Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 382

Archive 375

←

Archive 380

Archive 381

Archive 382

Archive 383

Archive 384

Archive 385

Required Valuable Feedback on My Created Article

Dear Editors,

This is my first article i have created (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rwadhaawa/Shriram_Automall_India_Ltd.) I am looking forward to get some valuable feedback from all of you on my article to make possible changes before making it live.

Thanks in advanceRwadhaawa (talk) 10:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Greetings Rwadhaawa, Are you aware of their umbrella page Shriram Group? It is only 245 words. I would suggest expanding that article first. Checkingfax (talk) 11:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Instead of the url, that probably won't work as a link because of the trailing full stop, try a wikilink, to User:Rwadhaawa/Shriram Automall India Ltd.. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

how to create wiki pedia page of a person?`

i want to create one wiki pedia page of a actor. how to make it loook gud and complete?what details i should give? like refrence and all? ANSHUJJW (talk) 14:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, ANSHUJJW. My advice would be to not even think of creating an article until you have had some experience of editing existing articles, and learnt some of the requirements: writing articles in a way that will be kept is difficult. But if you want to go ahead with Raghav sharma, start by reading my first article, and looking for all the reliable independent published sources about the actor which you absolutely must have in order to write an accecptable article. Then use the Article wizard to create your draft somewhere where it won't get deleted while you're working on it.

Bear in mind that

• if a piece of information hasn't been published, don't put it in the article. Period.
• if a piece of information is only published in a user-generated source, such as a blog or social media (or iMDB, or Wikipedia!) then don't put it in the article. Period.
• if a piece of information is only published in a source close to the subject (his website, his agent's website, the website of a film he's in, an article which is based on a press release) then it might be acceptable to put it in the article - but only if it is uncontroversial factual data, like dates and places. Even then, the published source must be cited.
• Wikipedia has almost no interest in what a person says or wants to say about themselves: it is only interested in what other people have said about them.

It follows that almost every piece of information in the article must come from a reliable published source with no connection to the actor or his associates, and should cite that source (see referencing for beginners). You need to start by finding several of these independent published sources which speak at length about Sharma, because if you cannot find them then there is not point in wasting your time writing an article that will not be accepted.

If this sounds discouraging, in a way it's meant to be: I hope that you become an active editor of Wikipedia, but many new editors begin by trying to do one of the hardest things - creating a new article - and get discouraged. Please start by helping us improve Wikipedia in easier ways.

(A minor point to finish with: Wikipedia uses standard spelling and punctuation). --ColinFine (talk) 15:08, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Userbox

What is a userbox? Is there a page with them on or? Sociable Computer (talk) 15:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sociable Computer
A userbox is a small colored box added to a user page to provide information about a user's interests, abilities and background - e.g. they are interested in music, athletics and gardening,, they speak native English and Spanish with a little French and they have a degree in psychobabble from the University of shoebox - for more information please see Wikipedia:Userboxes.
As for where to find userboxes Wikipedia:Userboxes/Gallery gives links to dozens of pages - each showing numerous boxes - although it is often as easy to spot one on another's userpage and copy the code. - Arjayay (talk) 16:00, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Not able to create aritcle

Hi,

Please help me out to rectify the content so that it is accepted by wikipedia.

Here is my link.

Draft:Riitam Riitam (talk) 17:07, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I have added a welcome message to your talk space. You should have received a notification about it. That you help you get started. Jadeslair (talk) 17:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Riitam
As clearly stated by Happysailor "You need to show significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to show notability".
Unless and until you add such sources to the article, it will never be accepted.
If there are no such sources, all you can do is keep playing, and hope that, one day, when you are better known, there will be such coverage. - Arjayay (talk) 17:16, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

What can be done about offensive material?

On the talk page for the article about Jess Greenberg ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jess_Greenberg#Mammaries ) there is a section called Mammaries that discusses a particular woman's breasts in a way the seems worse than merely rude -- I find it demeaning -- and it raises the question about how Wikipedia treats women in general. Two editors are involved in this, and they both are misbehaving. Where do I go to complain? Or can I delete this on my own? I mean there are rules about controversial unsourced material regarding living people -- it applies to articles but what about talk pages? Tuesdaymight (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Tuesdaymight, welcome to the Teahouse. You are right that there are problems with how Wikipedia treats women. There is a lot of discussion and information about this at meta:Gender gap... you might wish to join the mailing list mentioned there to see what others are doing to try to address some of these issues. I will say that such problems are much worse on many other websites, although that does not make it OK of course. Anyway I have changed the section heading there, because I agree with you that it is not appropriate according to our policy Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. I haven't removed the section entirely, as it really is just an admission that such attitudes exist... suppressing them by section blanking does not really help things perhaps. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I totally disagree with your response, Arthur. And I say this with all due respect. This is not a "gender issue": There are plenty of examples of men whose body parts are subjected to inappropriate and disrespectful discussions in some dubious parts of our pop culture and the internet -- the principles involved are EXACTLY the same. Is it proper for a talk page to indulge in a conversation regarding a person's body parts in such an offensive way? For you to suggest that I go explore gender issues is not only a confession on your part that you don't "get" the problem, but also it is to send me on a wild goose chase. I would prefer it if you just throw up your hands and say, "Hey Tuesday, I can't think of anything to be done." I would respect that. But I also disagree with your action -- you went over to the talk page and expressed support for Dontreader (if I've got that name right) who is an editor who said something like "Yeah, I know what you mean" regarding a woman's breasts. That's wrong of you, Arthur. I apologize if this sounds unduly harsh, but I'm trying to express this straightforwardly, and I know that you are being very helpful to most people here in the Teahouse, and I appreciate your attempt at this. I have a feeling though that I need to move on and search for a solution elsewhere , or else give up on it, or blank the section myself and see what happens. Cheers. Tuesdaymight (talk) 18:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I haven't been able to help you at all, Tuesdaymight. Nor, from what you say, have I even understood the problem. I still believe that this is a gender issue, and that a male actor would almost certainly not receive the same sorts of (repeated) comments. You believe otherwise. You mention searching for a solution elsewhere; you could, perhaps, raise the issue at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard, where people more experienced with such issues are available. Then again, you might disagree about what "such issues" are! Or indeed, it would not be unusual for someone to go ahead and blank the section themselves. I doubt that someone doing so (once) would suffer any sanction beyond a warning or two, but I do not decide such things so my word means little on that front. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 19:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, very much, Arthur. And just to respond to your suggestion that no male actor would receive the same sorts of repeated comments -- I could name some famous examples of performers, but, of course, I would risk being guilty of the same fault that I complained about. However, I will mention only one: A recent autobiography by the most famous guitar player of the most famous London rock band that has been around since 1964 -- that memoir is famously loaded with tons of the sort of comments of which you claim to be completely innocent. His comments are directed at a celebrated lead singer -- and they are specific comments and graphic descriptions repeated throughout the book as though he were obsessed. It is wrong, as everyone who has read the book seems to "get", and wrong in the same way that the talk page I mentioned to you is wrong. If you were to read that book you would not only learn more about narcotic drugs than you ever wanted to, but you would also come back to this page saying "Oh my God, Tuesday, I had no idea!" This is not a gender issue, but it's an issue of how humans should behave respecting other humans, and an issue of what Wikipedia is. Is Wikipedia a trashy sort of thing, like the tabloids, or is it not? However, thank you again, I have a good feeling that you and I have made some small progress in a good direction. Tuesdaymight (talk) 20:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Trying to create a page

Hello Teahouse,

I've been reading up on the do's and dont's of creating a page. I am not trying to get started and am confused. Would someone be so kind as to tell me exactly where I should go to create a page? I've tried going to what is referred to as a subpage so that I can create it there, but it shows that I have no page created.

Thank you

Ks6499 (talk) 20:00, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Ks6499 hello and welcome to The Teahouse. This question is your only contribution to English Wikipedia, so I'm not sure what you believe you have done, unless you were not signed in. The best advice is edit some existing articles and get a better idea of our policies. But if you are determined to go ahead and create an article, go to The Article Wizard and once you have read the information the blue links send you to, click on the big blue button. Follow the directions. And keep in mind all new articles must have independent reliable sources and a neutral point of view and they must be about notable topics. And if you are closely connected to the topic you want to write about, keep in mind conflict of interest.

One way to create an article is to use the search function, type in the desired title of the article, and see if you get a red link. If there is a red link, click on that. It is recommended that you choose the last option, a subpage, and follow the directions for a userspace draft.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

And here is some more good advice. It applies specifically to people, but a lot of the information is worth reading for any topic.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:07, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

2 Questions

I am a music exec and I am trying to create my bio. This is seeming like the most difficult task. But I am SO LOST. karen marie mason Karen marie mason (talk) 01:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Karen marie mason, this should get you up and running in about an hour: The Wikipedia Adventure. Have fun. Cheers. Checkingfax (talk) 01:43, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@Karen marie mason: Please do not attempt writing an article about yourself. see WP:AUTOBIO. Your inherent conflict of interest makes it near impossible for you to actually write and article that would be anywhere near compliance with our policies such as WP:NOTADVERT and WP:NPOV (which states that we present the subject of an article AS THIRD PARTIES view the subject).-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Karen marie mason hello and welcome to The Teahouse. You could request an article, though there is a backlog that would take months. But the big question is are you notable enough to have an article? Have independent reliable sources written extensively about you? You need to show that these sources exist.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:14, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Can't save edit with external link

I am trying to improve Arkan (dance) with external links to videos of several performances of the dance. I cannot get my edits to save. One window where I saved it, I think, over 8 hours ago still says "Saving"!

FWIW, I'm using mobile beta interface on my smartphone. And I entered this § through the Ask a Question box and it still came out down here. --Thnidu (talk) 05:07, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

PS. Can't put them anywhere. Not the article, not its talk page, not here! Any external link and the d*!# wheel just spins, nothing gets saved. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??!!! --Thnidu (talk) 06:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@Thnidu: About your question ending up at the bottom of the Teahouse: It appears to be a normal result of using the "Ask a question" on mobile devices (I've seen someone else make a similar comment when using mobile). I think it's because the pop-up box that's supposed to appear when you click on it (when using a computer) uses Javascript or something like that, so it doesn't work the same on a mobile device. (But don't trust me on this; I'm not sure how these Teahouse things work.) As for your editing issues, I don't know the answer to that, sorry. CabbagePotato (talk) 07:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Thnidu, I don't know if this will help you. For mobile, I use a Blackberry Bold 9900 with the Blackberry web browser. When I edit in mobile-view half the time the editor won't open. If it opens, the first time I try to save my edits, it fails. Once in a blue moon the edit won't save at all. I have found it is easier to edit in desktop-view and 100% reliable for launching the editor and for saving the edits. The desktop editor is more robust too, plus you get all the helpful links on the left side; the diff is more robust; etc. Hope this helps. Cheers. Checkingfax (talk) 08:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@Thnidu: When new editors try to include an external link, they are asked to complete a CAPTCHA. It may be that your device is not showing you this, while Wikipedia is waiting for your response. We'd need to know more (the type pf device/ OS version, etc) in order to diagnose and fix this properly. You might also do better to raise this matter at WP:VPT, or on the talk page for the beta app you're using. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Thanks, but I'm not a new editor, and my mobile device (Samsung Verizon Android Galaxy S-3, SCH-I535, OS v4.4.2) logs me in whenever I come to WP. I've been around here almost ten years, am autoconfirmed, etc. I'll take your suggestion, but from my laptop. --Thnidu (talk) 21:07, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Oy. This may be at least partially my bad, maybe two ways.

1. I tried to add the links from my laptop and got blacklist warnings... then realized I was using the links from the Google search page rather than the actual URLs.
2. When I checked the Settings menu in the mobile browser view of Wikipedia on my smartphone, I found that Use Beta was not checked. (Need to reset at every restart??)

I have the links up now successfully. I may or may not have the spoons to investigate what I was doing and, if I find apparent bugs, report them appropriately at WP:VPT or Phabricator. --Thnidu (talk) 00:13, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Have I sufficiently abided by the minimum standards for article creation?

Hi. Does this make the grade? Music Gone Public thank you for your time. MHoop (talk) 22:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey MHoop, and welcome to the Teahouse. Music Gone Public just needs more references and it needs to be shown through those references that the article is notable. If you need more information, please read this page. MrWooHoo (talk) 01:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Article Editing

Why do I have to wait 4 days before I can edit pages with semi protectio? Thanks Sociable Computer (talk) 00:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Sociable Computer: The semi-protection system is put in place to prevent abuse by requiring editors to have made at least 10 edits and have existed for four days before they can be edited directly. Don't fret though, the vast majority of articles on Wikipedia are not under such protection and if you wish to make a change to an article with semi protection you can use the Template:Edit semi-protected by adding {{edit semi-protected}} to the talk page of the article along with the edit you wish to have preformed. An experienced editor will come along and assess your change. Hope this helps! Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

User:Winner 42 I've added userboxes to my userpage, how do I put them all together? Sociable Computer (talk) 01:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Sociable Computer: I assume this question is unrelated to the first? Anyway, there is about a million different ways to arrange userboxes. Some of the common ones are found at Wikipedia:Userboxes#Grouping_userboxes. I personally use {{Userboxtop}} and {{Userboxbottom}}. Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

What do I do if I want to make an essay public?

I have an essay currently sitting in my namespace, User:Drcrazy102/Last_Chance_Saloon and I am wondering about how to submit it for general feedback, as it is a re-write of WP:ROPE's idea but with different language. I am not sure on how to submit it, so any help would be wonderful. Thanks, Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 01:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey. There is no special process for publishing in the Wikipedia namespace; it works exactly the same as for article mainspace. I'd suggest you be bold and simply make the page at Wikipedia:Last Chance Saloon; if an article is ready or near-ready, publishing it is really the easiest way to get feedback. If people think it's inappropriate for some reason, it might end up at WP:MFD, of course, but even then, you'll get useful feedback at the deletion discussion.

Read this first, though! --Ashenai (talk) 01:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the help! Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Review of my Article

Hi,

I am new to Wikipedia and recently submitted my first document for review, I would like to implore the help of seasoned writers for feedback and review. I would appreciate if you can tell me how to improve my article and identify the gaps in my writing style. My first article can be visited here Draft:Health Warehouse

Thanks

Billy ConnerBillybyconner (talk) 03:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I'm seeing potential copyvio issues. Half the lede is almost identical to this, and there are other similarities in the text to various online sources. It's important that articles be free of potential copyvio content. --Ashenai (talk) 03:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Empty pages

There are empty pages that need to be deleted, if i'm not mistaken. And more data stolen by pages like these. Thanks. Ras Benjih/^RasTalk 08:44, 31 Jul 09:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

hi @Ras Benjih: ,they should not be deleated ,as they are users personel pages.

-- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan 09:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

User pages (not talk pages) can be speedily deleted under WP:CSD#G7 if the user tags them for deletion or blanks them. I have deleted that one now. – Fayenatic London 10:26, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

How does one fix a Wikipedia page that has been tampered with?

I just took a look at the Wikipedia page for Thornton Wilder, and noticed that someone has recently made frivolous changes here and there and even added some scatological material.

How does one correct this sort of thing? EditWikiJapan (talk) 11:26, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi EditWikiJapan
Simple, recent, vandalism can easily be reverted by selecting a "clean" version, before the vandalism, from the page history, opening it and saving it.
User:Theroadislong did this on the Thornton Wilder article at 11.35 - has any vandalism been missed? - Arjayay (talk) 12:46, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

In this case it was the most recent edits. In other cases there may be good edits after the vandalism, and the vandalism can often be reverted without affecting the good edits by clicking the "undo" link at the edit. See more at Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Vandalism. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

How do I resubmit my article?

I submitted an article, which got rejected, and I have now updated the draft and would like to resubmit it, how can I do this? MotherlodeStudios (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. In this edit you removed the feedback & comment from the previous submission, and in doing so you removed the "Resubmit" button. I've added it back for you. The feedback & comment will be removed if & when the draft gets accepted and published to mainspace. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:43, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Personal Attack

Is this a personal attack? Sociable Computer (talk) 12:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Sociable Computer: Yes, that kind of comment is not right.--Aero Slicer 13:43, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Template Help

Talk page template of Wikipedia:WikiProject Jainism lacks classes redirect, template. How to include them? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 14:25, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Seeking advice about a declined article

This is my first visit to the Teahouse, and I am also working on my first article, Draft:C. L. Edson.

I would like some help in identifying particular passages that violate encyclopedic style, and also which references are not up to standards.

If you notice any other problems, please mention them.

Thanks in advance for any help you can give.

Wills473 (talk) 11:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Wills473: Your article looks well sourced, but you need to change a few things. Better check this page Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies. --Aero Slicer 14:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Help my article publish

I had created this page lately https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sumeet_Mittal Can someone please tell me what are the measures I should follow to get it live as soon as possible, Thanks in Advance. Ankyth (talk) 16:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Read the numerous feedback messages which you've already received. Learn about how to write in a neutral point of view. Get rid of the promotional claptrap. As long as you've got rubbish like "A major force to reckon within the space of mainstream Television, Mr. Sumeet H Mittal is a creative visionary par excellence and a master in telling stories close to the heart on a grandiose scale. Known for his strong story lines, beautiful character sketches and ground-breaking concepts, Sumeet H Mittal today is a name associated with continuous process of innovation and uncompromising attention to deliver quality content to his audiences, every single day, which has resulted in high quality content appealing to the masses.", the draft will always be rejected as being excessively promotional. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Ankyth, you keep resubmitting this draft without addressing the problems other editors have raised.
Firstly, remove all the totally meaningless PR puffery such as

"A major force to reckon within the space of mainstream Television, Mr. Sumeet H Mittal is a creative visionary par excellence and a master in telling stories close to the heart on a grandiose scale."

Secondly, remove all the references citing Wikipedia, IMDB and blogs, as none of these are reliable sources

Thirdly, add references showing he has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. If there are no such articles, the article will never be approved.

Fourthly, re-write the article using only the facts in those independent, reliable sources, but without copying them word for word, as that would be a copyright violation. - Arjayay (talk) 17:02, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Note also that you had been warned about copyright violation, which is a serious legal issue so much of the material has been deleted from the draft and from its history. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

As an aside, your article title should not include an underscore. Checkingfax (talk) 22:16, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

And as Happysailor said elsewhere on this page (this time with links and emphasis), you need

• to show significant coverage
• in reliable sources
• that are independent of the subject
• to show notability.

--Thnidu (talk) 17:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedians that edit Wikipedia?

They prefer deleted article who are not hoax for G3 Blatant Hoax...??? Example Judo do. Few don't let opportunity to the Wikipedia community (to discover an art geek don't find on google (Black Belt nov. 1967newspaper before 1970's or real books with paper...) to work with it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aikikai45 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Aikikai45: it's been explained to you by User:WikiDan61 that your article on Judo do probably shouldn't have been deleted as a hoax but doesn't look like a notable topic at the moment. You created a one line article with a list of titles that don't appear to do much more than confirm that Judo do exists but don't do anything to establish it as a notable sport. Please get over the deletion as a hoax and concentrate on coming up with some content that shows that it is a notable sport rather than just a variation of Judo. Nthep (talk) 16:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Nthep: doesn't look like It's a point of vue not the wikipedia community then I re-create a one line article to not hurt older wikipedian who wanted to write the article (it seems you didn't see the good version...)! My normal request are  Partly done white knight Accepted to delete the page that must be deleted! Now will you  Works for me works for Wikipédia and start doing good job so restore the page Judo do and his sub-page list of Judo-do techniques. So simply!--Aikikai45 (talk) 17:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Aikikai45: I gather from your writing that English is not your native language, and therefore you may be having difficulty reading and understanding the various Wikipedia guidelines about notability (which judo do appears to fail) and civility (which your editing often fails). Might I suggest that you might be more comfortable (and better understood in your arguments) editing the Wikipedia of your native language? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Reliable Source for religion

Hello, I have recently added few sources in some articles, which were reverted saying unreliable source. Can someone, please help me identify a reliable source which talks about relation of Solanki dynasty and Jainism -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 21:26, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, @Capankajsmilyo: Reliable sources, in general, are those that have a reputation for fact checking, expertise in the particular subject matter and editorial oversight. However, no source is automatically always reliable. The New York Times while generally one of the top reliable news sources is not necessarily a reliable source when discussing a subject involving the New York Times. Context matters. For religious claims, you will want to look for work by recognized expert theologians-and generally published by scholarly publishing houses such as University Presses. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 22:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Is this not vandalism?

A user just deleted the whole article, written long time back. He did not used any tags for citation, nor any discussion on talk page. He straight away deleted everything. Here is the article Sthulabhadra. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 20:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

No, removing unsourced and unverified material that could have been completely made up is not vandalism. See WP:NOTVAND. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi again Capankajsmilyo. See also the section of the bedrock verifiability policy known by the shortcut WP:BURDEN. In short, while there are recommendations for waiting before removal under certain circumstances, core policy allows wholesale challenge and removal of unsourced (or poorly sourced) content – without discussion and without any waiting period – and the burden to restore it is always on the proponent for keeping it in the article, to return it only with reliable sources directly supporting the content, cited using inline citations. Being unsourced was not the only reason this content was problematic – just because content can be properly sourced does not necessarily mean it must be included or that other policies don't warrant or even necessitate removal. Here, the content had terrible tone problems, and even though I'm noting it after the fact, it was required to be removed as it bore multiple hallmarks of being a copyright violation and plagiarism, and it was, of this. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:33, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Ohk, thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 22:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Nanda dynasty Religion

I have been adding various sources on Nanda Empire showing its religion, but a wikipedia editor keep on deleting them, saying they are unreliable. please help -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 19:45, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Please discuss with the other user on the article's talk page.--ukexpat (talk) 20:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Capankajsmilyo: Hey there, welcome to the Teahouse! I know editing on Wikipedia can be overwhelming, and the other editors, frustrating. From the way I'm looking at it, it seems that this editor was reverting your edits because they were either (1) from an unreliable source (e.g. this edit was reverted because the source was a not well-known source) or (2) because they didn't contain the relevant info, as stated here. I appreciate that your are being bold in your edits, but please also remember how we identify reliable sources on Wikipedia. Once again, thanks for your contributions! —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 21:17, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarifications -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 22:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Image not being displayed

Please help! Image in Nirvana section of Mahavira not being displayed. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 22:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey Capankajsmilyo. Because of the number of images in the page, they are stacking for me so that even though the image code for File:Kalpasutra Mahavira Nirvana.jpg and File:Siddha Shila.svg are placed in the nirvana section, they are displaying in 'read mode' way below that section when viewing the article at a fairly normal screen width. I can make them appear approximately next to that section but only if I drag my screen to a very narrow display. Is it possible this is the issue, rather than that they are not displaying at all? If they are not displaying, are you seeing some type of broken code or error, or are they just absent?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

It was fixed by [1]. Unclosed elements can interfere with later code. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

References in section titles

Hi Teahouse,

Is it OK formatting to put a reference in a section title? I haven't seen it before this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytophthora_infestans#Disease_management_.5B3.5D and I want to know if that's supposed to be that way or if there are any different guidelines.

Thanks! Mechanic1c (talk) 23:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't be done. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Section_headings -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Seeking advice for my new article which was previously deleted.

I have created this article Draft:Vishuddhasagar. It was previously deleted. Can you please guide me on how to improve it, so that it passes through this time. Thanks in advance -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 22:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

1) You have not demonstrated that Third parties have found the subject worthy of coverage . What you have presented is loaded with inappropriate flowery and promotional terminology. 3) and the quote is just completely random and non encyclopedic. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

What is a reliable source for filmographies?

I recently had an article rejected with the notation that "IMDB is not a reliable source". What would be a reliable source for a filmography?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Tara_Indiana&redirect=no

Nona Urbiznez (talk) 02:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I tend to Google the person's name with the film title (make sure to put the title in quotes; for one-word titles, add either 'film' or 'movie' to your search string), that will usually bring up some reliable source that mentions the person was in (or directed or whatever) that film. —2601:19A:4000:4A02:880D:D326:7C45:718F (talk) 02:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

GONE TOO LONG

I have not been on here in a couple of years and can't even remember how to sign my name. I had almost finished a course in editing on here but clearly need to get adopted again. The user who adopted me before is no longer active on the site. Thanks. Selene Scott (talk) 01:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Selene ScottSelene Scott (talk) 01:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Selene Scott, this should get you up and running in about an hour: The Wikipedia Adventure. Have fun. Cheers. Checkingfax (talk) 01:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Selene. Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user is still around. There's also the Wikipedia:Co-op. I recommend the Wikipedia:tutorial for a refresher. And if are willing to really spend the time and want to get a broad education on your own, I recommend carefully going through Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia, pausing as you go to open up links in new tabs and explore. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC

Thank You for your help, the both of you. (~~~~)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Selene Scott (talk • contribs) 03:32, 2 September 2015‎ (UTC)

@Selene Scott: - Your reply above was shown as unsigned because you had included it between nowiki tags, and the formatting was non-standard because you had included it between blockquote tags. - David Biddulph (talk) 04:11, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Broken template?

I was looking at the article Howard Sims and noticed that the square feet to square meters conversion template used seems not to be working correctly. It's yielding "3 sq ft-wide (0.28 m²)" which is obviously wrong, since 0.28 m is less than a foot. I believe the correct figure is 0.84 m², but I didn't want to just change it manually because I figure someone well-meaning would eventually put the template back in. I have absolutely no idea where to report something like this other than here! (BTW, I know accounts are free, so thanks in advance for the offer to register. ;)) —2601:19A:4000:4A02:880D:D326:7C45:718F (talk) 03:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

The template is working correctly but was used incorrectly in [2]. The calculation done by the template was right that 3 sq ft is 0.28 m², but that's not what it should have been used for. I have fixed the article.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 03:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll go look to see how you did that. —2601:19A:4000:4A02:880D:D326:7C45:718F (talk) 04:32, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

How can I know if a news article is notable enough?

Hello Teahouse! I have a question, how can I know if a news article is notable (except for a disaster, a plane crash, declaration of war and peace, and wildfires. I know they are notable.)? I am seeing sometimes an article like this, and I am thinking they are not notable enough. It has no references, and I think they doesn't show any significance, so I marked it as proposed for deletion, because I cannot see any speedy deletion criteria for that article; it is not controversial either. And also, if I encounter these unnotable articles again, what type lf deletion should I use, speedy delete (don't forget to include the criteria, such as A3), proposed delete, or article delete? And also inform me if that article is good for deletion. Thanks! Pokéfan95 (talk) 11:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC) Edited by Pokéfan95 (talk) 12:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Pokéfan95 if you see any article without any reference or the only reference being official website, feel free to nominate it for deletion. If the subject is clear, then it can't be speedy deletion page.--Aero Slicer 13:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

But if you do propose for deletion you need a better reason than "News article", and you also need to read the part of the {{prod}} template that says " If this template is removed, do not replace it." --David Biddulph (talk) 14:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Another thing to bear in mind when you look to see whether the subject is notable before you nominate it for deletion is to see whether the content is a WP:copyright violation. In this case, the wording obviously looked like a press release, and it was easy to find at least one place where the content had been published. I have tagged it for speedy deletion on those grounds. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:33, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your advices! I will do that next time. Again, thanks! Pokéfan95 (talk) 09:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello I have recently updated my page

I have recently updated my page.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sumeet_Mittal Can someone please tell me if I can submit the page and make it liveShashank29 (talk) 11:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@Shashank29: I hope this page helps you Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Happy editing.--Aero Slicer 14:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello

We can these only sources available, so what can be done with this. Can we submit our page with this?Shashank29 (talk) 14:26, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Let the producer become more famous and then, edit after few months as right now it would be WP:TOOSOON.--Aero Slicer 14:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello

The producer is very famous personality in TV industry in India. He is currently running 7 shows on Indian Television, from which 3 have the top TRPs. We want to submit the page and make it live asap123.201.246.120 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

A couple of problems with your statement. Who is "we"? Only one person may use an account. However, I see from the article history that several usernames have contributed. As for getting the article published, there is no deadline, and our purpose is not promotion.

Another question about this article is here. Ankyth claims to have created it. However, Shashank29 calls it "my" article. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

How to attempt merger?

I have this article Ikshvaku, which is nothing but extract of two articles Rishabha and Rishabha (Hinduism). Most of the content is already there in latter articles. Can you please help me in merging this article to Rishabha and Rishabha (Hinduism) and creating a link on latter pages as For other reference see Rishabha (Hinduism) / Rishabha -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 20:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Capankajsmilyo and welcome back to The Teahouse. I don't see where the content is already in the other articles. And until there is a merger, there shouldn't be a redirect, so I have removed that until it has a purpose. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

There are two articles Rishabha and Rishabha (Hinduism) which consists of content of Ikshvaku. Further Ikshvaku was just another name of Rishabha. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 14:32, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Eastman Kodak Products and Services

Looking to have the Products and Services sections of the Eastman Kodak page updated. Submitted a note via the Talk tab a month ago and haven't seen any response or activity. Thank you.

Nick Rangel

NrangelEKC (talk) 18:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey, I looked at your link. While conflict of interest editing is discouraged, I believe these proposed edits are fairly uncontroversial. As you have asked for input and received no feedback for a month, I suggest you make your affiliation clear on your user page, as per Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, and then simply have at it. Please note that if one or more editors end up objecting to the content or tone, or choose to substantially edit your contributions, then your edits are no longer uncontroversial. And it would certainly not be prudent for you to edit, say, the Controversies section directly. But Products and Services seems dry enough, content-wise, that judicious editing on your part should not be problematic.

I must emphasize that for COI edits, asking for advice/input on the article talk page first (as you have done) is always the correct way to go. But if you have received no suggestions or input for a month, then edits to bring the article up-to-date or correct uncontroversial factual inaccuracies seems acceptable.

In short, I think this conflict of interest can be managed, as per item 3 of Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Escape,_disclosure_or_management. I have added the page to my watchlist, and will be reviewing any edits made. --Ashenai (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@NrangelEKC: While I'm not an admin and have no particular involvement with this page, my Wikignomishness impelled me to look at that section, Eastman Kodak § Products and Services. I noticed a couple of things that should be fixed while you're about it:

1. § Digital printing solutions: "In 1997, Heidelberg and Eastman Kodak Co. had created the Nexpress Solutions LLC..." Heidelberg is a city in Germany, which this "Heidelberg" obviously isn't; but then what is it? It needs a link or at least the full name of the company.
2. Many of the subsections are unsupported by citations. Rather than add {{Refimprove section}} to all of those, I'm mentioning it here because, well, you've said you're going to update the section.

--Thnidu (talk) 03:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I did several Google searches on the Heidelberg situation, and it appears Wikipedia has an article on the company. I'm attempting to find sources that would be considered reliable to make the necessary article additions.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Do posts on talk pages have to be neutral?

Just curious, because I got a message saying my comment on a talk page about a controversial topic wasn't from a neutral point of view. I got confused because it didn't look like the other comments in the talk page were much more neutral than mine. Thans.--SwordofStorms (talk) 05:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Heya SwordofStorms! Generally, talk page posts are a representation of a user's own opinion and don't have to be written and checked to be from NPOV. Only articles need to be neutral as far as I am aware. However, you might need to be careful that your posts don't constitute WP:SPAM, as this is sometimes confused with NPOV, although I don't think that your talk page edit in question did constitute it. I'm going to head over to the talk page and see what the fuss is about now. | Naypta^✉ opened his mouth at 08:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

The editor was making libelous statements towards a living person on the linked talk page. Other edits to mainspace were indicative of POV pushing. Since the libelous statements were directed towards a prominent target of the Gamergate harassment campaign, I also informed the editor of the existence of the Gamergate Discretionary Sanctions. I stand 100% by my warnings to the editor. --KRAPENHOEFFER! TALK 14:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

So this was a WP:BLP issue. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Correct, also the article in question, and the particular individual which was the subject of BLP concerns is currently subject to the Gamergate Discretionary Sanctions. I have properly alerted the editor. --KRAPENHOEFFER! TALK 15:05, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I am pro-GamerGate personally. Never "harassed" anyone or met anyone that has. But, I think most of us know that we should trust the game's developers about their own game over Brianna Wu, which is why the Samus Aran page is fixed and protected now. Also, I of course would be neutral when editing actual articles.--SwordofStorms (talk) 15:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

One other point, if you are using the talk page to suggest an improvement to the article, such improvement must be NPOV.--ukexpat (talk) 13:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

And since talk pages are for article improvement improvement, most posts should be neutral. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

creating an article

If you google my name the results include another person with the same name who is a convicted child molester. Currently neither of us comes up in a search for "Moshe Turner" on wikipedia. I believe my reputation has been negatively impacted by sharing a name with this person. I thought it would be helpful if a search of my name on google brought up a link to a wikipedia article about me. As it happens I am the founder and executive director of a public charity so a (weak) case can be made that it would be appropriate to have such an article on wikipedia. I really want to put in place as many things as I can to differentiate myself from this monster of the same name. This would help, I think. What is wikipedia's position? Onemosheturner (talk) 05:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Onemosheturner. I have not yet looked into your story but will accept for the sake of discussion that your story is true. If so, my heart goes out to you. Here are my initial thoughts: Wikipedia does not exist to "right great wrongs" and if the only reason to have an article about you is to differentiate you from that other bad person on the internet, then that is not a sufficient reason for a Wikipedia biography. But, if you meet our notability guidelines, then we can write an encyclopedia article about you. The question is how strong your weak case for notability is. So, your first step is to assemble a comprehensive list of reliable independent sources that have devoted significant coverage to you. An experienced editor can assess that list. Beware of anyone offering a commercial service to create a Wikipedia article about you. Several hundred such accounts were blocked today.

I am willing to help if your story checks out. However, I am having eye surgery for a cataract tomorrow morning and do not know when I will be able to return to editing. I hope that it will be soon. My wife will read messages to me on this page and my talk page. And there are plenty of other helpful people here at the Teahouse, so please feel completely free to ask additional questions. I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

It is unclear that your "strategy" would even work. Wikipedia being created by volunteers is very likely to end up conflating stories about the two people sharing the same name further expanding the issue, and yet now on a highly cited location. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 09:34, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Editors are obligated to avoid combining information about two people with the same name into a single biography. Please read the essay Wikipedia:Don't build the Frankenstein. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 13:34, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Of course, there's always the danger that it's just a Jackanory to try and get official backing for an otherwise totally non-WP:GNG BLP, I suppose _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:16, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Let's take a step back here for a moment. Are we sure this is even Wikipedia's problem? Google's Knowledge Graph (or whatever it's called these days) pulls data from all over the internet, it's not our job to "correct" it. The OP's first point of contact should be Google.--ukexpat (talk) 13:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I do not think that Google is conflating the two people, at least based on my preliminary search. The problem that Onemosheturner is having is that newspaper articles about bad Moshe Turner dominate Google search results and you have to look way down the search.page to find information about good Moshe Turner. But, is good Moshe Turner notable by Wikipedia standards? I do not yet know. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I thought I answered these comments (by clicking "join this discussion") but my answer is not here. Did I do something wrong?Onemosheturner (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Did my lengthy reply get lost in the ether?Onemosheturner (talk) 16:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

How to get approval for a business page?

Here on wikipedia, I have added my own business page, but all the time it got rejected. I am quite curious to know what's the reason and how can it be consider under notability and verifiable criteria. As I follow some of business pages that are live here. What I have written is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:NOTO_IT_Solutions

Please review this and suggest me some valuable suggestions that can help me to get acceptance.

Thanks

14.141.174.138 (talk) 09:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

You need to prove that your business is notable (famous) enough to justify having a Wikipedia page. Please read WP:COMPANY to get an idea of what this means. You can prove this by adding references: significant mentions of your company in reliable, independent, neutral sources.

Unfortunately, if your company is not yet notable enough, then there's really nothing you can do to have the article accepted. It's not about what you write or how you write it; it's simply a question of whether your business is big, well-known, or significant enough. A lot of articles get rejected for lack of notability. If that happens, all you can do is try again later, when you've expanded your business and gotten more significant coverage. --Ashenai (talk) 10:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Ashenai Would you please advice a tentative how many reliable sources article required to be considers as Notable and it should be recent or old source also matters as per WIki Guidelens. Ruproy1972 (talk) 12:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Recent or old doesn't matter. As for numbers: more is better, obviously, but you only really need two or three if they're good sources (major media outlets, not a paid advertisement, serious reporting on the company and not just a casual mention.) And if you don't have any good sources, then even a hundred bad ones won't help. --Ashenai (talk) 13:10, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

NB, notability is not "fame", please let's not confuse the two.--ukexpat (talk) 13:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

True! I got the impression the person asking was ESL, and notability is kind of a tricky word/concept. I was trying to simplify. I hope the meaning wasn't lost! --Ashenai (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Quite apart from notability, the article must also not be promotional. The current draft is: it contains one paragraph of praise, and a list of products, and uses adjectives of quality throughout. No matter how important the company, such an article will be immediately deleted in mainspace, or at least ought to be. Experience shows that the proprietor of a company is usually not in a good position to judge the suitability of their company for Wikipedia-- see our policies on WP:Conflict of Interest. DGG ( talk ) 16:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Some help with starting a new article

I am beginning my first new article (in my sandbox), however, I think I should ask for some guidance regarding notability and references.

The article is about a French painter, Louis Jacques Vigon (1897-1985). I am interested in his work, and from time to time various art houses/online catalogues list his works for sale, but usually full details of the artworks/auctions are only available to paid subscribers of those newsletters. I am continuing to do further research.

Do you think I should create the page now, in the hope that other Wikipedia users may help to add and edit information, thus expanding the field of public knowledge about this artist, or should I rather wait until I have found further references myself?

Thank you. Kevin Turner RSA (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

He does seem relatively obscure - fr:Liste de peintres français shows a redlink, so there isn't an article on him in the French Wikipedia.
The fundamental requirement for any article is that the subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The more specific notability requirements for artists are at WP:ARTIST.
The fact that the newsletters are paid subscriptions is not the real problem, mentions in catalogues or other lists are not usually significant coverage, and as they are to promote a sale, are often not really reliable or truly independent. A monograph, article in a respected arts magazine or similar coverage is required.
Please don't waste your time writing an article, unless there is significant coverage to prove notability, as No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability - Arjayay (talk) 14:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

At the English Wikipedia, the qualifications for painters being notable are set at WP:CREATIVE.The basic one, and usually the easiest one to demonstrate, is that the artist has works in the permanent collections of major museums. (that's permanent collections, not temporary exhibitions) The museum website or publications are good sources for this, I you can demonstrate this, and there is no other problem, the article will be accepted. DGG ( talk ) 16:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

To avoid any confusion WP:ARTIST and WP:CREATIVE are both shortcuts to exactly the same section Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Creative professionals, not two different sets of criteria - Arjayay (talk) 16:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Avoiding article deletion

Hi,

I have written an article SMU School of Accountancy which has been nominated for deletion because of its promotional tone, lack of links and lack of independent sources. I have tried to add references to more independent sources and have added a number of links. I've also tried to make the tone sound less promotional. Would appreciate any advice on anything else you think I can do to improve the article so as to avoid deletion.RachR310 (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

It is now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SMU School of Accountancy. I doubt there is much to do to help--it's a department within a business school, and it is very rare that such subdivisions are considered notable. DGG ( talk ) 16:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)