Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 262

Archive 255

←

Archive 260

Archive 261

Archive 262

Archive 263

Archive 264

Archive 265

Video referencing

Hello, I am currently working on the article, Thillana Mohanambal. I have posted some video references in the "Legacy" portion of the article. While searching on both Google and Wikipedia about how to post them on wikipedia, it said use "{{cite AV media...". I have used that style of referencing. Is it ok? If not can you tell me which style to use. Thank you. Thamizhan1994 (^{Appo Pesu}) 13:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

@Thamizhan1994: The format is fine. But using Youtube (and similar sites) as a reference is very rarely appropriate. Often copyright is breached there. It is also a user edited site. As a general rule you must avoid such things as references. I would expect Thillana Mohanambal to be inspected for such items and for an experienced editor to consider them carefully and probably remove them. Fiddle Faddle 08:10, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings from the Teahouse Timtrent. I was fortunate at one time to be able to find the transcript of an interview online. I did not have to refer to a YouTube video (which I never do anyway) but could instead refer to the website where anyone could see the transcript. I hope this might be the case for you.

  Bfpage |leave a message  20:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Please judge your source against WP:42, and accept my good wishes. It was, however, not my question. Fiddle Faddle 21:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Article deleted but can it be re-written?

I have followed the guidelines so far, in seeing if I can be granted permission to re-write an article that was deleted. I went rather fast writing the article and it was not well referenced nor was in the correct format. I would like a second chance. I have written to the person who deleted the page...but where do I go from here? And is it even possible for me to re-write it or will it automatically be deleted due to the subject being the same content? Mkdpellet3 (talk) 20:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Mkdpellet3: hello and welcome to The Teahouse. If you can do a much better job following the guidelines, chances are the article won't be deleted the second time, but if you write substantially the same article, it will likely not stay around. Make sure you work on it as a draft, and remember reliable independent sources and a neutral point of view.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mkdpellet3 welcome again, like Vchimpanzee said first work on it as a draft. Then you can submit it for review. Reviewer will help you to fix mistakes in your draft. And you can always use your sandbox to do test edits.--Chamith (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! As Vchimpanzee said above, you should start of with a draft either in your sandbox, or the Draft: space. One recommendation is to use Article's for Creation a place where you could work on your article and get assistance and reviews by experience members. Best, ///EuroCarGT 22:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

How to correct language errors reported by Xtools

I'm working on the article Animatronics to prepare it for nomination as a featured article and I'd like to fix the language errors listed by X!tools but all of the errors are false positives. Is there any thing I can do to make them not show up as errors? David Condrey (talk) 22:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@David Condrey: Hey David, thanks for your question. It looks like X!'s tools maintains a bug reporting page through github. You need to make an account to report a new issue, but this is probably the fastest way to get the issue addressed. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 00:05, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! You can ignore them if you believed that the errors are not true. The tool just suggests possible errors, the tool is not perfect. Take for example yesterday's Featured Article: Capital Loop, LanguageTool lists 6 errors which are false. Good luck on the FA! ///EuroCarGT 00:06, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

And to add what I JethroBT said you could report bugs, errors or concerns to Github or Bugzilla. LanguageTool is currently on 2.8-SNAPSHOT which is a preview mode and not a stable build. ///EuroCarGT 00:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I submitted a feature request Issue 47 and forked the project so I can check out the code later. David Condrey (talk) 00:25, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am looking to create a new page for "Thierry Browers" who is already mentioned on wiki. but it got deleted.

I submitted a separate source article that was used for him on Wiki page: Raw Foodism, so was wondering why that wasn't adequate to keep a page on him? He is a friend and I was helping him start it, and he was going to edit it later.Thierrybrowers (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks DebbieThierrybrowers (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

For reference Thierry Browers and Raw foodism.

Hello Debbie, welcome to the Teahouse. Just to be mentioned in Wikipedia is not enough to merit an article. A subject must be notable among other things.

As your source article: as nearly as I can tell (Graham, Douglas. "The Challenges of Going on a Raw Food Diet". FoodnSport.com. Retrieved 2011-03-31.) does not mention Thierry Browers. Beside that it is a blog--not a reliable source.

As to your username: unless you are Thierry Browers, that username is problematic, for it creates the impression that you are Thierry Browers.

I am sorry to have to give you all this bad news. —teb728 t c 00:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

One more thing: Neither Thierry Browers nor you (as his friend) should be editing an article about him, for you both have a conflict of interest with regard to him. —teb728 t c 01:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Need help editing a post

Hello Wiki Teahouse,

I am hopeful that you can assist me. There is a misleading statement in a posting relating to one of my company’s investigational drugs, but our internal regulations preclude me from directly making edits to any Wiki content relating to our molecules. The URL for the data is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filanesib. The problematic statement is as follows:

However, a clinical trial published in 2012 found that the drug exhibited a "relative lack of clinical activity"; the trial was therefore halted before it was scheduled to end.[6]

This sentence is in the middle of a string of sentences which are about the use of filanesib in the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, but the problematic sentence is about a study of patients with advanced myeloid leukemias (AML). The manner in which the sentence is included is misleading because it suggests that a trial in multiple myeloma was halted due to a lack of clinical activity. While it is true that an AML trial was discontinued, but no multiple myeloma trials have ever been discontinued due to a lack of clinical efficacy. I propose that the sentence should either precede or follow the content about multiple myeloma, and it should be clarified that the discontinued trial was investigating the treatment of patients with AML.

If you are able, please let me know when the edit has been made.

Many thanks,

Steve65.114.206.125 (talk) 19:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Um, are you asking us to edit it for you since you can't?Mirror Freak My Guestbook 19:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Essentially, yes. The content is inaccurate and my company won't allow me to edit the content. If you are not able to provide assistance, please let me know who can. I have to assume that Wiki is interested in correcting inaccuracies when identified65.114.206.125 (talk) 19:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you provide a reference from a reliable source? Otherwise we can't "correct" it. Thank you!Mirror Freak My Guestbook 19:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Steve. I suggest that you add Template:Request edit in the format explained, to Talk: Filanesib, along with complete details and links to reliable sources backing up your proposed change. You may want to consider opening an account so that other editors can communicate with you reliably. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The source you have listed is accurate:

Khoury, H. J.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Borthakur, G.; Kadia, T.; Foudray, M. C.; Arellano, M.; Langston, A.; Bethelmie-Bryan, B.; Rush, S.; Litwiler, K.; Karan, S.; Simmons, H.; Marcus, A. I.; Ptaszynski, M.; Kantarjian, H. (2012). "A phase 1 dose-escalation study of ARRY-520, a kinesin spindle protein inhibitor, in patients with advanced myeloid leukemias". Cancer 118 (14): 3556–3564. doi:10.1002/cncr.26664. PMID 22139909.

The problem is that the sentence neglects to point out that the study is in patients with advanced myeloid leukemias. Since the sentence is sandwiched in the middle of several sentences about filanesib treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, the reader is left with the impression that the discontinued trial pertains to multiple myeloma, not advanced myeloid leukemias. The inclusion of a reference to the patients treated would at least clarify that the discontinued study pertained to advanced myeloid leukemias, not multiple myeloma.

Thanks for your help.65.114.206.125 (talk) 19:36, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Morning Steve. The article's author has clarified the sentence by providing a reference to the patients treated, and I have moved the sentence to where it appears to fit better contextually and chronologically. As mentioned above, the article's talk page Talk:Filanesib is a good place to discuss concerns about the article with the people writing it, and to make edit requests. Your company's internal regulations should permit you to edit that talk page, which is in accordance with Wikipedia best practices for parties with a conflict of interest. If you need any more help, please let us know. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 03:02, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Obvious conflict of interest but also obviously (hopefully!) neutral contribution

Dear Teahouse,

I mean to do a hopefully neutral page about the company I work for. It should state the name, what it stands for (brain electrical source analysis = BESA) and that is produces software for EEG and MEG analysis. And that's it, no more. Similar open source software is on wikipedia. They are of course more notable, as more people use them to publish, still (otherwise this and other companies wouldn't exist) a lot of publications are done with commercial software too. Would that be acceptable for wikipedia? I read the documentation, and though I guess a page about or company is not desired due to my affiliation (I am assuming the notability is ok), I wanted to be sure. Thank you very much for your time. Andre Andre at besa (talk) 08:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Andre at besa: While we deprecate WP:COI we have a mechanism at WP:AFC for helping COI editors to rip away any inappropriate material. I suggest this route to you, together with patience throughout the review process. I recommend that you declare your COI expressly n the talk page of the draft itself and deploy {{Connected contributor}} at the head as well. Some authors are able to achieve good articles despite COI. With luck you are one such. Fiddle Faddle 10:27, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

You may also want to review WP:Notability and WP:Company before you begin. These pages will give you an idea of how we determine notability of an organization. It would be a shame to go through the effort of drafting a page if only to see it deleted as non-notable. Best of luck. Keihatsu ^talk 12:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi both,

thank you very much for your time. I will follow your advice and see what I can do! Cheers, 87.138.135.246 (talk) 09:40, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Ops, had forgotten to log in! Sorry!

Anyways, thank you for your help. Best Andre at besa (talk) 11:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

article moderation for wikipedia

How long does it usually takes for an article to get moderated and posted on Wikipedia93.85.93.86 (talk) 12:50, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Um, It can take up to weeks for it to become integrated into the Wiki. You will get a message saying it has either been declined or it has been approved.Mirror Freak My Guestbook 12:53, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

What does it depend on? Thanks!93.85.93.86 (talk) 13:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The overall article. The references you added (reliable or not), Notability of the article.Mirror Freak My Guestbook 13:06, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Clear, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.85.93.86 (talk) 13:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Looking for feedback in Elaine King article

Hello, I´m the creator of this article (paid edition). Following the suggestion of an editor who is participating, I´m looking for feedback. Some lines of the article were deleted because the editor considered them promotional; in some of them it is ok, but I have doubts in two of them: 1 - about Elaine King´s role in her current job at WE Family Offices, the text was: "where she works with families to establish channels of communication, identify their specific needs, and create customized solutions that support and strengthen the family business." is this "promotional puffery"? 2 - "King also advises on retirement planning, saving for educational needs, estate planning, family meetings and financial competency programs focused on children and women."... is this "unreferenced promotion"? is this not a fact? .. And please check "About "Community" section deletion" in talk page, and tell me what you think. Thanks!--Ane wiki (talk) 20:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, to me these are promotional. It's a matter of level of detail. The fact that her role includes advising families on financial and business matters is fair enough, provided this is supported by the sources, but the detail about the methods she uses is not unless there is substantial writing in independent sources which focusses on these methods or areas.

In answer to your other question on the talk page: the article is an orphan because there are no other articles which link to it: it's not something which can be solved in the article itself. --ColinFine (talk) 21:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your answer. I understand. I will look for this sources. As for the second question, I understand that the article is an orphan, I was talking about the discussion in "About "Community" section deletion", at the end of the talk page.--Ane wiki (talk) 21:49, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Ane wiki for asking this question. I think you're going to help a lot of people by bringing this up since so many will have the same question. I do a lot of editing for brevity. My goal is to say things with the fewest words possible and to remove puffery, weasel words and things that express a point of view. For example, here is your version of the text:

"where she works with families to establish channels of communication, identify their specific needs, and create customized solutions that support and strengthen the family business...King also advises on retirement planning, saving for educational needs, estate planning, family meetings and financial competency programs focused on children and women."

Now here is my version of the text: "X facilitates the improvement of family communications by identifying specific needs. Customized solutions are provided to support the economic goals of the family."

  Bfpage |leave a message  20:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Bfpage! thanks for your advice! Can I upload the phrase you've written?

As I said on the talk page, I saw other pages like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariela_Dabbah which were written in the same style, and I did not see anyone questioning, then I thought it was valid. An editor answer me with "Please see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists "... I understand the idea, then can I edit other articles, like it, where I found this style? or make the suggestion to an admin?--Ane wiki (talk) 00:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Go ahead and edit them to improve the style, Ane. See Be bold, one of our most important guidelines. If your changes should be reverted, don't revert back, but start a discussion on the article talkpage. Bishonen | talk 11:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC).

Thank you Ane wiki for letting me suggest an edit to your article. Of course you can use what I have written. It is not copyrighted!

  Bfpage |leave a message  12:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help!--Ane wiki (talk) 16:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Expansion of email features

I see it is possible for Wikipedians to email each other within this site. But is it not possible to attach photos to the mails? Because I want to send other editors photos I took of pages from a book, so that they can use the information from the photos to develop articles. 15:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kailash29792 (talk • contribs)

Hello Kailash29792 welcome to the Teahouse, (You forgot to sign your post ) You can send email to other users by clicking "Email this user" from the "toolbox" on the left of the screen, when any User or User talk page is viewed. But no, you can't send picture through Wikipedia mail. Wikipedia mail should be used if you are discussing a confidential subject,Otherwise it is usually better to leave a message on the editor's talk page. And the message is sent as plain text. Wiki markup (such as links) and HTML code will not work. Your email address will also be disclosed to the recipient.--Chamith (talk) 16:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Summer of Monuments--how do you see the photos?

Hi, I just added two photos of the house at the historic site where I work in Windsor, NC. How do you see the photos that have been added? Also, how do you note in the "still needs for NC" that you have added photos. I am still debating adding a photo of my house, which is also on the register.NCDavid33 (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @NCDavid33: and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you are talking about File:1763 King-Bazemore Exterior.jpg and File:Front of 1803 Hope Mantion.jpg which you uploaded on Wikimedia Commons. To use those files, simply put type [[File:1763 King-Bazemore Exterior.jpg]] or [[File:File:Front of 1803 Hope Mantion.jpg]]. Cheers,  ΤheQ Editor  ^Talk? 17:52, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity...

This has nothing to do with me; rather, I ask this out of curiosity.

If one is a long-time Wikipedian who abides by the rules, and is not jaded in any manner whatsoever, and they are asked by a company that they work for to start a Wikipedia article on their company, and they consider doing so (first having to make sure that the company is attested in reliable print sources, as well as that the company meets our notability guidelines), and (if it meets those) begins to write an article on them, would they still have a conflict of interest?

What I mean is, if, for sake of argument, the Wikipedian in question did not actually have the company's interests ahead of their wishes to improve (and abide by the rules of) Wikipedia (and as such wouldn't actually include material that couldn't be reliably backed up, nor would they include promotional material), could they really be said to have a conflict of interest? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 11:16, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tharthan. In your hypothetical situation, the good Wikipedia editor has a boss who is almost certainly not as well-informed and committed to the neutral point of view as your imaginary editor. A person with the power to fire, or to give salary increases or promotions. This editor should use the Articles for Creation process, and disclose their conflict of interest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:47, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

That's a fair point. I never considered it from the perspective of a meddling executive messing with the due process of article creation. Hmm... I wonder if any cases like that have happened before. I'll have to search the archives of Wikipedia:AFC and see what comes up.

I just find it interesting reading through historical discussions (it's a guilty pleasure) for my own amusement. Please do not think poorly of me for doing so.

In any case, thank you for answering my question. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 20:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

DOWNLOAD AND INSTALL

Can this wikipedia be downloaded and installed as like as other browsers can be?Jojolpa (talk) 03:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Wikipedia is a website and could be access on any web browser with an established network connection. ///EuroCarGT 03:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

One never knows though. It is possible that one day a free "Wikrowser" might come to be, provided that: 1. Someone takes the time to put it together and 2. It utilises only its own resources, with the exception of resources that are made freely available. Such a thing exists on mobile platforms already (or at least on devices utilising iOS) in the form of Wikipanion. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Request help in editing a Post-it Notes talk page dispute on how best to write the publicly known facts of who invented Post-it notes first to post on Wikipedia page

Not exactly sure how to ask this question, but was told that teahouse was the best place to ask for help in editing it. A few Wikipedia editors over the last few years have been trying to introduce some factual (public 1997 Federal Court case records - AMRON vs 3M - and settlement reached) history onto both the ALAN AMRON and POST-IT NOTE Wikipedia pages.

Seems case law filed states Amron had in fact shown his invention of Press-on Memo in 1973 to 3M executives in 1974, when 3M then claimed to have invented it themselves. Without claiming or saying anything at all, at the very least, Wikipedia should make the world aware of these historical facts about the invention of Post-it notes which came from the invention of Press-on memo. I have, as you can see from my Talk on that Post-it note and Amron pages, exhausted my efforts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Post-it_note#Amron

If teahouse could please read that Post-it Notes talk page and suggest the correct wording to post that would allow the historical facts of the case and the settlement be posted, the world will thank you.

Post-it notes has a cult like following, and any facts about its origination or leading up to its creation is important.

Wikipedia has become the place for one to find historical facts about anyone and or anything. Why not Post-it notes?

Up until today 3M has controlled and manipulated what is being said about who invented Post-it notes. Anyone else who trys gets knocked down.

14 October 2014 LeannJordan LeannJordan (talk) 20:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse LeannJordan. I hope we can get you the information that you need. I went back to the talk pages that you reference. I noticed that you did create a new article on Amron. Your disputes with other editors seems to have spanned a long period of time. Perhaps it's time to step back for a moment and read: WP:Dispute resolution. I am not going to pretend that simply reading a help article will solve all the problems. You do have the option of asking another editor to become involved to help with the resolution of the problems that you see with the article and its editing. I don't have any one I can suggest to you at this time, but perhaps you may be able to find someone by examining the articles editing history and finding someone who you believe has a level head on their shoulders and can remain impartial. I may be wrong here, but it may be that you have such an intense interest in this topic that it has become personal. Right now I am the major contributor to an article that I am working on and for some strange reason when someone else comes to make an edit I have to remind myself that I do not own the article and anyone can change, revert or question anything that I do. When this happens we have to make sure that we don't take it personally. Please come back to the Teahouse. If we have not answered your questions and comments satisfactorily. Best regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Is there a policy regarding library catalog records?

Hello,

I work at a large nationally recognized research library, and we've been discussing various ways we can both help improve Wikipedia and at the same time offer better access to some of our collections. The question of linking to things like catalog records and finding aids has come up and I haven't really seen too many on here. I guess I'm wondering if there is an explicit or unspoken policy regarding these kinds of things. My only guess is that many records and finding aids only show institutional holdings or give bibliographic information about a particular item or collection but don't link to actual content and perhaps that's frowned on? Any thoughts on this matter would be appreciated.

Thanks ADGB1750 (talk) 19:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi ADGB1750 - I think WP:GLAM, the project that deals with collaboration with Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums, is probably the best place to discuss your ideas. Welcome to Wikipedia! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for coming to the Teahouse ADGB1750. I have seen article/list pages here on Wikipedia, which sometimes amounts to a simple annotated bibliography. But it sounds like your storehouse of information encompasses a lot more than just bibliographies. Are your bibliographies and records searchable online? Wikipedia articles often link to bibliographic entries that are not necessarily easily accessed by a reader of the article. For example, an editor on Wikipedia may have access to texts of scientific journals through his or her own institutional library. The editor who has access to the entire text of a journal article may still still cite that article and its contents, but should mention in the bibliography of the article that a subscription is required to access the information. It would be a wonderful thing to see your information become accessible to everyone, editors and readers alike. Best regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:18, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

ADDING TO THE DISCOGRAPHY OF MUSICAL SHOWS

As a new contributor to Wikipedia, I am not aware of a method to create a > discography of shows in articles about them. One of the main points of curiosity > about rare shows such as Jerome Kern's "Oh Lady! Lady!!" is what the show sounded > like. I understand that to add links to recordings that exist is considered > advertising. However, I believe people seeking information on these musical shows > need this ability. How may this be done without violating your guidelines? 2601:4:4A80:218:217:F2FF:FE02:632C (talk) 13:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You can sometimes link to a song, but you have to be careful about copyright - see Restrictions on linking. You can include a sample of the music - see Manual of Style/Music samples. You may be able to get further help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Theatre. RockMagnetist(talk) 06:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

how to completely replace an exising article

I want to contribute a completely new article about Berkeley Divinity School. The current one has basically shrunk to one paragraph. But: I work at the school--am I allowed to write an article about it? Or is that a conflict? Also, how do I go about adding a completely new article to replace an existing one? There are a few users that have been making small corrections. Should I consult with them? I do have a Wikipedia account! Johnarmstrong4567 (talk) 14:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I believe that you should hold a full consultation with them on the article's talk page. Now, you can not force them to participate, and, had you not the WP:COI you have declared, I would suggest that you take a bold stance and rewrite the article. Unfortunately you cannot do that. Start with seeking to consult, and come back here is that fails and ask what the next step ought to be. Tread softly, yet with precision. Fiddle Faddle 17:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Here are two points for you to consider, Johnarmstrong4567. First of all, we very rarely "completely replace" an existing article. That shows disrespect for other editors who have worked on the article over the years. Instead, the proper approach, in general, is to make a series of edits to expand and improve it. This allows other editors to accept and agree to some changes, while reverting and disagreeing with other edits.

However, because you are employed by the Berkeley Divinity School, you have a clear cut conflict of interest and should not be editing the body of the article yourself. Instead, propose additions to the article on its talk page, furnishing a link to a reliable source backing up any addition that you propose. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Scanner

In the recent India Wikimedia conference, I was very surprised to learn that there are few Wikipedias who give financial scholarships to their best editors for printer, scanner, computer hardwares, internet bills etc. Tamil Wikipedia has a project on this (here is the lik: Ta:விக்கிப்பீடியா:உதவித்தொகை). It was a new and surprising news for me.
I have requested a scanner there (needed for my Wikip/media works), but, I don't post in their Wiki.
As I learned many new things in the India conference, I am asking here, is there any project for En Wp editors where I can ask for a scanner? --Tito☸Dutta 20:50, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! Your Wikimedia chapter could provide you with equipment for free to contributors who are active in the Wikimedia Projects. I would suggest requesting your local Wikimedia chapter for free equipment. ///EuroCarGT 21:46, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Just to add that some Wikimedia Chapters may not have the equipment you are looking for. ///EuroCarGT 21:51, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks. --Tito☸Dutta 23:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC):::

Speaking as an editor of over five years of experience, Titodutta, I would say that a scanner is a tool that I rarely use. Occasionally, I might scan an image from a book published before 1923, or an old pre-digital photo from my own collection. But that has been rare. 99.9% of my work doesn't require a scanner, and if I didn't have one, I would just go to my local business support store (operated by wonderful people from India) where I could rent the use of a scanner for half an hour at a very reasonable rate. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:34, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

• I wrote about it here Ta:விக்கிப்பீடியா:உதவித்தொகை#User:Titodutta (it is in English). Thank you. --Tito☸Dutta 07:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

How to...

How to add a reference? I want to add it on the page Cen (surname) Dadapotato (talk) 17:18, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Dadapotato welcome to the Teahouse. Easiest way to add reference is place them in between<ref>...</ref> tags.All you have to do is place URL of your source in between <ref> tags.For example let's say you want to provide [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29570347] as a reference then all you have to do is write <ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29570347]</ref> on the specific place you need it (For more information go to this link). Hope this helps--Chamith (talk) 17:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

@Dadapotato: Welcome from me as well. ChamithN has already given you some good information. If you want more information on references, you can also check out Help:Referencing for beginners. I hope that helps as well! --Jayron32 17:31, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

@Dadapotato: Please also be aware that wherever possible you should not use "bare urls" for references, such as the example shown above, as these can lead to link rot. Use an appropriate {{citation}} template wherever possible and consider archiving the link.  Philg88 ^♦talk 06:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you to all of you Dadapotato (talk) 14:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

help in editing

Hi everyone! Facing a little problem in editing. In the wikipedia article on "Conduct disorder" I have added reference number 46 but there seems to be a problem with the ???date. I am not sure of what it is. Can someone help me out?

Also, Reference number 26 on the article on "Clozapine" is asking for title. How do I resolve that?

thanks. Raysujoy8 (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings @Raysujoy8: welcome to the teahouse. First here is an article you might find helpful: wp:references for beginners What I usually use is the Cite tool that is part of the basic editing widgets. If you click "Cite" then go down to where it will say "Templates" you can pull down the Templates menu and get some common kinds of references: books, journal articles, etc. Then it will give you a form to fill out. Note there are a lot of fields in that form, most of them are optional but it's best to fill in as much data as you can. I think the date and title things you are referring to are errors from a reference missing one or more required fields. When you get a red link in a reference it usually means either that some required field was left empty or some field such as the date has a value that isn't valid. I fixed the Clozapine reference for you, I had to do it a couple times myself because I kept getting the date format wrong. Here is what the code looks like FYI:

<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Midbari|first1=Y|last2=et. al.|title=Hematological and cardiometabolic safety of clozapine in the treatment of very early onset schizophrenia: a retrospective chart review.|journal=Journal of Child Adolescent Psychopharmacology|date= 2013-10-23|pmid=24111981}}</ref>

--MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Raysujoy8, I noticed that your citations at Clozapine looked like this: <ref>{{cite journal|pmid=24111981}}</ref>. My guess is that you intended to use <ref>{{cite pmid|24111981}}</ref>, but noticed that the documentation for {{cite pmid}} says "Per consensus, this template should no longer be used. Instead, please use the {{cite journal}} template." Unfortunately, {{cite journal}} doesn't work the way you tried to use it. However, if you use the form for journals that MadScientistX11 described above, you can enter the pmid and click on the search icon beside it to fill in all the fields (MadScientistX11, that would have made your life easier too). RockMagnetist(talk) 16:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Asian Games medal tallies from the past to the recent Asian Games in Inchon, South Korea.

Dear Wikipedia Editor,

My question is if you can correct the error on the added total medals from the past to recent Asian Games? Here are the medal tally of the Philippines in past Asian Games. Count the number of total medals. It's excitedly what I mention. The correction is 64 golds, 112 silvers, 205 bronzes and a total of 38. As far as this year's Asian Games in Inchon, South Korea is concern, it show 2 silvers and 12 bronzes. The corrections are 3 silvers and 11 bronzes. The 1 gold and 15 total medals are correct. Anyway, add carefully the total medals. It's excitedly what I added there.

Year Games	Gold	Silver	Bronze	Total	Rank
1951 New Delhi	5	6	8	19	4
1954 Manila	14	14	17	45	2
1958 Tokyo	9	19	15	43	2
1962 Jakarta	7	6	24	37	3
1966 Bangkok	2	15	20	37	10
1970 Bangkok	1	9	12	22	11
1974 Tehran	0	2	11	13	16
1978 Bangkok	4	4	8	16	9
1982 New Delhi	2	3	9	14	10
1986 Seoul	4	5	9	18	6
1990 Beijing	1	2	7	10	13
1994 Hiroshima	3	2	8	13	14
1998 Bangkok	1	5	12	18	21
2002 Busan	3	7	16	26	18
2006 Doha	4	6	9	19	18
2010 Guangzhou	3	4	9	16	19
2014 Incheon	1	2	12	15	22
     Total	63	111	196	368	10

Sincerely,

Alejandro Munoz § — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.0.120 (talk) 02:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Alejandro. (I have reformatted your table so that it is more readable). This sort of comment should go on the talk page Talk:Philippines at the Asian Games. But that table should not appear in the article unless all the information in it - including the totals - is referenced to published reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

How is gas dupont achieve standards? Let you know comments - http://www.gasoto.com

How is gas dupont achieve standards? Let you know comments! - http://www.gasoto.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaslanh01 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Gaslanh01. What is your question about editing Wikipedia? That is the only kind of question which is appropriate for this page. --ColinFine (talk) 16:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Profile formatting

Hi, all. I created a profile, but can't correct the formatting; the text won't wrap around and form a paragraph, instead forming a long, single line of copy. Tried using different browsers and loading w/plain text, w/o success. Thoughts? TheLiteratureGuy (talk) 17:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Aschmidt21: We actually don't use indents for beginning new paragraphs on Wikipedia. When you add spaces at the beginning of a new line, you end up getting that gray box that you saw. I've gone ahead and removed the indentation for you. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

References

Hey Teahouse, How do you make it to where when you add references in an article, you don't list the same reference twice. But you still link your facts to the same reference?Amanda Smalls 18:20, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey @Amanda Smalls: WP:NAMEDREFS is what you're looking for. To put it simply, you give a reference a name the first time it is used, and then refer to the reference's name any time you use the reference thereafter. Example of the first instance of a named reference:

<ref name="name"> reference goes here </ref>

To use the reference again later on:

<ref name="name" />

Hope that helps! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:26, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to ask, but could you show me what you mean in an article? I learn better through looking at the diffs of edits.Amanda Smalls 18:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

No problem - it's actually been implemented on one of the articles you made, Scarus ghobban. Take a look at the introduction while editing the page. You can see reference "j" appearing after the list of nicknames, and then appearing again at the end of the sentence. Let me know if you need further clarification. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Amanda Smalls. Have a look at this diff for Scarus dimidiatus. I have consolidated the citations and also expanded the web link to give a full citation. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

help with the wikipedia adventure?

Hi there, I'm just starting out in the wikipedia adventure and I'm having trouble progressing past the part where it says "Someone sent you a message! Check your messages!" I went to my talk page, but I didn't see any new messages, and no new dialogue popped up. What should I do?

Thanks! internatwave Internatwave (talk) 21:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Internatwave! Looking at the revision history for your talk page, I see that @Internatwave welcomed you to the Teahouse, deleted the welcome and restored it. Why, I don't know - but that would explain why you got a message but saw nothing new. I will post a new message on your talk page, and we'll see if that works for you. RockMagnetist(talk) 05:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Silly me - I didn't notice that you're the one who made those edits. That wouldn't account for the notification (I tested that on my own talk page). There remains my test message. RockMagnetist(talk) 16:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Is this

Unresolved

@Ocaasi: just in case it is. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

How can I change the Display Title of the page I made

Hi I created a page "United Medical Informational System (UMIAS)" and I need to change it on "United Medical Information and Analytical System ("EMIAS")" . I thought I would be able to change it after I become authorized, but after 4 days and more then 10 edits, I still can't do it. What should I do?IvanZuev (talk) 07:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi IvanZuev. You certainly should be able to move the page to a new title - what process are you following to try and rename it? Yunshui ^雲_水 07:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

oh, I got it. Thanks, man.IvanZuev (talk) 08:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not convinced that the current title (EMIAS) is correct. Shouldn't the title be the common name in English, ie "United Medical Information and Analytical System of Moscow" or some variation thereof, with a redirect at EMIAS?--ukexpat (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

bentsutomu1234

I would like to submit this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Bentsutomu1234/sandbox&oldid=629754472....how do I do it?

Hey Bentsutomu1234, welcome to the Teahouse. The article you've written is probably more appropriate for Wikiversity which hosts free learning materials, or could possibly be added to content already on Wikibooks, where free textbooks are hosted. The English Wikipedia generally excludes essays because they're not within in our encyclopedic scope. That said, it looks like some of content might be able to improve information in the special relativity article, particularly as you've included many sources in your report. Let me know if you need any help moving the content to a particular spot. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

copyright

Hi, I have had an article rejected because of copyright. I am assuming this is because I cut and pasted the objectives from the website of the organisation the article is about; but who owns the copyright? I jointly wrote the original on the website, surely I have a right to cut and paste it wherever I want? Jan Bridget 31.185.146.233 (talk) 22:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, User:31.185.146.233, and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia, material that are published elsewhere, including on the Internet, are presumed to be copyrighted to the original owner unless the website explicitly states that the material has been licensed under an acceptable Creative Commons License or GFDL. If you are the copyright owner of the material, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials on licensing the material under the Wikipedia license. KJ ^Discuss? 22:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! Copyright is a serious matter on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Projects. The article you wrote was rejected/deleted due to it having a copyright violation, a user has detected . You do not have the ownership of the original content where you have cut and pasted it, the copyright is owned by the organization you are presumably writing about. It's called Plagiarism and if you want to write up something you got to ensure it is in your own words, it is backed up by the source your using and lastly you understand you will submit work that is compatible with Wikipedia's Creative Commons license and GFDL. ///EuroCarGT 22:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Jan Bridget. While I'm sure EuroCarGT's reply was intended to be helpful, I don't think the word 'plagiarism' is appropriate if you wrote the original text. But Kkj11210's reply is more to the point: we require an explicit release by the copyright owner, whether that is you or the organisation. Even if the copyright question is settled, it is unlikely to be appropriate to paste the organisation's objectives from its website into a Wikipedia article, as they probably fall outside the "uncontroversial factual information" which is all that should be sourced from a non-independent source. Anything about the organisation's objectives should be included only if a reliable source independent of the organisation has discussed them. --ColinFine (talk) 16:00, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

My sincere apologies, ColinFine & 31.185.146.233 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I've misread that as I was on my mobile phone. However if you are the original text owner, you should verify your connection by sending a permission ticket as you are donating copyrighted text materials. ///EuroCarGT 20:51, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

subpage to live

I just finished a subpage in my user space, who do I make it go live? Samlack (talk) 18:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Morning Samlack. I reckon you should put {{subst:submit}} at the top of it, and then wait for it to be reviewed, which might take a few weeks or more. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

The draft article was on the user's main user page, and he included the "nowiki" tags round "subst:submit" so that it was ineffective; I have moved the draft to a sub-page with {{Userspace draft}} at the top, and invited him to click the green button. JohnCD (talk) 21:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Use of a picture on WIkipedia

I want to add a picture to an article in Wikipedia. The picture was released as a publicity shot by the Country Music Association in 1967 for use by the media. I have no idea what license to claim the right to use this picture on falls under. Can anyone help me out?TD (talk) 13:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, TD. It depends what you mean by "released .. for use by the media". Unfortunately, unless it was explicitly placed in the public domain (that is, they relinquished all rights to it. The other possibility, that of licensing it under something like CC-BY-SA, wasn't available in 1967 I believe), then it cannot be used in Wikipedia, unless such use meets all the criteria in non-free content criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 16:06, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

@ColinFine and Tdillard: Actually, some other possibilities exist. See the licensing (and extensive rationale and explanation) provided for https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Monroes_Cast_1966.jpg - another publicity photo from the same era. For that era, publication without a visible copyright notification is significant. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Demiurge1000: I've never heard of that exception before. --ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

New article...

I would like to see an article or create one myself for a man who has written a book. I believe the content of his book and life/career deserves an explanation and/or encyclopedic entry. His good friend, mentor and peer, has an article on Wikipedia and I think this gentleman should too.

Please advise?

Thank you! Theobc (talk) 21:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

@Theobc: hello and welcome to The Teahouse. It is not what you think but what independent reliable sources say about the man you want to write an article about. Is there significant coverage in multiple sources such as respected newspapers and magazines, which we call notability? Look at the references for the man who has an article on Wikipedia. The fact is that this other man may not be entitled to an article, but if the other article was properly written and sourced, and the man was notable by our definition, you may use that article as a model.

If you want to write the article yourself, WP:AFC is the best way since others can evaulate the article while it is a draft. In what we call article space, it would likely be quickly deleted. There is also requested articles but that is a slow process.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:22, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

NOTIFICATION

If I type {{ping|someone}}, will this notify someone ? I mean, will he/she get notification or not? would anyone like to reply,please?Jojolpa (talk) 03:51, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Someone would be notified by doing so. You can also notify someone by typing [[User:Someone]], if you want to link to one's userpage without notifying them, you can use {{noping|Someone}}. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 04:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jojolpa and welcome to the Teahouse. I have left you a small guide on how to ping and alert others at your talk page. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:33, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jojolpa: They will usually get a notification if you signed the post but there are some technical details at mw:Help:Echo#Mentions. It also assumes they haven't disabled "Mention" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo, but I'm guessing few users have disabled it. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Reference to information from a manufacturer's technical personnel

Hi! I am new to this. I updated an article about Kobo e-Readers today, based on my own experience with their reader and a detailed discussion with their technical assistance team. I'd like to know: (1) Is this a valid reference?; and (2) If it is, how would I go about citing it?Mitspacescientist (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

No I am afraid it is not acceptable. All information must be verifiable in a reliable source - that is a reader must be able to check the facts, at any time of day or night, at any point in the future. By talking to their technical assistance team, you have been conducting original research which is also unacceptable. Many people find these rules counter-intuitive, especially when they are referring to something, like their own-life, that they think they know better than anyone else, but these basic rules are to try and prevent information being invented, misinterpreted, or used to promote someone's point of view. - Arjayay (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

"At any time of day or night" is not correct. It is acceptable for a source to exist only in, for example, a handful of published paper copies, in only a handful of university libraries, that are only accessible to chosen academics, and only open 10am to 4pm weekdays. I'm pretty sure I've added references to sources that are published but expensive technical documentation from specific companies - it's possible to obtain those sources if one tries hard enough, but it might take weeks. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

(e.c) @Mitspacescientist: Hi Mitspacescientist. No this is not a valid reference and cannot be cited. All information must be verifiable in reliable, published sources. What you have done might be great information to work from in a different context, such as if you were writing a newspaper article. The heart of journalism is original research. By contrast, an encyclopedia is at the very opposite end; it is a tertiary source reference work, that presents a survey of already already published knowledge. For that reason we have a core content policy called no original research (see also the verifiability policy), that shows why this material is unusable and unacceptable for Wikipedia because of what it is. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I understand. I thought this might be the case and it is the reason that I asked the question. I did not cite anything rather than take the chance that I was doing something inadmissible. I still think the information is very useful and anyone can actually check it by either trying it on a Kobo e-Reader or talking to the Kobo folks. I tried very hard to be completely factual in the paragraph I wrote. I can't imagine that anyone would find the entry a problem or feel a need to remove it. In the mean time, I'll see if there is a User Guide or manual somewhere on the Net that I can reference to shore it up. Thanks for the wisdom!Mitspacescientist (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Mitspacescientist. The problem is of verifiability. Because Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anybody can edit, anybody may come along after you and change the information you have added, whether by accident, in error, or maliciously. If it is referenced to a reliable published source, then a reader can in principle verify it, even if you and the technician who told you it are no longer contactable. If it is not so referenced, it is unreliable and essentially worthless. --ColinFine (talk) 21:27, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

how can i make the signature icon work in IE?

The signature icon (visible above the edit) window works when using Opera 24 but not when using Internet Explorer 11. How can I make it work in IE? — Philogos (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! Do you mean the signature icon on the WikiEditor? ///EuroCarGT 02:19, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Philogos welcome again, what version of IE you're using?.If you are using Internet explorer 8 make sure that 'Compatibility View' is turned off.You also have to remove Confluence from the list of sites viewed in Compatibility View, and also uncheck the 'Display Intranet Sites in Compatibility View' check box. Hope this helps--Chamith (talk) 05:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

I am using IE version 11. In Tools\Compatibility View Settings I turned off "Compatibility View" but left on "use Microsoft compatibility list" and now, thanks, the signature icon works if I do not login : --31.49.82.106 (talk) 22:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC) but after I log in it stops working again! signing off with manual four tildes — Philogos (talk) 22:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Further test, Log off. Click icon, success: --31.49.82.106 (talk) 22:20, 15 October 2014 (UTC). Log in again, click icon: Nothing! PS further test while logged in: highlight a word, click B for bolden, no effect. Ditto with I for Italic and U for underline. Signing off with manual four tildes — Philogos (talk) 22:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)