Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 500

Archive 495

←

Archive 498

Archive 499

Archive 500

Archive 501

Archive 502

→

Archive 505

My two drafts have been waiting for re-review for 28 days. When will they be re-reviewed?

Hello, I am very new to editing and contributing to Wikipedia so please forgive me if this is the wrong place to ask this question. Anyway, I submitted two drafts for review 29 days ago, Paul Lukas (sports uniform reporter) and Peter Good (graphic designer), and much to my surprise they were reviewed the very next day but rejected. The same day of rejection I edited the two articles and added much more information including many more sources and references. I then submitted the two drafts for re-review. Today is the 28th day since I did that and my drafts are still waiting to be re-reviewed. So I'm just wondering if waiting almost a month is normal for drafts to be re-reviewed, and what I really want to know is when will my drafts finally be re-reviewed? Hopefully now that I wrote this message my drafts will get the attention they need. Thank you for reading this and hopefully the re-reviews will happen soon. If they don't is there any way I can delete my drafts and resubmit them as regular articles instead of drafts for review? If I knew the review process would take this long I would never have submitted my articles for review in the first place.T.X.Critter (talk) 22:55, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

@T.X.Critter: Please don't move drafts that you have created yourself. Let another user check to see whether the drafts should be accepted. I have moved Paul Lukas (sports uniform reporter) and Peter Good (graphic designer) back to the draft namespace for further review. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:43, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

One thing which you could do to make it easier for reviewers would be to expand the bare URLs in the references. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:53, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

The articles are Draft: Paul Lukas (sports uniform reporter) and Draft: Peter Good (graphic designer). When you ask a question about drafts, it is helpful if you provide links to them. Sometimes new articles get reviewed quickly and sometimes they don’t. It is not uncommon to wait a month for an article to be reviewed or re-reviewed. We are all volunteers, and there aren’t enough of us. Eventually an article that hasn’t been reviewed gets into a category of Very Old Submissions, and they usually get reviewed quickly. You haven’t done anything wrong by requesting re-review. Sometimes requests for re-review are granted, and sometimes they just sit. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:11, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, T.X.Critter. I agree with David Biddulph that you should flesh out those ugly, uninformative URL references into complete, informative references. Please see Referencing for beginners for information. Also, think of each draft article as a biography of each person, instead of a compilation of various incidents in their lives which received press attention. Instead of saying that the person was interviewed or profiled in publication X, summarize the biographical information in those sources, and reference publication X as the source. Do not list biographical details like education as bullet points but incorporate them as prose. When you say that art work is held in various collections, or that the person won various awards, you must provide references. Finally, please be patient. Drafts that are fully developed and properly referenced as encyclopedia articles are likely to get a second review much quicker than those which still have glaringly obvious problems. I hope this helps. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:34, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

"Ugly, uninformative URL references", "glaringly obvious problems"... Wow man, thanks for the constructive criticism! Did you miss the part where I wrote I am very new to editing and contributing to Wikipedia? You need to relax and realize I have barely any experience with this stuff! If I knew what my mistakes were and how to fix them and also list references properly I would! Did anyone stop to think the problems with my articles might be to due to a lack of easy to follow instructions for writing Wikipedia articles? If these do exist, good luck finding them on this impossible to navigate website! Instead of getting used to things and learning more and more every time I log in I get more and more lost, frustrated, and confused every time I log in! Wikipedia's interface and layout is a web design nightmare! Anyway, if I fix all the issues with my articles do you really think it will encourage someone to re-review them sooner? And do you think it will increase the odds of my articles getting approved? If my articles are going to get rejected anyway even after I fix the problems then I don't want to waste my time.T.X.Critter (talk) 01:59, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I personally agree that the language with respect to the references was harsh. I don't in general like the guideline do not bite the newcomers because, although it is a good concept, it is often mis-applied. However, in this case, calling the references "ugly [and] uninformative" was bitey rather than constructive. I agree that properly formatting references is the most difficult part of Wikipedia, and is a good reason why new editors should not be in too much of a hurry to develop an article and get it accepted; there are many other ways to help. However, the comment about "glaringly obvious problems" wasn't too harsh, in that problems identified on a first review that are not corrected become glaringly obvious (even if otherwise subtle). Robert McClenon (talk) 02:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry that you were offended by my frank assessment of your drafts, T.X.Critter. I meant to assist you and please note that I linked to instructions on how to improve things right after expressing my opinion that bare URL references are ugly and uninformative. That is my opinion wherever they occur in Wikipedia, and I always encourage editors to upgrade them. I have gone ahead and upgraded the first reference in each of your drafts. Take a look at how the references look now. Aren't the remaining references less attractive and less informative than the ones I have upgraded? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

How to make userboxes stack vertically?

If I place userboxes on my user page, they end up in an unbalanced jumble. I'd like them to appear in a vertical formation, like a list. How can I do this? ColouredFrames (talk) 01:18, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi ColouredFrames. See Template:Userboxtop. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Is my article ready to be resubmitted?

Following advice given to me by various experienced users I have been rewriting my article about the artist Charles Harris. I have converted his newspaper cuttings into references by citing the name of the paper, the author and the date of issue, mentioning key phases of the corresponing article which point to claims made in my Wiki entry. I have also rewritten the article for neutral content. Can anyone suggest a mentor or is it now ready for resubmission? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Landschaftsmaler/sandbox Landschaftsmaler (talk) 12:33, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Your article seems to be close-paraphrased from this site. This presents a potential copyright issue, as we cannot use text directly from copyrighted sources outside brief and contextually appropriate quotes. This article should be rewritten in entirely your own words.

You may want to keep in mind that Wikipedia articles should be neutral - try to avoid words and phrases which are promotional in tone, such as "Harris was awarded a prestigious Senior Academic Cultural Exchange Visit", "Harris also has an international reputation as a leading Landscape painter", and "Britain’s leading art critic, the late Brian Sewell commented on how Harris had “modestly eschewed these major prizes” in a review where he chose Harris as being, “One of the six best painters for the future.”" Intelligentsium 16:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

For the sake of clarity, Landshaftsmaler, I'd point out that while I generally agree with Intelligentsium, the only thing wrong with the last example is the evaluative language used about Sewell. An article should never use evaluative language in Wikipedia's voice, but it is quite acceptable to quote an independent (of the subject of the article) source that uses evaluative language - though if other prominent writers were critical of the subject, the article should talk about them too. --ColinFine (talk) 20:22, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, Landschaftsmaler. As I previously explained, and material likely to be challenged needs to be supported by a reference, as do all quotes in the article. You still seem to have unreferenced quotes in the draft, so at present it would be declined if submitted for review. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:19, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks everbody for your help. I will take a closer look and carry on editing my article.Landschaftsmaler (talk) 04:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Could use assistance

I'd like this as my signature, but the code is not accepted in my preferences. (I'm not a code guy.)

KamelTebaast

Any help would be greatly appreciated... thank you! Kamel Tebaast ^TALK 03:22, 1 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gestrid (talk • contribs) Note that this question was moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse by me. That's why SineBot signed this in my name. Please reply to Kamel Tebaast, not me. -- Gestrid (talk) 04:59, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Greetings Kamel Tebaast and Welcome to the Teahouse! How to customize your signature is explained at the Tip-of-the-day for June 30. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 07:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

@Kamel Tebaast: Signatures are only allowed to be 255 characters. The above code is 268 characters so the end is cut off when you try to save it, resulting in invalid code. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

THANKS, THAT WORKED!!! KamelTebaast 14:22, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Subst

Is it fine If I used {{subst}} on userboxes of my userpage? — The Optimistic Guy^Talk! 09:48, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it should be fine. KieranTribe 14:30, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

help with submitting information to an existing article

I would love to find someone to help me submit information I have with an article. It is just to complex a system for those of us not in this world of WIKI - when I try things just get rejected. Are there coaches who can help? Shilohsophia (talk) 15:55, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

There are people who can give advice. Some of them read this page and try to help. But while you haven't said what your proposed article will be about, there's not much they can do. Maproom (talk) 17:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

National election polling article/graph

Hey!

So, I tried to create an election polling article for the next Slovenian election as a summer pet project, seeing that there wasn't one already. This is how far I've gotten; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jakob_tekavec/sandbox . (I'm not sure that I'll actually publish it, though)

I was wondering if there's an online tool that would sample the data from the chart and aggregate it into those neat graphs you see on others election polling articles, or; if I'd ever happen to finish filling in the data and publishing it; if there would be any man (or woman) so gallant (and bored) as to attempt to create a graph and upload it himself?

Any other comments or suggestions are welcome.

Thanks in advance.

Jakob tekavec (talk) 18:53, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Finding sources

Hi,

This article I submitted was recently rejected. I am having a really hard time, even though I know there are good sources out there. Is there anyone that can help me fill in these gaps, I feel like I'm really close but am just spinning my wheels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fascination_Advantage

CherryManJr

CherryManJr (talk) 14:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

If there are "good sources out there", you need to cite them. All that the sources currently cited in the draft do is prove that one person is trying to promote the brand she has created. (A secondary problem is that the article fails to explain what it is a brand of.) Maproom (talk) 15:59, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, CherryManJr. A good tool for finding high-quality sources about many topics is Google Scholar. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:51, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Redemption of mirror publications

The 2014 book Pride of Tamil Cinema, despite taking chunks of material from us, is still mostly original, and won a National Award. But its author G. Dhananjayan is easily contactable, and to enable his books to be usable on Wikipedia as references, could we request him to rewrite the content in future editions? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

You are proposing that we request him to paraphrase Wikipedia rather than make straight copies? That may make his actions legal, but it won't make his content any more reliable. Maproom (talk) 07:41, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

No, I am saying that we suggest he remove whatever he has copied from us (but he would no doubt re-add it in a rewritten style after verifying the facts with external sources), but his work would still not be significantly affected since he uses content legitimately from various reliable sources. His award is his testimony to his credibility, so is there anything else we can do to allow his works to be usable here? Kailash29792 (talk) 10:22, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Background: See Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 425#WP:MIRROR and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 201#Pride of Tamil Cinema and Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mullum Malarum/archive1.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

User boxes

How do I get user boxes? Rcd178 (talk) 01:37, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Great question Rcd178! You can learn about them and see examples if you click on this blue link: WP:Userboxes.

  Bfpage |leave a message  09:15, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Search bar

I've created a new article; but it doesn't appear in the searching bar when enough letters are typed. --HamedH94 (talk) 13:04, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

When I type "Deldadeh" into the search box, I find the article you have created. Is that the article you mean? Maproom (talk) 13:36, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

No, my other article, Tooken, 2015 film. --HamedH94 (talk) 13:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Tooken (film) appears for me - It was started at 12:50, before you complained about its non-appearance at 13.04 - it often takes the servers a few minutes, sometimes several hours, to catch up - please be patient - Arjayay (talk) 13:45, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Renaming a category

As part of an RFC I need to move a few categories around. What's the fastest way to do this? Do I have to go to each page and change its categories? Is there a way to change them all at once? Thanks. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 14:52, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jujutsuan. Category renames must be proposed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Another language

How can I put a link of my article in another language Wikipedia in the side bar of my newly created article? --HamedH94 (talk) 13:35, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi HamedH94. Click "Add links" or "Edit links" under "Languages" in the left pane. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Two Different Companies Merged Under One Article

There are many factual errors in the Wikipedia article about All Media Network that are causing all kinds of trauma for us at our business. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Media_Network

It appears as though the page for All Media Guide (founded by Michael Erlewine in 1990) has just been renamed to All Media Network (which is actually a wholly different company spun off from Rovi in 2013). All Media Network does not distribute any music metadata to anybody (the entire business model section is referring to what All Media Guide did and is now done by Rovi). AllMusic is simply a consumer website that licenses the Rovi music information. How can this best be resolved?

I think having an historical article on All Media Guide (formed in 1990 and then acquired by the company that became Rovi in 2007) should be one page, and then a new page for All Media Network (websites spun off from Rovi in 2013 who does absolutely no licensing of data to other companies) should be a new page. How can this be done? ZacharyCJohnson (talk) 14:00, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello ZacharyCJohnson and thank you for coming to the Teahouse to ask your question. Before you get an answer though, I need to say that this statement you made above:

"...causing all kinds of trauma for us at our business," gives me pause.

It is very important to declare your conflict of interest on your talk page and on the talk page of the article to which you refer. If you don't, your article may be tagged for deletion as being promotional. In addition, your user name may be a problem if it is your actual name and your actual name appears in the article. Then the article will definitely get tagged for deletion and you might get blocked. These are issues that need to be addressed before separating the two articles that need to be 'unmerged' because they are different companies. What you are asking can be done by making a distinction between the two companies in the titles and performing a page move to the corrected title. I have to tell you though, there is not much motivation on my part as a volunteer editor to help you get the information out on a company and into the encyclopedia. The editors who volunteer their time in creating encyclopedic content on Wikipedia don't really care about the trauma your business is going through. I suggest you re-create a 'draft' of the article in your namespace. What that means is that you recreate your article by typing in this: User:ZacharyCJohnson/sandbox/companyname into the search box located in the top right hand corner of this wikipedia page. Start adding your content on this sandbox page and leave me a message on my talk page when you're ready to go and I will help you make the corrections. Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  22:42, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Bfpage, but I don't think this is entirely good advice. ZacharyCJohnson, I agree with Bfpage that your Conflict of interest is a problem: you are discouraged, but not forbidden, from editing an article about your company. But you should (and if you are in any way remunerated by the company, you must) declare this: See WP:PAID for how to do this. An article can get deleted for being too promotional, but that does not necessarily follow from its being edited by somebody with a COI: if you follow the guidance on conflict of interest (link above) and also study Your first article, it is possible for you to create an acceptable article. I advise using the Article wizard to create your draft in Draft space, though your sandbox (as Bfpage) suggested) is also possible. I'm not sure what Bfpage means about your user name: users are free to use any name which complies with our policy WP:UNP; and if your name occurs in the article that is prima facie evidence of conflict of interest, but if you handle that openly, that need not be a problem. --ColinFine (talk) 09:23, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Excellent advice and clarification ColinFine. I always appreciate learning something new.

  Bfpage |leave a message  09:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the detailed responses. I will make sure to be very clear that I am an employee of All Media Network. This is why I wanted to take this more cautious route as opposed to making changes to anything on my own. I have created a user page and have declared my employment in the About Me section. I don't know that I would be considered a "Paid Contributor" since I am not in marketing or PR or an intern or anything like that...I'm just a guy who works for this company and there is misleading information in the article.

Ultimately the issue is that the article says that All Media Network Business Model is to provide music information to other companies:

"AllMusic is also used to provide catalog data, artist biographies, album reviews, related artist information, playlists and other information in the iTunes Music Store, Zune Marketplace, Zune player, eMusic, AOL, Yahoo!, Amazon.com and other music stores. AllMusic is also at the heart of the Naim Extended Music database used by the Naim HDX hard disk player."

This is not a factual statement. AllMusic and All Media Network do not provide this information to music companies and services. Because of this misinformation we get a lot of musicians and users coming to us asking how their albums or images or biographies can be updated on these music services and we cannot help them. All Media Network was recently named in a lawsuit for copyright infringement for a photograph of a rapper, stating that All Media Network had distributed this image. We do not distribute any musician images. Another company does that.

This is what I would like to be corrected, since it is not a factual statement and is causing confusion to users and musicians. Kindly let me know if the best path is for me to draft a revision in my sandbox for review. Thanks again. ZacharyCJohnson (talk) 14:59, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I understand your frustration, but changing the content that you believe is incorrect and creating an article about a separate company really are two different things. Do you know how to create a draft page? Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  09:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, ZacharyCJohnson. Anybody may remove information from an article which is unsourced. It seems to me that the statement you are particularly concerned about is unsupported by the source cited, and so I have removed it. I am not certain that it is not supported, though, so I have explained this on the article's talk page. Note, by the way, that if you are employed by the company, then Wikipedia regards you as a paid contributor, whatever your role in the company. --ColinFine (talk) 20:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Where can I find my original article stub when speedy deletion takes place? It's no listed in my contributions and the stub is empty or listed as a red link. Thank you. I was working on Social Justice Sexuality Project. Submitted a request for reconsideration. Thank you! sheridanford (talk) 18:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@sheridanford: You can view its deletion log entry here. If by asking where you can "find" it, you mean seeing the entry itself, its deletion means it is no longer viewable (to non-administrators) – which is especially important in the case of a copyright violation. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:34, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, sheridanford. Any article you add to Wikipedia must be original prose written in your own words. You can include an occasional quotation, clearly indicated as such, and properly referenced. Copying and pasting content from copyrighted websites simply isn't allowed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Retracting (removing) warning issued by me

Hello, if i issued a notice or warning by mistake, can i simply remove it from the talk page? Sometimes, it would result in blanking of the page, so that's OK to do that? --Stylez995 (talk) 15:58, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is ok to blank the talk page in this case. Ruslik_Zero 09:48, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes it is okay to remove it- probably best to use an edit summary like "remove mistaken warning" so they know what you're doing. Alternatively, you can strike the warning out using <s> & </s> e.g. This sentence is struck out. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:56, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I have now removed a warning issued by me to an IP by mistake. Thanks for your advice! --Stylez995 (talk) 19:45, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@Stylez995: If the page will be left blank, you could always consider leaving a welcome message, such as {{Welcome}} or {{Welcome-anon}}. Instructions on how to do that are at those links. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 03:50, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Concerned with the article of WittyFeed, and how to go about sources.

Hi, I have created my an article named WittyFeed and it has been posted for speedy deletion criteria again owing to unreliable sources named as SiliconIndia, although Wikipedia has a page of SiliconIndia magazine which covers the story of startups and young entrepreneurs. And WittyFeed is a startup which is growing. Moreover, much of our content ( funding, vision & values of company, team, content) has been deleted I want to know why? As Buzzfeed also has similar content on Wikipedia page. --Garima Singh710. Garima Singh710 (talk) 15:54, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Garima Singh710. When you talk about how "much of our content" has been deleted, that implies that you have a direct financial connection with the company. If so, please comply with the mandatory Paid editing disclosure and read our policy on Conflict of interest. As for SiliconIndia, that link is red because articles about that magazine have been deleted twice as unambiguous promotion and advertising. We have an article about Buzzfeed because that website is notable, since it has received significant coverage in many reliable, independent sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:53, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Image

There is an image in this article and I wanted to know if WP has a policy against using unnecessary impolite media files. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HamedH94 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

HamedH94: It does not. Wikipedia is not censored. Maproom (talk) 16:17, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

HamedH94: Wikipedia does, however, have a policy about copyrighted images. For example, the image on the page you mentioned claims fair use under United States copyright laws. -- Gestrid (talk) 21:53, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Valerie Smith & Liberty Pike

Hello, I am writing a Wikipedia page for Valerie Smith & Liberty Pike. It has been brought to my attention that is will be deleted due to content and relevance. Also that my page is blatant use of Wikipedia. I have not used her resources through advertising or have intended to abuse Wikipedia under any intentional reasons. Valerie is a relevant Independent artist that has many recognitions and awards. Perhaps I am not coding the references clearly. I just am so disappointed that the page may be deleted. How can I fix this problem? Nancy Cardwell Valerievalpal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valerievalpal (talk • contribs) 02:07, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

The page was nominated for speedy deletion two weeks ago, and the speedy deletion tag was removed the next day after you added references. Please check on the status of the page before asking us a two-week old question. I see no mention of anyone claiming "blatant use of Wikipedia". Do you have any specific current questions? I do have a question. Do you have an association with Valerie Pike (as your user ID would suggest). If so, you must declare your conflict of interest and, if necessary, make the paid editing disclosure. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

The page is Valerie Smith & Liberty Pike. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:56, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I do not have a direct association with Valeire Smith and Liberty Pike. I have been involved and associated with the International Bluegrass Music Museum, International Bluegrass Association, and a columnist for magazine, "Bluegrass Unlimited". I had permission from "Valerie Smith Touring" to create the article under Valerie's resources, archives and approval using the username "Valerievalpal". Will that be a problem? Sorry for the two week delay, I was unaware of the usage of talk page. Will be on top of information more efficiently in the future. Thank you for your comments, it is much appreciated. Valerievalpal (talk) 03:29, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

You don't need someone's permission to create an article about them. (It is a widespread misconception that permission from the subject is either required or desirable. On the contrary, it reduces the likelihood of neutral point of view.) Your use of a username that incorporates the subject's user name raises the issue that you will be, and will be seen as, a single-purpose account, and will limit your editing to maintaining her article. While there is no explicit rule against SPA's, they are not encouraged. By the way, this account is the only account that you may use. The use of multiple accounts, including one account to maintain each of multiple articles, is, with a few exceptions, not permitted. Editing multiple articles is not one of the exceptions. You might consider requesting a change in user name. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:33, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Valerievalpal, you may request a username change by going here and filling out the form. -- Gestrid (talk) 22:09, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Special:GlobalRenameRequest

In order to request for a new username, a user must register email with wikipedia account. When I make such request, can they see my email address? Rainbow Archer (talk) 06:57, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rainbow Archer and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, the small group of trusted people (32 stewards + 66 global renamers) who can do renaming have access to this information. For how they are chosen see m:Steward requests/Global permissions. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:39, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Rainbow Archer, if you don't want to or can't provide an email address, you can go to this page and fill out a request there. Unfortunately, there seems to be a bug with the renaming tool right now, so no renames are being done until that's worked out. You can still submit a request, but it won't be done until the bug is worked out. (I'm not sure if this affects Special:GlobalRenameRequest or not. If so, that request would be put on hold as well, I assume.) -- Gestrid (talk) 22:21, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

a question on including documentation and one on

Want to add names of two known slaves to List of Slaves page, I would like to include documentation from NARA files of the female slaves application for pension that confirm the status of her and her in the eyes of God marriage spouse. I am a novice at the computer, help please.

Next question: My mother was the first Black Special Education Supervisor in Colo. Springs, Colo. School District Number 11, she traveled with the DOD Educators to the Soviet Union in 1966,and her and her spouse were the first blacks, (1971) to reside and own a home in Village Seven in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Is any of this likely to be noteworthy for people to read in the future? or is there a page where I might add Betty and her father? I have found that much like my mother her father had little recognition as a black business owner and home owner in Savannah, Ga.in the 1920's till his death.

Thank you for your time. My apology if the query seems mundane. d.69.136.133.1 (talk) 20:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. If you look at the beginning of List of slaves, you will see that entries must be "reliably sourced". There is no way that the article can or ought to record the name of every slave, since there were millions of them. Instead, we should list those where we have reliably published biographical information in a secondary source, as opposed to a name in a primary document from the NARA archives.

As for your mother and grandfather, you say they had "little recognition". In that case, Wikipedia may not be the appropriate place to publish information about them. I suggest that journals of local historical societies in Colorado and Georgia may be better places to start. Please read Your first article for a good introduction to what is involved in writing an acceptable Wikipedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:43, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

PROD tag removing

If the author of an article removes a PROD tag on his article without discussing it at all, is that OK? Can the page be tagged again? NikolaiHo 02:18, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Nikolaiho. As it says at the shortcut WP:PROD, "PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected. It must never be used simultaneously with an AfD, and it may only be placed on an article a single time. Any editor (including the article's creator) may object to the deletion by simply removing the tag; this action permanently cancels the proposed deletion via PROD." Accordingly, if any editor still believes that the article should be deleted, it should be taken to Articles for Deletion for a complete debate among interested editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:05, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikolaiho. Just to add to the information that Cullen328 posted. WP:DEPROD also states that even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith it should not be re-added. The section further states that removals that are clearly not an objection to deletion, such as page blanking or obvious vandalism, and tags removed by banned users can be reverted, but I believe that in such cases the burden falls upon the editor wishing to re-add the tag to explain their reasons for doing so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

New user may benefit from mentoring

Hi y'all,

I came across a new user, Hermes7979 (first edit ~ 2016-06-12), who may benefit from some skilled attention. I personally have not been particularly active on Wikipedia lately and am disinclined to explore such further. However I thought someone here might be inclined to take interest. Their pattern of edits seems a bit 'out of the ordinary' to me—at least for a new user; they've jumped-right-in to modifying and creating categories, largely related to war, military, and violence. To-each-there-own, but after glancing through a bit of their edit history—and the history of how those edits sometimes have been received—their way of going about it seems at times perhaps naively overzealous, out of context, or some such. Also, when they have made textual contributions they may be awkward and/or ungrammatical in their use of English—an example of their work.

I've presented of course my own observations and opinions; I encourage someone with a greater interest in mentoring to take a bit of time to go through a sampling of Hermes7979's edits and related page histories so as to form their own opinions and observations and perhaps then offer guidance.

--Kevjonesin (talk) 12:18, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Kevjonesin. The Wikipedia community encourages us all to be bold and go forth and edit, which means that we are all going to make mistakes every now and then. Pretty much all Wikipedia articles are imperfect, so part of editing is finding the mistakes and helping to correct them. At the same time, the community also expects editors to be here to help build Wikipedia and have the competence to do so. All of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, etc. can be really confusing to new editors, so they often make mistakes in good faith simply because they do not know better. If you feel this other editor could benefit from some guidance, then you can let them know about Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area, but I think whether they want to be mentored is completely up to them. All you can really do is try to encourage them and point out why certain edits they are making might be problematic. If you've already tried this and they just have continued on as before, then you can try templates in varying degrees. If they still continue on despite being warned/notified about a problem, then you might have to bring things up at the relevant noticeboard to get other members of the community involved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Citations

I need help adding a citation to the wiki page tsewang Gyaltson if not this page will be deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hockeyfollower (talk • contribs) 12:08, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I think that before adding references you need to find them first. Have you found any? Ruslik_Zero 16:49, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Hockeyfollower. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners, which describes how to add citations to articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:58, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Dialects and units

If an article uses American English, should it also use Imperial units (and put metrics in parentheses)?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  21:26, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Dunkleosteus77. There is no general rule. Many articles written in American English are not about American topics per se, but rather that is the variety of English used when the article was begun. In those cases, I believe that metric units of measurement should be used, since they are most widely used worldwide. If the topic itself is clearly American, such as biographies of Americans and articles about American highways, geography or sports, then use United States customary units first. On the other hand, articles about medicine, chemistry, physics, space exploration and the like should use metric units of measurement. Please see the shortcuts WP:ENGVAR and WP:MEASUREMENTS for more information. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:22, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Imperial units should not be used in an article about an American topic. Imperial units are a specific form of English customary units that were formerly much used, and are still sometimes used, in the United Kingdom, but never in the United States. (They were adopted at the beginning of the Second British Empire, and the American colonies were part of the First British Empire.) The United States, as noted, used United States customary units, which are not Imperial. That is a minor point. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

New article without publishing

Hello I want to create a new page without publishing it first. I want to edit it some times before publishing it. Please help.WegenerCenter (talk) 13:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean by creating an article without publishing it first? What do you mean by publishing it? Robert McClenon (talk) 13:21, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

This is your only edit to Wikipedia. If you have general questions about using Wikipedia, read the welcome message that I am about to post, and ask us any questions. If you want practice in using Wikipedia, play WP:The Wikipedia Adventure. What is your question? Robert McClenon (talk) 13:23, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, WegenerCenter, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds like you want to create a draft. You can do that via Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

As well as that, you can create a sandbox page in your user profile for editing. I'd recommend creating a draft for your first few new pages though to allow experienced editors to have a look over it. KieranTribe 14:05, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

You can create an article as a draft via Wikipedia:Articles for creation (AfC). It will be "published" in the sense that it will be publicly viewable as soon as you save the page, but doing it that way does give you a measure of leeway to edit before it goes truly live in the article mainspace and is considered on the merits for, e.g., deletion, as not meeting our requirements for encyclopedia articles. You should determine first whether the topic meets notability standards, before using your time to work on an article topic that might not be appropriate. I also suggest reading Wikipedia:Your first article and then taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial before starting. Keep in mind that you must not copy and paste any copyrighted material into a page, even as a draft. If you do create a page through AfC, there will be a button on the page to submit it for review once you are ready to "go live". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:13, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Elizabeth Anderson

I reviewed Draft:Elizabeth Anderson and declined it as having inadequate sources User:Electrocdwiki then posted:

Hello. To better establish notoriety I have added a couple of sentences in the "bio" with a few external references. The list of works has also been improved. Whuld this updated version now be publishable? Thanks for your time, Jean-François Denis

Well, first, notoriety isn’t the same as Wikipedia notability. Two of the references are trying to publicize electro-acoustic techniques and are lists of performers. Are they independent and reliable. Two of them are by Anderson. Are there multiple independent reliable sources?

Do other experienced editors have comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 13:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Jean-François. Please understand that Wikipedia has almost no interest in what the subject of an article, or their friends, relatives, or associates, say about them: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about them, in reliable places. So an article on Elizabeth Anderson should be based almost 100% on what people who have no connection with her have published about her. It's not clear to me whether the electrodoc.music-recherches biography is independent of her: as it doesn't have an author named, I suspect that it is substantially written by her. The same is true of electrodc reference, but in addition, that is your site, and you are her distributor, so even if it were written by somebody else it would not be accepted as independent. There's nothing wrong with citing such materials for uncontroversial factual information, but they do not contribute to the notability that Wikipedia requires, which depends on independent sources. You need to find independent reviews or articles (which talk about her, not just about her works). In addition, since you are the founder and director of her record label, you have a Conflict of interest in contributing to an article about her, which you should declare explicitly. --ColinFine (talk) 14:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

My First Article on David Iornem

Hello, I have been editing and re-submitting my article named "David Iornem". I have been effecting all the suggested corrections. However, I need your help on getting the article approved. Kind regards, Isaac.IsaacAdom (talk) 11:47, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, IsaacAdom. If the draft is the one at Draft:David Iornem, then you don't seem to have edited it since it was declined, so I am confused by your comment here. Your draft needs better referencing. References aren't intended to serve as links to the homepages of organisations mentioned in articles, but raather to provide details of sources that support material in the article. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:10, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

The content is very informal and breezy and has peacock language such as: "David is seen to have a wide network of friends and business associates cutting across international boundaries, cultures and age groups whom he invites around the world to participate in training workshops and seminars through his open-university system" in the voice of Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:12, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

I have deleted the page as a blatant copyright violation. IsaacAdom, you cannot copy and paste previously written copyrighted content as the text of an article (even with surface modification). But for short, cited quotes, marked as such in quotation marks, articles are written in our own words, cited to reliable sources to verify the information but not the sentences.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Question About Dates of Publication of New Articles (including Draft: John L Furth)

User:Aroger0821 wrote, concerning Draft: John L Furth ,to my talk page: I relieze that you have high standards for Wikipedia and I am trying really hard to add the footnotes but i have no idea how and i have gone to every resource you sent me and youtube as well. This article is a tribute to my grandfather John Furth who helped me pay for schooling so i could improve on some personal things. I would really appreciate it if you could post it so that at the Forth Of July celebration I can surprise him. I am totaly fine if you edit it on your own but I have no idea how to do it on my own. Thank you so much for reviewing my past two submissions. Alexander R

I would like to know if other experienced editors will comment on the idea that some new editors have of scheduling the publication of a Wikipedia article on a particular day as a tribute to the subject. I have never heard of that being done ,although I have often seen requests for it, and am aware that In Wikipedia, there is no deadline. (The idea of timed tributes both would seem to imply more organization that we have, and would might create too much competition for dates.) In this case, the references still are general references only and not in line. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:27, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry Aroger0821. I'm sure you meant the best by wanting to create a tribute to your grandfather, but that's not what we do here: our purpose here is to create an encyclopaedia, and all other purposes are subservient to that. If you had started early enough, and had enough experience, to create an article that was well enough referenced and neutrally written to be acceptable on its own terms, and had done it by July 4th, well and good. But writing a good Wikipedia article is difficult, and the fact that you have a conflict of interest makes it harder still. We cannot let our policies and standards slip for reasons unconnected with the encyclopaedia. And "date of publication" is not really a concept that means anything in Wikipedia: no article is ever finished. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 15:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

upload a image

Dear Sir, i want to know about uploading images on wikipedia.. pls guide.i want to upload images from my PC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudip8822 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sudip8822, welcome to The Teahouse. You can upload images from File Upload Wizard, but first please read WP:Copyright and WP:image use policy. — TOG 16:46, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Fabacus

I reviewed Draft:Fabacus and declined it on corporate notability grounds. User:Sushi Rider then posted to my talk page:

thank you for swiftly reviewing my recent draft submission. Though the company is trying to create innovative software solutions - they are a young company and therefore have not received many citations to indicate their notability. How would you, please, recommend to improve the article? Sushi rider (talk) 15:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

First, don’t write about innovative solutions. See the solutions essay, which points out that mention of solutions is usually marketing gibberish. Second, young companies that have not been reviewed may not be notable. Third, do you have an association with the company? Fourth, what do other editors say? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Question about "Film IMDb refimprove" template

I found the Template:Film IMDb refimprove page that explains use of the template and shows four examples. I am puzzled, however, because the first and third templates produced identical results when I tried them in my sandbox. Since the third template has the additional "only=yes" parameter, shouldn't that add something to the resulting display, showing that IMDB is the only source? Eddie Blick (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

@Teblick: It adds a hidden category like Category:Articles sourced only by IMDb from June 2016 when it's used in articles. It uses namespace detection and doesn't do it in userspace. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

That's good to know. Thanks! Eddie Blick (talk) 20:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Remote Ischemic Conditioning

I reviewed Draft:Remote Ischemic Conditioning and declined it on context grounds that I didn’t understand what the importance of remote ischemic conditions was. User:Moose139 then posted to my talk page:

Hello Robert, you kindly reviewed my draft article Remote Ischemic Conditioning and made a good suggestion with which I agreed. I edited and reposted but you have not responded. I don't know if your intent was for me to post it to the Teahouse? I am very new to this so please help me navigate the process. I don't even know if this the proper spot to respond to you.

First, my talk page is an appropriate place to ask questions, but the Teahouse is even better for general questions because it has other editors also. Second, I should have also said that a lede sentence was needed. Without one, I still don’t entirely understand the purpose of remote ischemic conditioning. Third, are there any other comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

I have added an opening sentence to the draft, which explains the purpose of the technique. I have also reduced the excessive capitalisation. Maproom (talk) 21:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Pinging User:Moose139. Maproom (talk) 21:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

New Article

Hello, I just created my first article and I'm waiting for it to be revised by "someone else other than its creator". How long does that process usually take? Thank you!Atimothy89 (talk) 16:36, 4 July 2016 (UTC) AT

Hi Atimothy89. I'm not sure what you mean by revised. Maybe patrolled? Or if it's a draft, reviewed? In either case, it should be done within a couple of weeks at the latest. Articles don't have to be edited or revised by people other than the creator, though. If an article is complete and correct, it may not need additional editing for a while.

Later: I took a look at the article and it needs more sources, as well as some editing to remove external links in the text. However, it's a good start. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 18:57, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

The article had a template at the top saying that it was a new unreviewed article, needing review by someone other than its creator. Drikulaeri removed that template, so presumably they reviewed its content. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:26, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphan Question

User:Bronka2016 posted the following to my talk page:

Hello, "This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. " Being an 'orphan' article does this imply that there are no other links or connections to any other articles relating to Z.A. Wnek? If that is the assertion please refer to http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygmunt_Aleksander_Wnęk which is the result of untold man-hours in research and effort to achieve its current status. Mr. McClenon, if indeed the assertion that Zygmunt Aleksander Wnęk is still an 'orphan' article please advise how best to introduce the link/connections you cite. As stated previously, I am a complete novice and am finding it difficult in negotiating the 'Find Link tool' which is not that helpful. Thanks for your time! (Bronka2016 (talk)

This had to do with Zygmunt Aleksander Wnęk. My first question is whether the orphan tag, which is a tedious mechanical determination, is added and removed by a bot. The second question is whether someone can give advice to Bronka2016 as to what, if anything, to do about the tag. My advice is not to worry much about the tag, which will never result in deletion (certainly since the subject is ipso facto notable), but that the place where links would be appropriate would be articles in Polish participation in the Second World War, especially in France. Comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 13:49, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: My understanding is that Template:Orphan can be added by both a bot or an editor. They can, however, be removed by any editor who de-orphans an article as explained in WP:DE-ORPHAN. Based upon Special:WhatLinksHere/Zygmunt Aleksander Wnęk, however, it looks as if this article is still an orphan so that tag should not be removed. There are various ways to de-prphan an article as explained in WP:O#Various ways to de-orphan. Since the article says that Wnęk was born in Kolomyia, one possible way to de-orphan the article might be to add his name to Kolomyia#Notable people. Another possibility might be to add is name to Polish Legions in World War I#Notable officers who served in the Polish Legions. I say possible because each of the two article may have an agreed upon common selection criteria for adding names to the embedded lists, so you should check the article talk page first to see if any such discussion has taken place. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:16, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Refill and reflinks

Which is better and how to use them?

John Jaffar Janardan (talk) 05:33, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

inserting image in infobox

I am drafting an article on the artist Ed Herring. The article is under his name. I have used the infobox template for artists and all has gone well except for the photo portrait of the artist concerned, which does not appear in the infobox even though it has been uploaded (as a thumb). The instructions are clear about not using brackets and I thought I had followed this. Does anyone know what I have to do to make the jpg file appear in the infobox? GosheronGaucheron (talk) 08:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

 Done please see this diff for what I did
Basically, I removed all the brackets and used the correct file name - you were trying to insert File:Ed Herring portrait impr.jpg instad of File:Ed Herring portrait.jpg - file names have to be exact - they are case, space and punctuation sensitive - Arjayay (talk) 08:23, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so very much. I suspected it was some omission on my part.GosheronGaucheron (talk) 07:34, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

How do I get the following draft Wikipedia page published?

How do I get the following draft Wikipedia page published?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vessels_%28Be'lakor_album%29

Ghostpatrol86 (talk) 07:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. When you are ready to submit the draft for review, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. Note that when you want to refer to a Wikipedia page, a wikilink like Draft:Vessels (Be'lakor album) is more readable than a url like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vessels_%28Be'lakor_album%29 . --David Biddulph (talk) 09:24, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Portuguese entry in English Wiki

Hello,

I've submitted an article in portuguese into english Wiki, by mistake. I want to know how can I move this to Portuguese Wiki or how can I have both languages?

Ajoaomartins (talk) 09:16, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello Ajoaomartins and welcome to the Teahouse. I have translated your article (Marisa Ferreira) into English. If you want to create an article on the Portuguese Wikipedia, you need to do that directly there. We can't move articles between one Wikipedia and the other. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 12:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Ajoaomartins, this is one case where copy-and-paste might be appropriate. If you go to Marisa Ferreira, and pick "History", you can find your Portuguese version in the history, "Edit" it, and copy all the source, with its WikiMarkup, to your clipboard. Then you can go to pt:Marisa Ferreira and paste it there. Note that if you do so, you must attribute it (see WP:Copying within Wikipedia): even though you wrote it, you automatically licensed it to Wikipedia under CC-BY-SA when you Saved your edit in the English Wikipedia, so under the terms of that licence you must attribute any copy of it. --ColinFine (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)