Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 202

Archive 195

←

Archive 200

Archive 201

Archive 202

Archive 203

Archive 204

Archive 205

Transferring Files

Does anyone knows if there is a way to transfer images from english wiki to other language wiki's.Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 02:19, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Vigyani and welcome to the Teahouse. There are two ways to do this depending on what the image is and which Wiki you want to copy it to. Wikipedia has two types of images, those stored in each local project (for example on English Wikipedia) and those stored at Wikimedia Commons, which are accessible to all projects. You should bear in mind that each "local" Wiki may have it's own rules on what may or not be uploaded - for example English Wikipedia allows the upload of "Fair use" images while Wikimedia Commons does not. If you come across an image on English Wikipedia that you would like to use in another language Wiki you can either edit the image's local page and insert the template {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}, first making sure that you have read the guidelines here or if you feel competent to do so then go ahead and move the file yourself (again, having read the guidelines first). Once the file has been moved to Commons it will be accessible from any other language Wiki. I hope this is useful, but if you have a more specific question, please feel free to ask. Cheers, ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 04:23, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Philg88. Thank you very such a detailed reply. I was already aware of everything you have mentioned above. I will make my question more specific. I am looking for some tool/gadget, which could enable me to transfer easily some of the "local" images (fair use images which can't be transferred to Commons) on English Wikipedia to Punjabi Wikipedia. Our community there is very small, so we have not really set any rules. We just take some stuff from English Wikipedia often assuming that here it is well scrutinized.--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 06:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome Vigyani There is no tool or gadget that I'm aware of. I'm not a qualified copyright lawyer (although it feels like it sometimes :) ) and I am not familiar with the copyright laws of either of the jurisdictions of the Punjab. If you download fair use images from English Wikipedia then reupload them to Punjabi Wikipedia, please be very careful not to breach any applicable laws by your actions. Good luck, ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 06:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Actually copyright law in Punjab is not relevant, all Wikipedias are hosted on servers in Florida, so only US law matters. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:22, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

there is User:Commons fair use upload bot over on commons. i would caution you, local officials will try to enforce local law, like Finland, Germany, and French Intelligence. you are in a fair dealing jurisdiction. on the other hand, if you want to proceed, then you should include in your policy an Exemption Doctrine Policy, per Resolution:Licensing policy. i would not copy the english policy, but use the Fair Use Codes & Best Practices. you may have to add a take-down upon request, like http://ubu.com/. Duckduckstop (talk) 17:10, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Is there way to highlight an error you do not know how to fix so that others can help with it?

Hi There, Relatively new to editing. I came across a page that does not look right to me. But I am not sure I know how to fix the errors I see. Is there a way to highlight a page so others can see it. Here is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_social_construction_of_nature

What seems wrong to me is the "See Also" section. To be consitent to wikipedia shouldn't that have hyperlinks and not just names? Some of the people mentioned can't be found on wikipedia. Jdk780 (talk) 15:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey Jdk780, and welcome to the Teahouse. You ask a good question. I also agree the See Also section on Postmodern social construction of nature there is not quite right. I have some suggestions:

• The sentence starting Davis Demeritt's typology... can probably be tacked onto the end of the "Position" section.
• The header "See also" can change to "Further reading"
• The sentence starting Other examinations of the social construction... can be removed entirely, and the books can be listed using bullets.

What do you think about these suggestions? Can you implement them on your own, or would you like me to help? I think it's good to keep the sources there, but it probably shouldn't be called a "See also" section if it's just a listing of publications. Thanks, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 19:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Also, to bring attention to problems in an article, it can sometimes be helpful to describe your concerns on the talk page of the article, but that depends on whether active editors are watching that article. Coming to the Teahouse is certainly appropriate, but if you have an idea for fixing a problem like this one, feel free to be bold and try it out. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 19:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

GA review

Hello! I just finished reviewing the article Obsessed (2009 film) and I passed the article. However, I do not know how to put in the "old id" on the talk page. Can you please help me? WooHoo! • Talk to me! 22:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Brandon! To get the number for the OLD ID, click "permanent link" in the toolbox on the left-hand toolbar, and copy the oldid= value. I believe, for this article, it is 604510820, and then add that number to the template on the talk page. Thanks for reviewing GAs; that is an area where we can always use help :-) Go Phightins! 22:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

inter-language link: conflicts

I am trying to do an inter-language link between: Lantern tower (English) and Tour-lanterne (French). When I try to do the link, I get messages I do not understand about conflicting links and the need to merge or delete links to resolve the conflicts.Phormium (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)Phormium (talk) 22:31, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Phormium, I fixed it by moving the English Lantern tower from wikidata:Q3319336 to wikidata:Q785456. The former (Cimborrio or similar in many languages) is apparently for more general Church towers. The latter (Tiburio in many languages) seems a better match and already included the French fr:Tour-lanterne. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Kane Is Able, Inc.

Hi, I was working on the Kane Is Able, Inc. page as an assignment by my boss at Kane and was notified that I have a strong conflict of interest. I have my changes that I originally made saved in a word document. All the information I initially put on the page was from our website. How do I go about getting rid of the Conflict of Interest so that I could make the necessary changes. All of the information I have is the company's wording.

Thank you! --Colleen.carter (talk) 12:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Colleen. You can't get rid of your conflict of interest except by severing any connection you have with Kane Is Able, which presumably is not an option. What you can do (the recommended option) is to mention any factual changes that need making on the talk page of the article concerned, so that editors without a conflict of interest can consider making the changes. Please be aware that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a business directory; the intention is not for the articles about organisations to be written by the organisations themselves. In addition, Wikipedia's licensing terms mean that anything copied from the organization's website probably cannot be used (for copyright reasons), even aside from the fact that the wording of the organization's own website is likely to be too promotional for an encyclopedia article. Apologies that this puts you in a difficult position. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Is my subject notable enough to be included

Dear Cullen,

In March, I asked whether I could enter an article detailing the life and work of the famous theatre and TV Director Roger Jenkins. ColinFine kindly advised that I could not unless Roger was notable in the Wikipedia sense. I have investigated books that have refered to Roger and his career and they are as follows.

The Complete Secret Army by Andy Priestner. Clssic TV Press 2008. There is a full page devoted to Roger.

Poldark Country by David Clark. Bossiney Books and Cornish Life Magazine. There are two pages featuring photographs of Roger.

The Poldark World by Winston Graham. This includes a page detailing Roger's work.

British Television by Peter Graham Scott. Publishers McFarland and Co. There are eight mentions of Roger on separate pages.

The Year of the Jouncer by Simon Gray. Granta Books 2006. Roger is featured over two pages.

Added to Roger's lifetime of work in the Theatre and on television covering works of Shakespear, ZCars, Poldark, Howards Way, Trouble Shooters and many others, does the above meet the notable criteria and will my article be accepted.

I look forward to your reply.

Many thanks,

Keith92.2.210.10 (talk) 20:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Keith and welcome to The Teahouse. Cullen might arrive later and have a different opinion, but I believe you have established notability. More sources might be good, but I don't think the article will be deleted on the grounds of the person not being notable.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:16, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear Cullen, I posted my question last night and received a reply from Vchimpanzee which was very nice. Vchimpanzee said you might also comment. As I have seen many of your comments on notability elsewhere, I would be very grateful for your views. Many thanks, KeithKeithhmorris (talk) 10:17, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

If you are trying to ask a question of a specific user, the place to do that is on the user's talk page. If you want to talk to Cullen328, try User talk:Cullen328. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:09, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Here I am, and I agree that the sources listed above make a convincing case for notability, and I suggest that you proceed with the article, Keith. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Keith, you did everything correctly. I'm glad I could help. I didn't send you to Cullen's talk page because questions answered here help more people.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:36, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Non-free image upload

Hi, I am writing an article on Ernest Bond, and found a picture here. I know it is probably unfree, but is there any chance of uploading it when I mainspace the article? Thanks, Matty.007 09:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Matty.007 and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you can't use that image as it is copyright by whoever took it or the publisher of the book. Wikipedia only allows images that are free (although in some cases Fair use can apply, but not in this one) otherwise it consititutes a copyright violation. Sorry to disappoint. Cheers, ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 09:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer Phil, I knew a little about fair use, but not enough to say if this was allowable or not. Thanks again, Matty.007 09:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Matty.007 I don't think it's that clear cut. Point 1 of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria is

No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose.

The argument that "the subject is dead, so no free equivalent could be created", has been used to support several images.
I suggest you read Wikipedia:Non-free content review - you could upload it and request a review. Arjayay (talk) 10:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

@Arjayay: The specific image in the book Matty.007 asked about is copyright 2010 by the author and/or the publisher. The book is the source of that image and there can be no exception to that copyright for "fair use", regardless of whether the subject is dead or otherwise. Uploading a scan of the picture from the book to Wikipedia would be a clear breach of copyright and I would advise you not to do it. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 10:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

That's not entirely correct. Copyrighted images can be used on Wikipedia, subject to certain provisos. Firstly, the article would need to be in mainspace, rather than a sandbox. The image would have to be uploaded to Wikipedia, rather than Commons, and would need to have a comprehensive fair use rationale, but if there are no free alternatives available then fair use could certainly be applied. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

So it could be uploaded with a fair use rationale? Thanks, Matty.007 10:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Just to note, there is also a picture at [1]. Thanks, Matty.007 10:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Iff there's no other free image of the guy available, and the article's live, and you can satisfy the other requirements at Fair use, then yes, you would be able to upload it. No idea whether the image in Christe is free, but I'd assume not. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I usually check commons for people to see if there are pics, none there, or on Flickr, or even non-free on G images I could see (there is a hacker who also uses the name 'Commander X'). The only other picture I found is a screen grab from a film, presumably even worse than the current option. I was aware I couldn't have non-free images in sandbox articles though. Thanks again, Matty.007 10:47, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I spotted that screengrab - the 1970s had some awesome glasses... The "live article" requirement is part of the fair use rationale, specifically WP:NFCCP#7. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again for all the help. Bonus points if anyone can find a fair use image similar to the screengrab, or can tell me where to get a pair of those glasses! Thanks, Matty.007 17:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Help publishing article

Hello, I have edited and re-edited this article for notability and for neutrality quite a few times. Could someone take a look at the changes and see if I need to make any other changes before submitting the article (for the 2nd time).

21:09, 17 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jedenl (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft is at Draft:Shabby Apple; your sandbox is now just a redirect to there. You don't need to submit it again, as it is already submitted and waiting (with about 1900 other drafts) for review. You can, of course, continue to make improvements while it is awaiting review, and you don't need to resubmit. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:23, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

How do i use an image which i don't own in my article?

I am currently creating an article on the James Bond henchman Tee Hee. I have used an image from the Live And Let Die film article but it's a promotional cast photo. I would like to add a still of Tee Hee. but i don't own any images. How do i use an image i don't own in my article?

Ps. Leave a message on my talk page saying you've replied.

Thanks Wyliecoyote1990 (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Wyliecoyote1990, thanks for asking rather than just going ahead. Unless the image has been released into the public domain (which most images haven't) or you can persuade the copyright holder to release it under a suitable licence, the only way you can use it is if the proposed use meets all the requirements listed in non-free content criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 22:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I usually google images to use in articles.Wyliecoyote1990 (talk) 22:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

The Google Image search is a great way to find lots of images connected to a topic, Wyliecoyote1990. But a large majority of the images you find there will not be acceptable for use on Wikipedia, because those images are copyrighted and have not been released under a Creative Commons license. If you are searching for an image related to World War I (1914-1918), then you will have lots of luck since copyright has expired for any image published in the United States before 1923. But if you are searching for an image of a contemporary celebrity, the majority are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia. Those few that are acceptable have clear evidence of being copyright free or released under a Creative Commons license. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Is that promotional photo in the Live And Let Die article owned by the person who created the article? Wyliecoyote1990 (talk) 12:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

There is an article on Francisco Scaramanga which uses a picture of him in the infobox. I'm assuming the person who wrote the article owns the image as well. Wyliecoyote1990 (talk) 12:57, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Those two images are copyrighted and are used under our guideline for use of non-free images, which was mentioned above by ColinFine.. A detailed rationale is needed for each image, a low resolution version should be used, the image needs to be uploaded to Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons) and the image is then approved for use in a specific article, not for general use. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit war

Hello, I have a situation where there is a edit war but nobody has talked to each other about it and one person has reliable sources, how should I handle this situation of Fact versus fiction? Thanks, Happy_Attack_Dog (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Happy Attack Dog mobile. My advice to all concerned is to STOP edit warring now, and discuss matters on the talk page. Even if an editor has reliable sources, they are still subject to a block for edit warring. Being right is not a defense. We discuss content disputes and work toward consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I just want to note that I am not involved in the edit war but both parites have been warned, should I take this to the talk page still? thanks, Happy_Attack_Dog (talk) 23:54, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

It would be great for you to start a discussion on the article's talk page, and advise the other two editors of the discussion, Happy Attack Dog mobile. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Un-reverting (?) etiquette

I think I've found my wikicalling: WP:DAB and recently disambiguated a link at Jacques Dutronc. The fix was reverted and I left a message on that editor's page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:FormerIP#Jacques_Dutronc) asking about the revert. No answer yet but it really seems clear to me that the link should be disambiguated. Or have I got that wrong? What is wiki protocol here? Should I change it back before hearing from FormerIP about his/her reasoning? Thanks for any guidance Mfbjr (talk) 13:02, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mfbjr, welcome to the teahouse. FormerIP has not edited since you posted your message on their talkpage, so it is worth waiting for their reply before proceeding. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:08, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mfbjr. It seems that French record company Gaumont Musique went out of business in 2009, and there is no article on French Wikipedia about the company. Normally, we don't link to a disambiguation page, but I don't think a red link is appropriate since it seems unlikely that we will ever have an English article about the company. I recommend no link for Gaumont Musique. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Cullen328 and Arthur goes shopping Thank you so much - I'd missed that they have gone out of business and I agree that it should be unlinked. Thanks again! Mfbjr (talk) 01:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Of course, Mfbjr, YOU could be the editor writing the article about that defunct record company Gaumont Musique, and then you could also translate it into French. Don't worry, though. This is not an assignment, but just a fleeting thought. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Move a article

Hi. I am a rookie and I want to move City Hall, Hong Kong to Hong Kong City Hall. The agreement was reached in the talk page, so what's next? It is very kind if someone can help.香港分子 (talk) 10:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi 香港分子 and welcome, the process is described at Wikipedia:Move#How to move a page. I have done this for you, if you have any questions on following the process please leave a message at my talk page. Best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 10:17, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

article deletion - please help

My article was deleted for too much like an advertisement, but I am not trying to market this company. ERDI is very important because this where our public safety divers and rescue teams are trained. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emergency_Response_Diving_International&action=edit&redlink=1 Jcyahoo (talk) 19:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Jcyahoo (talk) 19:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Jcyahoo. Yes it was and when you recreated it it was again. So I am guessing your question is "What to do about that?" Well, recreating it again is not what to do about it. It has been userfied for you at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Emergency Response Diving International. There, you can work on it at your leisure and improve it until it is ready for the encyclopedia. At this point, it does not meet the standard for an article on a company or organization, found at WP:NCORP, and even though you state your intention is not to market the company, it is sure written like it is. John from Idegon (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

How do you add a page?

I was adding photos to a page, but I could not find a separate page for what I was looking for. I found a page that told me about it, but I could not upload an image even though I had one. How do I add a page to Wikipedia? Can I ask someone on Wikipedia to write it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thirtyonem (talk • contribs) 17:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Thirtyonem. Adding new pages to Wikipedia is welcome, provided the subjects of the pages meet the criteria of "notability"; but writing a new page that will be kept is not easy and many new pages get deleted every day. The advice to follow is in such places as your first article, which will take you through the things you need to get straight and how to proceed. --ColinFine (talk) 17:39, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Why I can't My page in search results on Google? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadySudhir (talk • contribs) 16:51, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, ShadySudhir. We here at Wikipedia cannot control what shows up on Google's search results. For that matter, please do not write an article just so that it can receive attention by being a top result on Google's search results. Please see WP:COI. Instead, it may be better for you to edit some more existing articles first to become familiar with editing here, before creating new articles. Thank you. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 19:33, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Misspelling of name

I misspelled the name of the photographer G.W.Griffin on the photo I inserted for Bartholomew Bretherton (1775 - 1857). Although I have corrected it where I can, I cannot get in to change the title where it is still spelled incorrectly (i.e. Griffen). It should have an 'i' not an 'e'. Is it possible to correct this or is it too late?

Audrey202 (talk) 03:56, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Audrey and thanks for stopping by The Teahouse. You would use Template:Rename media and place said template on the photo you want renamed. There are instructions in that link on how to format the request. If you have more questions about how to do it properly, feel free to ask. --Jayron32 04:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I will have a try tomorrow. It's late at night here now. Thanks for your help guys. I'm a novice at this, as you've probably guessed. Audrey202 (talk) 08:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

@Audrey202:. Hi Audrey, there is already an identical copy of this photo on Wikimedia Commons, which is central repository for media across all Wikipedia projects, here. There is also an existing version on the local English Wikipedia. I have changed the link on the Bartholomew Bretherton article to use the existing picture and, as your upload is surplus to requirements, it will be deleted, which is no reflection on you. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Best,  Philg88 ^♦talk 05:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes I wanted to delete one of them but wasn't sure which one to delete. Please do what you think is best. Audrey202 (talk) 08:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi again Audrey202. I've tagged one of the files for deletion, which will leave one copy on the local English Wikipedia (per your request on the page), and one on Wikimedia Commons. Best,  Philg88 ^♦talk 10:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Is this image free?

Hi, I found this image. Is it free to upload? Thanks, Matty.007 20:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

That page doesn't give any indication of the copyright status, so currently the answer is no. Looking at the page of the person who uploaded it, he isn't the copyright holder either. Nthep (talk) 20:32, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

given that the subject is deceased, the photo may fit into the non-free usage criteria for use on Wikipedia even though it may not be a free image. You may look into that avenue :-) Bali88 (talk) 01:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Matty007. The relevant guideline mentioned by Bali88 can be found at WP:NFCI #10. I would try to find a better version of the image, ideally hosted by the copyright holder, so that you can credit the image properly in the fair use rationale. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I asked quite a similar question a few days ago, and am fairly confident that the only pictures I can find are either this one, a (probably illegal) screengrab, or a few in books. When I mainspace the article I will probably use an image from one of the books/this one as a non-free illustration, thanks for all the help. Matty.007 12:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Fast edits

When someone knows there is a change to a page. Like an athlete but that athlete is not that popular. They change it right away how do they do that. Tylkrby767 (talk) 16:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey there - the best way to keep track of pages you want to watch it to place them on your watchlist. Your watchlist provides you with all the recent changes to your watched articles. Hope this helps, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Tag Filter

I was trying to change my username until i saw the tag filter.I didnt know how to do it can you help me.please tell me how to work the tag filter. Tylkrby767 (talk) 13:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tylkrby767, welcome back to the Teahouse! I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you say the "tag filter" is preventing you from changing your username, but if you would like to change your username, head over to Wikipedia:Changing username. Make sure you read all the guidelines. Wikipedia does have an edit filter in place that can cause the software to react automatically to certain behaviors. The purpose of the edit filter is to prevent spamming and abuse. See Wikipedia:Edit filter for more information about the edit filter. I don't see how it will prevent you from requesting a username change, however. If this doesn't answer your question, leave a follow-up below, and I or another host will be happy to clarify anything. Best, Mz7 (talk) 17:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Non-free image upload

Hi, I uploaded the non-free image File:Commander Ernest Bond photograph.jpg, did I do it OK? Thanks, Matty.007 15:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey Matty! Yes you've uploaded the image correctly with the right non-free media information templates and rationale. I've made the long link into MediaWiki's URL format. ///EuroCarGT 17:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I don't often do non-free images. Thanks, Matty.007 19:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

When patrolling recent changes for vandalism should I place an emphasis on checking edits made by IP editors?

As of now, I already do this. Should I be doing this or not? Thanks. Fungal vexation (talk) 19:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Fungal vexation. I don't think there are any rules saying you can't emphasize checking edits made by IP editors. You can fight vandalism how you want to fight vandalism. Just remember that IPs are human too, and while 80% of all vandalism on Wikipedia is done by anonymous users, more than 80% of all edits done by anonymous users are not vandalism. Best, Mz7 (talk) 20:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

What is the criteria for making a new page about a park?

I had a look around the parks in Manchester and noticed that most parks do have their own page (Heaton, Picadilly, Plattfields, Alexandra) but noticed that Birchfields and Crowcroft are both missing from the list despite having a significant impact on the area they respectably are in (Longsight and Rusholme) and both relatively large and used quite often.

My initial presumption on why they didn't have a page was maybe that there isn't much information about the parks but I was quite doubtful as both have served their areas for a relevantly long period of time. CorrectiveMeasures (talk) 14:57, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, editors use a test called notability to decide whether a topic can have its own article. Generally, if a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. A good way to test for notability, in my opinion, is the amnesia test. First, forget everything you know about the parks—act as if you know nothing about the parks. Now, go online and do research about the park so you can write an article. Only include in the article what you find information in reliable sources. If you find it very difficult to find reliable sources for the topics, they are probably not notable enough for Wikipedia. Hope this helps. If you need more clarification, leave a follow-up below and I will be happy to clarify. Mz7 (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, CorrectiveMeasures. You got some good advice from Mz7. I suggest that you study the references in the other articles about parks in Manchester and other urban parks in the UK. That will give you an idea of the type of sources you might find covering the parks you are interested in. Developing your skills at searching for sources online is important, but sometimes a visit to a local library or bookstore may be well worth your time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

As an extra note, and touching on the question implied in your question - the absence of an article for these parks may be merely because no-one has written one yet. It's not an indication that articles about these parks cannot be written, if sources exist. I searched for Birchfield Park and no article of that title has been deleted. A little further searching finds that Hayward Area Recreation and Park District is in charge of a Birchfield Park in California, but that is a different place and should not dissuade you from creating an article about Manchester's Birchfield Park if you can find sources that talk about it. (The Birchfield Park in California is perhaps not notable, so you should go right ahead and create Birchfield Park about the Manchester instance, if there are sources.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:09, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fine. I would like to thank all of you for your responses, I really appreciate it.

CorrectiveMeasures (talk) 21:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Database has changed name, how do I move page

The MOPED, Model Organism Protein Expression Database has changed its name to MOPED, the Multi-Omics Profiling Expression Database. I would like to update the page but do not know if it is best to make a new MOPED page and edit the original page to tell users to go to the new page, or move the old page to the new name and edit the page? thank you for your help.Eastewart2010 (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey there! Autoconfirmed users (including yourself) have the ability to move pages from one title to another. Moving a page just changes the title of the article, and keeps all prior editing history with it. I've gone ahead and moved the page for you, along with updating the article with the new name and the addition of a note stating how the name has changed. Hope this helps, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Eastewart2010 (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Question about Possibly living people

Hey, here's how the category is described: "Persons of advanced age (over 90) for whom no documentation has existed for a decade or longer can be placed in Category:Possibly living people."

Now what I wonder is what kind of documentation we're talking about here. It doesn't say "reliable documentation" because it's not something that needs to be cited directly in the article. How strictly does this have to be followed?

I have a few sources that indicate that a certain 90+ actress is alive, but it has to be inferred (logical deduction without it being directly proven). Is it necessary that I still need a "reliable" source as per the BLP standards? By the way, the person in question is Julie Gibson and so far all the reverts have been made by different anonymous users. Thanks! OscarL 14:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

If this was just an undisputed change, I'd say that you're probably safe to categorize him as a living person, not merely a possibly living person. The "possibly living" category is meant more for situations where we don't have a clue whether the person is living or not, not where we can reasonably deduce it. That said, if your change is being reverted, even if anonymously, you may want to start a discussion on the article talk page about the category. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 18:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Report / Edit out illegal content

There is an article having a link to an external site with forum thread. One of the main threads has child abuse (pictures). How to remove link to external site without exposing the change in log? (Do not want to expose it as if some degenerated individual come across it and want to look at it.) Warumwarum (talk) 17:52, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Just point it out so we can help. Forum links are rarely appropriate in Wikipedia anywhere. If it is in the "External links" section, take this to WP:ELN. In the article body, probably WP:RSN. --Ronz (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Not to confound you or dismiss your efforts, Warumwarum, but I doubt pictures of physical child abuse would be illegal. I am not a lawyer, that is just what experience tells me. Sexual abuse, however would probably be another story. However, just because a website has a forum wouldn't necessarily make it a site that we couldn't reference. And it also would make a difference if the link your are referring to as being used as a reference or as an external link. If you do not want to post the name of the page, there is a way to discuss this with someone in authority via email. See WP:OTRSN for details. Thanks for your diligence. John from Idegon (talk) 18:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it is sexual abuse that the issue is about. The page in question is relevant in itself to the subject for the page. There is tasks posted as challenges, and users can post answers as replies. Guess that makes it a forum. Issue is that there has been posted rather disturbing content as "answer" and from the looks of it this is several months ago: as in no cation taken from admin, thus best to remove IMHO. Thanks for response. Warumwarum (talk) 18:43, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

template image

Hi, I wanna know the steps to put a template image for albums. Xx7nick (talk) 05:43, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Xx7nick, welcome back to the Teahouse! You had the code almost right; it's just that the C in "Cover" needs to be capitalized. I've just fixed it. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 19:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Revert question

Hi, I'm trying to get clarification on 1RR, such as on abortion related pages,and other pages which that rule applies to. The question involves conduct policy, after the initial revert, with respect to further general editing on that same page. For example, if I revert the contribution of an editor, and then that revert is later reverted by another editor, and then I don’t touch it again, I leave that editor’s contribution exactly as is, but within that same 24 hour period, I edit content from another uninvolved editor, is that a violation of the 1RR? I’d like to be clear on this policy so I don’t accidentally violate it. Thanks!BoboMeowCat (talk) 16:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

When you "edit content from another uninvolved editor," is that another reversion? If so, then yes, it would violate 1RR because 3RR, the rule on which 1RR is based, counts all reversions regardless of content. (Keep in mind that the same exceptions apply for 1RR as for 3RR.) Anon126 (talk - contribs) 19:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC) There is already an extensive discussion on User talk:BoboMeowCat. Anon126 (talk - contribs) 19:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Quotes in searches

If I put a quote in a search, such as "and and" I get lots of "and"s. I thought that if you enclosed a string in quotes that would be all you would get.  Jodosma  (talk) 17:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Jodosma and welcome back to The Teahouse. It might help to ask this question at WP:VPT since the people who know how a search works are more likely to answer a question there.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks  Done.  Jodosma  (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

My article was deleted even though it had good sources and inline citations - help!

My recent article on Canadian UNICEF artist T.M. Ananny was deleted 3 days after it was created. It seems one editor is not in favour of creating an article on this artist, as it had been deleted before. Why? Reliable sources have been cited, i.e. Canadian coin commission, articles in magazines, work in major art galleries in North America, work selected for UNICEF Christmas cards 12 times. What could possibly be the problem here? I am excited to be an editor on Wikipedia and hope that my article on T.M. Ananny can somehow be revived! Gladbot (talk) 22:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Gladbot to Teahouse and Wikipedia! According to the log: administrator JohnCD deleted the page under Criteria for Speedy Deletion G5 (banned user) - under the reason: See Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Ananny for details of banned sock User:Ananny who has been spamming and self-promoting for years. Unfortunately I can't view the article, however you could ask the deleting admin here or at WP:REFUND. Best, ///EuroCarGT 23:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Worthy of note is that Gladbot has twice tried to spam the artist's name into Liquitex. There is an eight year record of promotional editing and spamming in connection with this artist. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Whoa! Firt of all as a newbie editor I was instructed by an "orphan tag" to link articles to T.M.Ananny. When I researched on Wikipedia how to do this, I was instructed to create links by finding subject material that was similar. Liquitex was one of the lines of paint that the artist used (Magazin'Art Article 1999 pg. 63). I don't think that you should call your new editors vandals, it doesn't sound very nice or welcoming. Should we as new editors ignore the tags placed on our articles? A little advice would be most welcome! Thanks again for letting me contribute! Gladbot (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

You are not a new editor. You are a sock of User:Ananny or else a WP:MEATPUPPET, but I'd guess the former. You've been banned for many years and you crop up every few months, usually around holidays, to spam Wikipedia and self-promote yourself. You have wasted the time of dozens of editors with I don't know how many fake accounts, all for the purpose of promoting yourself. freshacconci talk to me 00:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I am an editor at Wikipedia. If you do not want editors to create articles why is Wikipedia made open to do so? There should be no such things as someone banned in your open system. Sorry if you feel your time is wasted.Gladbot (talk) 01:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

You are not sorry. We go through this every time. You act indignant or claim spurious things like cyber-bullying once called out as being a sock and a spammer. If you were to ever read Wikipedia guidelines you would see that all editors must adhere to a number of policies and guidelines. But of course, you are only here to promote your art and have never contributed anything else. So, your sulky "sorry to waste your time" is of course farcical as you have wasted many, many editors time over the course of eight years. freshacconci talk to me 01:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I would like to see my article on T.M. Ananny restored. All Wikipedia criteria for good reliable sources have been met and it is wrong of you to keep removing it.Gladbot (talk) 01:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Gladbot. One thing I noticed right away is that your username ends with the word "bot". This may be in violation of Wikipedia's username policy. On Wikipedia, we actually have bot accounts that serve to carry out repetitive tasks. They are usually run by automated scripts. Since your username might imply that your account is a bot account, it may be misleading to other editors. Please follow the steps at Wikipedia:Changing username to remedy this. Thank you. Mz7 (talk) 02:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Gadbot. My advice is to forget about Ananny. If you have some vested interest in this person than by Wikipedia rules you shouldn't be working or proposing an article on them anyway and if you don't then you need to recognize that Wikipedia has rules that are interpreted by fallible humans. I don't always agree with the decisions about what is notable or a proper change either. What I do in those situations is just find another topic. One great thing about Wikipedia is there is always more than enough editing that needs to be done. I suggest trying user:SuggestBot or other tools to find existing articles that you can help out with. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Just a heads up to everyone: Gladbot (talk · contribs) has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, and so they may not be able to respond to answers here anymore. Mz7 (talk) 22:04, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

My Sandbox was "reviewed" - what does that mean and do I need to do anything?

Good morning. I just received an email from Wikipedia, telling me that "User:Gronk Oz/sandbox was reviewed by DragonflySixtyseven." I don't understand what this means or what (if anything) I should do about it. I checked my Sandbox History, and nothing has changed on it or its talk page. I don't have anything meaningful on that page; I just use it to experiment with formatting etc before I use them on real pages - is that appropriate? Gronk Oz (talk) 05:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Gronk Oz. It simply means that editor took a quick look at your sandbox and saw nothing inappropriate there. It was likely not an in-depth look. No action is needed. We give a high degree of freedom to sandbox usage, but there are some things that are unacceptable, as all Wikipedia pages belong to the community as a whole, and are ultimately for the purpose of improving the encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:50, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Great - thanks for clarifying that, Cullen.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Appropriate way to add a company logo

I added the company logo File:The Bouqs Company Logo.png to display on the page that I'm writing: Articles for creation/The Bouqs Company. But the logo was marked for deletion. What is the proper way to display a company logo? Thank you.

David Condrey (talk) 23:03, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Fair use images can only be used in the mainspace (i.e. articles). Your article draft isn't actually an article yet, so the image will be deleted until it is. I'd wait until your draft is actually moved into the mainspace to re-upload the image and place it in the article. Also be sure to update the file description with the article that the logo will be used in; right now, it's listed as being used in Flower for some reason. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. This is just a school of thought, but I was thinking that maybe the logo fails the threshold of originality required for copyright. It is composed of just text; however, the text is stylized in cursive. I doubt cursive writing is creative enough for copyright protection, so the image may be {{PD-logo}}. Mz7 (talk) 03:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

You may be correct, Mz7 but it takes a lot of expertise in copyright law to say for sure. I think that the safest course of action is to follow WP:NFCI #2, and add it to the article after it is in mainspace. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

If you do intend to add it to the article under a non-free use rationale, you need to fill in all the parameters. The current rationale is incomplete. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

If it is, then it can go on Commons, at least in theory. Commons have deleted logos that met {{PD-logo}} though.

I assumed "Flower" is the example usage. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 04:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC).

I have reduced the resolution, if it does not meet {{PD-logo}} this will be required. Otherwise you can legitimately go back to the hi-res verison, as far as I know. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 04:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC).

Article for Creation

I started writing a new article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/The_Bouqs_Company and submitted it for review and have been continuing to improve it but noticed that the box on top of the page which reads: "Draft article not currently submitted for review." is still present. So I was wondering if perhaps I am doing it incorrectly because I see that I had been working in the 'Talk' tab, but there is another tab called 'Project Page'. So I copied everything over to the 'Project Page' tab and have now succeeded only in completely confusing myself.

David Condrey (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, David. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Bouqs Company is the right place for the submission. If you look in the confusing box at the top of the page it says: "Note: the submission-received box appears at the bottom of the page at first. If it's there, your draft has been submitted correctly, even if this message is still shown."; (the fact that the "'not submitted" box stays at the top of the page is a software fault). The "Review waiting" box is there at the foot of the page, 3 times in fact, and your submission is indeed waiting in the review queue. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

You've done it correctly, David. After your draft is submitted, either a bot or a reviewer will eventually come along and remove the gray box as part of their routine cleanup tasks. I've gone ahead and cleaned up your submission for you, removing the gray "draft article not submitted for review" box. Hope this clears up the confusion. Happy editing! Mz7 (talk) 03:41, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

One point which you might usefully address while you are awaiting review is the problem of external links within the body text of the article; please read WP:external links. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Creating a new category

Hi, I'm working on a new article about a Swedish-American author, and I'm looking for appropriate categories to add to the article. I noticed under Category:American writers there are a number of subcategories, including Category:American writers of European descent. Would it be appropriate to create a set category, Category:American writers of Swedish descent? Is there another location that would be more appropriate? Although this article would be the first to use that category, I know of a number of other articles that might fit (see: List of Swedish Americans#Writers), and there are a number of notable Swedish-American authors I know of who do not currently have Wikipedia articles. Thanks in advance! rchopman (talk) 17:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion, creating this category is probably fine, rchopman, but be prepared to defer to the judgment of editors who spend a lot of time on categories, which can sometimes be controversial. I have only created one category in almost five years of editing, though I frequently assign articles to existing categories. Be prepared to cite a reference that says "writer X is Swedish-American" or something close. It is not enough that writer X has a surname that sounds Swedish to you. Good luck. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Good to know - thanks very much! rchopman (talk) 12:42, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

exporting importing Version history

I am translating an american Article on the German Wpedia. They told me I have to import the original Version history into the new article, but I do not know how? Could you help? The wPedia Articles on importing version history are cryptic. Thank you in advancePatrick jason (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Translate us, an edit summary referring to the source article will be enough to provide the necessary attribution. Wikipedia:Translation similarly refers to the edit summary, but also to adding the template {{Translated page}} to the article talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

@Patrick jason: For German Wikipedia you cannot use the English translation templates - you need to put a copy of {{Vorlage:Übersetzung}} on the talk page of the German article. If you need help to find the article REVIDs necessary for the process please leave me a message on my talk page.  Philg88 ^♦talk 14:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Patrick. OK, this is a slightly more sophisticated process than cut-and-paste, and I can only help you with the en: side of it. The export process can be found at Special:Export simply enter the name of the article, and uncheck "Include only the current revision, not the full history".

You will then need help on the German Wikipedia to use de:Spezial:Importieren.

Possibly they will grant you the Importer right, or they may have a different process.

Good luck! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC).

Removing "Unsourced material" banner

How do I request to have my page reviewed in order to get the "needs additional citations for verification." banner at the top of our page removed? ( Southern Arkansas University )

I have cited everything on the page, and would like it at least reviewed to see if it meets the necessary criteria at this point.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Cdbrice00 (talk) 14:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Cdbrice00 and welcome to the Teahouse. The article now looks to be well referenced so you can certainly remove the banner yourself. One thing to bear in mind, there seem to be an awful lot of links in the lead section, which is discouraged by the appropriate guideline. Rest assured, if anyone is unhappy with your removal of the banner they will soon put it back again.  Philg88 ^♦talk 15:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Philg88, thank you for taking the time to respond, I sincerely appreciate your help.

I will cull back some of the citations in the lead section, I was more focused on adequately citing for the sake of getting rid of that banner. :)

Cheers, and thanks for what you do.

Cdbrice00 (talk) 15:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Where do I find the page I created.

Hi I created a short page about a village. I got the message that it will take 3 weeks to review that page. But where can I see the draft copy of the page? Regards Phantomx013 (talk) 18:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Phantomx013, welcome to the Teahouse! You can find it by going to your contributions. Click the "Contributions" link at the top, or type in Special:Contributions/Phantomx013 in the search box. In this case, your article is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mandouli Anon126 (please ping!-talk-contribs) 18:20, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks :)

This is my first article on wikipedia. I hope it gets approved :) Phantomx013 (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

You have the advantage that Wikipedia notability requirements are weak when applied to human settlements whose existence can be verified. I have asked for input and assistance (not necessarily in that order) at the submarine lair of none other than User:Dr. Blofeld. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

In general "notable people" lists are expected to only contain people who are "notable enough" for a Wikipedia article. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:48, 22 April 2014 (UTC).