afraid you will never get a page here, no matter how much they might want you to write one for them. I hope this helps a little. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello Nick Moyes, I am art manager of Popovy Sisters, I do work with them, but I do not get paid for articles. It is my own will as they are a very notable artists who have been published internationally, won several awards, and collaborated with some important Artists and Designers. How can I restart writing the article again? Julia mji (talk) 07:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Julia mji: You could start a new draft. However, to keep you from wasting your time, I would suggest you very carefully read the advice above. It is required that articles be written mostly from reliable and independent source material. That material should be substantially or entirely about the article subject, not just name drop them. If a substantial quantity of such material exists about that subject, write a draft in a neutral tone, and ensure to stick only to facts verified by reliable references, not any personal knowledge you may have. If a good quantity of such reference material doesn't exist, they are not an appropriate subject for an article. In that case, you might want to consider writing about them elsewhere. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hi, Julia mji. If you are their 'art manager', then you are most definitely paid, but that really isn't a concern here because you've correctly declared your working relationship on your Talk Page, so thank you very much for that. If they've won awards, find the references that prove this; if they've been featured in international exhibitions, show the sources that demonstrate this. Find the mentions in books or news media. You are, of course, (as has just been said above) able to start another draft and resubmit if for review (or you can keep one for as long as you like within your own personal sandbox) but my advice would be to avoid repeating the approach you took last time, whatever that was. I often advise that 'less is more' - just get past the hurdle of Notability for artists, and don't puff up an article with irrelevant references that just seem intended to promote. I thinks that's all I can offer you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
How do I see what happens to my additions?
I am really new to this, I just started editing yesterday, and I have just been correcting small grammar mistakes and other minor stuff. Where can I see when one of my changes gets deleted or something like that? Do I get a notification? Thanks, cpscm! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Actualcpscm (talk • contribs) 16:38, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hello Actualcpscm, and welcome to the Teahouse! There is "something like that", but you will not (in general, but see WP:UNDO, if someone does that to one of your edits, you get a "ping") be notified when someone edits your edits.
- At Special:Contributions/Actualcpscm you will see some edits marked current which means nobody has edited the page after you.
- If you add articles to your WP:WATCHLIST you can check that now and then, and see who did what to which article. Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- If you add to your watchlist any articles which you edit (which is, I think, still the default in Special:Preferences), you'll see any further changes flagged in the watchlist. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, Actualcpscm, and welcome. I want to acknowledge you for that approach. Many new users start straight in with trying to create new articles, and that often leads to frustration for them and others. Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 17:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Actualcpscm. Can I just make a very small observation about your username? It might be absolutely fine, but something about it hints to me that it could have been created by you on behalf of an organisation (such as the Center for Purchasing and Supply Chain Management, for example). Should that be the case (and I'm not suggesting it actually is), you ought to be informed at this early stage that we don't allow usernames which imply shared use by more than one person - see WP:NOSHARING. It can be got around quite easily by simply abandoning one account now and choosing a different user name (cpscm(Nick) for example, Nor do we encourage that account to edit on topics related to it without declaring an interest. I'm not in any way trying to discourage you from editing, but just wanted to highlight a potential issue that might arise in the future. One way around any other nit-picking editor like me asking questions is to introduce yourself via your userpage (which you've not yet created), and you can tell the world a little about your Wikipedia editing interests. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:07, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Nick Moyes, thanks for your input! I am in no way related to that organisation. In fact, my username was originally a play on "salt" in online communities; capsicum is Latin for pepper, and because that name is often already taken, I just removed all the vowels... I will consider changing my name, though, so thank you!