Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1003

Archive 1000

Archive 1001

Archive 1002

Archive 1003

Archive 1004

Archive 1005

→

Archive 1010

Does interview content disqualify an article as a source?

I've drafted this page, but it's not been approved because of a lack of sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Otis_Mensah

The editor says it does not quite satisfy WP:MUSICBIO or WP:AUTHOR.

In WP:MUSICBIO it says 'publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves' may not be suitable. The editor seems to suggest that if a source has interview material in it, it might not be appropriate.

I'm not experienced with Wikipedia, but this doesn't seem quite right.

Can anyone please advise? I don't want to resubmit and have the article rejected!

Many thanks

Mikeysandford (talk) 15:19, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Mikeysandford: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. An interview is considered a primary source, as it comes from the subject themselves, and as such is not acceptable for establishing notability. Wikipedia should only summarize what independent reliable sources state about the subject. If a source is entirely an interview, it would not be acceptable. If a source only contains snippets of an interview, it would depend on what the source says and how much of its content depends on that interview. 331dot (talk) 15:25, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

What people say about themselves in an interview is not considered a reliable source. Because people might lie. Or inadvertently err. Ditto subject's own website, Facebook, other social media and IMBd. Did you include https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/nov/23/sheffields-first-hip-hop-poet-laureate-gone-are-the-days-of-tradition ? David notMD (talk) 15:29, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Umm...not to muddy the waters here, but the waters are a bit muddy here. Yes, interviews are considered a primary source for the informational content of what someone says about themselves. Whether an interview counts toward notability has been the subject of a great deal of debate with fairly strong feelings on both sides. These are generally secondary publications, despite the fact that the content of the interview itself is primary in nature. These may also include a good deal of contextual content written by the source itself that is not simply a reprinting of the transcript of the interview, and this content would generally be considered secondary. GMG^talk 15:35, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Mikeysandford: That particular line in WP:MUSICBIO is a little questionable in my view. The point it is making is that an interview is not really independent, and using what an individual has said about themselves as a source for an encyclopedia is not ideal. So far, fair enough. However, my view is that the fact that a reliable source like the Guardian chooses to profile an artist is a good indicator of notability, and simply the fact that that profile is based on an interview should not lessen that.

However, I think the reviewer's comment that the article is currently borderline and would benefit from one more source is perfectly fair. If you can find that source it seems like you will have no issues with it being rejected again. Other than that, I'm not sure that anyone here can help much - if you disagree, you'd be better of talking to the reviewer directly at their talk page. Hug^syrup 15:30, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing / Vandalism ?

I was working on the page for Jearld Moldenhauer which has been identified as a stub. I added some new biographical content and two new sources and did some basic copy-editing. I was flagged first for unconstructive edits and then disruptive editing, but I don't understand why - I didn't remove anything, but the warning was as follows:

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Jearld Moldenhauer, you may be blocked from editing. Please read the notes you've been given - you are repeatedly replacing good, reliable citations with low quality, unreliable sources. Please at least acknowledge reading this before continuing as it's disruptive. Praxidicae (talk) 20:16, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I didn't remove or replace any citations. The two sources I did add were from a scholarly source. I responded to the user that flagged the edits but got no response. So I don't understand the warning or how to proceed. Michneri (talk) 13:10, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: GMG^talk 13:12, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

It looks as if in one of your edits you copy-pasted a load of content in from a draft, which isn't ideal as it makes it very hard to identify what, exactly, you changed. And you also seem to have pasted in a {{user sandbox}} template along with it which I appreciate was probably accidental, but is also not helpful and would probably have led me to revert your edit as well. However I agree that, as far as I can tell, you didn't remove any citations you only added them. If you give Praxidicae a bit more time, they may reply to your message at their talk page or chip in here to explain further.Hug^syrup 13:25, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

There are several issues here that I found disruptive, the first was that you were replacing books with a website which you are affiliated with and second, you added content which was basically the equivalent of a trip itinerary while placing inappropriate templates, numerous times in both articles. Praxidicae (talk) 13:37, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, the sandbox template was a mistake which I did notice and fixed immediately, and I will refrain from copy-pasting in a load of content from drafts in the future. However, I did not replace any books, at most I moved a citation for clarity when I added a sentence. We can disagree over the value of the content I added, though I would argue it was historically significant, however that wasn't what was flagged as a problem. The website, regardless of affiliation, is a digitized and publicly accessible version of a book that's already cited on the page and that I did not write.Michneri (talk) 14:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Ref #2 is Moldenhaur's website and ref #4 is dead. Ref #2 is used for some simple factual text, so not a big problem. Ref #4 should be rescued or replaced. As I entered on Talk, surprised that there is no content post-1972. Did JM retreat from activism? David notMD (talk) 15:18, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Ref#4 should be replaced with this new link (the archive has redone their website and the page was moved). He continued to be active past 1972, I had added content from 1974 and was working to add more, but that was when it was reverted. Michneri (talk) 15:44, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

How to correct a page when I am not allowed to edit?

I discovered an error on a page and tried to edit it. However, this particular page requires an editor to have made 500 past edits. How can I contact someone to get this page corrected? Solid365 (talk) 18:35, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Use Template:Edit extended-protected. (And please note that your signature goes at the end of a message, not the beginning.) --David Biddulph (talk) 18:43, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

How to improve my edits?

There are many common methods to improve an edit like use of proper citations, and correct facts. But is there any way we can write about something which is traditional but yet not revealed on the internet but people have the relevant knowledge of that topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delhidutyfrees (talk • contribs) 18:09, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Delhidutyfrees: You need to cite published sources, but the sources do not need to be online. See WP:REFB for help on that. If there are no published sources, then don't include it. RudolfRed (talk) 18:35, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delhidutyfrees (talk • contribs) 18:47, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Your Talk page has content about needing to change your User name, and to declare paid editing. David notMD (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Avoiding COI editing

My organization has noted a few incorrect items and some flags on our page. We would like to avoid any conflict of interesting editing, but would also like to ensure the most accurate information is reflected. Based on researching various Wikipedia best practice pages, it seems like the best approach is for the organization to recommend the corrections, updates, resolutions to flags, etc. on the talk page while noting the recommendations are coming from the organization. Can you confirm that my understanding is correct and, if so, are there any other tips or recommendations you can provide?

Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoatRodeoClown (talk • contribs) 22:41, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

• GoatRodeoClown (talk · contribs) - given your conflict of interest, in accordance with the policy, it is probably best that you refrain from editing the page at all. As you have suggested, leaving notes on the talk page would be helpful, provided you must disclose your conflict on your user page, and the talk page with the template, but it also merits mentioning that any edits must be accompanied by citations from reliable sources. Finding such (unbiased) sources and supplying them on the talk page would also be an aid. If such third party sources do not exist, then the material, updated or otherwise, cannot be added while remaining within Wikipedia's encyclopedic ambitions. Hope this helps, do not hesitate to ask any further questions, and kudos for compliance with WP:COI. Thanks, Stormy clouds (talk) 22:57, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Topic: ShareChat. Isn't it notable enough to be on Wikipedia?

I've been trying to publish Wiki page for ShareChat but it's getting rejected. Need some tips: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ShareChat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankurshva (talk • contribs) 06:47, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ankurshva: - there are quite a lot of tips provided in the notices at the top of the draft. Do you feel you have addressed all of these, or is there some aspect of them that you don't understand? Hug^syrup 07:31, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

You have tripled the length of the draft since the last decline. However, much of what has been added - including entire sections - have no references. Either provide citations or deleted unreferenced content before submitting again. David notMD (talk) 09:22, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

You disclosed a paid relationship on your Talk page: "I work for ShareChat (company Mohalla Tech Pvt Ltd), and, as part of my job responsibilities, I am editing this Wikipedia article about ShareChat on behalf of company Mohalla Tech Pvt Ltd." This information belongs on your User page. Also, you must comply with WP:PAID. David notMD (talk) 09:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

It's an app available only in India, and supports several Indian languages, but not English. It might be appropriate for one of those Indian language wikis. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:16, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

AlanM1, that makes no sense. Either it's notable or it's not. What has the demographic it services got anything to do with anything? It's borderline inappropriate to suggest such a thing, in my opinion. Usedtobecool ^✉ ✨ 17:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

My concern was the bolded part – it is intentionally not useful to the English-speaking world, for whom it is not developed or targeted, with which I have no problem whatsoever. Is it of interest (notable) to enwiki readers? Doesn't notability have at least some attention to audience? Has it been covered significantly by English-language sources? I understand this is not a requirement, but it is an impediment to verifiability. I apologize if you or anyone else is offended by what I wrote; that is certainly not my intent. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Just to expand a little, I can understand that mention of things not of interest to English-speakers can be useful from the standpoint of complete knowledge. They should certainly find a place in lists, etc. But if English-language sources don't find them notable enough, that seems a good indicator that a separate article may not be appropriate.

Having said all that, unless there is another ShareChat, I believe it is notable based on a quick Google search (the above was based on comments by other reviewers in the existing draft when I wrote the above). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:07, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Sources do not have to be English. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:13, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

• Personally i think it's notable enough. And notablity has been increased since Twitter has invested 100mn on ShareChat recently 12345 -- CptViraj (📧) 03:38, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

If we are making an encyclopaedia of ALL KNOWLEDGE then it doesn’t make sense to drop an article because of it’s irrelevance in English (?). However, it is lacking sources and I think this discussion is getting off-topic. I think if someone better than me at finding sources did a search then it would be that point addressed. My opinion. BEANS X2 (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree. It is a bit off to say that notability should be determined by the existence of English sources. Regarding the question, a quick Google search reveals coverage and it includes non-Indian/English sources. Darwin Naz (talk) 23:57, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

RT audience scores

Can I add Rotten Tomatoes audience scores to film articles? —J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 03:47, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

As a general rule, the opinions of professional film critics are more encylopedic that the opinions of random ticket buyers, J.S. Clingman. Please read Wikipedia:Review aggregators. Stick with the standards established in Featured articles and Good articles about films. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:55, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Will do! Merci beaucoup, Cullen328!—J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 03:57, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

On uploading images for draft articles not yet approved or submitted

Would I be allowed to upload an image to use on a draft article I'm creating? I'm confident that when I submit it for review that it can't be turned down because of lack of notability, because I have at least 10 pertinent sources, including articles from Deadline and Fox News. —J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 02:42, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi J.S. Clingman. If the file you'd like to upload is released under a free license (see also c:Commons:Licensing) that the Wikimedia Foundation accepts, or is otherwise considered to be within the public domain, then yes you could possibly use it in a draft. If, however, the file is not released under such a free license or is not considered to be within the public domain and therefore needs to be uploaded under a non-free license, then no you cannot use the file in a draft per Wikipedia non-free content use criterion #9. You should wait until the draft has been approved before uploading the file as explained in WP:DRAFTS#Preparing drafts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:39, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Marchjuly! —J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 03:45, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, J.S. Clingman. To simplify things a bit, that depends on the copyright status of the image. If you took that photo yourself and are willing to license it for free use by anyone under an acceptable Creative Commons license, then upload the image to Wikimedia Commons, and it can then be used for any purpose. If the image is not protected by copyright because it was published before 1924 or was the paid work of an employee of the U.S. government, then it is also OK for upload to Wikimedia Commons. However, if you are planning to use the image under Wikipedia's strict guideline on use of non free images, then you must wait until your draft article is accepted into Wikipedia's main space. That is the only acceptable use of such images, and their use will be scrutinized. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome and clarification, Cullen328!—J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 03:59, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

How to add Twitter picture (Shared) with correct copy right

I wish to add a photo from a Twitter page (Personal account) which is shared all followers. So, i wish add that image to a Wiki page..though the image publicly available, how to ask user to change the license of the image to Creative Commons Licenses (for example CC BY). Am i missing any things? I am new to Creative commons /Wiki Copyright. Please advise. Many thanks. Twitter image url: https://twitter.com/GarethM/status/1151512197044023299/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shekar brother (talk • contribs) 06:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Shekar brother. You can use Twitter or any other social media platform to approach the copyright holder of any given photo, asking that person to voluntarily release rights under an acceptable Creative Commons license. But the decision is entirely in the hands of the copyright holder. Most of them will want to retain more controlled rights to their photo, but a few may accept your request, and follow through with the proper licensing. Be very careful to avoid any hint that you are harassing people. Be kind and gentle. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:27, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

First-hand sources

Can I use information from first-hand sources as a reference in an article? Say an email from a company representative in answer to a direct inquiry?—J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 05:47, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

That would be an unpublished primary source, and not independent. Wikipedia is based on information in independent published sources, so you can't use your e-mail as a reference, but if the information is not controversial and not challenged, then it might be OK to include it. A company's own website would be preferable for basic facts about the company because at least it is published information, though not independent. Dbfirs 06:09, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, J.S. Clingman. I am going to be a bit more firm than Dbfirs on this matter. Using an unpublished email from a corporate representative for any purpose whatsoever on Wikipedia is a serious violation of our policy against Original research and any such content would also fail our core content policy of Verifiability. If the email helps guide you to finding an actual independent reliable source, then it is fine to use for your own off-Wikipedia research efforts. But that email itself has no place whatsover on Wikipedia itself. This is a matter of policy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:21, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @J.S. Clingman: Absolutely not! Welcome to the Teahouse, and please appreciate that this encyclopaedia would soon degenerate into a place full of spin, bias and personal opinion if one of our key principles were not that of VERIFIABILITY. We need every other user to be able to fact-check content here, and to do that all sources of information used in articles must be publicly available and presented via reliable sources. This includes news outlets, properly published books or periodicals. Single pieces of paper, emails etc simply aren't accessible enough to everyone else, and can be easily faked. Thus, we have blanket ruling against the use of such unpublished sources. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 06:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that's safer advice. I've struck my over-generous comment above. Why not ask your company correspondent to put the answer on the website, then at least it is published? Dbfirs 06:38, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Dbfirs:, @Cullen328:, and @Nick Moyes:. I figured the answer was probably no, but I wanted to be certain. I might have to request that they put the information on their site, like you suggested @Dbfirs:. Thanks!—J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 12:18, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Article Not Created But Article Created Message Appears!

I recently created my new draft Aay's Village. After completing all information I added to queue of article acception on WikiPedia. Some author visited my page and marked it approved. A green message appears showing that my article is approved but still the article is not shifted to mainspace. The article is still mentioned as a Draft at WikiPedia. Could anyone help me?

Aay's Village Draft At: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aays_Village

Please check it out, I will be thnakful to the community! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilbert Ryan (talk • contribs) 11:25, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hilbert Ryan. I’m not going to address the current issue, my apologies. But I would like to address the fact that your draft has no sources thus violating Verifiability, one of Wikipedia’s core policies. This will need to be changed in order for your draft to be kept on Wikipedia. If you need assisstance, see Help:Citing or please ask again at the Teahouse for help and an editor should be able to help. Regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:27, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Hilbert Ryan, welcome to the Teahouse. The history for that draft shows four edits, all by you. The edit where you replaced an {{AfC submission}} template with an "accepted" message is this one. The article hasn't been reviewed, but it would be rejected because it doesn't have any references. There's some useful info at Help:Referencing for beginners. You'll want to delete the message at the top of the article, add enough sources to make the article verifiable and show that Aay's Village is notable, then submit it again when it's ready. After that, wait for a reviewer to look at it. If you need any more help, you're always welcome to ask here.

Also, don't try to review other people's drafts until you have more experience and have been approved as a reviewer, and don't vandalise them either. This edit where you tried to approve another editor's draft at the same time as describing the article's subject as a "stupid" instead of a coach, is not acceptable. Neither are the next few edits where you marked his education as "WebZed" (your article about which was speedy-deleted), changed the acceptance message to read "You are more than welcome to continue fucking quality contributions", added a picture of a donkey etc etc. You'll get blocked if you continue to do things like that. › Mortee _talk 12:38, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Need help in publishing the article from Sandbox page to wiki article

Team

I Need help in publishing the article from Sandbox page to wiki article — Preceding unsigned comment added by VenkatChinnapureddy (talk • contribs) 12:49, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

VenkatChinnapureddy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit the draft for review. Click the blue "submit your draft for review" button. It may need further work before it is ready, I would suggest you read Your First Article before submitting it. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Transferring material between Wiki articles

There are many cases where one section of a Wiki page is bulking-up too long, distending the article, and needs to be lifted-out into its own separate page, leaving only a short summary of it on the main page.

I can’t see how this counts as using copyright material to start a new page, as ruled inadmissable by Wiki guidelines. Valetude (talk) 10:56, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Valetude. Copying text from one article to another is allowed, but you need to provide attribution when doing so by linking to the source article in the edit summary. See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for a full explanation. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Article size for thoughts on length. David notMD (talk) 15:55, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

lazy ed's way to type "template:"

When I want to talk about a template or search for a template is there a shorter way add a link to the template namespace or call up the template documentation other than typing out the entire "t-e-m-p-l-a-t-e-(colon)" portion? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 09:43, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi NewsAndEventsGuy. There is no Wikipedia:Namespace#Aliases for Template. For wikilinks in discussions it's common to write {{tl|Example}} to produce {{Example}} instead of Template:Example, but it's mainly because it looks better and be copy-pasted for uses, not to save a few characters. You can choose namespace at Special:Search but it ends up taking longer if you have a normal type versus click ratio. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:55, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, I knew I'd seen something like t1 but couldn't remember. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 09:58, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

NewsAndEventsGuy Just in case... it's tl (L for Llama), not t1. The font in code format makes them look very similar. There are lots of related templates in the documentation for {{tl}}, of which the ones I use most often are {{tlp}} and {{tlx}} for adding parameters to the example, and (mostly in my cheatsheet) {{tbullet}} to demonstrate what a template does › Mortee _talk 23:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks Mortee! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:36, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Image

https://thecreative.cafe/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none-610d01afd6a8 Does the image here meet the threshold of originiality? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve Mulch Civic (Pro) (talk • contribs) 23:19, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello Steve Mulch and welcome to the Teahouse.

We most often speak of the threshold of originality in discussing logos; some logos are simple enough that they are considered to be uncopyrightable, at least in some jurisdictions.

Your chart, as part of the webpage, would generally be treated as copyrighted material. Whether that copyright belongs to you or to someone you closely copied it from could be a matter of dispute; most likely, in that case, yours might be considered a derivative work. The idea of a two-by-two matrix with labels and items in the quadrants is by now fairly commonplace and I'm fairly certain the general idea of such a chart is not subject to copyright.

But what are you really asking? — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:27, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

NOT in category?

Is it technically possible to have a template or link that gives you a random page that is NOT in a category? BEANS X2 (talk) 09:05, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

• I believe not, but there might be workarounds to whatever it is you actually want to achieve. What is it? Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@BEANS X2: You can go to Category:Wikipedia backlog then find the categories on the left titled ‘Articles needing additional categories from (date)’. These categories have articles in that have no/very few categories in them. Regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:30, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Also, try going to Category:Uncategorized pages then click the bold, blue sentence after the second paragraph. Regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:52, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Tigraan: I want a link that gives me a random page that has not got a short description (Not in Category:Pages with short description) to get numbers up. Thinking about it, if that was possible, it would probably have already been done. BEANS X2 (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@BEANS X2: Thanks for revealing what you actually want so we can give proper answers for it. Category:Pages with short description only contains 30 pages. I guess you mean one of the subcategories. The search -incategory:"Articles with short description" gives mainspace pages not in Category:Articles with short description. -incategory:"Articles with short description" -incategory:"Disambiguation pages with short description" also avoids pages in Category:Disambiguation pages with short description. Searches produce a non-random list of search results. You could add some random words to the search to make the results more random. -hastemplate:"Short description" also works since both categories are added by Template:Short description. This will probably use less server resources. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Thank you for your help! The teahouse has been very useful. --BEANS X2 (talk) 05:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Punctuation for image descriptions

Should I or should I not be adding periods in the descriptions of images? I see both descriptions with a period and without one (seemingly more without one), so I thought I'd better ask here to get a concrete answer. For example, which of the following would be correct? I would assume with a period, but since I see so many descriptions without one, you know, doesn't hurt to ask.

Inside the cab of an R46 car

Inside the cab of an R46 car.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by GeneralPunger (talk • contribs) 06:14, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

No periods when caption is a sentence fragment. See WP:CAPFRAG. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:27, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Help editing page?

I'm not sure how to edit pages on Wikipedia but would like to add an additional, worthy, tourist attraction to Moose Jaws wiki page. The city is Moose Jaw and the attraction I would love to add is the grant hall hotel. Its a very unique boutique hotel with a rich history here in moose jaw. The experience in the hotel is outstanding with a 1930's feel an absolute must see if visiting the city. Any help would be much appreciated thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klautamu (talk • contribs) 21:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Many pages on Wikipedia can be edited by clicking the “edit” button on the top of the page. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 21:42, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

... but any changes you make need to be supported by references to published independent reliable sources. Bear in mind that Wikipedia is not a tourist guide. - David Biddulph (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello Klautamu and welcome to Wikipedia. I actually know the place you've described, and was even inside it a short time ago. But as David Biddulph noted, Wikipedia only cares about what reliable sources have said about a topic. Only if several reliable sources have given the place extensive coverage would it be considered notable enough to mention. Wikipedia has no interest in unpubished personal knowledge, experience or opinions. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 08:28, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Taudhakpur

Hello, I just want to know whether my article has been submitted successfully or not. Please check and inform. Thank-you.Rushdesk2017 (talk) 08:41, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello Rushdesk2017. Yes, you’re draft has been submitted for review and a reviewer should be able to review soon. Please be patient as it make take several weeks for a reviewer to do so. The draft looks good after a glance so it should be accepted. If you have anymore questions, please do ask. Regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 09:37, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Y Moved to Draft and Accepted. The article is at Taudhakpur. Editors feel free to have a look and review my review. Usedtobecool ^✉ ✨ 09:51, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations on your first articles, Rushdesk2017. I hope you got the same sense of achievement that I got when I created mine. Just one thing: it looks like you might be trying to prepare them on your Userpage, which isnt really the right way to go about things. That page is for you to say a little about yourself, your editing interests and related stuff. Drafting new pages is best done in your own sandbox page (see link at top), or as a draft via the Articles for Creation wizard. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 10:11, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

How did 2605:6000:1711:C8C6:6DB1:34CA:FC05:4A8A get a new I.P address so fast?

2605:6000:1711:C8C6:6DB1:34CA:FC05:4A8A How did the ip get a new address so fast? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humorous1234 (talk • contribs) 05:32, 25 August 2019 (UTC) This one: 2605:6000:1711:C8C6:A451:EC6E:A430:D49

Humorous1234: some ISPs have a pool of IP addresses, and each time one of their customers connects to the internet, they are allocated an address from the pool. (This is of course nothing to do with Wikipedia.) Maproom (talk) 07:06, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Humorous1234: At least the last half (64 bits; four hexadectets) of IPv6 addresses are generally assigned on the local network. The ISP assigns no more than the top 64 bits, and often the top 48 or even fewer, to a particular customer. The user's local network hardware is doing it, and it's not unheard of (though I don't know the reason). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Could somebody please help me in my discussion with User:Justlettersandnumbers

Hi everyone, I am new to Wikipedia and have done extensive research about a top 20 highly competitive and selective FDS-accredited drama school in the UK (Drama Studio London) and Justlettersandnumbers (talk · contribs) has literally removed everything based on one-sided accusations without giving me a chance to explain myself (which I have done with Ganbaruby (talk · contribs) who kindly helped me and made me feel welcome. Justlettersandnumbers (talk · contribs) has refused to discuss anything with me and automatically deleted everything from the article without giving me a chance to edit it and has labelled everything automatically as an "inappropriate edit" or a copyright violation, when everything I have done so far was in good faith and had references. Justlettersandnumbers (talk · contribs) himself added red links back to the article (which I have since had to remove yet again before he blanked the entire article) and highly inaccurate information to the article while claiming ownership of this article (such as saying that it is a "distance learning school" when in reality it is a top 20 FDS accredited drama school in the UK which is highly selective and you can only audition for and attend in person, but user:Justlettersandnumbers refuses to acknowledge any of this), which I understand is against Wikipedia policy in itself. I would very much appreciate it if an experienced editor could kindly join in this discussion to allow me to edit the article again without everything automatically being removed by user:Justlettersandnumbers who seems unwilling to discuss anything with me. User:Justlettersandnumbers even listed one of my edits on the article of Middlesex University as an "inappropriate edit" when all I did was refer one word to its own Wikipedia article........User:Justlettersandnumbers has not made me feel very welcome so far on Wikipedia and has not given me any chance to explain myself or to even edit my edits in the article, when he himself has violated Wikipedia policy by adding red links and inaccurate information to the article of Drama Studio London (which I have subsequently removed), but everything I have edited has been deleted yet again by User:Justlettersandnumbers, which I find very sneaky of him to do so, when in all honesty I do not want any arguments and just want to fairly have a discussion in order to edit this article, but I have received no response so far to my invitation to discuss all of this with user:Justlettersandnumbers--Coreyar (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

• I also find it very strange that User:Justlettersandnumbers first deleted everything by saying that everything I have added is an "inappropriate edit" and when I tried to edit it again and explained that he added inaccurate information and red links back to the article, he suddenly said that everything is a "copyright violation", which is also untrue, and he has not given me any chance to edit or explain anything, but just automatically deleted everything that I have edited again. I find that very strange and unwelcoming of him and it seems like he is claiming ownership of the article without giving me the chance to edit it.--Coreyar (talk) 14:17, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I also did not copy/paste anything, I directly referred back to the article that contained the information, but User:Justlettersandnumbers could have just discussed this with me and I could have edited it, but now I am not even allowed to edit anything anymore from him since he has blanked everything and does not allow me to edit the article again. Isn't Wikipedia a free encyclopedia for all to edit? He was not even willing to discuss this with me first before deleting everything, which I did with User:Ganbaruby who kindly discussed everything with me and we came to a consensus, but User:Justlettersandnumbers has refuse to discuss anything with me to give me a chance to re-edit it and now I am not allowed to edit anything from him anymore........
  • Justlettersandnumbers (talk · contribs) has also made it very clear by reverting on the article of Drama Studio London that he is unwilling to discuss anything with me and refuses to go onto the talk page before reverting all of my edits yet again.--Coreyar (talk) 14:21, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi there Coreyar. Your edits were reverted for a number of reasons:

1. It was a clear violation of our policy on promotional content. Here at Wikipedia, we write in a Neutral point of view which you did not do. You promoted the company heavily.
2. Verifiability is a key policy of Wikipedia which is taken very seriously. Your edits did not have Reliable sources to back up the information you added. Instead, you used your own Original research which is not permitted on Wikipedia.
3. It appears you copy and pasted information from another website which is copyright violation. This is not permitted on Wikipedia.

I suggest you take the Tutorial and see Help:Editing before continuing, so that your edits are not reverted in the future. Best wishes, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 14:46, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your message Willbb234 (talk · contribs). However, is User:Justlettersandnumbers allowed to add red links to an article, inaccurate information and claim ownership of the article by blanking it and not allowing me to edit it again and reverting all my edits and refusing to discuss anything on the talk page with me? Aren't those Wikipedia policy violations?--Coreyar (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

• • • It is such a shame that I have received rather hostile reactions from editors on my talk page instead of anyone kindly giving me help and advice. The only decent editor so far who has objectively helped me and came to a consensus was Ganbaruby. I thought the Tea House would be a friendly place where I could expect help, not be attacked and scrutinised based on one-sided accusations without giving me a chance to explain myself, which has made Wikipedia very off-putting and not a free place to edit at all in my opinion.........such a shame and I hope that someone can still decently help me in a friendly manner to re-edit the article of Drama Studio London--Coreyar (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Apart from the serious copyright issues, you added ridiculous trumpery to the Drama Studio London "one of the twenty most prestigious and most selective officially accredited leading drama schools" which was quite rightly reverted by User:Justlettersandnumbers. Theroadislong (talk) 15:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Theroadislong (talk · contribs), Since I am a new editor, all of you could have at least discussed this with me first so that I could have re-edited and removed edits from the article instead of being hostile towards me....I do not appreciate one-sided accusations without giving me the chance to explain myself or correct my edits........However, is User:Justlettersandnumbers allowed to add red links to an article, inaccurate information and claim ownership of the article by blanking it and not allowing me to edit it again and reverting all my edits and refusing to discuss anything on the talk page with me? Aren't those Wikipedia policy violations?--Coreyar (talk) 15:24, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes User:Justlettersandnumbers is allowed to add red links there is nothing in the guidelines to stop him and it is actually encouraged. The content at Drama Studio London has been blanked pending an investigation into copyright violation which Wikipedia takes very seriously. Theroadislong (talk) 15:37, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

See your Talk page as to why you are temporarily blocked. Standard practice is add, if reverted, discuss on the article's Talk. What you wanted to do is re-add your content and keep it in the article while discussing at Talk. Finding one editor who agreed with you (Ganbaruby) is not consensus. David notMD (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Coreyar: being a new user does not give you the right to violate Wikipedia policies. Wikipedia takes its policy on copyright violation particularly seriously, as allowing it to be violated could have legal consequences. Maproom (talk) 20:21, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Just for the record, Coreyar, I have attempted to discuss your edits with you, as you can see by looking at your talk-page, User talk:Coreyar. Matters I've raised with you have been:

1. the remarkably promotional tone of many of your edits, in my view wholly inappropriate to an encyclopaedia (e.g., "the most prestigious and most selective officially accredited leading drama schools")
2. compliance with our copyright policy
3. the possibility that you may have a conflict of interest or paid relationship to one or more of the topics you have written about.

Your "chance to explain [your]self" was to reply to those messages, which you chose not to do; instead, you started edit-warring to restore the same inappropriate content as before, and got yourself briefly blocked. Once you return, perhaps you would care to offer some explanation here? Specific questions you might consider are:

• are you connected to any of the topics you've written about, such as Drama Studio London or Drama UK?
• why do you use such promotional language in relation to them?
• how did you end up writing content identical to that here if you didn't copy it? Was it copied from somewhere else?

Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:51, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Sources and tables

If I create a table based on information from a source (or sources) cited several times previously in an article, must I still refer back to the source(s) in every entry of the table?—J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, J.S. Clingman. WP:HEADERS suggests that column and row headings are a good place to reference sources, which is what I tend to do when creating tables. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Cordless Larry!—J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 15:43, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@J.S. Clingman: Looking at your Draft:Kingdom Studios, you could, above the table, add a short sentence with a description of the table including the reference, like Following is a table of planned films:<ref>...</ref>. Also note that, if you want all the text to be centered, you don't need to specify it for each cell; just change the table header to:

{| class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align:center;"

—[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:41, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks AlanM1! Il do that.—J.S. Clingman Fëalórin, A Child of God (talk) 13:39, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Searching all projects?

There are times that I would like to search certain words/phrases on all of the various wiki sites - I call them portals, I believe you call them projects (en.wikipedia, es.wikipedia, commons, etc). But short of opening each individual site and entering my search criteria, I don't know of another way to do it. Any ideas? Quakewoody (talk) 21:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Quakewoody, welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know of an in-house tool to do this, but if you type site:wikipedia.org "my search term" into Google, results from all the subdomains (en., es. etc) will be included. Commons is on Wikimedia.org so you'd need to run a second search to cover that. Hope this helps. Depending on what you're trying to achieve, it might also be relevant that if you go to a particular article on Wikipedia (in any language), links to the equivalent articles in other languages are given in the bar on the left (assuming someone has linked them). › Mortee _talk 22:41, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

First, doing that on Google doesn't show all results, just most. But also, that is a delayed search. I am really just trying to prevent certain spam, and some vandals have started learning to use "other than" en.Wiki to spread their disease. Wikipedia search is fairly instant, plus I get the info like "last updated" or being able to search just talk pages of discussion pages, etc. Quakewoody (talk) 23:25, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Perhaps someone else knows of a tool that I don't and can tell us both about it. › Mortee _talk 23:32, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@Quakewoody and Mortee: Global Search —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:47, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Maybe I could get more out of it if it came with instructions. But, as of right now, I can tell you that this link is nice but heavily flawed and in no way a complete result. But I will spend some time toying with it using some of the terms I regularly search for. Maybe I can add it to my regular arsenal of spam fighting. Quakewoody (talk) 13:50, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Moving articles from French Wikipedia

Hello Wikipedia, I'm a new one here, and i'm a french student. I'm working on Jocelyne Saab's films, who released a lot of her movie in different country. I have been trying to write articles about her on the french wikipedia plateform in english, but it has been locked. Would it be possible to transfert my articles to the english plateform (i'm working from english sources) ? How can i process ? Thanks for the answer Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by RZLMV (talk • contribs) 09:27, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@RZLMV: welcome to the Teahouse! In order to get the text from your deleted articles at French Wikipedia, you'll need to contact the administrators there. Hopefully they will be able to send you the text, and you can then create the articles here. Please use the Articles for creation process or the so-called "Article Wizard" for your first articles, to help you through the process. New accounts cannot create articles on English Wikipedia until they have made a number of edits - this is different from French Wikipedia. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@RZLMV:, just as an additional tip, please note that film articles on English Wikipedia should meet the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (films) (and WP:GNG in general). But of course any sourced contributions within these guidelines are greatly appreciated. I also cleaned up some formatting issues in the main article for Jocelyne Saab - hope this is helpful. GermanJoe (talk) 10:08, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@GermanJoe and Bonadea: Thank all of you for the answer, i actually trying to understand all wikipedia's rulls to the english plateform, and really thank you GermanJoe for helping me improve the English page of Jocelyne ! Regards. RZLMV ([User talk:RZLMV|talk]]) 15:32, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Is this significant coverage for wiki notability?

I am looking to write an article in the english wikipedia about a well known state lawyer of Mongolia. There are mentions and citation found in english to the works of the laywer, but there are no articles or biographies in english about this laywer. So my question is can I write about this person in the english wiki, with only his works and research papers as his notability? Additionally, his works are in Mongolian, but there are research papers done in english that cite the laywers works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Буддаа Батнаран (talk • contribs) 14:44, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Буддаа Батнаран, You can use Mongolian sources that talk about his life. It's not easy to say he's notable or not without actually seeing the sources. So please start a draft and use all relevant sources in any language. – Ammarpad (talk) 15:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Why not write the article for Mongolian Wikipedia? Quakewoody (talk) 16:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Буддаа Батнаран Sources to demonstrate that a subject meets our Notability criteria here on English Wikipedia do not themselves have to be written in English. It helps, but it's not essential. There are innumerable brilliant lawyers around the world who would fail to meet those criteria - very few get written about by independent sources in a way that easily demonstrate notability, as defined by Wikipedia, whether in English or otherwise. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:11, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

How do I check my account security?

I got home and went on to wikipedia, however I had to log back in, with some message that my account had be logged out due to attempted logins. I was wondering if there is a way to see who is trying to get into my account or not? Govvy (talk) 19:43, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Govvy. There was a spate of attempted logins some time ago. I had hundreds of attempts, as did many others, so I made my password a bit more secure. Checkusers can see the IP addresses of edits, but I'm not sure whether failed login attempts have their source recorded. If your password is strong then I wouldn't worry about it. Hackers will only succeed if the password is weak or used elsewhere and hacked there. Dbfirs 20:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

k, I used generated chain passwords, so should be okay. Govvy (talk) 20:17, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Custom spelling list?

In an edit window, I get red squiggles under words the internal wiki spellchecker does not recognize. This is a great feature unless such phrases are intentional and frequently recur (i.e., a name in a BLP). Is there a way to add a custom list of words for use by the internal spell checker? Thanks NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:20, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi NewsAndEventsGuy and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not a Wikipedia spellchecker, but the spellchecker in your browser. Most browsers have a custom dictionary to which you can add words, usually by left- or right-clicking on the word. Dbfirs 20:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Really? Who knew! Thanks! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:47, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

need help with understanding "reliable sources" for new page on Cronyn Observatory

This is my first wikipedia page, and I realize that at the moment there are no references included.

Much of the information comes from my having worked at the observatory for 34 years.

We've been working on the history of this institution for the past 5 years. This includes many successful searches in the archives of The University of Western Ontario and other archives. Much information is first hand knowledge, a good example being the sizes and parameters of the telescopes. Certainly there are references available for all publications mentioned in the "Research" area.

I've been using as an example the pages for Scotlands "Mills Observatory", which interestingly has the telescope that we were offered for purchase in 1939 (Western archives private communication).

Thanks so much for so promptly looking at my submission.

Please help me understand what is needed for reliable sources.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Avocet7 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Avocet7. Have you tried taking a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources yet? If not, then try looking at it because it pretty much explains how Wikipedia defines a "reliable source". You might also want to look at Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth because these pages explain why editors who try to base article content on their own personal knowledge often find themselves running into problems with other editors. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Knowledge , sharing with other language in wikipedia

first of all , i'm french . i watch some french article in wikipedia and sometime i wanna know if the english version is a better one than the french one (and vice-versa) .

Generaly , it's quiet the same thing , but sometime , it's outdated . i'm just coming from the Syphilis page (the french one and after , the english one ) and it seem that the english page is outdated So i have a few question. Can we updated it with french material? some "free" french source (from scientifics articles) are well cited in the french page of the Syphilis , who updated the knowledge we know about this desease .

it is not unusual to see sometime, in the french side of wikipedia , some english source . so i wouldlike to know if we can put some french source and , to an extent , wanna know how these different side communicate .

Ps: sorry for my bad english — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eldiran (talk • contribs) 02:09, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Eldiran, French (or any other language) sources are more than welcome on English Wikipedia (and to my knowledge, any other Wikipedia project). Each language Wikipedia is a separate project, so be mindful that content decisions (and guidelines governing them) may be different on English Wikipedia than on French Wikipedia. That having been said, most of the time adding additional translated content from another Wikipedia is fine and welcome.

Additionally, if there's something you want to add but aren't sure your English skills are good enough, another option to consider is to write a comment on the talk page providing the sources and a brief explanation of how/why they should be added. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:29, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Eldiran Greetings. Additional note - sources can be in any languages and not just French and secondly, please translate the content in your own words and not using machine translation. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:09, 26 August 2019 (UTC)