Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 200

Archive 195

←

Archive 198

Archive 199

Archive 200

Archive 201

Archive 202

→

Archive 205

How to proceed with user / user account made solely for vandalism?

How should I proceed with user / user account made solely for vandalism?

USER: Special:Contributions/Josefkosut

Any help would be appreciated Xxxartxxx (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The first thing you need to do is read Wikipedia's definition of vandalism. The user appeared to be trying to place a speedy-deletion tag on the article, and give notification that he had done so, but was obviously confused about the process; Wikipedia's policy is to assume good faith unless there is evidence of ill-intent, and at first glance I see no evidence of vandalism from that account. Those of us who are not administrators can't see how similar the current article is to those which were previously deleted, so it isn't apparent to us whether the speedy-deletion tag would be valid in this case. If the tag does get placed, it must not be removed by you as the author of the article. Instead you can use the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". If you do find evidence that a user is committing vandalism under Wikipedia's definition, you should first issue warnings on the user's talk page as outlined at WP:vandalism#For beginners, and if vandalism continues after a final warning then the user can eventually be reported to WP:AIV. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear David Biddulph, thank you for your assistance. However, the edit I was referring to was the first vandalism edit. Next, there was the vandalism that ensued with the edit which also "attempt" to place the speedy-deletion tag. Since there is (1) in the article TALK page a clear indication that is a new page from a deleted page (from nearly two years ago) with a substantial amount of new sourceable / verifiable materials, and (2) the account was clearly made to disrupt said page, without any indication of assume good faith, one can only assume the editors actions intent were solely disruptive in nature. Otherwise the procedures would have been done in accordance with assume good faith and per Wiki policy. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and suggestions. --Xxxartxxx (talk) 19:34, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

@Xxxartxxx: Hi Xxxartxxx. I have attempted to understand what you mean in the above clarification but I do not. Indeed, I have looked at every edit by User:Josefkosut and I see nothing in his edits from which to infer that the user has done anything in bad faith and David's description appears spot on. Understand that, as David said, only an administrator can look at the deleted content, compare it to the current content and then make a judgement call as to whether section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion applies does or does not apply. There is nothing unusual (nor is it a hallmark of bad faith) to tag an article under CSD G4 when it was originally deleted at AfD, and to then await an administrator's review. Obviously the tagging here was misformatted but the intent is neutral in the absence of anything else and if the deletion template had been formatted properly, you would actually be in the wrong to remove it. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Xxxartxxx. I'm going to have to agree with David here. The edit isn't vandalism as defined by Wikipedia policy. An example of vandalism looks something like this; that edit is clearly an attempt to harm Wikipedia. The edits made by Josefkosut, on the other hand, were the user's first ever contributions to Wikipedia. I would expect that they would not have the experience or the knowledge to make the right decisions, especially in an area like the deletion process. While the edit may have been incorrect, the edit was at least made in an attempt to be correct. If you don't agree with the edit, then undo it and move on. I do not think there is any further action you need to take at this time. If the user continues to add the template despite repeated attempts to inform them of consensus/policy, it may be seen as disruptive editing, but it is important to note that disruptive editing is not vandalism. Best, Mz7 (talk) 22:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you both! I can take comfort in the fact that Mz7, too, found apparent incredulity in the fact that "the edits made by first time user Josefkosut did not assume good faith, and were on the other hand, ones one would NOT expect from a first-time wiki novice, ie that they would have the experience or the knowledge to make the right decisions, especially in an area like the deletion process -- not to mention knowledge or experience with the subject matter of the article." Thank you all for your invaluable contributions to this thread! I will be happy to view this lone incident as an act of disruptive editing -- and per Mz7 advice: "think there is any further action to take at this time." Thanks again! --Xxxartxxx (talk) 22:38, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Again, Xxxartxxx, you seem not to be understanding what has been explained to you above. Repeated attempts to template an article for deletion against consensus may be seen as disruptive. This was a single attempt, which was neither disruptive nor vandalism. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:49, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear User talk:Cullen328, thank you for your message. Yes, indeed, I did understand what was written by the generous editors. However, I do appreciate your additional clarification: "Repeated attempts to template an article for deletion against consensus may be seen as disruptive." Thank you! --Xxxartxxx (talk) 00:03, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Xxxartxxx, you seem to be misunderstanding the concept of assume good faith, as you have twice now responded to people mentioning it by talking about Josefkosut failing to do so. As we have no knowledge whatever of Josefkosut's motives, we are quite unable to determine whether they assumed anything, but I see no reason to suppose that they were assuming bad faith. You on the other hand have assumed that Josefkosut was committing vandalism, which none of the other contributors to this discussion have agreed with. The advice to assume good faith is addressed to you, not to Josefkosut. --ColinFine (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Rquestes for accounts

Hello, I am wondering: where I should request a account to be created?

Happy Attack Dog (you rang?) 14:49, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:ACC. Or log out and create one yourself. Make sure you follow the policy on multiple accounts, though. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:50, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Reliable source check

Hi! I'm curious as to whether there's a place on Wikipedia where I can ask on a regular basis whether a website is reliable or not. For example, is http://smallbusiness.aol.com/2011/02/09/we-dont-need-no-education-meet-the-millionaire-dropouts/ this a reliable source? Thanks, Bananasoldier (talk) 03:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

To editor Bananasoldier: Would the reliable sources noticeboard match that description? Anon126 (talk - contribs) 04:44, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Bananasoldier (talk) 15:12, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Against vandalism

I am new user, just made some edits against vandalism. Is there any shortcut way to identify different vandalism in articles other than RC patrol? A.Minkowiski (talk) 16:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello A.Minkowiski and welcome to the Teahouse! — I know this isn't your question, but there are several tools you can use to speed up counter-vandalism. The most helpful, in my opinion, is Twinkle. Twinkle adds "rollback" buttons to diff and edit history screens so you can quickly undo vandalism with a click. When you go to a user talk page, you'll notice a "TW" dropdown menu, which includes a variety of different options, including the ability to select from dozens of user warning templates across multiple warning levels. It's a powerful tool, useful in many circumstances. However, Twinkle is only available to you after your account is 4 days old and has made 10 edits.

Now, to answer your question, there are certain automated tools you can install on your computer that can speed up vandalism, but most require the rollback right, which isn't usually granted unless your account has over 200 edits and is in good standing. (Go to WP:PERM to request for it.)

So in short, yes, there are certain shortcut ways to fight vandalism, but you need to show experience to get at them. I remember back when I first started editing, I would go to Special:Log/newusers and click on all of the blue "contribs" links to check for vandalism by newly created user accounts. Eventually, I racked up enough experience for rollback. If you are interested in counter-vandalism, I'd check out the Counter-Vandalism Unit. Make sure you are familiar with the vandalism policy. If this response doesn't help you, feel free to leave a follow-up below and I will be happy to clarify. Good luck, Mz7 (talk) 18:16, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

There are some tips for new vandal fighters on my userpage. I might move them somewhere else, but for the time being, I hope they help! K6ka (talk | contribs) 19:11, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but how can I get access for Twinkle ? A.Minkowiski (talk) 07:17, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

To editor A.Minkowiski: You can enable Twinkle from the gadgets section of your preferences. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 08:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks A.Minkowiski (talk) 08:37, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

@A.Minkowiski: My understanding was that your account needs to be at least 4 days old to enable Twinkle (called autoconfirmed). Anon126 is right, of course, that is how you would enable it. If you want it sooner, I'm sure you can make a good case by going to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed and asking for it. Best of luck, Mz7 (alt) (talk) 13:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

That is true. However, A.Minkowiski's account is almost 4 days old, so they can enable TW in two days anyway. Epicgenius (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Is there any mechanism to mark pages for later edits?

Hello all. I encountered a situation at my very first day here. Consider this real case scenario: You are reading an article and you notice that it needs some modifications. But at the time you can't (you are busy or you don't have access to resources and etc). Is there any way, such as an editlist, that allows users to bookmark such pages for later edits? Although my question already mentions the word bookmark (I know also there is a watchlist), but I was wondering if there is a built-in mechanism for this purpose. After all, browser bookmarks are there to be forgotten!Wiki Pouya M (talk) 12:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Wiki Pouya M and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no standard tool (i.e. a part of Wikipedia's software) that does this, probably because with the millions of editors involved with the project it would create squillions of additional files and slow things down. You could make such a list by creating a subpage of your sandbox in a separate browser tab, then pasting in the article titles that you want to go back to later. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 13:12, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Wiki Pouya M. You could add it to your watchlist, by picking the star in the toolbar at the top of the article. That would not record why you had added it, but it would at least be findable by looking at your watchlist. --ColinFine (talk) 16:33, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Licence Tag

I have permission (in an email) from the copyright holder/author of a photo that I would like to post. Which tag do I use for the licence. The author would also like full credit. Anetek3D (talk) 15:20, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, it would depend on what they allowed in their e-mail, presumably? I am certainly not an expert on this, but AFAIK, in order to upload Files where permission to do so has been granted in an e-mail conversation, that conversation should be logged with the OTRS team. Moreover, the OTRS page states that the copyright holder should state under which specific license they release their work. The OTRS team recommend that the copyright holder use one of their e-mail templates to avoid ambiguity. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 16:33, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Hi Anetek3D. If you want to upload the file to Wikimedia Commons, which is the recommended method, the copyright owner will first have to release the media under a free licence - see here for more details. You should send an email to: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org using one of the templates templates found here using the instructions on the same page. Good luck! ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 16:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

My content was deleted for lack of notability

I was trying to write an article about a band that I saw locally and noticed didn't have a wikipedia page. I carefully researched and formatted the page but it was deleted. The article was on the band Yamadeo. What did I do wrong? Aabell03 (talk) 17:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

@Aabell03: I think you may be confusing a well laid out page with a notable topic. A quick pass with Google general search shows little that is notable, however pleasant their music may be. Google searches of News reveal nothing. Reading WP:GNG would be useful for you, I think. There's a lot to learn here. I hope you enjoy learning it. Fiddle Faddle 17:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Possible reflist bug

I've been working on the article for W. J. Burley and the Reflist tag suddenly stopped working. The article already had one and I've added many more sources, but now the section won't show up and I'm getting the "you have references but no reflist section" error. I even copy-pasted the template code back in from the help page in case there was a typo somewhere. Does anyone see what's going on here? SarahTheEntwife (talk) 19:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Sarah, easy to make mistake. In the section on Henry Pym you'd got <ref name="DLB"> rather than <ref name="DLB"/> so the software thought everything that followed as part of the reference. Nthep (talk) 19:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you; that was fast! SarahTheEntwife (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Added AfD, but no heading

I must be doing something wrong in the AfD page as I've added Parrog but it isn't listed in the Contents and it doesn't have its own heading. Can someone help? Ta Tony Holkham (talk) 20:38, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tony, step II at WP:AFDHOWTO was missing. I have fixed it. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I must try to understand WP:AFDHOWTO - I may have got the steps out of sequence, or something. Cheers Tony Holkham (talk) 21:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

It was {{subst:afd2 | pg=PageName | cat=Category | text=Why the page should be deleted}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:04, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I think I got confused by the OR in the help page. Thanks again, and I'll keep a copy of this to refer to should I need it again Tony Holkham (talk) 21:51, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Or you could go to your preferences and enable WP:TWINKLE. That will automate the process and you won't have to worry about it. John from Idegon (talk) 22:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

keeping wikipedia simple

i love Wikipedia because of its simple layout and design and ease of finding information.!my question is as follows : i am a software graduate in information technology from Mumbai university,India. i would like to contribute to Wikipedia.how do i go about this? thanks

Niranjan Kamath

IT Software.India..59.183.49.70 (talk) 17:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to the Teahouse! A good first step is to create an account, which will help you maintain a consistent identity when interacting with other editors, among other benefits. Next, go through the introduction to learn about editing Wikipedia. After that, you can find articles in your field of expertise by joining a WikiProject, a group of editors working to improve articles in a certain subject area. (Computing-related projects may suit you well.) Anon126 (talk - contribs) 18:38, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Wecome to the teahouse Niranjan. I'm also a software guy and I agree with you, it's a great environment and the simplicity and elegance are a big reason. There are two ways you can contribute, as a technical person and as an editor. Either way probably the best way to start is to get familiar with the wiki markup language and how to do basic editing. If you look at this page: Wikipedia:Community_portal and scroll down a bit you can see a bunch of headings under Help Out, things like Fix Spelling, Fix grammar, etc. Each heading has info on how to do those kind of changes as well as links to articles that require that kind of editing. One thing I would recommend is to start by editing existing articles. So many new editors jump right to creating new articles. I think it's much better to get familiar with basic editing first before you start creating new articles. Also, you might want to try user:SuggestBot it's a program that looks at your editing history and suggests articles that need editing and that match your interests. You also might find this useful: Wikipedia:Technical_FAQ it has a bunch of overview material on technical questions. Also, one tip that I find very useful: all wikipedia concepts are prefaced by "wp" so if you want to search for a particular internal article you should start with "wp:" in the search box and then start typing the word you think may be the name of the article, so for example to find if there is a manual of style type "wp:man" and you will see the auto complete goes to the manual of style article. Hope that wasn't too long winded and that there was something in all that you find useful. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Does the Draft of my Human Kitten article meet Notability Standards?

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

Do you all think this meets the notability standards? TheMilkman12345 (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, TheMilkman12345. In a word, no. The cited critical coverage is in blogs. The vast majority of blogs are not reliable sources for establishing notability. Please review the notability guideline for musicians at WP:MUSICBIO. Please also reformat your references eliminating bare URLs. See referencing for beginners. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

SPI Case reopening

How can we reopen an SPI case ? Zince34' 10:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Just open a new SPI case for the same master. It will automatically connect to any pre-existing cases and archives. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks ! Zince34' 10:23, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

And how can we prevent a vandal from creating more socks ?Zince34' 10:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

That's less straightforward. In a lot of cases, editing from their IP is disabled when they are blocked. In some instances, if they have access to a range of IP addresses, a rangeblock will take care of them. However, sometimes the collateral damage from such a block is too great to be worth implementing, or they have access to a number of dynamic IP addresses. In these cases, the best course of action is to identify the socks when they edit, revert their edits, report them to the administrators and (if necessary) file a new SPI case. Most of them get bored long before we do... Yunshui ^雲_水 11:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Now this is the situation. A vandal has been creating throwaway accounts. Each time one gets blocked, he creates another. Now he has threatened to make more and has openly specified the names of that accounts. Can we create doppelgangers so that he cannot make more. Zince34' 04:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

And remember, this guy is a registered account, not an IP. Zince34' 04:59, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

How to find information about totalitarion states

How do I find accurate and unbiased information about totalitarian and one party states? I know I can't trust official sources, because they're probobly changed to make the government look good. How can I find the Truth? The Dracommunist (talk) 22:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

When you find out, tell me. Generally this page is for asking questions pertaining to the nuts and bolts of editing Wikipedia, and as such your question is well beyond our scope. It is probably well beyond everyone's scope, but you can try asking at WP:Reference desk. John from Idegon (talk) 22:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I think the first reply is correct. Have a look at Single-party state for some related information. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 03:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, The Dracommunist and welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia offers a useful way to find things by classifying them into different "categories". You can find what categories an article belongs to by scrolling to the bottom of the article and looking at the list there. For your specific query, have a look at this one: Category:Military dictatorship, which should give you lots of information on Totalitarianism. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 05:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

AP has reported the death of a six-month-old giraffe, Kyah, during risky surgery today.

I would like to see Kyah's name added to the Tuesday, April 8, list of notable deaths but do not know how to do this. I believe the rule is that the animal should have a webpage in order to be listed. Not sure that she has one. The surgery was performed in Oklahoma; this sad story is on several major news 'sites. Kyah had a congenital defect that prevented her from eating solid food but was otherwise a normal and apparently delightful animal. The surgery has been successfully performed on smaller animals but never before on a giraffe.

If this story is permitted, hopefully someone who knows how will post it on the Notable Deaths webpage. Thanks. Patti131.151.26.119 (talk) 04:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Patti, and welcome to the Teahouse. We only report on deaths of people (and animals) who are notable, which has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia. So, these would normally be people (or animals) who already have a Wikipedia biography. I do not see any article about a giraffe named Kyah. Neither a person nor an animal becomes notable simply because the circumstances of their death were newsworthy. That being said, I agree that this sad death is worthy of attention. I am just unconvinced at this time that it is worthy of attention in this encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:59, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Patti and thanks for your inquiry. In order to feature in the Deaths in 2014 article, an individual should normally have a Wikipedia article or if not there should be coverage by reliable sources that shows that individual's notability. As sad as the animal's death may be, I'm not sure that, as a six-month-old giraffe, Kyah would meet those criteria. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 06:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Sandbox

What exactly is the sandbox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pratyaykundu (talk • contribs) 08:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Pratyakundu. The Wikipedia sandbox is a page where you can practice editing, to play around with formatting and markup. It is cleared out regularly by an automated program, so it's not a good place to start drafting an article. For that, you can use your own personal sandbox, which is linked to in the menu at the top right of your screen. Here, you can draft articles and practice editing without the page being blanked by a bot. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:37, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

How can 4-6 of 6 References be invisible in the edit window?

On page "TRIAC" (the semiconductor device) I found link #6 to be broken, so I found a replcaement URL within the original domain, and tried to edit the References section. Only links 1 - 3 appeared in the edit window. Is this a bug?, or, how can this happen? I attempted to add my link after link 3, but got assorted errors. I attempted to edit the whole page instead of the section, and also could not find References 4-6 anywhere. jimswen (talk) 10:11, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jim. Reference sections don't work quite like other sections - the content there is transcluded from elsewhere on the page. To find it, go to the References section, and click on the little caret (^) next to the reference. This will take you to the point in the text where that citation is located; edit that section and you'll find your reference. Reference 6, for example, is located in the Example data section, in the third line of the table code there. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:17, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I see. Thanks Yunshui. jimswen (talk) 10:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

The TRIAC page is pretty unusual because it uses two slightly different forms of referencing; that's why some of the refs appear in a template under the References heading and some appear elsewhere. I can easily see why it might be confusing! Yunshui ^雲_水 10:46, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

What user pages do I have?

This is probably a silly question, but I can't seem to find the answer anywhere...
Is there some way I can get a list of all my user pages? I have created a few user pages, most of which I don't need any more. So I would like to clean them up. But I can't be confident that I can remember them all just off the top of my head, so having a list would help. It would also help in the situation where I had "finger trouble" when creating a page, and accidentally gave it a name that was not quite what I intended - then I could not find the page again. --Gronk Oz (talk) 09:59, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Your user subpages are here - to find them easily in future, go to your contribution history and select "Subpages" from the very bottom of the screen. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:19, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Brilliant! That is exactly what I needed; thank you. --Gronk Oz (talk) 10:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

created a article ,which as already existed ,but i want to move to existing article by over writing.

Hi I created a page in sandbox name User:Will Talk2/sandbox, but a article already existed page is Nanduri Prasada Rao,i want obver write it by moving article in sandbox,please suggest me.. Will Talk2 (talk) 12:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I have repaired your 2 broken links, changed the URLs to WP:wikilinks, & corrected one of them. Note that spaces are significant in Wikipedia page names. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I would suggest that you post a message to Talk:Nanduri Prasada Rao, suggesting the change and giving a wikilink to your sandbox draft. Normaaly it is better to make edits (suitably referenced to reliable sources, of course) to an existing article, rather than trying to replace it totally. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

What does it mean?

When I see the semi-protected pages, and it says that I have to be on Wikipedia for 4 days and 10 edits to edit the semi-protected page, what does that mean? It confuses me. There's a ghost haunting you.~Ri_-_Writen by Ash~Ash (talk) 20:06, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

@Riley-yAsh: Hi Riley-yAsh. It means that in order to become autoconfirmed, and thus be able to edit semi-protected pages, your account must have been created more than 4 days (96 hours) ago and you have to have made 10 separate edits, i.e., each time you make some change and then successfully save a page is one edit. You currently have made a sufficient number of edits, but your account was only created on April 7, 2014 at 7:10 UTC, so you will not become autoconfirmed until April 11, 2014 at 7:10 UTC. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Is not being able to edit semi-protected pages holding you up? What is it you want to do? I or another administrator can grant you autoconfirmed status early. However, note that you can ask for an edit to be made to a semi-protected page by going to its talk page, creating a thread where you explain exactly what you want changed, and then posting above that text the following template, which will call someone to your request: {{Edit semi-protected}}--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:03, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah..okay! Thank you!

And not really, I just wanted to edit part of the post on Wolf-German Shepherd mixes on the Wolfdog page. :)((Which I have now figured out, I don't even need to do..XD)) There's a ghost haunting you.~Ri_-_Writen by Ash~Ash (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Article in Afrikaans WikiAfrica

I wrote an article about the George Museum in English. Then translated it into Afrikaans. I tried to move the stub to the main page but I do not think it was done the correct way. How do you move a WikiAfrica stub to the Afrikaans Main Page? Would appreciate any help.....I need to get the translation on the main page Lorinda63 (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Lorinda63. I don't think you can move a page between Wikipedias: this is one case where you have to copy and paste - but you should make sure that the source is acknowledged (there's a template for doing so in en Wikipedia, but I don't know about af). You'll find the procedure listed at Translate us. Incidentally I'm puzzled why you would be moving a page to the main page of another Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply Colin

I also have no idea what I'm doing.....I was suppose to write an English and Afrikaans article about the museum. I created the stub for the Afrikaans article, then tried my luck and did the move....whih was obviously not right. I followed the instructions on how to create an article in another language i.e. to insert the language (Afrikaans) in front of the stub name. Perhaps I should start over. Do I start the usual way , in the incubator? When the article is finished, how do I get it to the Afrikaans Wikipedia? Thanks again for your reply.Lorinda63 (talk) 19:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Colinfine,

I had a look at the Translate us as you suggested.Looks like that is what I should have done. What i did was to create a new article stub for the Afrikaans article. Even doing the translation seems complicated....my knowledge is very basic. Lorinda63 (talk) 19:45, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Difficulties with speedy removal under article 7

I recently created an article, entitled 'Neubauer Collegium for Culture and Society', and it was speedily deleted because it violated article 7, I assume. I am very much confused as to why my article was deleted under this article, for relevance to the world, in my opinion was shown. I am currently trying to get the text of the article back so I can share that with you guys and ask what precisely to change, but do not know if I did it properly (this whole wiki editing business is positively frightful!). As such I have two questions, 1) how do I contact the editor who asked for the speedy deletion so I can work with him on fixing the supposed issues and 2) how can I make sure my request to get the text of my deleted article back will be realized? Any help would be much appreciated!The editor seems prolific, his username is Gaijin42. (Kakejaufman (talk) 20:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kakejaufman and welcome to the Teahouse. The article wasn't deleted because of the A7 criterion, it was deleted because of the G12 criterion. What this means is that you apparently just copied the content of a website and pasted it into the article. You can't do that. All content has to be written in your own words. (Also, if you still want to contact the deleting admin, see User talk:Star Mississippi.) --Jakob (talk) 20:32, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! My mistake. Is there any way I could retrieve the article still? Kakejaufman (talk) 20:40, 9 April 2014 (UTC)kakejaufman

Highly unlikely, to reinstate a copy-vio, would be to commit another copy-vio. - Arjayay (talk) 20:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Also, you appear to have a mistaken notion on what it takes to have an article in Wikipedia. Importance has nothing to do with it. It is all about notability, which can best be explained by asking yourself this question: Are reliable, independent, secondary sources talking about the subject in detail? Admittedly, I did not do too detailed of a search, but I did not find any reliable sources talking about that organization. John from Idegon (talk) 21:04, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

The organization, while new, has launched initiatives that have been writte about in the New York Times and other reputable newspapers (see http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/movies/awardsseason/cinemetrics-extracts-statistical-data-from-movies.html?_r=1). That being said, the article does not name the Collegium directly,is that a problem? Currently most of the sources regarding the Neubauer Collegium are unique to the university where it is housed. Also, my intention with retrieving the article was more to see how I had constructed it before, I do not remember drawing as many direct quotes as I must have, with that in mind is it still impossible to retrieve the earlier version? Kakejaufman (talk) 21:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)kakejaufman

You can ask the deleting administrator to email you the source code but don't be surprised if that request is declined. Emailing copyright infringing content is still infringement.

And yes, it's a problem if the organization doesn't have any direct coverage in independent reliable sources. Its initiatives might be notable due to their coverage, but notability is not inherited; that is, just because one subject is notable doesn't necessarily mean a related subject is notable.

Your best approach is probably to use WP:AFC to submit a new article, where it can be evaluated by a neutral reviewer before putting it back in main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

update info at French_frigate_Hermione_(1779)#External_links

How do I input the following?

In 2015, a handcrafted replica of the Hermione ­ the 18th century frigate that brought the young Marquis de Lafayette with French troops back to General Washington, a historic voyage that changed the course of the colony's quest for independence from the British – will return to America.

Stopping at ports from Yorktown, Mount Vernon and Philadelphia to New York and Boston, Hermione’s itinerary reaffirms the historic relationship between the United States and France.

The Friends of Lafayette-Hermione in America, a non-profit group, supports this return voyage – partnering alongside local heritage and nautical groups, students and teachers K-through-12, and many cultural organizations, museums and universities – with a full program of educational, musical, culinary and special events scheduled at each port during 2014 and 2015; to learn more, please visit: www.hermione2015.com

I want insert this section at the end. How do I do this, please. Thanks!

Lafayette1780 Lafayette1780 (talk) 18:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Lafayette1780. In general, you can just edit the article to add information. However, in this case, I wouldn't do so, for a couple of reasons. First, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball: it generally doesn't contain information about future events unless they are pretty definitely going to happen, and have been widely reported in reliable media. Secondly, information added to Wikipedia should always be referenced to reliable sources, and usually to sources independent of the subject; so the hermione link you give is acceptable only for very limited information (uncontroversial factual information). Thirdly, though information of this type might go into an article, it certainly doesn't belong in the "external links" section. I think your best bet is to post on the talk page Talk:French frigate Hermione (1779), with references to reliable sources unconnected with the subject, and let people who are more familiar with the subject than I am decide what should be added to the article. --ColinFine (talk) 19:16, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear Colin, Hi, so now it's removed by you I take it.

What I don't understand is that the FRENCH group's link, hermione.com, is on wikipedia but not hermione2015.com, which is a partner group? It's a double standard as far as I can see.

This is not crystal ball, either; The NY Times reported on the entire project, the return voyage and the Friends of Hermione-Lafayette in America group on Nov 10. 2013, see:

http://intransit.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/lafayettes-ship-and-journey-will-be-recreated/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

What's wrong here?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lafayette1780 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Lafayette1780: I haven't removed anything. Since you have a reliable source for the information, you are welcome to add it to the the article, with that reference. But in a suitable section of the text, not in the "External links" section. As for the external links: most of the ones there are inappropriate (according to the policy in WP:EL) and should be removed. The link to hermione.com (which seems to go to the same place as your proposed link) is appropriate, but I don't think any of the others are. In particular, the one to a site publicising a book is WP:SPAM and should certainly be removed. --ColinFine (talk) 23:27, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Please also consider this, Lafayette1780: We have two separate articles. One is about the original 1779 ship, which should be about that historic ship, mentioning the 21st century reproduction briefly. The second, French frigate Hermione (2012) is about the reproduction, and it should only mention the original ship briefly. It is not appropriate, in my opinion, to link to several websites about the reproduction in the article about the original ship. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:09, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

S.D.

how do i fix a speedly deleton — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suber36g (talk • contribs) 03:32, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The process is described in the notice which you removed from your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Worried about a fraudulent article

Hello, I have recently joined Wikipedia and have been reading Wikipedia articles about a lot of families on Wikipedia (I am interested in family histories).

I came across an article about a so called " Daniell Family " . This article does not seem to make sense at all as most information mentioned is not linked to the subject of the article and none of the sources listed are referring to this "Daniell family". I cannot find any further information about the notability or importance of this family on the internet either.

When I looked at the history of this article, I came across several Wikipedia accounts all created on the 9th of April and all of them have similar editing patterns on their talk pages. It seems like they are sockpuppets.

I am very worried about this article, as somebody might be creating an article about their own family, making them seem more important/notable than they really are. I have a feeling this article might turn into something serious or fraudulent, as this article claims links with famous important families and institutions, such as the Rockefeller family and Harvard University, when there are no legitimate sources anywhere confirming any link with anybody or anything mentioned in this article.

Furthermore, this article vaguely mentions links to two English painters, but I cannot find any confirmation anywhere about the links with these painters.

I would appreciate it if an experienced editor would seriously take a look at the accounts editing this page and consider deleting the article. Thanks--OhioJack (talk) 04:58, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, OhioJack and thank you for bringing this to our attention. After devoting two minutes to reading this "article", I consider it a steaming pile of horse shit. Please excuse my frankness. This is probably a misguided experiment to see how long a hoax will last on Wikipedia. I don't usually do deletions, and I am not an administrator, but I will alert those with the powers to take immediate action. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Wonderful news. You have just said exactly what I was thinking! Thanks and I appreciate the fact that this is being taken seriously.--OhioJack (talk) 05:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The hoax article is now gone and the search term now redirects to the actual head of an actual 18th century family of British artists, OhioJack. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

OhioJack, you may be interested in checking out the discussion on the noticeboard. It certainly was taken seriously. Thank you again. Bishonen | talk 09:34, 10 April 2014 (UTC).

Inserting an Image.

Hi. I've managed to insert an image into the Infobox, but it has parts of the code above it and below it. When I delete those characters from the code, the picture disappears, and the code appears in black text. How do I get the picture to appear normally? This is the page in question: Knifer (musical). Any help would be greatly appreciated. Introspecta (talk) 01:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I have corrected it for you. The syntax is shown in Template:Infobox musical and (with an example) in Template:Infobox musical/doc. I changed the url in your question to a wikilink to make it more readable. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Experts on copyright may have advice for you on the adequacy of your non-free use rationale for the image at File:Original Knifer Programme Cover, 1986.jpg. At first glance it looks to me as if it is missing some essential information, in which case the image may be liable to deletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:10, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

@Introspecta: As David Biddulph points out, some essential information was missing so I have tweaked the relevant claims and hopefully it is now OK as a fair use image. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 06:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help; I really appreciate it. Introspecta (talk) 09:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Linking to an existing page.

Hi, I'm trying to make a link on one page to another, but it either links to another page with a similar name, comes up red, or just comes up with black code instead of a blue link. I don't want to mess up the page; could anyone help? The page I want to have the link on is: Steven Moffat and the page I want to link it to is: Knifer (musical) The second page is mentioned in the 'Early Life and Press Gang' section of the first. Introspecta (talk) 11:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Introspecta and welcome to the Teahouse. You almost had it right, you just didn't have the space between Knifer and (musical). I have fixed it for you and you can ask me for assistance if you have the same problem in future. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:32, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not good at this computer business. Introspecta (talk)

Should it have the word '(musical)' on the page? Introspecta (talk) 11:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Introspecta the way you have it is fine :) Flat Out let's discuss it 11:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry to be such a nuisance. Introspecta (talk) 11:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Introspecta you are not a nuisance in any way. I hope we cross paths again. Flat Out let's discuss it 12:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

:-) Introspecta (talk) 12:08, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I have changed the URLs in your question to wikilinks to make them more readable. In answer to your question as to whether the word "(musical)" should be displayed in the link on the page, the answer is No; I think that Flat Out was answering a question on whether that was an appropriate title for the article. To link to the right place but avoid displaying the unnecessary disambiguation suffix, we use what is known as the pipe trick. [[Knifer (musical)|]] displays as Knifer. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:11, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I responded to the original question and put a space in to a link where the pipe trick had already been done, so it was [[Knifer (musical)|Knifer]], however I didn't realise that Introspecta changed it to [[Knifer (musical)]] when I answered the second question. Flat Out let's discuss it 13:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Another point for Introspecta (and other newcomers to Wikipedia) to note is that Wikipedia has a "Show preview" button which ought normally be used after an edit before hitting "Save page", then when you can see that the edit is successful you can Save page, but if unsuccessful you can correct your edit and preview again before saving. If you save numerous unsuccessful edits because you haven't used the preview, it does clutter and confuse the page's edit history. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Blunder in a wikipedia page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_engineering_college_rankings

In this topic, the data entered is erroneous and has no link to whatsoever the references mentioned. So it will be better if the page is removed or else the editor can check the references to correct the rankings. I tried to edit it but there was too much of confusion and chaos that I cancelled my edit.

Please look into it and let me know if I can be of any help. Sukanya.h (talk) 14:07, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sukanya.h and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for raising your concerns over the List of Indian engineering college rankings article. Rather than suggest the page for deletion, I will tag it for clean up as it does contain a number of references. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 14:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

create an account

how do i do it 67.191.27.191 (talk) 16:50, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Among the many useful links on your user talk page is one that says "creating an account". --David Biddulph (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Actually, just go to Special:CreateAccount and follow the instructions there. --Jakob (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

speedy delete

Hey there! An article is up for speedy deletion, and having read the criteria, I'm failing to understand the reasoning.

YusufJournalisminaction (talk) 20:58, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

To editor Journalisminaction: I've moved it to User:Journalisminaction/Yusuf Omar and added a notice that will allow you to submit it to eventually become an actual article. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 21:15, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion?

Hello, I have been on wikipedia for a while but I think I have finally found me niche. Which is adding wikilinks. Now as I was working through "Category:Articles with too few wikilinks from October 2012" I found a lot of articles that are lacking in citations and/or are completely unreferenced. After doing a quick search most of the unreferenced articles might be able to be deleted for lack of notability. However, I am conflicted about it. On the one hand its unreferenced and not notable. On the other hand an editor sometimes several took the time to create the article, edited it and improved it. So what should I do? NathanWubs (talk) 06:33, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi NathanWubs and welcome to the Teahouse. There are two methods whereby articles get deleted - either speedily or through a proposal. The criteria for the former are very precise and just because an article is unreferenced does not make it a certain candidate for speedy deletion. The key issues for proposed deletion are somewhat wider and are based on notability and verifiability, which in turned are based on the availability of reliable sources. If you feel that an article is a deletion candidate on those grounds then you can insert an {{Afd}} template on the page but please read the guide to deletion first. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 06:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the swift reply. I will be going through the deletion guides and see later on today what could be done. As once again I rather not have those pages up for deletion at all. But if they indeed do not meet WP:RS or WP:N I will just bite the bullet and start using the proper ways to get those articles deleted. NathanWubs (talk) 07:28, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

@NathanWubs: Sorry, I should also have mentioned that there is a third alternative called "proposed deletion", which may be suitable. More details can be found here ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 09:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

No problem I stumbled on that myself anyways. But thanks again, I appreciate your help so that I can make better contributions to Wikipedia. NathanWubs (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Formatting tables

Re: Editing Ministry of National Defense (Chile); Ministers of National Defense (Second Creation)

• Jorge Burgos as Defense Minister in Michelle Bachelet Cabinet

No matter what cell formation I use, even copying and pasting those that are already there, the format seems to be off on the last cell. I left the changes I made as is because I was frustrated, but I just need to know how to move it over/down so it's in the correct area.

I was previously helped by Stwalkerster, he said there was an extra cell that he deleted, however upon still looking at the page, the last cell that has Michelle Bachelet as the appointing president isn't lined up with the correct column. I add another cell, it's spaced over too far, I delete a cell and it's spaced too far inward. Can anyone help please? Snickers2686 (talk) 16:22, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Snickers2686, welcome to the Teahouse. I fixed it in [1] by specifying the right number of rows in rowspan. Tables with colspan and rowspan can be tricky. Help:Table has some general help about it. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:32, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Uploading a pic with this license

I just received permission by an owner on flickr by email to use an image for an article, however the license is Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic, can I upload it? (Monkelese (talk) 18:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Monkelese, welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for your question. That kind of license (described here) is not appropriate for Wikipedia because it does not allow for commercial reusage. That the copyright holder has given you "Wikipedia-only" or similar permission is insufficient, and they must actually change the license to one that allows for commercial use (such as the CC-BY-SA or CC-BY licenses available on flickr). We require copyright holders to release their images under licenses that allow for such usage, because we want folks to have broad rights to the materials they find on Wikipedia. It's possible that the image may qualify under fair use, but that depends on what the image is and why/how it is being used. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 18:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

How can I get contact information from anyone who is or has provided info. about the Mansfield Haymakers, minor league baseball team 1898?

How can I get contact information for anyone providing info. to WIKI about the Mansfield Haymakers, minor league baseball team 1898?

REASON I NEED CONTACT INFORMATION FROM ANYONE PROVIDING DATA TO WIKI: I'm attempting to elicit a photo of my grandfather Fred Brott in a minor league baseball uniform, right-fielder for Mansfield Haymakers, who subsequently changed his surname after 1901.

I've tried countless sources in attempting to get a photo without success yetZsportsgeek (talk) 21:10, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Zsportsgeek and welcome to The Teahouse. While there is no Mansfield Haymakers article, you could do a search for the term. Click here and you will see a list of articles, many of which are about players for that team. Click on any of the articles, and you will see "View history" or "history" at the top of the page. Click on that and you will see a list of names of contributors to those articles. If you find someone you want to contact, click on "talk" beside the name to get to the person's talk page, and click on "New section" and just ask for help as you did here.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I also did a search for Fred Brott and came up with the Nashville Centennials.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:46, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Question about linguistic glossing

In the article, Lithuanian accentuation, there is a lot of linguistic glossing. In the copy-edit, should it be left alone or expanded so the non-expert reader may understand it? Many thanks for your advice and a decaf flat white if you have it, regards, Myrtle G. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 16:33, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

@Myrtlegroggins: Hi there. As I understand it (based on my experience with Chinese), foreign language text using the roman alphabet in the article body should be shown in italics and wrapped in the {{lang}} template like this: {{lang|xx|text}} , where "XX" is the ISO language code (in this case 'lt'). I don't think that any further expansion is required, especially in an article on accentuation, which by definition is likely to be read by people who have a basic familiarity with the language. Never mind the coffee, for a copyedit like that one you deserve a triple scotch :) ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 16:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou so much. Hee hee, being a tea totaller, I'll skip the scotch but perhaps some propafol?;-) Myrtle G. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 22:53, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Admin??

How do I know if someone is a Wikipedia administrator...or just someone power tripping and changing stuff. How do I talk to that person as I am not sure? I thought Wikipedia editors contacted you when something is wrong.....Please let me know....I undid the changes as I wasn't sure and I am not able to get a hold of this person... Anetek3D (talk) 21:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Anatek, anyone is free to edit any article and that includes removing content if they feel it is incorrect or does not comply with Wikipedia policies. That doesn't require administrator rights. If you are talking about the removal of images from Gerald Fried by Werieth then their action was correct as those images are only used on Wikipedia by way of meeting the non free content criteria. To use images like these all 10 criteria have to be met and the way you were trying to use those images - as decoration - does not meet criterion #8 and they should not be re-added to the Fried article. Nthep (talk) 21:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Nthep thanks for your information. How can I get a hold of a user....I try the talk button but it doesn't go anywhere...Is there an email type thing? Anetek3D (talk) 21:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Every user has a talk page that you can find at User talk:<USERNAME> but then you have to edit that page, like nay other page, to leave them a message. Nthep (talk) 21:42, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

It's usually not important whether the user is an admin but if you want to know then you can click "User rights" at the bottom of their user contributions. For example, [2] says "administrator" for me. Their user page may also say it but it doesn't always and it can be falsified. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:11, 12 April 2014 (UTC)