Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 331

Archive 325

←

Archive 329

Archive 330

Archive 331

Archive 332

Archive 333

→

Archive 335

Need help

Good day, I am a new contributor and my knowledge of things here are limited. I'm writing about Peruvian art and artists and I have several books that I am using as sources. I tried to link to categories that already exist but when I do this a new page appears as if the category was new and my link to the category does not work. I received a message as deleting the category, but I was just trying to add the categories and did not know how to add them. Then I deleted it because it did not look right. How do I do add the category? Thank you for the help. Sincerely Veronica Cruzalegui. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VeronicaCruzalegui (talk • contribs)

Hello. I'm looking at your most recent edit and it seems fine. Have you resolved the general issue now, or would you like to highlight some problematic edits you have made? --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:49, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

As an aside, I definitely recommend WP:HOTCAT as a tool to make (re)categorization easier. I've been using the tool for months and it saves a great deal of time. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Article creation

Hello Sir, I want to create an article, but i don't know that first of all i will create draft or just create an article. Also want to know the process of article creation. please help me. thanks Rjmirchi Rjmirchi (talk) 04:44, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Please start with Wikipedia:Your first article and come back to us with any questions it leaves unanswered or for other help. Fiddle Faddle 07:16, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

How to make a map and add it to wikipedia indicating my location

Hello editors

How are map created and added to the Wikipedia page? Basimbe 07:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Basimbe. If you need a map creating, the Map workshop is a good place to start. However, Wikipedia isn't Facebook, and we don't need to know where you are - maps on Wikipedia are generally used to show the location of (usually geographical) subjects, not users. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Basimbe, I'm not sure what you mean by "my" location. If this is about an article then please say which article and whether you want the article itself to display a map without the reader having to click something, or you want a clickable globe and coordinates like the top right corner of for example Nabisunsa Girls' Secondary School. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Yunshui, I have made major amendment to the article that I request to be deleted. I would like to post it the final version now. Can you help me with this?

HafizAzizi91 (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Could you please check my article?

The article - User:Fashion Author/Iryna Korolenko. Could you please help me with references and external links - the format looks not well at this point and I cannot get how to fix this. Is it possible to include a picture from online resource to this article?

I appreciate your help, Fashion Author (talk) 20:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Fashion Author. Your references 1 and 2 are fine, except that it helps the reader if you put more information than just a bare link: title, date, author's name, publisher and so on. I always use citation templates such as {{cite web}} - these are optional, but I find them a useful way to format references. If you pick that link above, it will take you to the documentation page explaining how to use that particular template. The page referencing for beginners will introduce you to the whole subject.

The ==References== section should be the last one - but in fact nowadays you don't need to create one: the software will create it automatically whenever there are references. The "floating references" (3 and 4) are not a recommended way of doing things: references should be used inline, to support specific information in the article. The external links would look better if you gave them a title; but I suspect that they are not acceptable in any case.

It is not possible to link to pictures outside Wikipedia, except to the sister project Wikimedia commons. In order to use a picture in a Wikipedia article, it must first be uploaded to Commons, or sometimes to Wikipedia itself. But this is allowed only if the picture is in the public domain, or has been explicitly released by the copyright holder under a suitable licence such as CC-BY-SA, which allows anybody to use it for any purposes. Most images on the internet are not licenced in this way, and can't be used; and the owners of commercial images usually are not willing to release them in a way compatible with Wikipedia. If you have a picture that you took yourself, you can probably upload it and license it when you do so. --ColinFine (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine Fashion Author (talk) 22:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

--ColinFine Could you please look at it again? I made some changes - I cannot understand what I miised in reference 4? Fashion Author (talk) 23:07, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello again Fashion Author. You left out the "url=" in reference 4: I have added it. I've also added a lang= and trans-title= parameters to reference 3, and change the title of 4 to the actual title. But what you have not got is references to where somebody unconnected with Korolenko or her agencies has written a substantial article about her, and published it in a reliable place. None of the current references are substantial and independent. The Freshblood references are interviews, and so are not independent: they may be used with discretion to reference uncontroversial factual information, but they cannot contribute to notability, without which an article will never be accepted into Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 11:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Using French citation/reference templates in translated articles

I'm translating some material in the French Wikipedia to an English Wikipedia article. There are a fair number of footnote references, which should display fine and don't need translating, but the French language Citation template parameters aren't recognized in English. Is there some way to write the markup code to signal begin/end of French Citation reference parameters instead of having to translate each parameter? Thanks Dpendery (talk) 10:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Dpendery. I'm pretty sure the answer is no, I'm afraid. Each template is self-contained and knows only about the parameters that have been defined for it. It knows nothing about any other template, in any language. It is just possible that WP:AWB might be able to help - as I don't use Windows, I have never looked at it. --ColinFine (talk) 11:31, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I created an article about a company and it may be deleted. But it has importance and I don`t think that it would be right to remove it. How can i prove that I am right? Valik gord (talk) 11:27, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

By providing reliably published third party sources that discuss the subject in a significant manner. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:44, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Non-english sources

Hello, I just joined Wikipedia. I was wondering how to verify non-English sources. I would like to verify some statements on the Joseph de Maistre article which I thought were strange. GTDPN (talk) 18:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

I have used Google Translate to help me understand the content of non-English sources. It isn't perfect, but for most texts that I have tried so far, the automated translation allowed me to understand the majority of the content. Hope that helps & I'm interested to see what other suggestions people have :) Laatu (talk) 19:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)Laatu

You can also perhaps find some help by hunting down translators at Category:Available translators in Wikipedia. You'd need to know the language code, but it's a start. --Jayron32 23:27, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Another point of confirmation that a statement is verifiable (or lacks verifiability) based on a foreign-language source is to go on the Wikipedia for the language for your source (I would guess the French Wikipedia), translate it with machine translation, then see if the same statement you want to verify is there. If yes, check if the statement is inconsistent. If it is, and you also checked the source by translating it, then it is likely inaccurate. Happy editing, Esquivalience ^t 23:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you all for your help. I just google translated the French article, which contains additional information about the thing I thought was strange. GTDPN (talk) 12:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Has an article been deleted previously?

Looking at new articles, I came across Giulio Gallazzi. The article is brand new, but it has been created complete with maintenance tags (mostly "citation needed") which are dated from last year. My first suspicion is that this may be a copy of a previously deleted article - is there any way to check that? Gronk Oz (talk) 14:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I just noticed that the whole article is a copy of Andrea Illy, probably created by mistake. I will flag for deletion. But I would still be interested to know if there is a way to find out about the deletion...--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Andrea Illy did look rather familiar... I've A10'ed it already. As regards previous deletions, if the article was created under the same title, then administrators can view the history of the deleted pages as well (and get a little alert about it), but I don't think other editors can find out if a previous version existed, at least not if it's been overwritten. There are sometimes tags on the talkpage if an AFD took place, but that's not a guarantee. If it's been previously created under a different title, then I guess Google might be useful if it was very recent, or perhaps Wayback if not - on Wikipedia itself, though, I don't know of a mechanism that can check for prior deletions under other titles. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

@Yunshui and Gronk Oz: Other than the page logs obviously, I usually check http://speedydeletion.wikia.com (Yep that exists) which has the content of pretty much every deleted en.wiki page, and the Draft: namespace for copy-paste moves. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 14:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Handy tip - thanks EoRdE6. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Great - thanks to both of you! --Gronk Oz (talk) 14:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

under the ‘Talk’ section of Wikipedia, it says this article is now listed in the ‘Stub-Class’ on their quality scale – not sure what that means, but is there any way to get that upgraded?

I edited the page for Stephen Viscusi who I love his books and follow him on CNN and ABC news. However, in the article it says: under the ‘Talk’ section of Wikipedia, it says this article is now listed in the ‘Stub-Class’ on their quality scale – not sure what that means, but is there any way to get that upgraded?

Thank you for your help! GlobalWikiCitizen (talk) 21:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

@GlobalWikiCitizen: Any editor in good standing may comp[are the article against the project quality standards, usually stated in the box on its talk page, and make an assessment. Fiddle Faddle 21:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

@GlobalWikiCitizen: The article was initially rated as a stub by an automated bot six years ago, in 2009. I have gone ahead and assessed the article against these criteria and found the article to conform to B class standards. To get this article to GA status I would recommend citing the remaining unsourced statements such as "Stephen felt he wanted to share the career advice he had learned as a headhunter, and in 2001 he wrote his first book, On the Job: How to Make it in the Real World of Work. The book was published by Three Rivers Press, a Division of Random House." As well as turning down the light promotional tone of the article, possibly including a criticism section if enough information can be found. I can do a proper GA review for you if you would like in the future. Winner 42 Talk to me! 14:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Removing a Neutrality Tag?

I worked on article that was tagged 'The neutrality of this article is disputed.' in October 2013. I've since edited the disputed section, as have other authors.

The article in question is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xsyon

I've attempted to contact the editor that tagged the page, but he seems to be busy and I have not received a response. My last attempt to contact the editor was on March 13 2015 on his talk page.

How can I get the section of the page reviewed and the neutrality dispute tag removed?

Thank you Stormbusta (talk) 15:44, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

• @Stormbusta: You seem to have addressed the mild POV issues in the features section. I've gone ahead and removed the tag at the top of the page: {{POV|date=October 2013}}. In the future, feel free to remove tags if you feel they are no longer accurate and the issues have been addressed, if another editor disagrees, they can always re-add the tag and have a discussion with you on the article's talk page. Winner 42 Talk to me! 16:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

LGBT sororities

Recently, someone deleted a sorority from the list of List of LGBT and LGBT-friendly fraternities and sororities with the rationale that it is not notable enough to have a wikipedia article. When I questioned it, they pointed me to the talk page saying that the criteria is listed there. All I can find there is a post saying to abide by the criteria set forth in the lead...which does not contain any criteria. If there is criteria set up for the article, it should be more obvious. Maybe it's just me and I'm too much of a dumb dumb to find it, but I think it should be laid out a little more clearly.

Also, I disagree with the criteria that the article should only contain organizations that have wikipedia articles. Typically, that critieria is only used when there are hundreds of possible entries and you have a need to limit it. At most, there may be a handful of LGBT organizations so there is no reason to limit it like that. The list of social fraternities and sororities doesn't even limit it like that. Anyway, no one is apparently manning the article, so I'd love some additional feedback to gain consensus on this. Bali88 (talk) 13:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bali88. I guess you refer to User talk:RHaworth#Gamma Zeta Rho but that doesn't mention the talk page. It says:

• In the source code of the "list of" page you will see an HTML comment marked "important". Please read it.

Click the edit tab [1] at top of the article to see the source code: "IMPORTANT, READ BEFORE ADDING AN ENTRY: Please ONLY add organisations with a Wikipedia entry. They are likely to be removed otherwise." It's very common that Wikipedia lists are only intended for subjects with articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh okay. I didn't know that's where it was. I still disagree with it and would like to change it. If anyone has any opinion on the matter, I'd love for that feedback to be added to the talk page. It's tough to get consensus when no one responds :-) Bali88 (talk) 17:12, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

This is very close to WP:CANVAS. Perhaps you should consider that if no one is responding, you are a majority of one. John from Idegon (talk) 17:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm not asking for people to agree with me, I'm asking for opinions of any sort. It's not quite the same thing. If you disagree, you are welcome to state as much. The reason I'm reaching out is that the article is practically abandoned. No one appears to be working on it and the only reason the other author even deleted that entry is because they were involved in deleting that article. Bali88 (talk) 17:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@Bali88: Let us restore some simplicity to this discussion. If th sorority passes WP:GNG or perhaps WP:CORP then create a draft demonstrating that, using new words and excellence of referencing. (WP:42 should be your guiding star). Then submit it for review via the WP:AFC process, or move it to main namespace. Make it bomb-proof before you move it yourself, or it is likely simply to be deleted. So, more power to your elbow! Go ahead with confidence and good referencing. Fiddle Faddle 17:29, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Timtrent No, no, I think I was unclear. I'm not saying that these deleted organizations pass WP:GNG or that I want them to have separate articles, I'm saying we should include them on the list even if they don't pass GNG. I'm proposing changing the inclusion criteria on the list to make it more similar to other Greek organization lists. I'm just asking for more opinions on this topic. :-) Bali88 (talk) 17:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@Bali88: Yes, yes. We are very unlikely to include loads of random non notable orgs in lists. Show it to be notable and then there is no argument. Remember that we care only about whether Wikipedia is improved by an edit. Adding non notable stuff devalues Wikipedia. Fiddle Faddle 17:40, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

It's certainly possible that it will become a list of garbage, but I think the List of social fraternities and sororities has done very well with this same inclusion criteria. As long as it has more than one chapter, it is considered a national organization. Bali88 (talk) 17:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Trying to correct my late father's date of birth on Wikipedia

My father, William Atcheson Stewart, died in 1990. He has a brief bio on Wikipedia and on other sites that have relied on Wikipedia. His date of birth has been incorrectly shown. I tried to edit but that edit was rejected. I have a copy of his Funeral Director's Proof of Death - I was his Estate Executor and all documents were filed with correct DOB. He was born February 26, 1915 and NOT February 15, 1915 as being shown. How can I correct this? Slingerg (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@Slingerg: There is always a challenge when the truth and the sources differ. Wikipedia is peculiar in that it always defers to sources, even when incorrect. WP:TRUTH may astonish you. It is for a reason, though. All our facts must be able to be verified in sources. Family knowledge is, paradoxically, not a reliable source.

Your route is not to edit William Atcheson Stewart directly, but to discuss the edit and the rationale on the talk page, Talk:William Atcheson Stewart, and to offer the information that you have, and simply accept that consensus may or may not accept it. Fiddle Faddle 18:27, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I have removed the date of birth per fundamental policy, but have not replaced it with the date you stated. My edit summary explains my rationale.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:04, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

The best thing to do in a case like this is to mention only the uncontested year of birth, until a published reliable source can be found that verifies the correct date. Fuhghettaboutit has done the right thing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Can I upload personal photos that are over 50 years old? If so, how?

I am trying to compose my first article (a biography of civil servant and writer who died in 1973). I have 3 photographs, all over 50 years old, provided by his children: (1) A public ceremony at which he is being awarded an honorary degree; (2) At his desk ca. 1935; and (3) With a famous person ca. 1935. I tried making my way through WikiCommons but short of taking time off to get a law degree I couldn't get past the copyright law stuff. Is there an easy way to upload these photos? Thanks. 786wiki (talk) 18:12, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, 786wiki, a picture (in the US anyway) has to be older than that for copyright not to apply (1923). However, all is not lost. You may upload one of just him to en.wikipedia, not Commons, under "fair use" exception. Since he is dead, it is not possible to take a picture under your own license to upload. Use the "Upload a File" link on the left side of every page. The instructions are reasonably simple. Note that you will not be able to actually add it to the article until it goes into the encyclopedia, as fair use images are not allowed in either userspace or draftspace. If you need help with the details, feel free to stop back or write me on my talk. John from Idegon (talk) 19:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 786wiki. John from Idegon is correct and the specific policy language can be found at WP:NFCI #10. I suggest that you wait until your article is in main space, and upload the photo that best shows him. You can crop the photo of him and the famous person, for example, to show just him. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Images

How do I add (to my Sandbox) a home picture of me that I downloaded from my camera to my computer (and yes, it's a JPG file)? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Are you thinking to add a self-picture to your user page? --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Like a picture of my cat or something like that Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 16:35, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Dunkleosteus77 hello and welcome to The Teahouse. Wikipedia:Uploading images has the technical details. You would want to upload to Wikimedia Commons. For your user page, you would not be allowed fair use, so you wouldn't upload to Wikipedia. Assuming you took the photo yourself or have permission from the person who did, you would be expected to make the image available for anyone who wanted to use it, for any purpose, without the photographer's permission, as long as they acknowledge the copyright.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Can anyone look on my talk page?

I need help with my talk pageShumbard (talk) 20:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Shumbard. You appear to have a fragment of an article on your talk page: this is not what talk pages are for. Your talk page is for people to post messages for you (and you to reply if you wish). I wonder if you meant to post this on the talk page of the article Talk:Adaptive Behavior? If so, it would be better to indicate what change you think is required to the article, rather than just make a general point. --ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

For information about your user talk page and the article talk page, see Help:Using talk pages. I misinterpreted what was going on and deleted my response (since ColinFine said everything I should have) after I encountered an edit conflict trying to improve it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:28, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Need to block an article about myself

I am a freelancer otherwise but managing personal communication info on the net for a very dear childhood friend who s a public figure. Some fan from Pakistan created a page for him. The information given on the page is wrong. So i edited the info and it appeared also on the page. Two days later the creator changed it back to the old data. Am concerned since the info is about an actor it hampers the image and career in the long run. The actor about whom it is written wishes to create a new page and block this page. Please help as this is urgent.

Toshwets (talk) 03:40, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

It is necessary to know what article you are talking about in order for us to help you.John from Idegon (talk) 04:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: Based on contributiona alone, I would guess Pritam Singh (RJ Preetam Pyare). EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 05:34, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Assuming it to be that article, as written it neither asserts nor verifies notability. On that basis I have put it up for discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pritam Singh (RJ Preetam Pyare) All editors are invited to contribute to the discussion Fiddle Faddle 07:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes The page I am talking about is Pritam Singh (RJ Preetam Singh) Toshwets (talk) 07:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Toshwets and welcome the the Teahouse. Typically the best thing to do when there is a disagreement over what information should be included in an article is to try and discuss things on the article's talk page. So, if you feel information you have added to the article has been improperly removed, it might be a good idea for you to explain why at Talk:Pritam Singh (RJ Preetam Pyare) and try and find out what other editors think before re-adding the information to the article. This allows other editors, including those who may be more familiar with relevant Wikipedia policy and guidelines, to offer opinions and suggestions. Sometimes we add information to articles that we really believe should be there, but actually probably should not per some Wikipedia policy or guideline.

Also, the wording of your question (Need to block an article about myself) and the statement I am a freelancer otherwise but managing personal communication info on the net for a very dear childhood friend who s a public figure seem to imply that you are either Pritam Singh or someone closely connected to him. If either is true, then you may have what is called a conflict of interest, or COI, with the subject of the article and, therefore, should be careful about editing it. Although COI is not expressly prohibited on Wikipedia, it is something that is highly discouraged because COI editors often have a hard time maintaining a neutral point of view. It might be a good idea for you to read advice for editors who may have a conflict of interest and Wikipedia's pretty simple conflict of interest guide for reference so that you understand which kinds of COI editing is typically considered acceptable.

Wikipedia article's are not owned by any particular person. This includes the person who created the article, the people editing the article, and the subject of the article. Wikipedia article are supposed to reflect what published independent reliable sources have said about the subject; They are not intended to promote the subject. Signh (or anyone connected to him) does not have the final say about what is added to an article written about him. If Signh feels that information has been added which is clearly in violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, the it may be removed; This, however, should be done in accordance with dealing with articles about yourself and steps for engagement. Please note that simply not liking what is written is not considered a good reason for removing information from article. - Marchjuly (talk) 00:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

References Vs Sources

Hello, can you kindly give me your layman's definition of references vs sources and any edifying information you think could help make articles strong. Thank you!Annalynnehurtgen (talk) 00:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

From a practical point of view in editing article text, these are two words for the same thing and can be used interchangably. However, if you want to get semantic, reference=citation=the text put into the article which points at / unambiguously describes a source ... and source=the actual material consulted with supports content in the article. So, the reference would be what sits between the <ref> and </ref> tags, but the source is the newspaper, website, book, whatever which was consulted and which the reference describes. Does this address your question, or does it raise another related to the specific context that your posting here has arisen from? --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

How do I know if I can use a photo?

I would like to use a photo (of a person) for a wikipedia page I created, but I probably can't use it because I don't own it (I found it on the internet). So how can I use a photo I found on the internet ? Swaggityswag08 (talk) 23:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I can guarantee that all photos in Wikimedia Commons are usable in Wikipedia articles, user page... Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 00:00, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Greetings Swaggityswag08, Adding to Dunkleosteus77 answer, at Wikimedia Commons, there is a Search tool at commons:Special:Search It allows you to look for existing images. Search is located at - from the Commons main menu, click on Special pages and look under the Lists of pages section. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 00:56, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Swaggityswag08. Image use policy is complex. To simplify regarding photos of people, if the person in question is alive, you can't use a random photo you found online, because such photos are assumed to be copyrighted unless there is solid evidence to the contrary. You or another editor could in theory go take a photo of that person and freely license it. If the person has died, then no one can take a new photo, and if no free photo is available, we can use a low resolution version of an online photo under our non-free content policy. Or, it could be scanned from a book or magazine. The photo should be uploaded here on English Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons), and used only in that biography. See WP:NFCI #10 for the policy language and details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Swaggityswag08. Just for reference, Wikipedia Commons, like Wikipedia, is there for pretty much anyone to edit. Images are being deleted from Wikipedia Commons all of the time for copyright violations or other reasons. So, there's no 100% guarantee when it comes to Wikipedia Commons images. Moreover, while copyright status is the main hurdle that needs to be cleared when uploading an image, other policies and guidelines come into play when actually adding an image to an article. Images, like any other bit of information, should only be added if relevant and used in proper context. Sometimes this can be subjective, which means that it can be a good idea to discuss adding the image on the article's talk page before actually doing so. If you find a specific image online and you want to know whether it can be used, then you can ask for advice at Wikipedia's Media Copyright Questions page. If you want specific advice as to whether it is OK to upload an image to Wikipedia Commons, then you can ask at the Wikipedia Commons Village Pump. Both pages tend to be watched by editors who have lots of experience with images and they probably can help you figure out which images are OK and which are not. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:28, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Duplicated an article

I started an article in the Sandbox, then used the Article Wizard to finish it, and now the Coren Search Bot has flagged the finished article as being similar to the Sandbox one.Praenomen3 (talk) 03:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Praenomen3, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks like you figured out before getting this answer: just put a brief explanation on the Talk page for that article (Herjolfsnes (Norse Greenland)), and remove that tag. And you have blanked your sandbox, ready to go on your next article. It's all good.--Gronk Oz (talk) 05:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Concerned about edits made with references and article reverted back to before edited copy

I am in the process of updating an article that includes erroneous and false information. I have spent the last two days cleaning this article and adding additional information with creditable references to confirm my edits. I complete 80% of my edits and it is later reverted back to the original.

The article was fine tuned to paint a more favorable picture of a biography, which such shuold be the case of anyone who has editors who purposely paint a more negative picture. Because most of the content is erroneous, and the rewrites include the errors with references to support the changes, why would anyone want to revert it back to the original less favorable article, unless it is personal and biased. I just joined this on behalf of the person being highlighted and need to know the protocol for filing a complaint after the edits were done in good faith. The article that was written before my rewrites are untrue and plays on words.

I am trying to find these answers before I continue editing this article. If it is pointless to edit, I need to know that as well and ask why would Wikipedia not allow a subject to correct his image.

Thank you. Genesis20 78 (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Because a lot of the content you removed was backed by reliable sources. And attempting to make the biography more "positive" is a violation of WP:NPOV. If you wanna call something biased and erroneous, you have to explain why, It's not all those things just because you say they are. Weegeerunner (talk) 22:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

The place to discuss this is on the article's talk page, Talk:Vernon Jones. (There was a similar discussion back in 2008, but nothing there since). If you and other editors cannot reach consensus, then you need to turn to Wikipedia's dispute resolution process: simply reapplying a change that somebody has undone is called edit warring, and can get you blocked.

I'm a little concerned that you say you joined it "on behalf of the person being highlighted": that phrase is used in a number of ways, but if you mean that you are connected with Jones, and editing for him, then you have a conflict of interest, and shouldn't be directly editing the article at all, but just making suggestion and requests on the talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Are you saying that people don't have a right to have erroneous information removed and that editors can't be hired to rewrite information. I am clearly charged with following through on information that is false. For example: The article starts off negatively and with FALSE information. So you are saying to correct allof this, I need to take it to the Resolution pageGenesis20 78 (talk) 22:50, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you (talk) although I am confused. Although I am not related or have a relationship with Mr. Jones I have been asked to rewrite it. Are you saying that this violates Wikipedia? So it is okay for anyone to write articles and once they are published, that person doesn't have a right to correct it? I am researching the references in the article and finding most of the references reflecting only one view (negative) of the person's biography. If an editor can cite references that dispute the content, are you saying this is not allowed? Or the changes have to come from someone totally not connected to the individual? Please help me understand and I apologize for so many questions. I'm only connected by nature of me being a freelance writer.Genesis20 78 (talk) 23:34, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Genesis20 78. Conflict of interest (COI) editing is not something expressly prohibited by Wikipedia, but it is something highly discouraged because it can be hard for a COI editor to maintain a neutral point of view and edit according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. You say you have been asked to rewrite the article, but it's not clear by whom. This could give others the impression that you have an apparent COI. You might find the information in Wikipedia's pretty simple conflict of interest guide and advice for editors who may have a conflict of interest to be helpful in explaining what type of COI editing is generally considered to be OK and what to do if you find incorrect information has been added to the article. If, by chance, you are being paid to edit the article, then you might want to take a look at Wikipedia's position on paid editing.

FWIW, nobody owns a Wikipedia article per se, so technically anyone is free to edit it. These edits, however, are supposed to be in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. Sometimes there can be disagreements among editors as to what should be added and what should be removed from articles and how these policies/guidelines apply. In such cases, it's generally a good idea to be cautions and try to reach a consensus through talk page discussion on the article's talk page before making the edit. It's OK to be bold, but it's considered "good editing practice" to to discuss things if your edit has been reverted to get feedback from others. - Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your response Marchjuly. I've been reading a lot about the guidelines and it seems that even when I follow the rules, such as adding credible references, my edits are still being reverted. I have left a lot on talk pages which have not been addressed, so it appears that I am talking to myself and because I am trying to get content that is false removed, could that be why I am being ignored. I'm just trying to get a credible article out here. It's as if I will question what I reference from this point from Wikipedia because this has been a tedious, but educational, experience. I do research and when people question what reference is credible, I would presume that if it is being cited from a magazine article or newspaper that has an editorial board that we could consider it as such. Exhausted and about ready to say why bother. I appreciate your input, thanks again.Genesis20 78 (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I saw that you've tried to discuss things at User talk:Genesis20 78#Understanding rewrites being rejected on your user talk page This is OK, but it's likely that not many people are watching your user talk page which probably explains why you haven't gotten a response. That's why it's better to discuss things specifically related to article content on article talk pages (e.g., Talk:Vernon Jones). More people tend to watch these pages so it makes it easier to get a discussion going. You can start a new discussion on "Talk:Vernon Jones" by simply clicking "New section" at the top of the page, or you can added something to an existing discussion by clicking "edit" for a particular section. Regardless, interacting with other editors and discussing things will be easier if you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's talk page guidelines. Finally, try not to get discouraged if people don't respond right away. Wikipedia editors are all volunteers. If you feel time no one is responding quickly enough to your article talk page posts, then ask for assistance at Wikipedia's biographies of living people noticeboard. Hope that helps. - Marchjuly (talk) 02:44, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Genesis20 78. Thank you for disclosing that you are a paid editor. Undisclosed paid editing is a violation of our Terms of Service, so I suggest that you post a disclosure on your user page, and on Talk:Vernon Jones. When I read Vernon Jones, I see significant violations of our critically important policy regarding biographies of living people. As a general rule, we exclude even well-referenced allegations of criminality or misconduct, if there have been no indictments or convictions. I see lots of content in this article which should probably be removed. I do not have time here to read the full list of sources, or to analyze the article in detail. But Genesis20 78 is 100% correct that subjects of our biographies have the right to request removal of inaccurate, poorly referenced information, including unproven allegations of misconduct. This is a core content policy that overrides leser policies and guidelines. I have posted at the Biographies of living persons noticeboard, asking for experienced editors to take a look at this article's problems. I encourage every editor reading this to pitch in and help. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:51, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Subspecies Box?

If you go to the Tiger Article and scroll down, you'll see an organized box of the different species of tigers. I'm trying to do that for the whale article, but I have no idea how to do that. Any ideas? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 02:04, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Are you referring to the table in the section Tiger#Subspecies? If yes, this is a basic table, really. See Help:Table for information on how to compose the wikitext syntax ... or simply copy the shell elements from the Tiger article; if you are using Visual Editor, I believe there is a drop down menu for inserting a table of defined dimensions. Personally, I'd add more columns than used in the Tiger example so that the content is better structured with less narrative and put narrative into text outside the table, but that is a stylistic choice. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:08, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

We already have List_of_cetaceans_by_population. We don't need a different table in whale. - UtherSRG (talk) 05:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

explain in detail the alternative dispute resolution

Hello, 41.210.169.110. It's easy to miss a question when you add it at the bottom without a heading, so I've moved your question up here to the top, and given it a heading. I don't think "explain in detail" questions are really appropriate for this page: if you want the detail, please read the page WP:dispute resolution. If you have particular questions, by all means come back and ask them here. --ColinFine (talk) 11:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Categories and things at the top of my page

Hi Teahouse. I wrote an article but why is the reference not big, how can I add categories, please can you help me? Thank youScienceyperson (talk) 12:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Scienceyperson: You have other issues to address first. The article is proposed for deletion, a slow but steady process, stating "No indications of any common usage of this name in Jersey. Even the cited books do not appear to mention the name (at least according to Google's search of their contents).". We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42

I suggest you address those issues before adding categories, etc. I will format the section heading for you, though. Fiddle Faddle 12:08, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I wrote a letter to the person who proposed deletion. Thank you for fixing the section heading. Please can you help me with the other problems? Thank you

Can I remove accents on someone's name without moving the page?

Hi Teahouse. As part of a cleanup to improve notability I recently moved the entry of Emilio Sanchez Font to Emilio Sanchez. However I left the a accent on Sanchez which interferes with wikipedia links and some search engines. Is there a way to delete the accent without moving it again? The artist himself never use the accent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emilio_S%C3%A1nchez_%28artist%29 Thanks! HeatherBlack (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi back atcha @HeatherBlack:. Unfortunately, if you need to change the title, you're going to have to move it again. If the accent is not used by the person themselves, it is right to use the unaccented a. Note that "a" and "á" are different characters, so when you move the article to its new title, replace "á" with "a" and you'll be fine. --Jayron32 14:08, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!HeatherBlack (talk) 14:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Submit Addition

Can someone show me how to submit my addition?https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Shumbard/sandbox&redirect=no

ThanksShumbard (talk) 14:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

It looks as though you're trying to add a statement to the Adaptive behavior article. If that's the case, you don't need to create a new page - just click on the Edit tab at the top of Adaptive behavior and add the text Adaptive Behavior may also be affected by mechanisms in the brain that lead to addiction. Conceding it is not only a matter of one’s own free will but a disease that leads to possible substance abuse is providing new opportunities for treatment.<ref>{{cite journal|first=R. Andrew|last=Chambers|year=2008|title=Impulsivity, dual diagnosis, and the structure of motivated behavior in addiction|journal|Behavioral and Brain Sciences|issue=31|pages=443-444 |doi=10.1017/S0140525X08004792}}</ref> at the appropriate point. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Wording question

Hello again. On the article, North Carolina Council of State elections, 2004, I recently changed what appeared to be some weasel wording. However, I do not know the correct term, or terms, for what the winner of an election did compared to the loser. I used 'beat' and 'defeat' (separately), assuming that these are correct terms. Can somebody please clarify this? Rubbish computer (talk) 16:04, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Rubbish computer: I think those are both standard usages. See Here for defeat, definition 1 and here for beat, definition 4. I have a preference for "defeat" because the word "beat" sounds metaphorical in a sense, "beat" in the sense of "to strike" or "to hit" as in "to beat up" or "beating your children" seems to be the origin of the "defeat" meaning, but the sense has drifted over time to be fairly non-pejorative, so I think you can use either. --Jayron32 16:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you @Jayron32:. I used 'defeat' as it seemed to be more suitable for defeating a challenge or opponent. Rubbish computer (talk) 16:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

take down an article

hello! what should a person do if their personal information is not properly represented on wikipedia? What is the link? Thank you!Annalynnehurtgen (talk) 06:06, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Annalynnehurtgen. Are you talking about Joseph Michael Levry? If so, it seems that you tried to blank the article after another editor tried to make it more neutral. That article is not your "personal information" since you released it under a Creative Commons license allowing anyone to edit the article in compliance with our policies and guidelines. The other editor seems to be trying to make the article more neutral and less promotional. That is a good thing, and you do not have the right to decide on your own what "properly represented" means. That's a decision that all interested editors make together. Count me among the interested editors. That's how Wikipedia operates. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:29, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Annalynnehurtgen, if you are talking about somebody who wants to change an article about themselves, there are guidelines at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia.--Gronk Oz (talk) 17:49, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

What if all of the information on a page relates to something else?

Hello party people! I was looking at the page Niji Iro Elementary and I see it is flagged for notability, which seems appropriate, since it's an elementary school, but I also see that most of the entry relates to another, predecessor school. I am new to wikipedia editing. What can or should I do about that? WhateverHappenedToBabyJane (talk) 15:51, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

WhateverHappenedToBabyJane, that is strange - this problem was fixed by Boleyn back on 6 April. The solution was to put in place a redirection from this page (Niji-Iro Japanese Immersion Elementary School) to the more appropriate article about Livonia Public Schools. I thought that would be the end of it, but then TCT WIKIEDITS reverted all that and took it back to the way it was. So I guess we have to do it the hard way, with a discussion on the article's Talk page. I have started the discussion there; please feel free to put in your contribution as well.--Gronk Oz (talk) 17:11, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I will!

WhateverHappenedToBabyJane (talk) 18:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

UTC problem

On my contributions, [2] the time I edited at is an hour before when I did so and this appears to be a general problem with my UTC. My time zone is GMT. Please advise. Rubbish computer (talk) 17:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I suspect your time zone is currently BST, not GMT. BST is 1 hour different from GMT (which for all practical purposes is UTC) hence the difference - it is far more confusing for people elsewhere in the world - especially those near the date-line who frequently see a different day - Arjayay (talk) 19:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Arjayay: Apologies! I unfortunately thought that UTC was internet slang for Your time zone. Rubbish computer (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Help with working on a draft

I would like to ask for help with editing a draft of an article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Orbis_Pictus_Play The article was deleted in the past, so I try to improve it and would like to re-submit it. References have been added to the text but I feel the tone of the article could still be worked on. As I am a beginner, I would like to ask for help with improving this draft, thank you. Aknel3ova (talk) 12:46, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Aknel3ova hello and welcome to The Teahouse. Just based on a brief look, I see several obvious problems. You say children are "entranced". That is not the type of word we would use in Wikipedia articles unless we are quoting a source. It just sounds promotional. And there are a number of similar situations where it seems the article is describing how great the experience is. It is better to be neutral unless saying what a specific source might say. Also, the lead section, before the table of contents, states as fact what would be opinions, so it would be better to say who considers these opinions to be true. The calendar of events is not something we would likely have in Wikipedia article. There are spelling and grammar errors but these are easily corrected. I'm not sure if "worldpremiered" is a word but it might be in some countries.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Help on not deleting article I'm a beginner

How can I make my articles not be deleted? First Beginner need help!Karenymayo (talk) 18:56, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm assuming this is referring to Joe P. Mayo; deleted under A7. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 19:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Karenymayo as per the note on your talk page it was deleted because there was not enough indication of why the person would meet Wikipedias Notability standards (also see Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything). If this person is notable then you need to add the relevant reliable references to show it. To avoid your article just being deleted like this it is best to read Your first article and use the Articles for creation procedure. If you had used this method then you would have been informed it was not up to standard, for which ever reason(s) and would have been able to amend and resubmit until getting approved (assuming the person does actually meet Notability) Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:19, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Karenymayo welcome to The Teahouse. If you can follow the advice given by KylieTastic, and it is possible to find sources that show why the person is notable, you can ask for the deleted page to be restored, and you should work on it as a draft or a user page. Because your name is Mayo and the article subject name is Mayo, I believe you may have a conflict of interest and should disclose that should you want to try again. People with a conflict of interest have trouble with the neutral point of view.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Entirely nonconstructive talk?

What should be done about talk like this, Talk:Monsoon#Chemical bonding (Section 31)? Rubbish computer (talk) 20:09, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Be BOLD and remove it. It's obviously someone posting their homework, hoping to get an answer. Nthep (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

(ec) Rubbish computer hello and welcome back to The Teahouse.

This looks like a case of someone posting their homework questions, but Wikipedia will not do your homework for you. It happened over a year ago, so I don't see how the section managed to stay on there for so long.

I looked at the wrong section at first. In the next section there was obvious vandalism and I think it's fine just to remove it with a proper edit summary. It's amazing that remained on the page for nine months. And a quick check of the IP's contributions showed this IP had a habit of vandalism, although it could be a school where multiple people committed vandalism.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd already followed my own advice and deleted it. Nthep (talk) 21:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Nthep between the two of us we solved two problems, so there's nothing to be sorry about. I think there's some glitch when I go to a section that causes me to end up below where I want to be and all I saw was the vandalism.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:43, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Help with drafts ...

Hello! It's been quite some time since I added a couple entries to the site back in March and they haven't yet been published. Can anyone advice on what may be wrong or missing?

Page 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peter_Tourian Page 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:SYNERGY_HomeCare_Franchising,_LLC

Since submitting, I've been a regular contributor, though I admit my edits have been on the sparse side as most of what I would edit has been already contributed, but I am trying.

Thanks so much, -A.

Leximaven (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Leximaven, and welcome to the Teahouse. Actually, those two drafts have not been submitted for review. When you are ready, you should add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page and save. However, neither one is ready to be added to the encyclopedia at this time. To show that your subjects are well enough known to warrant an encyclopedia article, and also to confirm the information, you have to add multiple specific references to reliable independent sources, such as news reports, magazine articles or books about them. (See WP:Referencing for beginners).—Anne Delong (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Anne. Your insights are incredible helpful.

Leximaven (talk) 21:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

News about fysics

It is about Erik Verlinde se: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Erik_Verlinde Its very interesting about dark matter. (exsist or not) But I am not good in English. Who can write this? Jan Duimel (talk) 20:08, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Jan Duimel. I suggest you ask for a collaborator at WT:WikiProject Physics. --ColinFine (talk) 21:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Removal of Single Source Alert

How does the "warning" message at the top of a single sourced article get removed: "This article relies entirely upon a single source, the National Register Information System (NRIS) database or one of its mirrors. Articles based solely on the NRIS may contain errors. Please help ensure the accuracy of the information in this article by citing at least one more reliable source. (November 2013)"

The article I am updating must have been created by someone associated with the National Register. I am in the process of adding additional information and have added another outside source, as well as links with other wiki pages.

Does the message automatically get removed or is there a special process?

Thank you!Museum2015 02:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Museum2015. There is no special process. If you clicked edit this page at the of the article you would have seen {{NRIS-only|date=November 2013}}. That template is what was placing the message. Anyone can remove a maintenance template if they have clearly taken care of the issue it flagged. I have removed it but I have placed a different message because the article is mostly unsourced. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

P.S. the reason your signature has no links in it (why it doesn't look like most others) is probably because in your preferences, under the signature section, you have a check mark in the box for "Treat the above as wiki markup", which should be removed.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:08, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that. I have more historical information to add, which will be sourced, so I hope this article will be up to snuff soon.

I have never worked in the format before, but find it is not too daunting...said the person who was going to add a photo. Museum2015 03:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

@Museum2015: Ha! yes, we constantly get questions from wild-eyed people backed into a corner by the process of uploading images and navigating copyright when doing so.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Check mark removed!

Museum2015 (talk) 03:57, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Adding images

I would like to learn how to add images to an article.

If you want to add an image that is already on Wikipedia or in the Wikimedia commons read Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial. If you want to upload an image read Wikipedia:Uploading_images. Maestroso simplo Maestroso simplo (talk) 04:04, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Replacing bad image.

Hi, teahouse.

I was researching an article on Austin, TX and noticed that one of it's iconic buildings is poorly represented by an image. I've contacted the architecture firm and have a better image (building is on the Texas drivers' license, marathon metals and other memorabilia). Can I replace an image? Or at least add a new one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downtown_Austin (image of Frost Bank Tower).

Thanks, Lola LolaDepoletti (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Your problem, LolaDepoletti will be the ownership of the copyright. The new picture has to be licenced correctly. Fiddle Faddle 20:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

The architect owns copyright and has given me permission; won't that suffice?

Lola LolaDepoletti (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

LolaDepoletti, you need the copyright holder to email us giving their permission. Please see Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for the process and suggested email content. Nthep (talk) 20:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@LolaDepoletti: Provided the architect donates the material yes. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. We have to be very formal because people need to prove they have the rights to publish copyright material. Fiddle Faddle 20:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

okay, will do. Thanks.

LolaDepoletti (talk) 21:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Another option is to search Wikipedia Commons for a photo of the building in question, or even to take one yourself - in either case there is no question of copyright ownership.--Gronk Oz (talk) 04:30, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Where has my page gone?

Hello

I started to write a new page a few weeks ago. I didnt create a log in account. The page was rejected initially and i was asked to improve the references. Which i did and re-submitted. However, after the Easter break i have compeltely forgotten how i accessed this draft page. Can anyone help please? Thanks Karla Karlahemming (talk) 10:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

@Karlahemming: What was it called? We, or you, might just be able to find it using the search facilities here, but we can't do a thing without more information. Fiddle Faddle 10:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

You can also try searching for it in the big search box at [3]. It will search everything, including user and draft pages. By default only articles in the encyclopedia are searched. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:13, 16 April 2015 (UTC)