Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 33

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

→

Archive 40

What just happened?

Either something went wrong with my internet that affected only Wikipedia (so far as I can tell), or else the whole website was temporarily down. Does anyone else know what happened? AutomaticStrikeout 21:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I can't tell for sure because I'm not you. What did it say? Brambleberry ^{☾of RC☽} 21:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

It actually wouldn't open Wikipedia pages at all. It just pointed me back to a search engine page with the word "Wikipedia" as the search keyword. AutomaticStrikeout 21:23, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi guys! Well, I just checked with staff at the Wikimedia Foundation (who supports Wikipedia on the backend and in other ways) and they said that WMF "accidentally told the network to refuse traffic from the entire world, and the network did as it was told." So, it was an accident with some type of "config" which denied the world access to free knowledge for a few minutes. Actually - even more updates as I'm typing - I guess someone was trying to block a specific IP and well, blocked the world. Everything is back up and running. :) Moments like this make you realize how important Wikipedia really is (and why donating is important too - less stupid servers, as they said to me "stupid servers are stupid"). SarahStierch (talk) 21:26, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the explanation! AutomaticStrikeout 21:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Should a WMF member be added to the village stocks? I once read about a person who accidentally broke Google. Ryan Vesey 21:31, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I think so. Provided, of course, that we can identify the culprit, and that they don't object! AutomaticStrikeout 21:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I third that. Brambleberry ^{☾of RC☽} 21:35, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ironholds has declared that Steven Walling is to blame. I'm sure he isn't, but, sometimes you just have to have a scapegoat. ;-) SarahStierch (talk) 21:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Is there a link for that, just out of curiosity? AutomaticStrikeout 21:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

It was on IRC. :P SarahStierch (talk) 21:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Indeed; we have officially declared that Steven is in fact the source of any and all problems with anything ever, including typos. And that him having this job is his fault :D. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 20:46, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Wow! That was some meltdown!! I kept getting "Internet Explorer cannot display the page". I definitely thought someone plugged the plug, or at least, didn't pay the electric bill... --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

It was definitely Steven's fault.--Eloquence* 20:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thrown into the stocks with the caveat that he is obviously a scapegoat. Ryan Vesey 21:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Is there guidance on promoting Wikipedia in schools?

Hi. I have the great opportunity to share about Wikipedia to about 60 12-year students in about 6 weeks time. They will be mostly interested in how to use it as a resource, but I will be able to dispose of myths and hopefully promote Wikipedia. All help/guidance welcome. Thanks, Mozzy66 (talk) 09:26, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mozzy, I am Referent in the Educational Program of WMDE. Feel free to ask questions, on my user talk page or via mail. Kind regards Ziko (talk) 09:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mozzy, and welcome to the Teahouse! One thing you can do is to sign up with the Education Program, which provides a set of experienced Wikipedians as mentors for your students. For example, I am one of the online ambassadors, who strictly help online. You may also be assigned a Campus Ambassador, to help you in person. Take a look through those pages and let me know if you have any questions! I hope this works for you. If it doesn't, we can help you find another solution - maybe describing your project in more detail? Happy editing! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 16:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to you both. I was unclear in what I asked for: these are 12 years olds, so I think the Uni oriented Education Program is not so relevant. I am not looking to get them editing yet (though I will show them it is not so scary) but to encourage a positive outlook to Wikipedia, e.g. to its reliability. Is there any material reaching out to such a young group. Thanks, Mozzy66 (talk) 12:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Helo Mozzy, as far as I know there are no real materials (maybe the Anglo Saxons have produced something?). In Germany, we stopped promoting our services to schools and only go to schools if it is a useful occasion e.g. because of media attention. We gave up the hope that pupils could become editors (only in extremely rare cases). Telling pupils that WP is reliable is not a peticular goal, as pupils already naively copy from WP. Media awareness is the key word that is also popular among teachers. A thorough understanding of copyright and free knowledge (the latter is the goal of WMDE) is important. You can get the pupils' attention if you first shock them with what can be the consequences of neglegant behavior on the internet with regard to copyright related issues. On the other hand, it is not the task of the Wikimedians to teach pupils what they actually should learn from their teachers... so it's up to you what you find important, and how you want to invest your time. Kind regards Ziko (talk) 13:25, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mozzy. It seems unhelpful to introduce pupils to Wikipedia without introducing them to its most important facet - that anyone can edit! Of course, you should also make them aware of the pitfalls of this, such as potential issues with copyright (see also WP:close paraphrasing), and, for this age group, giving away too much personal information.

In terms of using Wikipedia purely as a resource, "anyone can edit" also means that hoaxes or incorrect information are more likely than in printed works, and the important idea to get across to pupils is that they should use Wikipedia as a starting point, not a place to copy and paste from. So, they should look at what sources Wikipedia cites for the information it gives, and try to find and check some of those sources themselves.

Wikipedia:School and university projects has had a number of school editing projects where the pupils were in the approximate age group you mention. The average 12 year old would find it difficult to participate constructively on Wikipedia - but equally, the average 12 year old would find it difficult to become a proficient competitor at javelin throwing, but many schools still give them a taste of that sport. From experience, school projects with pupils of this age tend to produce very few problems because the volume of material outputted by the students tends to be very low. (By contrast, the university level projects produce very many problems, because the volume of material tends to be very high.) Whether you encourage them to edit or not, you should point them to Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors anyway. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:16, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the links, Demiurge1000, I am not too familiar with the material on en.wp. Still, I keep admonishing that contributing to an encyclopaedia is a hobby for a very small minority, no matter whether it is about writing whole articles or making small corrections. Most people just don't find that fun. Don't be disappointed but make your goals broader. :-) Ziko (talk) 23:42, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mozzy! It sounds like you have a great idea here. Though many teachers discourage the use of Wikipedia for academic purposes, the truth is that most students will use it at one time or another. Instead of leaving the whole issue at "don't use Wikipedia," I think showing students how to use it in a beneficial way and educating them about possibly issues (inaccuracy, bias, etc.) is a great idea. I would suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia and an essay called Wikipedia:Academic use. Both pages approach the issue relatively neutrally, and discuss the benefits and dangers when using Wikipedia academically. The pages are not really intended for students this young, but the information is relavent to basically anyone.

You've been getting a lot of feedback here regarding helping these students edit, but it sounds like that's not your intention. That's probably good—12 is very young to be editing, and issues can arise both for the student and for Wikipedia. That said, I'm very involved in the Wikipedia Education Program, so if you have questions regarding that, I'd be happy to help. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi everyone, and thanks for all the advice. I will have a go at this and let you know how I go. Some of it will be just plain promotion of Wikipedia to the teachers. There are many who formed a negative view of it at an early stage, perhaps due to gossip, bad press or bad experience. Anyway I hope to have fun with them all. Zikos comment of it being a minority hobby is probably pretty accurate - maybe i will be like someone coming in and showing that i make model trians, or breed finches - and perhaps just one might think: "that is so cool, i want to get into that one day..." Cheers, Mozzy66 (talk) 10:41, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

autoconfirm status

do deleted edits count toward the 10 edits necessary for autoconfirmed? RHSN (talk) 23:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, and thanks for stopping in at the Teahouse. What do you mean by "deleted"? Generally, anything that shows up in your contributions counts. This means that edits that someone else has added to, modified, or reverted still count, since that's just another edit on top of yours. Your edit remains in that page's history, and so it shows up in your contributions as well. Edits made to deleted pages do not count—if you edit (or create) a page that is later deleted, those edits are removed from your contributions, and they don't count, as far as I'm aware.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 00:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I do mean edits to pages that are deleted... I created a user subpage and made a few edits to it, then requested speedy deletion of that page without realizing that those edits would no longer show in my contributions. Which was a mistake on my part. Thanks for your answer. --RHSN (talk) 01:10, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

If you're looking for something to do that will help you get some experience editing, you could try joining up with WikiProject Wikify or the Guild of Copy Editors. The first of those focuses on wikifying articles, e.g. improving formatting and adding wikilinks, while the second focuses on correcting errors in grammar, spelling, and style. In any case, you may find the Wikipedia Manual of Style helpful. It describes various stylistic rules and recommendations for editing, like which kind of spelling to use in an article ("colour" versus "color", etc). Thanks again for visiting the Teahouse!  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 02:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

My friendly suggestion to you, RHSN, is to not be in a rush to reach autoconfirmed status. It is really very good to gain some experience here by making minor but constructive improvements to the encyclopedia before moving on to bigger and more challenging things. That's my thought, at least. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Creation of Shubh Film

Hello Everyone,

Today I tried to create a page for Shubh Film, which is the leading film production company in our state Chhattisgarh. As I have a keen interest in regional cinema I felt that it is important to have this information on Wikipedia as all film production houses are listed. Shubh Film has produces 3 all time hit movies of Chhattisgarhi Cinema. Though Chhattisgarh is not a very big state of India as compared with others, but that should not be a reason calling it "Non Significant". Shubh Film is a very popular production house of our state.

Please someone look into this and help me out...

Thanks in advance... . Simplify.buzz (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Creating your first article can be tricky. Doing a bit of research first will greatly improve your chances for success. Notice that when the article on Shubh film was deleted, no one called the production company or the region "Non Significant." Instead, the reason given for deleting the article was that you had not indicated why the company was significant. Have a read of Wikipedia:Notability and you will see exactly what you need to do to show that a company is notable. If the company has produced hit movies that have been reviewed by the press in India and/or elsewhere, you should not have a problem finding reliable sources that will help you demonstrate notability. Also, I highly recommend reading Wikipedia:Your first article, which clearly spells out what you should and should not do in creating your first article. Finally, if you ask one of these administrators, he/she will place a copy of your deleted article in your userspace so you can work on improving it until it is "ready for prime time." Good luck, and don't hesitate to ask more questions if you have them! Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 20:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your reply, I have just followed your advice and asked an administrator to move the article to my user space. Now I will cite all reference from newspapers and other media. Onca again thank you.. Simplify.buzz (talk) 21:05, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

We are at your service, my friend. Please let us know if you have any other questions. Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The high school project

Moved from Teahouse talk page hajatvrc @ 17:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Three questions: 1. If a beginner (me) wanted to work on the high school project is there a better way than looking at a good article (say Plano Senior High School) and imitating that?

2. In the category "notable alumni" for schools is notable defined to be "wiki-notable" = "has an wiki article about them"?

3. The template for HS does not include a slot for the website for the school's Foundation. a) should it and b) is there a way to put something in an infobox that there is not a slot for? Thank youPyramid43 (talk) 17:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Pyramid and welcome to the Teahouse.

1. If you're going to work on a high school article then looking at a Wikipedia:Good Article like Plano Senior is a great way to do it.
2. Notable alumni should be wiki-notable in their own right, that means either they do have a wiki article about them or if not they would meet the notability criteria. If they already have an article, link to it. If they don't it's worth including a line or two and reference to establish why they are notable (this is a brief abstract of Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines#Alumni).
3. The template to use is {{Infobox school}}. This template will support more than one website being listed by using both the parameter |url= and |website=, you can use text to differentiate between the school website and the foundation website. For example

{{Infobox school
|url= School {{url|example1.com}}
|website= Foundation {{url|example2.com}}
}}

Hope this is of some use to you. NtheP (talk) 18:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

article rejected PLease help

My article keeps been rejected. Can someone PLEASE tell me what I am doing wrong. Your help will be greatly appreciated. Heres the link to the article:

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Eli Levy Rubinstain. (Jennypatrizia (talk) 16:09, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. It looks like the reviewers are having trouble viewing your references and can't verify the statements made in the article or the notability of the subject. You might want to check out the referencing for beginners page for a guide on how to get started on correctly adding references to an article. References can be confusing at first, but once you get it the first time, it usually comes pretty easily after that. Topher385 (talk) 16:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jenny. Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry you've had such a rough time of it so far. The basic problem with the article you show us is that it does not demonstrate that Mr. Rubinstain meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. In other words, the article does not show that Mr. Rubinstain has received coverage in newspapers, magazines, books, TV, and/or other reliable sources. If you want this article to be approved, you will have to find reliable sources that talk about Mr. Rubinstain and demonstrate that he is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. One more note, it might help you to read Wikipedia's policies on encyclopedic style. That might help you word the article in a manner which will help it get approved. In the meantime, don't let these initial issues get you down. We all have to learn about editing when we start, and sometimes the process is a bit complicated. Thanks for helping to build Wikipedia! Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 16:34, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

May I create a Cisco Portal?

On Wikipedia I noticed there were things called portals. But I also noticed we lacked a Cisco portal. I have asked if I may create Cisco pages. The answer apparently was yes. So I am asking if I may (with the help of anybody who is interested) to create a Wiki project Cisco and a Cisco Portal. ZSpeed (talk) 14:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, ZSpeed! If you wish to create WikiProject Cisco, it may be a good idea to see what others think before. The best way to do that is to go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals, which gives you the instructions for creating a WikiProject proposal. If enough people wish to join, which is usually between 6 and 12 users, then you can create a WikiProject using a skeleton by following the instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject. Brambleberry ^{☾of RC☽} 14:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for clearing that up.ZSpeed (talk) 14:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem, that's what we do! Brambleberry ^{☾of RC☽} 14:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

drug rehab wiki

is drug rehab wiki a part of wikipedia? I ask this b/c it seems like there are duplicates re: specific subjects like love addiciton, gambling addiction for example. The articles that appear under drug rehab wiki are different than those appearing under wikipedia.

Also I have been unsuccessful in locating a link fm. wikipedia "drug rehab wiki". The only way i have been able to pull it up is by typing "drug rehab wiki" into the google engine. If they are 1 in the same then why do we have multiple articles appearing for the same topic & with similar info.?

Please help me. I'm confused. AddictionPsychologistFrank (talk) 14:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, AddictionPsychologistFrank, and welcome to the Teahouse. :) Drug rehab wiki is not affiliated with Wikipedia. Wiki is a generic term used by a lot of people. There's a recent post on how to tell when a site is connected to Wikipedia at the Wikimedia Foundation website. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Hey, AddictionPsychologistFrank and welcome to the Teahouse! The two wiki's have no relation other than the fact that Drug Rehab Wiki uses the software that was mostly developed for Wikipedia. Drug Rehab Wiki does not have the same rules as we do, such as their not using inline citations. This difference makes information found on Drug Rehab Wiki largely incompatible with Wikipedia, which would explain the differences in information. At Wikipedia we have a firm "No original research" policy that says there can be no claims without support from reputable sources in the form of citations. You can probably use information on Wikipedia to transfer over to Drug Rehab Wiki, but to do it the other way around you would have to find sources that support what you are trying to add. I do hope that this has answered your question. hajatvrc @ 14:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I think Hajatvrc does a good job answering above. I only want to add one more note. You are always free to write articles on this subject (or improve existing ones) if you're interested in that area. Just be sure to cite your information with reliable sources, that are neutral. So, as an example for the field of drug issues, a government report on drug usage or a peer-reviewed paper on drug addictions is definitely preferable to .com website links. Best of luck and welcome to Wikipedia! Lord Roem (talk) 03:16, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

What tag do I use for outdated predictions of the future?

There's an article which quotes a source in 2009 talking about predictions for 2010. I'd like to add a tag to remind editors that this should be replaced with a more recent source that can confirm or deny whether the prediction came true, but I'm not sure what the tag to use. Any ideas? Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 12:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

How about {{out of date|date=August 2012}} ? Sionk (talk) 12:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Sionk, that says the right thing, but it's made for the top of an article. Is there maybe a tag that fits the end of a sentence? Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 12:58, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. Maybe {{update after}}, which is for inline with the text. WP:TC has most of the clean up tags listed, for future reference. Sionk (talk) 13:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that did the trick.[1] And thanks for the tip about WP:TC. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 13:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

How do I add/edit articles?

So, I am new to wikipedia and I was wondering, how do I edit an article? I saw something that was incorrect so I wanted to change it, but could not figure out how. Can you please explain? Secondly, I was wondering how to add more articles to a specific topic? What do i do if there's more that I want to add to a topic? (article) Thank you. I really appreciate the help! 58.168.229.1 (talk) 09:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, and thanks for dropping in at the Teahouse. To edit an article, simply click the edit link at the very top of the page. This will take you to the editing page, where you can see the text and any wiki markup code in that page. From there, you can make whatever edits you see fit. Fill in an edit summary to briefly describe the changes you made, and mark the minor edit box if your edit was for something small, like correcting spelling errors or adding formatting. It's a good idea to click the preview button before you save the page, so that you can see how your edits will look, and if anything shows up wrong, you can fix it before saving. Once everything looks right, click the save button to save your changes.

By the way, be bold when editing, and don't worry about making mistakes. The software that Wikipedia runs on has features that allow you, or anyone else, to restore a previous version of a page. If you do mess something up on accident, it's easy to put things back and start over.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 10:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

And also, if an article is semi-protected (with a silver padlock in the top-right corner, like here), that means only registered users that are confirmed (after a few days editing and 10 edits) are allowed to edit. If there is a golden padlock (like here) means only administrators can edit the page. You can read Wikipedia's protection policy for more details. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 11:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I have to start a WP

But how will I start a WP?

i.e What all things should I do to get it clearly started?Unpresidented welcome to almaat chat 04:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'll be happy to help - however what are you looking for help with? Could you be a bit more specific? Are you trying to create a new page? Thanks! Theopolisme _TALK 05:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I've created a new page, but I need to know if I have register it somewhere, or get permission from somebody, or something like that.Unpresidented welcome to almaat chat 05:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Creating a WikiProject isn't my area of expertise, but this page has quite a few tips. Any other hosts wish to chime in here? Theopolisme _TALK 05:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

There are a few important points on that page that can be summarized easily. Before starting a new WikiProject:

• make sure there isn't another project, or proposal for one, that does the same thing as what you're planning
• once you've done that, look for existing WikiProjects that are related to the topic of the one you want to start; if these exist, consider joining them and working on your idea as a sub-project
• if that doesn't help, make sure your project idea doesn't cover too many or too few topics (e.g. it's not too general or specific)
• before actually starting your project, look around for other people who would be interested in helping

That seems to be the TL;DR version of the page, anyway.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 10:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I see you registered your proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Puntland back in May but apart from yourself there appear only to be two other interested editors. While there is nothing stops you having the project you might want to ask yourself if there is any point. Projects are there to co-ordinate effort, if there are only a small number of you, do you need a project page to do that or can you liaise via user or article talk pages? How much effort will go into maintaining the project page rather than working on articles? That said the converse argument is that the level of support for the proposal is almost irrelevant as the existence of the project page may attract more editors who wouldn't necessarily be aware of the existence of the proposals page. A bit of a Chicken or the egg situation. Personally I would be bold and if you have already set the project page up, go forward with it. NtheP (talk) 10:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

What to do?

What do I do about this article. I think the subject of the article may have also written it, and even if not there are some serious problems. I'm not sure what the protocol is for handling this. AutomaticStrikeout 00:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

• Hi Strikeout, and welcome to the Teahouse! While there is no hard and fast rule against creating autobiographies, it is strongly frowned upon. If you come across one, like the now-deleted article you linked above, you can see if it fulfills one of the criteria for speedy deletion (for blatant advertising, copyright infringement, or whatnot) and tag it with the appropriate template. This one was advertising, which falls under {{Db-g11}}. An administrator will then come along, review it, and possibly delete it. If the administrator declines the deletion, you can then go to articles for deletion. Note that some autobiographies may pass the general notabilities guidelines with referencing and whatnot, so you should double check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

  Ok, thank you. I've just started with the speedy deletion stuff, and I wasn't sure if this article met that criteria. AutomaticStrikeout 03:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

  If you're uncertain, AFD may be the easier route (takes longer, but it generally reaches a fairly solid consensus) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget that there's also WP:PROD for articles that are fairly clear-cut (i.e. non-controversial) candidates for deletion, but don't meet any of the criteria to be speedily deleted. If anyone removes the proposed deletion tag from the article, that counts as an objection, and then it's time to either drop the issue or take it to AFD.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 03:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Good Article nomination

I've been working on a major revision of an article that I'd like ultimately to nominate for GA status. How would I go about doing that? Also, is there a way to ask for a peer review along the way, so I don't make an idiot of myself? Thanks in advance for any advice.Jburlinson (talk) 18:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Jburlinson! For good article nominations, you can read the nomination process. First, you have to choose the most appropriate subsection (a list of subsections are located here). Now, go to the talk page of the article you want to nominate and place {{subst:GAN|subtopic=name of the subsection on this page where the article is to be listed}} on the top of the talk page. For example, if the subsection is "Transport", then you'll put {{subst:GAN|subtopic=Transport}} on top of the article talk page. For a peer review, add {{subst:PR}} to the top of the article's talk page. When you save the page, you'll see a link to create a new peer review discussion page. Complete that page as instructed and sign the discussion page. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 18:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Perfect, just perfect!! Thanks so much.Jburlinson (talk) 18:53, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletation

i created page named http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charudatta_aphale&pe=1&

but it was deleted i don't why on above given link it says something about A7

Please help me create this page again i have enough info to create this page

Thanks Worldvinwiki (talk) 07:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for dropping in at the Teahouse. "A7" is a kind of shorthand here. It refers to one of the reasons an article can be deleted quickly—specifically, your article was deleted because it didn't explain what is notable or important about the subject, using reliable sources so that people can verify that the information in the article is accurate. All Wikipedia articles need to have sources to prove that the things they're about have received coverage in other media, such as books, newspapers, other websites, and television. These sources are also used so that other people can make sure the information in the article is accurate.

When you're ready to create your article again, try reading this page first, which will tell you everything you need to know about starting your first Wikipedia article. Instead of saving it as an article right away, consider submitting it to Articles for Creation. There, other editors can review your article before publishing it. If it is not ready to be published just yet, they can provide you with helpful feedback that explains the kind of improvements you can make to it first. Thanks again for visiting, and let us know if you need any more help!  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 08:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

How to be neutral?

Please send me tips to be neutral when writing for Wikipedia. I am open to alot of feedback. Thank you. Khyati Gupta (talk) 06:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Guptakhy! That's an excellent question to ask. I'm sure some other editors will give you some more in depth answers, but I'll start with a simple solution. One of the keys to neutrality in Wikipedia is to find a new subject that interests you. Your edits should always be to things that interest you (otherwise Wikipedia would become a chore), but you should attempt to find something you aren't invested in. Some of my best articles are about ships. The topics were very interesting and I enjoyed writing the articles, but I didn't have an opinion on the matter. Attempting that as much as you can is the best way to be neutral. I look forward to seeing what some of the other hosts have to share with us both about being neutral when you do have an opinion. Ryan Vesey 07:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

You can also try reading carefully through your edits before you save them. Write whatever you were planning on writing, then click the preview button and read through what you've written. If you notice that some phrases sound biased, go back and rewrite them to have a more neutral tone. The Wikipedia Manual of Style has an excellent page of words to watch out for in your writing. They are broken up into a few sections, such as "words that may introduce bias". That section, in particular, has lots of suggestions on how to avoid writing in a biased tone.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 07:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Copyright issue: automatic translation issue

I created/translated the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mieczysław_Detyniecki from the spanish version. I did it based on an automatic translation. It is not perfect yet, but before putting even more work on it I would like to figure out the following. A wikiBOT found that there is another copy in the web (which is in theory impossible)! It turns out that somebody did a straight forward google translation of the spanish wikipedia page. It is rough that the note numbers are still in the text (but not the content), moreover the english does not make totally sense. How do I prove that there is no copyright issues here? Polish Art Student 12:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polish art student (talk • contribs)

Hello, Polish art student and welcome to Wikipedia. :) Thank you for doing that; this is an important way that we help disseminate the work done by volunteers around the world. This happens sometimes. You did the best thing to start - explaining what happened. Usually, it just takes a few minutes of investigation to determine which came first. I'm going to take a look and see what I can figure out. I'll be back and update this message once I have. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

You did exactly the right thing by explaining what happened, and you are completely correct that the other website copied from the Spanish Wikipedia, but - I'm so sorry - it turns out that the Spanish Wikipedia article was created as a copy-paste of content hosted by the National Museum Foundation. :( We will have to rewrite the article anyway. Just to make sure that we will be left with at least some basic information on him, I've started that at Talk:Mieczysław Detyniecki/Temp.

One thing I did notice is that you used the Spanish Wikipedia as a reference. While we love translations from other projects, we can't actually rely on them to be accurate and we can't cite them as sources. :) Because projects like Wikipedia can be edited by anybody, we don't regard them as "reliable." It can be a good idea to find independent sources when you do translations or, at least, to rely on the sources the original article uses.

I hope you won't find this too discouraging. This kind of thing is very rare. It's not your fault at all, of course, that the editor on the Spanish project copied the content from somewhere else. :( --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Just wanted to insert a little note here—translating from other Wikipedias is not only allowed, but encouraged; we have templates specifically for the purpose of requesting this, {{Expand language}}. Generally, the sources from the translated article can be used to source the translation as well.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 05:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I find this more than discouraging. I translate an article, to "improve" wikipedia. And as a result an article is erased! By the way, who tells you that the text in the webpage you are pointing to is not a copy from wikipedia? From what I remember (it is not anymore online), it was more complete! Complete not only the text, but also with lots of links to other pages: all this is lost!

Based on the current experience, I did the following test. I took a random wikipedia page (arithmetic mean). I took the first paragraph google it. It turns out that it "already" exists in tons (2440 to be exact) pages. Does it mean that wikipedia should erase it, because of copyright issues?

I am very sorry that you're finding it discouraging. The article isn't erased because of what you did; as Hut8.5 explained to you a few days ago, the problem is what somebody else did. There's no doubt that they copied from the other source. Beside the fact that it is a reliable source, it had dating and formatting that was removed in the second edit on Spanish Wikipedia. Very probably, what you found with the random page you tested are "mirrors" of Wikipedia like the site you originally correctly identified as having copied from us. This is okay, although they are supposed to give us credit, because our content is liberally licensed. But we just can't keep material that has been copied from other sites unless we can prove that they are compatibly licensed or public domain. These are core policies meant to keep us legal, and we have to comply. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Polish art student! A good thing has happened here, since we have removed a copyright violation (copyvio) the encyclopaedia has improved! The sooner these are removed the sooner we can start a legal properly licensed page on the subject. So thank you for your work here, and of course thank you to Moonriddengirl, one of our top cpoyvio fixers. We move on and up. Rich Farmbrough, 15:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC).

TOC question

Hello hosts and thank you for being here - very comforting! And thanks to Sarah for her invite. My question is - I recently added the section “Cast” to the movie Borderland article. While my interests are more in keeping with history and other subjects, I happened to discover I could contribute to this page. In order to learn I thought I’d go for it. Well,,, I am now trying to fix the TOC, which automatically changed on it’s own. I have explained it all on the talk page, which I’ll attempt to link for you here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Borderland_(film)

I have studied the editing pages for a while now and am unable to figure this one out. Does anyone have the time to help me with this please? If the link I provided doesn't work - should I have left the http off? And can I link to the specific section of that talk page? Multi-layered question for you! Thank you for any assistance you can provide!Albeit27 (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Yay! My link works. So the latter questions at the end of post can be disregarded. :) Albeit27 (talk) 01:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Albeit27! That problem is easily fixable, and if you go to the page now you will see that I fixed it! There are three "levels" of section headings. The largest looks like this when you code it: =Big header text=. The next level looks liek this: ==Mid-level header text==. The smallest looks like this: ===Small header text===. Usually, in articles we only use the mid-level and small headers. When you added the "Cast" header, you only put one = on each side of the text, which created a large header. This caused the mid-level headers below it to be counted as "subheaders" of the Cast header. Therefore, the TOC indented them and labelled them 2.1 and 2.2. All that needed to be done was to add an extra = on each side of the header! Thanks for your contributions and this question.

Regarding linking, you certainly can link to a specific section. If the title of the page is "Borderland (film)" and the section you want to link to is "Cast", you would code that link like this:

[[Borderland (film)#Cast]]

You will notice that the page title and the section title are separated by a "#". When you save the code, it will show up on the page like this: Borderland (film)#Cast, and will link right to the section. If you have any other questions, ask away! hajatvrc @ 01:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much hajatvrc. You provided easy and concise instructions! It all makes sense now. And I appreciate you fixing the TOC too. I hope you have a nice weekend! Albeit27 (talk) 06:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Just a note for completeness, the header levels go down a few more than three. Rich Farmbrough, 03:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC).

Thank you Rich Farmbrough! I appreciate your thoroughness and helping me to understand my way around! Please read the last paragraph I've posted below.

Howdy, Albeit27. One more point to add about the internal links is that you the text viewed by readers can be changed. For example, the link to Borderland (film)#Cast can be edited as "[[Borderland (film)#Cast|the cast]]" so that it just shows the cast when you refer to it in another article. Use a pipe "|" inside the wikilink to separate the link and the words you want displayed. Hope that helps with your editing projects, DocTree (talk) 03:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello DocTree! Thanks so very much. In the next couple of days I plan on contributing to Julius Caesar's page under the section "Legend and Legacy" - so excited. And I hope to completely uplift the "Ancient Roman Slavery" article, which has multiple issues (3 tags, one saying it needs to be completely rewritten). It'll be a little while before that's complete - reading books at home. Meanwhile I'll con't to gnome around correcting grammar, sentence structure, etc. (ummm, not that my writing is perfect).

Thanks to you, Sarah, hajatvrc, Rich Farmbrough, and my mentor (the list is growing!) and all others who have been so kind to newbies - the atmosphere at Wikipedia is nourishing at it's best! And I heard 93% of editors are male??? lol, well you (mostly) men have been great! I volunteered at craigslist's help board for a while - because I knew their system, but I set out to learn their system (to some extent) because the innocent people coming on-line for help were treated so horribly, even cruelly, that I wanted to show understanding and some compassion. I have decided this is a better and more positive place to spend my net time. Again, thanks to all. Your kindness to a stranger won't be forgotten. I'll include other passerby's here when saying please remind the Teahouse community how appreciative we newbies are. Well, when did I become so chatty? lol Take care all. Albeit27 (talk) 07:51, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

How do I remove an inaccurate and potentially libelous page?

-redacted as much as possible-, wrote a page about Lawrence Tenney Stevens that is inaccurate and potentially libelous. This is a poorly researched, poorly written article. I manage the art archives of Lawrence Tenney Stevens and want the page removed. 4.254.162.102 (talk) 02:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey 4.254.162.102! We do take libel very seriously on Wikipedia. We would be able to help you much more quickly if you point us to a particular section that is inaccurate. In many cases, we can just remove the stuff that is potentially libelous and it will be gone. This is often easier than nominating the whole page for deletion just because that process can take up to a week. Any more info you could give us would help us help you. hajatvrc @ 02:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi 4.254.162.102, Welcome to the Teahouse. Whatever your issue, "outing" is not allowed: "Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia." I did not see this information on the user's page, please be careful. heather walls (talk) 02:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

How do you know if you are allowed to change a redirect?

Example: Alex Wong (dancer) redirects to the ballet company he worked for and has only a single mention of him. I would like to add a page of his own seperate from the company. He achieved much since leaving the company. Not to be confused with another Alex Wong (producer, musician) they are not same person. So you think you can dance TV constest show American idol TV contest show Released a single titled "Crave" Produced the music video for the single Also has lead role in new movie "The ballet dancer" Should I just creat a page Alex Wong (dancer, singer, producer) ? Or did Alex Wong himself create the redirect? Sorry for being such a noob. Thanks for any help.Zolvera (talk) 22:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, and thanks for stopping in at the Teahouse. From what I understand, you are looking to take a page that is currently just a redirect and make it into its own article. There are two main approaches you could try: the first is to be bold and simply edit the redirect page, replacing the content on it with the article you would like to create in its place. If someone disagrees with this, or finds that there are problems with the article, they will probably revert your edit, which means it's time to take the discussion to the talk page—this method of deciding what to do with pages is used often enough that it actually has its own name: the bold, revert, discuss cycle.

The second approach is good if you'd like some help writing the article, or would like to get some more opinions before doing this: you can use the {{split}} template (click "split" to see it) to propose that the page the redirect leads to be split up, with a separate page for some of the topics already in it. The template page shows you the code to use it.  dalahäst ^{(let's talk!)} 00:50, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Zolvera. Don't apologize for being a noob. We all were once and I'm still pretty new. You asked a GREAT question with lots of answers.

1. Create your article about Alex Wong (dancer) in your sandbox. Just click the My sandbox at the top of every page and start typing. Since this is your first article, read through the tutorial or work with an adopter to get started. A couple of Teahouse Hosts are active in the Adopt-a-user program, Ryan (talk) and WormTT (talk). Click on their (talk) and leave a message saying you would like to be adopted. You will get a reply on your talk page.
2. When your article is ready, go to the ballet company page. On the left under "Toolbox", click on "What links here". In that list, you will see Alex Wong (dancer), the current redirect. When you click on Alex Wong (dancer) there, you will go to the redirect page rather than directly to the ballet page. Now click "Edit" at the top of the page and do a copy-and-paste of the following code just above the redirection in that existing redirect page: {{db-move|Alex Wong (dancer)|Current redirect to be replaced by full article}} That will list the page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. An administrator will delete the redirect so your article can be moved into mainspace and become the definitive article on Alex Wong (dancer). You will be an auto-confirmed user by then and can do the move yourself.

Thanks to your question, I see that there are now 4 "Alex Wong" articles, the singer SingleTrackMind to which a bare Alex Wong goes plus "Alex Wong (dancer)" about whom you are concerned and "Alex Wong (singer)" from American Idol and "Alex Wong (musician, producer). When there were only two Alex Wong articles, a Hatnote was added to each page to direct readers to the other page that they might have been seeking. I now see two Hatnotes on pages. When more than two articles with the same name or title exist, there should be a Disambiguation page to help readers find the article in which they are interested. I'm still pretty new and have never created a Disambiguation page and worked through the process of deleting Hatnotes that are no longer needed and other clean-up so that the Wikipedia is improved rather than just further confused and cluttered. So I'm off the learn about Disambiguation pages. Hope this answered your question. Take care, DocTree (talk) 01:50, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

How do I print a Wikipedia article?

68.35.221.241 (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, 68, welcome to Wikipedia! On the left sidebar on the screen, in the menu labeled "Print/export" (it's towards the bottom on my screen), there's a link that says "Printable version". If you click on that, it'll take you to a (more) printer-friendly version of the page you're on. You can then print the page by using the appropriate command in your browser (for most Windows browsers, I believe you can hit Ctrl and P at the same time, or go to File and select Print). Hope this helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi.. Can I get??

I am stuck at one place in wikipedia.. Can I get the skype ID of any specialist... ARK (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi ARK. I am not saying someone wouldn't do that, but typically we give advice on the wiki directly. Couldn't you tell us what you're stuck on here? Alternatively, there is an internet relay chat forum for Wikipedia help: #wikipedia-en-help – click here to connect. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

There's an IRC channel for the Teahouse as well: #wikipedia-teahouse ^connect FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 16:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Quick correction :) The channel for Teahouse help chat is #wikipedia-teahouse-help ^connect (it was announced in the host lounge, changed from wikipedia-th-help). See you there! heather walls (talk) 16:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I've struck my comment so there's no confusion. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 16:56, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I was not aware of that. From a practical standpoint though, pointing anyone there is problematic because of low attendance at this point in the Teahouse's life – right now it's completely empty, whereas the help channel has 77 people in it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Article Resubmission

Hi All, First time editor/poster/everything here at Wikipedia. My article has lastly been reviewed and rejected. The reason for the decline was that it appears to read more like an advertisment. Following all the advices on 'Wikipedia en help' I tried to improve it and I think the article has made a good progress. But before to ask for a re-subsmission I wanted to get a new feedback from you if possible. Do you think other things need to be changed? Many thanks for all your help. Just one more question, I cannot find anymore the button 're-submission', does anyone knows where am i supposed to click to re-submit it ? Cheers

Article : Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tatratea

Many, many thanks for all your help

Tatratea (talk)

moved new question to top of page. NtheP (talk) 10:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! I can review articles and will be reviewing yours shortly. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 10:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Most of the advertising seems to be gone, but there is still a problem, namely your English. If you do not mind I can make some changes to the English in the article, because it doesn't seem to be your first language. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 10:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Floating Boat, Many thanks for your answer. I am effectively not English but French, this mainly explains why it looks difficult to read for you. Sorry about that ! Feel free to change whatever you think useful to improve the article ! Many thanks again. Tatratea (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

All right, I'll get started! FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I've corrected some of the English, and added a source from the Independent (a well-known British newspaper). It should be good to go! FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I've moved the page to Tatratea. Congratulations on your new article! There's just one last thing to do. Your username could be seen as being promotional so I would advise you to change it here. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 12:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Floating Boat, First of all I deeply want to thank you for all your help ! This is amazing, i did not expect to see the article already broadcasted ! So happy !! This is ok, I'll change my username right now !! Many thanks again Floating Boat !! Cheers ! Tatratea (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Insufficient inline citations

Hi there --

Could someone please offer up their expertise on citations? I have several citation for the Pendleton Whisky page, but I still have a flag up. This is what the flag says:

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (May 2012)

Could someone help me determine what I should do next?

Thanks!Cvargas1129 (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Cvargas, hi, welcome to the Teahouse. Tags like the one you mention aren't automatically added or removed. So if you think a tag is no longer applicable, you are free to remove it. I've removed the tag now as the additions you made are very positive and remove the issue the tag highlighted. NtheP (talk) 20:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Wonderful, thanks for the help NtheP (talk! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvargas1129 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Volunteering

Hi I have been told that volunteer photo editors are used by Wikipedia? I have over ten years working with photoshop/ gimp etc and also teach image editing and restoration. If possible I would like to offer these skills to Wikipedia.

Stephen 86.22.7.197 (talk) 07:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Stephen! That would be great! Wikipedia always needs people with good photoshop skills. You'll need to create an account, as accounts will be needed to upload images, but to find things that need doing the Wikipedia:Graphic Lab is always after skilled volunteers. - Bilby (talk) 07:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey Stephen, thanks for any help you can give! I'd like to point you out to com:commons:Graphics Lab as well. Your assistance would be useful for both projects. Ryan Vesey Review me! 18:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Here is the correct link: commons:commons:Graphics Lab. You might help at Commons:Category:Images for cleanup too. -- Common Good (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I should have used a preview. Ryan Vesey Review me! 18:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, so taking your advice I created an account. However I'm finding navigating my way round very difficult. For instance, where do I go to find images needing some digital TLC? Then after downloading then retouching how is the retouched image placed back on its correct wiki page, it it automatic? I did manage to somewhat confirm the authenticity of a photograph of Edison, Ford and Firestone that a request had been submitted for. However to be honest I'm not sure if I clicked on the right links to submit said appraisal. --Ceepin1826 (talk) 10:01, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ceepin. It can be very difficult at first and your offer is very generous. One place to find requests for fixing/retouching photographs is at following link (I suggest bookmarking it with your browser): Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop.

Maybe I can boil a few things down. The first thing to know is that there are actually two websites often involved with image use here: This site (the English Wikipedia), and our sister site, the Wikimedia Commons, a free media repository. It can be very confusing in that many of the images seen and used here are actually hosted at the Commons (though some are local), and when you click on one of those images here, you are not actually seeing where the image is hosted. So my first tip is this:

• Anytime you come across an image here, after you click on it if you see this symbol , the image is actually at the Commons. When that is the case, there will be some text just below the image that says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below." The phrase "description page" will be a blue-colored link to the actual image page at the Commons. Now what to do?

1. Click on that link!
2. Bookmark that page or keep it open because that is where you will be re-uploading the image after you work your image manipulation magic offline.
3. Download the image, work your magic, then go back to the page where the image is hosted. Look for a link near the bottom of the page that says: "Upload a new version of this file" (you can use your browser's find function to find this text – on most computers, accessed by clicking Ctrl+F).
4. Click that link.
5. On the resulting page, click on the button marked Browse which should then access your computer and allow you to choose the image you've fixed and saved.
6. Briefly describe what you've done in the "File changes" field, e.g., "removed watermark, per request".
7. Click on the button marked Upload file
8. Voila.

There's much more I could say but I don't want to overwhelm you. Maybe just start with removing the watermarks from the photographs on the page I linked at the beginning, following the steps I've laid out, which I hope are clear and correct. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Fuhghettaboutit Ok, I managed to follow your instruction to find and download an image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albertus_Soegijapranata) needing attention. I carried out the requested work, saved it and then ? I could not find, even using Ctrl+F, anything that said "Upload a new version of this file" I did try, on the left side of the page, in the toolbox, "upload file" but soon realised I'd boobed! So I've got an image all dressed up, but with nowhere to go! Help.--Ceepin1826 (talk) 08:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ceepin1826

1. If the image is based here, as for example File:Sogijapranata Nasional 24 July 1963.jpg is, then the "Upload a new version of this file" link is a few inches from the bottom of the page.
2. If the image is based at the Commons project, as for example File:Soegijapranata Nasional 8 Nov 1960 p1.jpg is (see the box under the image, that says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below.") then you need to click through to that location (the description page there). But first, make sure that you're logged in at that project, by clicking Special:MergeAccount (This will create a Unified login, thereby automatically logging you in at all the Wikimedia Foundation projects). Once you're logged in, the "Upload a new version of this file" link will appear. (ctrl+F for it).

Hope that helps. -- Quiddity (talk) 03:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Remove Lawrence Tenney Stevens Page?

I say again, the Lawrence Tenney Stevens page is inaccurate. I am the director of the Lawrence Tenney Stevens Trust and the foremost authority on Lawrence Tenney Stevens. As a courtesy, I provided accurate information to the person who submitted the LTS page to Wikipedia. It is unfortunate that she submitted the page without first asking me to review it for accuracy. I understand that there are reviewers who decide whether to accept these pages. Please, read the text of the LTS page and compare it to the quoted sources. You will see that in attempting to paraphrase the sources, the submitter has made very simple mistakes and leaps that are not supported by the sources. Thank you hajatvrc for your input. If the goal is accuracy, this will be best achieved by removing the page and allowing me to submit one that is accurate, non-libelous, and non-copyright infringing. To rewrite the current page and make additions and corrections will take longer. I do not have the time to learn the ins-and-outs of Wikipedia and have no idea how to communicate with others except through this teahouse. 4.254.163.75 (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The answer is to correct the existing page. You say it would be quicker for you to submit your own new page but that would require learning to edit just as much as repairing what is there now. If you mean you want to substitute a corporate press release or something of that nature it would infringe copyright apart from issues of conflict of interest and closeness to the subject of the article.--Charles (talk) 20:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Are you talking about pending changes protection or about the Articles for Creation process? Electric Catfish 20:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)