Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 451

Archive 445

←

Archive 449

Archive 450

Archive 451

Archive 452

Archive 453

→

Archive 455

Can you help me with my bland boredom-including alexithimia at editing and reading?

Hello, first. Yes, I "hate" editing and reading. They are too extremely boring for me. Do you, my dear kid Sir, have any motivational and scientific-based click to make me become a strong and robust editor and a lover of reading? I would be thankful if you did so much that even my heart will come to life by itself and congratulate you.

As you observe, I have a decent personal vocabulary despite not being a native English speaker. I am Greek. Sorry if my question sounds silly or weird, but I really WANT to read like it's the most massive and important Herculean goal in my life, but I am genetically...bored and strained. My fellow room-occupying idiots here do also almost every constant and undetectable cursed day ear-bleedingly obnoxious noise with them hitting plates, large objects, floors and tables that is disturbing. All "boom" and "boom". I feel like "booming" their silly stupid faces.

It seems I am usually, anyway, not a natural to reading and I want your grand help. Thanks if you do. Hanno the Navigator (talk) 19:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Hanno the Navigator. The Teahouse is a place for learning how to edit Wikipedia, so many people might consider your question off topic. But "developing a love for reading" is an essential skill for success as a Wikipedia editor, so I Googled that phrase, and found lots of good stuff. This article resonated with me, but I have loved reading since early childhood. I hope you can develop the same love. With your roommates, excellent sound deadening ear protection may help. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Austin Franklin (Football) Isn't Austin Franklin

Can someone here please give some advice to a new user who doesn’t understand the difference between a user name and an article name? The user is User: Austin Franklin (Football), and he created a biography of Austin Franklin, but he isn’t Austin Franklin. When I cautioned him for creating an autobiography, he replied that it wasn’t an autobiography. I asked him who he was, and he said he was a friend of Austin Franklin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARobert_McClenon&type=revision&diff=704309733&oldid=704288102

The problem is of course now that he has a misleading username, which implies that he is Austin Franklin, who is a real person who is the subject of a biography of a living person who passes gridiron football notability. Can someone please advise him? Also, can someone please advise him how to post to user talk pages? They should be added to at the bottom everywhere but this Teahouse.

Robert McClenon (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Robert McClenon - You answered them pretty cogently on their talk page, with a very appropriate template. There wasn't much else to tell them, but I left a brief addition to your comment. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Automated filter blocks from creating a page

Hello everyone! I'm trying to create a company page to wiki for informative purposes and getting blocked for possible autobiography. I've gone through the policies and as far as I can understand my writing is complitely from neutral point of view; I'm writing what the company does and including its highlights in history.

I've included references to wikipages that clarify the information and have external links to the networks the company uploads inform to.

I see that the other companies alike have shorter biographies, which could be the solution for this page; removal of large part of the information and only submitting the company information and it's history + links.

Any ideas? Pivatic (talk) 10:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Pivatic. The edit filter which warned you regarding your article states that if you do still want to save the page you can "scroll down and click "save page" again." - it was only a warning about writing autobiographies, automatically detected because your username is the same as the name of the article you were trying to create; it shouldn't have stopped you from clicking save again. That said, the article you were trying to create read like an advert, and did not cite any third party reliable sources of information. If you're going to recreate the page you should make sure to cite such sources. Sam Walton (talk) 10:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sam, scrolling down I'm only seeing "Dismiss" and "Try Again" buttons, no "Save page". "Try Again" returns me back to the "save your changes" window.

I've removed whole lot from the article, all that's left is short summary of what the company does & when/where it was found, what industries are connected & the company history.

The company is a global manufacturer which is why I thought it should have English & Finnish (founded in Finland) wikipages. Here's the Finnish one that got throught ( https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pivatic ), English version is exactly the same with free translation. Pivatic (talk) 11:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I see that the Finnish article has no references to sources independent of the subject. Under the rules of the English Wikipedia, the article will not be accepted unless it meets English Wikipedia's definition of notability, requiring that the subject has received significant coverage in reliable published sources that are independent of the subject. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:48, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Despite the answer above, the editor submitted a draft with no references to sources independent of the subject, with predictable results. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I have added a number of useful links to your user talk page. You need to read WP:Your first article, and also WP:COI, WP:Paid, and WP:CORPNAME. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Fixing broken redirects to article sections

Hello again, Teahouse. I am concerned with fixing redirects to sections that have been since renamed or perhaps removed. Is there any bot that can fix this? For example: Mayor of Pitcairn redirects to List of rulers of the Pitcairn Islands#Local Heads of Government (1790–present), if the section title were to be renamed, e.g. List of local Heads of Government since 1790, the redirect would only link to the article in question and no specific category in particular. Is there any way this could be fixed, either manually or automatically, so that the new section title is swiftly implemented to replace the old within the redirect. Many thanks. --Neve–selbert 08:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome again to the Teahouse Neve-selbert. It is rarely a safe idea to rename sections. Better yet, create an anchor before renaming:

Examples

1. {{anchor|Foo}}
   could be linked to with [[#Foo|...]] from within the same article, or it could be linked to with [[Article name#Foo|...]] from other articles and from redirects. Anchors can be more suitable for inter-article linking than section titles are. For example:
2. == {{anchor|Foo}} Section title ==
   Here, links via [[Article name#Foo]] would remain valid even if the section were renamed. (Note that the anchor is placed before the section name; otherwise browsers may hide the section title from view.) However, as noted under Limitations below, it may be preferable to use direct HTML rather than the template within section titles:
3. == <span id="Foo"></span> Section title ==
   

The template can be used to create multiple anchors with a single call. For example,
{{anchor|Foo|Bar|baz}}
will create three anchors that can then be linked to with [[#Foo]], [[#Bar]] and [[#baz]]

Limitations

Character	Code	Template	Meaning
"	" "	—	(double) quotation mark
#	#	—	hash
|	|	{{!}}	pipe
=	=	{{=}}	equals

• Anchor names that contain any character shown in the table on the right will not work as expected. However, any of these characters can be replaced with the "&#" codes shown for them here. Or, the pipe symbol and equals sign can be worked around with {{!}} and {{=}}, respectively. Markup code such as <sup> and <sub> (superscript and subscript) cannot be used. Most other characters, including white space and punctuation, are not a problem.
• Anchor names should be unique on a page, and should not duplicate any heading titles. Duplicate anchors will not work as expected since the #location links go to the first anchor with that name. Duplicate anchors result in invalid HTML; you can check for duplicate anchors by running the page through the W3C Markup Validation Service.
• If the template is added to a section title then the code will appear in the edit summary window when that section is edited, as in "/* {{anchor|Issues}}Limitations */ New issue". Also, when the section is saved, browsers may not return to the section. Consider using <span id="..."></span> directly, rather than using the anchor template, when in a section title.
• Anchor links are case sensitive in some browsers, so treat all anchor links as case sensitive.

Ping us back with any questions. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:39, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

@Checkingfax: I am afraid you have misunderstood my question. I wanted to know whether or not a bot could be created to fix redirects to article sections that have since been renamed or deleted. Thank-you. --Neve–selbert 12:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Requesting update to Walgreens Boots Alliance page

Dear editors,

Using my account SourcingABC, I have recommended a factual change on the Walgreens Boots Alliance Talk page, using the <request edit> function. I initially submitted my suggestion on 20 January but unfortunately no one has come forward to either make the change themselves or to state that I can make the change personally.

The current sales information in the opening section will shortly be a year out of date. As a result, I propose replacing it with the information from the company's full year results in October 2015. In the interests of transparency I am declaring that I work for Walgreens Boots Alliance.

Please could you advise on the best course of action for updating the page.

Thank you. SourcingABC (talk) 18:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Photo and Permission - Next Steps

You have all been terrific in guiding me along the Wikipedia path. I am very happy to see Molly Upton "live" and had the chance to visit her mother last weekend. I brought with me a permission form I found at permissions-commons. Her mother was happy to sign and gave me permission to take a picture of a photo of Molly she loves. So I have a signed permissions form and a jpg. Where do these go now? Are these sufficient?

Thank you,

Last CallTapestry1 (talk) 18:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Please e-mail them to permissions-en@wikimedia.org --ukexpat (talk) 20:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

ClueBot removed my entry, sad

Hi, I'm new to Wiki editing and got a little too excited with my helping I think.

I added an entry to a page that I noticed was missing an entry - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Video_converters doesn't have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prism_Video_Converter_Software. It was immediately removed by ClueBot and I received a sad message saying that I might be a vandal.

When I was adding it, I was having a hard time figuring out the formatting. I'd really like to figure this out, I think to format correctly, I can't use the regular edit link, but I'm not sure. Before I spend a lot of time, any suggestions? I think I'm in a little over my head but my stubborn side wants to figure this out before I go back to sticking to grammar edits for a bit. Thank you for any advice!!!Nerdgirl33 (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Nerdgirl33: and welcome to the Teahouse. I see nothing wrong with this edit, and so have reverted the bot. Can't see why the bot reverted it, so I've reported it as a false positive. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:06, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

As a side note, questions here should always go at the top of the page (unlike most other pages where it's the bottom of the page). Joseph2302 (talk) 22:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thank you so much! I appreciate your kind comment and your help. Nerdgirl33 (talk) 22:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Since Cluebot is a bot, it does make mistakes, and it does provide a procedure for reporting false positive. The chances of having a valid edit reverted by the bot are low, but you had bad luck. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nerdgirl33. It probably had nothing to do with the bot's reverting you, but you had omitted the formatting found in the other rows. I added it with this edit. —teb728 t c 23:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Can i give minor warnings

If someone has vandalised a page, and i revert it, can i post a vandalism warning on their talk page, or do i need to have fulfilled any requirements? 6000j (talk) 01:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 6000j. Vandalism has a very narrow definition on Wikipedia: "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content, in a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page." New editors often make the mistake of calling poor quality edits "vandalism", or edits they disagree with "vandalism". This is a big mistake. If you are 100% sure that an edit is vandalism, then you can warn the offender even if you are very new. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I know, by vandalism I mean stuff like replacing an entire pages text with Plumssss... for no reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 6000j (talk • contribs) 02:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

It would have been helpful for you to have been more specific in your original question, 6000j. Now that you have, please go ahead and warn. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Clarification regarding POV

Does this amounts to WP:POV pushing on the part of wikipedian? If yes, what are the options available before us? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 11:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't see it as POV pushing, just as a misguided attempt to impose his own view of how language should be used. I think it should be reverted and discussed. Maproom (talk) 11:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert Maproom. But he has done it again. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 11:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

This is discussed in section #Vandalism and 3RR below, and doesn't need to be raised again here. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

David Biddulph, he has been warned twice for WP:EDITWAR in 2009 and 2016 and blocked once. Yet he has reverted again. Can you please help? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 11:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I see that you've drawn it to the attention of the admin who blocked him last time. There is nothing I can do. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

How can I improve my first article?

Hello Wikipedia

I have recently started working on writing my very first Wikipedia article. I think I am mostly done with it but I want some feedback before I send it to be reviewed. This is my first article so it will probably be riddled with errors but do provide as much criticism as you can. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chariot_Rider/sandbox. Thank you for your advice. Chariot Rider (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

The article concentrates on the detailed mechanics of the game. It doesn't start at the beginning, by saying what it runs on (and is there a server involved?), how many players it's for, and whether it's real-time, turn-based, or something in between. Also, it has only one acceptable reference – you'll need to find a couple more. Maproom (talk) 17:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@Chariot Rider: In my first glance, I see that the article lacks the basic criteria. The references only contain links to the cites. Title, ref name, name of publisher and website, accessed date etc. are missing. The article needs linking to other pages which most people like me are unfamiliar with. Please read WP:MOS, WP:REF and WP:LINK. Otherwise, you are doing a great job! Ikhtiar H (talk) 17:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

My Kannada native speakers map draft has been rejected. Please help me create it.

Hi Teahouse, My Kannada native speakers map draft has been rejected. Please help me create it. What else is required or what do I need to do to get it created? Cheers, NitinBhargava2016 (talk) 13:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@NitinBhargava2016: Wikipedia isn't a traveling guide source like Wikitravel. I see that you are zealed to widespread the Kannada language. You are doing the right thing but just not in the correct way. We don't allow a single article for a specific map. What you can do now is provide the native speaker map in the existing article of Kannada. Perhaps you can even add more relevant information related to the map. Editing and improving articles are most welcomed in this community as well as fun to do, particularly the pages that you are interested on. Cheers! Ikhtiar H (talk) 14:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ikhtiar H, Earlier, I had added this native speaker map in the existing article of Kannada. However, it has been removed by user kwami as in below edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kannada&diff=prev&oldid=702527546 Any help in this regard is highly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Cheers,NitinBhargava2016 (talk) 14:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@NitinBhargava2016: - if those maps are based on Google maps, I am not completely sure that they are usable on Commons and Wikipedia. I have asked on Commons:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright for further advice from more knowledgeable folks. Aside from that license question, another quick tip: if you create maps based on other original maps, you should always provide source information for the original map and for eventual data that you add to such maps. GermanJoe (talk) 15:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Google maps are copyright and any maps derived from them carry the same copyright status, so they do not meet Commons licensing criteria, nor can they be uploaded to Wikipedia as non-free media.--ukexpat (talk) 21:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

how to avoid getting a new number for a reference / citation that has been used earlier

Hi, I'm a first time editor and have submitted an article. It was well received but needed a little help with formatting and is waiting for re-review. I think its almost complete but when inserting references/ citations to support statements the references are given numbers automatically and sequentially. How do I add a reference that has already been cited without it being given a new reference number so that it doesn't appear with multiple numbers and is repeated several times within the list of references? Thanks for any help teahouse can provide.Nala67 (talk) 08:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Nala67:, welcome to the Teahouse! To make the same reference appear only once in the list, you have to give specific name to a reference. Add one of them like this:

<ref name="name">content</ref> From then onwards if you want to note that reference in a different place, apply the following: <ref name="name" /> For more understanding, please see the repeated citation guideline. Cheers! Ikhtiar H (talk) 09:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Further explanation at WP:NAMEDREFS.--ukexpat (talk) 21:04, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

RE: adding a youtube documentary video to a profile

Is there a way to add a youtube video to a profile? Each time I attempted it was blacklisted. This video is a film documentary about the individuals in this profile??? T Heart (talk) 23:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Imasku. A large percentage of YouTube videos do not meet Wikipedia's strict copyright standards and cannot be included as external links. Please read WP:YOUTUBE for a detailed explanation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:23, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Imasku what do you mean by "profile"? We do not have profiles. We have encyclopedic articles about notable subjects. If you think of the articles in this way, it will help you do a better job conforming to our policies. Or are you referring to a user page (which is less likely given the content of your question)?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

help!

How do i get started?Ef1500 (talk) 03:29, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

First, don't add unsourced information to articles. Second, don't submit test edits to Articles for Creation. However, I've put a welcome message on your talk page that contains links to many policies and guidelines and helpful information. Read them and ask any questions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:40, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

They didn't pay attention to my advice, and were indeffed as WP:NOTHERE, among other things for vandalism. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Userbox

How to create a userbox? Captain Spark (talk) 08:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

OOPS - sorry, I can't read; ignore the following (the question was about a Userbox, not Infobox).Hi, @Captain Spark:. This is done by copying the relevant template, e.g. {{Infobox person}} or {{Infobox military conflict}}. Then fill in the relevant blanks; the rest can be left blank for later use and they won't be displayed.--Gronk Oz (talk) 09:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Captain Spark, go to WP:UBX and read the guidelines for creating a new one. They tell you everything you need to know. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 22:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Contested Deletion?

Hi - my name is hannahfaire667. I've only been a member of the Wikipedia community for a day and already I've been told that my user:talk page has been flagged for potential deletion because I posted irrelevant content and I haven't contributed to the Wikipedia community. Unfortunately, I'm part of a University class. The articles we post on our user-talk pages are answers to questions posed by our professor and we're supposed to use them to learn formatting and discuss the material in class with ourselves and others. The way I'm supposed to use the user:talk page (according to my professor) doesn't look like it would ever be deemed exactly 'relevant'.

What should I do? I'm nervous my page is going to be taken down and I've only had it for a day. I can't fail this class because one person thinks my page isn't good. I'm not bullying or posting crude material or doing anything that would break one of the 'Five Pillars' - I'm just answering my assignments the way I'm told.

Please help? I can't afford to fail this class because my page is flagged for deletion. Would it be wrong of me just to unflag it and move on? Hannahfaire667 (talk) 07:26, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Hannahfaire667. Do not remove the tag from your talk page. Instead, remove the content that has nothing to do with building an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a social network for chit-chat about playing video games. Although friendly banter is allowed on talk pages, it should be banter that is clearly related to writing, expanding, improving and referencing encyclopedia articles. So do your best to complete your class assignments in ways that help build the encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Cullen328 Great thank you. Hannahfaire667 (talk) 08:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

• Firstly, your user talk page is reserved for discussions between you and other users. You, SchrumpflinH and JacobTheOhioan have all been mis-using your talk pages in this respect. Next, article drafts in user space are allowed. Typically, one such would be user:Example/foo and people may discuss it at user talk:Example/foo. But finally and most importantly, all material in user space must be intended for publication. Anything else constitutes the sin of using Wikipedia as a free host. User talk:Hannahfaire667 and User talk:JacobTheOhioan were both blatantly sinful. I recommend you to install the wiki software on your the computer of your educational establishment. There you may write to your hearts' content totally unmolested. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:29, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Hannahfaire667. It sounds as if you're saying that your teacher is expecting you to do something in Wikipedia that is against the policies of Wikipedia. If that is the case, then I'm afraid you're in a difficult position. I suggest you look at WP:School and university projects to see what is allowed (and what is recommended), and go back to your teacher to see if you misunderstood or whether they are not aware of how Wikipedia works. --ColinFine (talk) 11:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

ColinFine and RHaworth. Thank you for all your assistance, but I do recoil a bit at the word "sinful". I was just doing what my professor told us to do, which was "comment on each other's postings" on our user:talk pages. I wasn't aware there was a different way of replying to people's conversations. I'm incredibly sorry this whole debacle started. I was only trying to complete my assignment the way I thought it was assigned. I will research and talk with my professor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannahfaire667 (talk • contribs)

• Hanna, it is indicative of how badly you have been guided that you have not learned to sign talk page comments with ~~~~ . Apologies if "sinful" offended. It was of course tongue in cheek and intended to show a less serious sort of offence. Thus a wiki crime is to blatantly advertise ones own company. What you and your fellow students were doing was not as bad as that. Perhaps misdemeanour would have been a better word — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
• Adding QueenElsaIngrid (talk · contribs) to your group. If there are more of you, please declare yourselves. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
• Oh dear, several more. Collating the list at User talk:GregXenon01. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

• See section #my content can't be viewed above. I think from this exercise the teacher will hopefully learn more than the students do. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:05, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

RHaworth As our pages are delete now - is there any possibility to get our source text again? As I've seen the history was cleared as well and I am wondering if there is any chance to keep track to it? SchrumpflinH (talk) 17:00, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

SchrumpflinH if you know the exact name of the deleted page, and you ask nicely, you can follow the procedures outlined under WP:REFUND. It doesn't sound like there is a copyright violation or anything else that would prevent this from being possible.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Vchimpanzeethank you, RHaworth send them to me via mail, but thank you for your instruction - I will consider it, if I occur to need it again!-SchrumpflinH (talk) 22:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

the subject's notability issue

Nairabarkhudaryan (talk) 15:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)Hello,

I am trying to create an article, but it was not accepted and the reason of this is an adequacy of the subject's notability. I provided references (books, articles), but it seems there is still not enough proof of his notability. The mentioned books discuss clearly about him. Could you please assist me with this Thanks in advanceNairabarkhudaryan (talk) 15:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

This is about Draft:Melik-Barkhudar. Maproom (talk) 16:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

(e/c)The article in question appears to be Draft:Melik-Barkhudar. This was declined by Robert McClenon and then by Onel5969. --Gronk Oz (talk) 16:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@Nairabarkhudaryan:, it is unclear what the subject of this article is. It starts out by saying that the article concerns "an Armenian noble family". But most of the article is about one person, who seems to have the same name as that of the family. I don't have access to the three books referenced; do they talk about the individual, or about the family? Whatever the subject actually is, they need to talk specifically about that.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Maproom - You apparently made a good-faith error that, if done by an author, is usually a bad-faith error. You removed the AFC declines and comments. They have a notation, "Do Not Remove". They are supposed to be kept with the article while it is in draft space. When the article is accepted, the script removes them. Don't worry; I have restored them. Please don't remove AFC notes while a draft is in progress. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I didn't see adequate third-party evidence of the notability of the family, and am not aware of a guideline that states that all historical noble families are considered notable. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Robert McClenon: I am puzzled. I made one edit to that article, as shown in its history. But I believe my edit consisted entirely of copy-edits. I did not intend to remove, and do not recall removing, the AFC declines and comments, though it is conceivable that I did so by mistake. But I certainly did not edit (as shown in the history) "'Gorisi ampʻopʻ patmutʻyun'" to "'Brief history of Goris'". I couldn't. I don't know a single word of Armenian, or whatever language that is. Maproom (talk) 22:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@Maproom: Is this the edit you intended? If so you were editing from an old version. —teb728 t c 22:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

It is. I see. I apologise, and shall take care not to make that mistake again. Thank you, teb728, for figuring out what I had done. Maproom (talk) 22:39, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Looking for other users by name

HI! this is probably a really simple question but i'm stumped for some reason. How do we find other users by exact username? I tried searching them in the search box but it didn't come up! Thank you! Emily boston (talk) 20:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Emily boston. To go to a specific editor's page, type "User:" in the search box followed by the exact user name. So, entering "User: Cullen328" takes you to my user page. Similarly, entering "User talk: Cullen328" takes you to my talk page. Leave out the quotation marks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Emily boston. Strictly speaking Cullen's procedure searches for user pages. It works for Cullen and for you because you both have user pages. If you want to search for a user with no user page, you can use the dialog at Special:ListUsers. —teb728 t c 20:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Cullen's procedure always works for "User:". PrimeHunter (talk) 11:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Well sort of, it works if you enter User: and the whole username. But it doesn't search in the sense of offering completions from a partial username unless the user has a userpage. On the other hand it finds userpages for non-existent accounts (like say User:TEB728). —teb728 t c 13:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

disallowed subpages for major drafts: is user namespace allowed?

I'm confused about allowed/disallowed uses of user subpages as a sandbox: Writing drafts of major article revisions. Is this disallowed use rule about using the article namespace or include my user namespace?

I've revised, essentially rewritten the entire lead for opioid in my sandbox. I need to copy it to a temporary sandbox to clean up automatically generated refnames before taking it to the opioid/talk page. (This lead suffers from too many cooks and better to do it this way, then seek revision/consensus.)

Help and a cup of P&G appreciated — Box73 (talk) 02:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

• Hi Box73 subpages are definitely allowed in your user area for this purpose (your sandbox being just the default name of one). As in point 1 of Allowed uses. The rule 2 of Disallowed uses is talking about the main article name space. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks KylieTastic. I ended up posting it directly to the talk page but will definitely do this in the future. Now comes the fun part! With crossed fingers — Box73 (talk) 12:27, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

The article Opioid already exists. While the use of sandboxes to write about topics that have existing articles is permitted, it is not typically not a useful way to try to improve existing articles. The reviewers will decline the submission because the article already exists, and will tell you to make edits directly to the existing article. Go to the article talk page and discuss edits to the existing article. (There is a myth held by some professors in giving class assignments that Articles for Creation is an appropriate way to develop large-scale changes to existing articles. I don't know if you have a class assignment. Many class assignments are given by professors who do not understand Wikipedia policy, and they put the students in an extremely unpleasant bind. In any case, Articles for Creation is not currently used to modify existing articles.) Robert McClenon (talk) 15:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Help me editing a Real Ispat and Power page.

The wikipedia page, Real Ispat and Power is going to be deleted until is has been rewritten. Please help me in rewriting this.Gktmtrebars (talk) 11:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

It needs more than rewriting. It needs someone to find evidence that its subject is notable. Please click on that blue link to see what would be involved. Maproom (talk) 12:11, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Usually, if an article is tagged for speedy deletion, it will be deleted. Even if the article can be rewritten to address tone concerns, there isn't time to rewrite it before an admin looks in the queue of nominations for speedy deletion and deletes it. If your article is tagged for speedy deletion, either it should never have been moved into article space, or it was incorrectly nominated. In the latter case, you can contest the nomination. In your case, if you think that you can rework the draft, you may submit a Request for Undeletion, to ask to move it into your user space (not to restore it to article space). In that case, you would do well to work on it with the Articles for Creation process. Articles in AFC are declined for two main types of reasons, just as articles in article space are nominated for speedy deletion: Tone reasons (reading like an advertisement) and notability reasons. In the AFC process, there are usually multiple attempts to improve the draft. However, if the topic isn't notable, that is, if you can't find references to it in third-party reliable sources, you may never be able to rewrite it to where it will be accepted. In any case, submit a Request for Undeletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Ronniejbaroi/sandbox

I reviewed User:Ronniejbaroi/sandbox and declined it. It isn’t an encyclopedic draft. I said that it read like an essay and might be a class assignment, but was not an article draft. I then received a boilerplate note, with no text, on my talk page from User:Ronniejbaroi. Can the original poster ask what the question is, or can someone explain to the original poster that, while sandboxes can be used for almost anything except copyvio or attack pages, they should not be submitted to Article for Creation unless they are encyclopedic drafts (and that a fine point about words is usually not a topic for an encyclopedic draft)?

Robert McClenon (talk) 15:25, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Updating factual inaccuracies on company Wikipedia page

Dear editors,

I work for Etsy and we recently discovered some factual inaccuracies cited on our Wikipedia page, which we are seeking permission to amend . I sent a detailed email to the Wikipedia info email outlining the inaccuracies and providing numerous third-party sources that show the correct information. I received a response noting that conflict of interest changes are strongly discouraged. While I understand and respect this, we would still like these corrections to be made--they are factual in nature and not promotional (e.g. The Wikipedia page states that Etsy was founded in 1998 when the correct date is actually 2005. It also incorrectly states our manufacturing policies, which are well documented on our website and have been reported on by numerous media outlets). Please let me know how I may get these articles amended without violating Wikipedia's conflict of interest terms.

Thank you. 64.124.192.210 (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

First, do not refer to "our" Wikipedia page. It doesn't belong to you. No corporate page does. It is a common mistake to refer to "our" page. The pages all belong to Wikipedia. Second, post you concerns to the article talk page, Talk: Etsy, giving reliable s ources, and they should be addressed. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

When you post your suggestions on the Talk page as Robert suggests, it would be good to precede it with the code {{request edit}}. This will bring it to the attention of editors as a request. In my experience, editors will respect that you have identified the potential for a conflict of interest and used the request procedure.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Which is that page you are referring to ' e.g. The Wikipedia page that states etsy was founded in 1998 when the correct date is 2005', please mention, you can change the contents in the article. You can even make your own account(create a account on Wikipedia)and make changes. BOTFIGHTER (talk) 16:33, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Number of Edits

Hello, I am a fairly new editor (or compared to most people a very new editor), and I have been a member of the Wikipedia Community for about a month. However, I have a question in regard to the number of Edits I have done.

I have seen pages listing the milestones of how many pages an user has edited, but I do not know how many I have done. Please teach me how to keep track of how many edits I have done. KnowledgeIsGoodForYou (talk) 14:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi KnowledgeIsGoodForYou. At the time that I write this you have made 87 edits. A detailed breakdown of this stat is available here. You can find this info for any editor by looking them up in Special:Contributions, then scrolling down to the bottom and clicking "Edit Count". --LukeSurl ^{t c} 14:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks LukeSurl, and one more question - how am I able to tell which edits are specifically which, such as which one was my 25th, 50th, and 75th(s)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KnowledgeIsGoodForYou (talk • contribs) 15:34, 13 February 2016‎ (UTC)

Special:Contributions/KnowledgeIsGoodForYou lists them in reverse chronological order. You can group them, such as 20 or 50 at a time, and start from the oldest, to help you in counting. Bear in mind that edits to any page which has subsequently been deleted will not be shown. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:34, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

how to create an article on a company if it is of private interest?

how to create an article on a company if it is of private interest?

Ganesh Sivah (talk) 15:56, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I think that the question needs clarification. Do you mean that there is a company that is privately owned but is notable, having been described by multiple third-party independent reliable sources? If so, create the article, preferably in draft space, with the appropriate references. However, if you mean that you want to create a profile about a small privately held company, be aware that Wikipedia is not a directory and does not have either profiles or advertisements. It is an encyclopedia, and only has encyclopedic articles on notable subjects. If the company is small and privately owned, it is unlikely to be notable. Please clarify the question if those answers are not sufficient. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Table

How to create a table like TV series, in article and BLP infobox. But do they use the same table thing --Britty192 (talk) 01:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Britty192, welcome to the teahouse. I'm afraid I don't understand exactly what your question is; could you clarify what you want to do? The "infobox person" template has a number of parameters; what additional information do you want to include? Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Looking for opportunities to improve my first article

I have contributed my first article (Dwayne Perkins), and it appears to have been accepted!

At this point, I am very interested in hearing high-level suggestions for further enhancing this article...new sections that I should consider researching, glaring biographical omissions, etc.

My initial goal was to capture the very basics and document them as well as I could, but I know that the result is a fairly bare-bones article which could undoubtedly stand some improvement in terms of its content, and I am looking for any feedback you might have.

Marknashtx (talk) 18:40, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Marknashtx; welcome to the teahouse, and congratulations on a very creditable first effort. You are correct in saying that it is currently short, and could do with a lot more detail, although this is sometimes inevitable with biographies of less known individuals. I would suggest trying to find a source that offers a profile of Perkins himself, rather than coverage of his performances. In my opinion the highest priority at this moment would be more details of his personal life, and also more detail about the content/style/themes of his comedy. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll start digging for information that addresses his comedic style.

I know it pretty well...after all, that's what brought him to my attention in the first place. :-) But the key will be finding the objective third-party sources where it's summarized. So I'll start digging for those.

There are a few aspects of his personal life, especially from his earlier life, that could be relevant as well, so I will start working on those as well.

Thanks for the feedback! Marknashtx (talk) 19:01, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Fixing the TOC for Help:Maintenance template removal#Specific template guidance

I am working on the above page – just a draft as yet. The idea is that some of our various maintenance templates will have a link to it, from "Learn how and when to remove this template". As you all know, we often get the question here (and at other help forums) from new users confused after having (supposedly) addressed an issue flagged by a template, and not understanding how to remove it or that it is not removed automatically.

Anyway, you'll see that the page's table of contents includes a list of a whole bunch of templates after the "specific template guidance" section. You'll also see that the TOC links do not work, because those section headers are in a collapsed part of the page. I thought adding links in the same form through anchors might fix the problem but that was a bust. Any ideas?

I would actually prefer it if the TOC would omit including this entire set of sections. I found {{TOC limit}} but it doesn't seem to allow omission of only certain ones. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: Hm...You could consider making these topics under "specific template guidance" all level three headers (=== ===) rather than level two headers, and implement the appropriate TOC limit. Would that work? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 00:33, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks. I got it to work with third level section headers. It's much better without the TOC so cluttered but I need to think about a different form of display entirely for that section--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:36, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

How do I link edits done under an IP address with future edits done under an account name?

How do I link edits done under an IP address with future edits done under an account name? ToaMakuta (talk) 02:06, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ToaMakuta. You can disclose that IP address on your current user page, if you wish, and list the articles you had edited as an IP. You can also mention the new named account on the talk page for the IP address. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:00, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

But you might want to be careful, as that links your IP address to your account name - which may lead to problems in the future.
As stated at Wikipedia:Why create an account?

"You are actually less identifiable logged in than you are as an unregistered editor, owing to the hiding of your IP address (so long as you avoid disclosing identifiable information on your user page). You might want to consider privacy and the possibility of offline harassment, when deciding what to say on your user page." - Arjayay (talk) 16:39, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion has been tagged on my post, I am new, can someone please help me with my mistakes?

Speedy Deletion has been tagged on my post, I am new, can someone please help me with my mistakes? Here is the link: Rey Rey Rodriguez. Nyricanfl (talk) 02:39, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. There are a number of useful links on your user talk page, including WP:Your first article. If your article is deleted, if you try again you would be better to submit the article as a draft for review through the article for creation procedure (where other editors can tell you what needs improving), rather than creating it directly as a mainspace article where it is much more likely to be deleted if it doesn't immediately satisfy Wikipedia's requirements. The starting point is to understand Wikipedia's definition of notability, requiring that the topic has received significant coverage in reliable published sources that are independent of the subject. For notability purposes, references to material written or created by the subject are of no use; what we need is that significant coverage by independent published sources, which might (for example be books or newspapers). If the subject has not received such coverage, it means that he does not (yet) get a Wikipedia article. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:55, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

David, I appreciate the information. I wish I would have came here first. Thank you. Nyricanfl (talk) 05:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

If you actually want to get the page accepted, and you probably do, you should either: (1) before it is deleted, copy the text from the original version of the draft into your user space to work on it; or (2) after it is deleted, make a request for undeletion to have the original version moved to your user space so that you can work on it. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:13, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't know why you blanked the page. Does that mean that you are giving up on it? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:13, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Technical assistance with adding references at the bottom and uploading a photo

Please help me finish and post a biography of Yadullah Khosroshahi, a leader of Iranian oil workers and labor ,movements who died in London Feb. 4, 2010.

How do I add journal references at the bottom of the article and upload a photo of him?

Thanks.

Kamran Nayeri

Knayeri (talk) 18:51, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Anybody out there? Knayeri (talk) 19:05, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Knayeri. You posted your request 22 minutes ago, and then asked again 8 minutes ago. Please be patient! We are all volunteers here.

In answer to your question, I recommend you read your first article, and referencing for beginners. But personally I very strongly recommend that you do two things before you ever try writing an article:

1. Spend time improving existing articles, so that you learn how Wikipedia works before plunging in to the most difficult task there is;
2. Spend more time collecting reliable sources (which excludes any wikis and most blogs) which have published information about Khosroshahi, written entirely by people who have no connection with him (which excludes anything published by him or his party, and any interviews with him).

Once you have found those, you can start writing an article in draft space, making sure that you do not say a single thing that you have not found in a reliable published source. That way, you have a chance of creating an article which will actually be accepted when you submit it for review (unlike the majority of drafts written by inexperienced editors).

I'm sorry if this sounds discouraging, but the fact is that writing a new article is hard, and I'm trying to help you approach it in a way that is likely to work. --ColinFine (talk) 19:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Knayeri. The draft article in question is User:Knayeri/Yadullah Khosroshahi. Based on what you have written in your draft, I think that it is very likely that this person is notable enough for a Wikipedia biography. It is the references that you will add that will show that convincingly. You want to add what we call "in line references", which are added in the body of the article after a specific claim. For example, right after saying that he died in London, you might include a reference to a British newspaper article about his death. English language sources are preferable when available but for an Iranian topic, reliable sources in Farsi or other languages are fine. The procedures for creating references are explained in Referencing for beginners. Feel free to ask specific followup questions here at the Teahouse at any time.

As for a photo, the procedure depends on the copyright status. If you describe a specific photo, including who took it under which circumstances, we can give specific advice. Photos found on the internet are almost always copyrighted. If no freely licensed or copyright free photo can be found, then an option for use of a non-free photo can be found at the shortcut WP:NFCI #10. This applies only to live encyclopedia articles, not drafts, so wait a while on this.

You should also read about the Neutral point of view. The current version has lots of advocacy language. It is clear and understandable that you have passionate feelings about Iranian politics. But Wikipedia articles need to be written in a dispassionate, factual style, so the tone of the prose needs a lot of work. In conclusion, I want to say that I have worked on some articles about trade union leaders, including George Meany, which is rated a Good article. Please feel free to ask for help with anything. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:25, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

meta question about Wikipedia Teahouse: talk

At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Teahouse there are a few citations to articles pertaining to Teahouse's origins, and issues of male dominance in Wikipedia editing. The first of those articles: Yermi Brenner (24 June 2013). "Taking On Wikipedia’s Bias". Medium. Archived from the original on 28 July 2013. Retrieved 28 July 2013. (details) is a good article, but unfortunately, the page's apparent address http://www.webcitation.org/mainframe.php doesn't load in Chrome, and though it loads in Firefox it disables the back button. The third article Deanna Zandt (26 April 2013). "Yes, Wikipedia Is Sexist -- That's Why It Needs You". Forbes. Retrieved 24 October 2013. (details) won't open (due to Forbes policy) if one has AdBlocker installed, meaning, in essence that one cannot read the page unless you submit to having yourself monitored, and tracked by Forbes. The questions: 1. Should such unfriendly appearing links be linked so prominently from the "friendly" part of Wikipedia? The content is good -- I have no problem; it is their vehicles I question. 2. Should Wikipedia encourage content served from more vanilla websites (those not so dominated by tracking and scripted pages)? David.daileyatsrudotedu (talk) 23:13, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

How do I submit an article (entry) my first!

How do I submit an article that is almost finished (I still need to complete a citation--journal name and date). Knayeri (talk) 21:43, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Knayeri. I see you have submitted Draft:Yadullah Khosroshahi for review. Looking at it quickly, I think you've done a good job, but there is still work to be done. My immediate concern is that the lead section is much too long: that section should be a brief introduction, but it goes into a lot of detail. [[WP:LEAD#Length|]] says "a lead that is too long is intimidating, difficult to read, and may cause the reader to lose interest halfway", and that was my experience. I haven't looked to see whether the detail is repeated in later sections: if so, it should be removed from the lead, otherwise, much of it should be moved from the lead to later sections.

Another point is that some of the text editorialises. For example "This proved to be a transformative period in Khosroshahi's development as a working class leader". This is an interpretation, and should never appear in Wikipedia's voice. (It would be fine if it referenced a reliable source which said it was a transformative period, but even then I have doubts about "proved to be".)

I suggest you continue working on the draft while it is waiting for review. --ColinFine (talk) 23:16, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Collin, for your constructive suggestions. I will address them. Knayeri (talk) 23:25, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

page delete?

hey, i have created a page, ERICA NOCKALLS, And i have now added references, is this enough for it not to get deleted, i am also having further issues with images if you could help?

thanksChrisToast (talk) 01:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

i got an email saying it broke guidelines, but i was still building the page. will it stay now?

ChrisToast (talk) 01:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Your page is at Erica Nockalls (not the SHOUTING version you gave). You need to read the various links in the message at the top of the article. In particular you need to understand what is meant by reliable sources and how to use them in footnotes as explained in Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. You tried to add links to blogs, which are not reliable sources, and in any case they would not have been useful as there was no indication as to which "source" was being used to support which statement in the article. You have seven days in which to add valid references to the article. You would be well advised to read the various useful links which have been added to your user talk page, and particularly Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Since sources, although not reliable sources, have been added, the WP:BLPPROD tag can be removed, but, if it is, the article will almost certainly be nominated at Articles for Deletion. The article also needs have copy-editing. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Contributing explanatory drawings to articles, is this Original Research?

Just a newbie, but the FAQ was vague here. If I need to contribute a drawing (i.e. draw a diagram in a CAD package, render and upload the SVG) in order to better explain something in an article , (as all the ones I can find on the web are copyrighted or just lame), does the drawing count as "original research" ?

Likewise , some times formulae can be re-written in a form that is easier to understand (to a non-university student) , but not strictly the same as textbook derivations. In some cases an editor may need to string 3 or 4 formula together as stepping stones to guide the reader to a better understanding. It's the sort of things that lecturers might scribble on blackboards, but be difficult to find and attribute on the web. The material itself will be well known, I'm asking about taking the reader through a particular path that might possibly be considered as an "original" approach. Salbayeng (talk) 05:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Salbayeng. There are no easy answers to your questions. A drawing or a diagram is not original research as long as it accurately illustrates the topic or concept being discussed. The accuracy and the appropriateness of such an image for inclusion in a particular article is a matter to be decided by consensus among the editors interested in improving that specific article. So, be prepared to make the case that the image improves the article, and for the possibility that other editors may disagree.

Similarly for your idea regarding formulae. It takes great talent to describe technical matters in a way that beginning students of the topic can understand, and so I encourage any work that you do in that area. A clear explanation of a complex topic is not original research, but your explanation must be based on what the range of reliable sources say. Oversimplification is a danger, as is cutting corners. Again, it is important to approach these efforts with a collaborative attitude, fully prepared to debate and discuss and compromise with other interested editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

OK That sounds perfectly fair to me, a lot of peer reviewed articles that I would normally cite are targeted at academics and tend to skip over a lot of detail, that detail exists, but scattered over dozens of textbooks etc, these references could then be cited in the talk page,

A related topic is the use of Analogical_models to explain something in terms of something more easily understood. So if I "flavoured" an existing analog to match the wording in the rest of the article, and there was consensus agreement , then all is good. I guess in general terms , retaining the substance of an regularly accepted explanation, but rewording with a different flavour is usually acceptable (and avoids copyright infringement!). Thanks for your insight. Salbayeng (talk) 02:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Bokar Coffee (Eight O'clock brand)

I was looking up Eight O'clock brand Bokar coffee and noticed the write up had it discontinued in 2012. I buy it regularly at my local grocery store (Metro) here in Barrhaven, a suburb of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. The description etc is accurate, the only wrong info is that it is available, it's still great (very strong) in 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.162.101 (talk) 03:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I have deleted the statement that it has been discontinued, as unreferenced. Maproom (talk) 09:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC)