Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 512

Archive 505

←

Archive 510

Archive 511

Archive 512

Archive 513

Archive 514

Archive 515

My first Article about a person

My draft article already had 2 declinations, seemsy due to not enough reliable references.

I really do not know which references will have more weight that will lead to inclusions, Can I reference a Wikipedia articles mentioning the subject's name?

Thanks.

See draft:Janine_Berdin Jose berdin (talk) 01:33, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jose berdin. No, you cannot use one Wikipedia article as a reference in another Wikipedia article. Although we strive for accuracy, this is a website freely edited by anyone, so vandalism and inaccuracies make their way into various articles. Reliable sources have professional editorial control, and Wikipedia doesn't. The type of sources that demonstrate notability for an actor are articles in major regional or national newspapers and magazines with good reputations for accuracy, and the articles should devote significant coverage to this person. Brief, passing mentions are insufficient to establish notability. How much coverage is "sufficient" is a matter of editorial judgement, but I think that most experienced editors would agree that we are looking for several paragraphs of biographical coverage in each of several reliable sources. I suggest that you read and study Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:10, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jose berdin In addition to what Cullen328 posted above, I also you suggest that you take a look at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Since your last name is the same as the person you are writing about, it appears that you might have a conflict of interest (COI) with respect to Janine Berdin. Although Wikipedia doesn't expressly prohibit COI editing, it is something that is highly discourage because it can be hard to write about someone or something in a neutral manner when you have a close connection to the subject. If you are able to show that Janine Berdin has received the significant coverage referred to above by Cullen328, then it might be better to request the article be written by someone other than yourself. Just a suggestion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:22, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I will try to follow your suggestions. By the way, should I wait for the article to be published so that others can contribute about the subject? Because as of now only what I know can be written on the draft.

Jose berdin (talk) 01:33, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi again Jose berdin. Like articles, anyone can edit AfC drafts, but most experienced editors will refrain from doing so out of deference to the draft's creator unless there is a serious policy related matter (e.g., copyright violation or biographies of living person violation) which require immediate attention or they are specifically asked to do so. AfC reviewers will post comments and suggestions on things they feel need to be done in order to bring the draft up to Wikipedia standards, but they too will not really directly edit the draft. Occasionally another editors may help clean up the formatting/syntax of lists, tables, references or headings, etc., but you're pretty much on your own when it comes to adding the content and finding the sources needed to establish notability. Once a draft becomes an article, however, it's there for anyone to edit anytime they want regardless of who created the article; it's even there for anyone to nominate for deletion if they feel it's not up to Wikipedia's standards. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:17, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Marchjuly, I really appreciate your help on this, As for the subject, COI could be my main issue, because of the my surname. but I tried to be transparent so editors will know that I am not hiding anything. In your opinion, this draft still have a chance to become a Wiki article?

Jose berdin (talk) 01:33, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

If your only connection to Janice Berdin is that you both just by chance share the same surname, then you don't really have a COI. Apparent COIs can still be problematic, so you may just have to explain that the same surname is just coincidental when another editor asks you about it. Anyway, even having a COI with the subject of your draft does not mean you cannot continue to work on it; it just means that you might have to make some extra effort to try and keep your draft as neutrally worded as possible. The AfC reviewers will offer suggestions on ways to improve the wording and point out things that are too promotional/bias sounding. The main hurdle you need to clear is establishing that Berdin has received the significant coverage needed in multiple independent reliable sources required for Wikipedia notability. Promotional sounding content, etc. can be revised/removed through editing, but all the editing/formatting in the world is not going to make someone Wikipedia notable per WP:CONTN. I suggest you take a look at WP:NACTOR, WP:MUSICBIO and WP:PEOPLE to see what kind of things are used going to be used to assess Berdin's Wikipedia notability.

I am not an AfC reviewer and this is only my personal opinion, but out of the 10 sources you cited in the draft only source no. 1 seems to specifically discuss Berdin at all, but that is only a very brief mention so it's likely not sufficient to show notability. Source no. 2 appears to be user-generated or possibly even a mirror so wouldn't even be considered a reliable source for any purpose. Same goes for sources nos. 4, 6 and 7. Sources nos. 3, 5, 8 and 9 basically just mention Berdin by name and therefore are too trivial for establishing notability. Finally, source no. 10 just appears to be the same as source no. 1, just posted on a different website. So, in my opinion, the sources you've cited do not establish Wikipedia notability and much better ones are needed if you want the article to be accepted by the AfC reviewers. It possible that it's just simply too soon for a Wikipedia article to be written about her right now, but as her career progress she will receive better and more significant coverage that will easily establish her Wikipedia notability for a possible future article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Moving Draft to Live, How?

Hi,

I'm new to Wikipedia article creation. Couple of weeks back, I created an article titled 'Dr.Repalle Shiva Praveen Kumar' which was immediately coming under 'Speedy Article Deletion'. Then I again created as Draft:Repalle Shiva Praveen Kumar before moving LIVE. But, I'm totally stuck, how to find the issues in my article content and move it to live. Please help....please help...Catalogcits (talk) 05:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Catalogcits, in order to get your draft moved to the main article space, you have to submit it for review and wait for a reviewer to come along and either approve it or deny it and give you suggestions on how to fix it. -- MorbidEntree - _{(Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)}(please reply using {{ping}}) 05:35, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

@MorbidEntree: The draft was submitted for review some days ago. It received a number of comments for a reviewer, but Catalogcits has not yet addressed those comments. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:52, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

how to unhide languages

I noticed today that all of a sudden, the behaviour of the language selection pane has changed.

When I open a page in English, everything is as usual – I get to choose any language in which that particular article exists.

When I open the Russian version of the article, though, the language selection is decreased to a handful of languages which someone or something has chosen to hold for important. In order to get the full choice of languages, I have to click on "ещё 32" ("32 more"), and even then I don't simply get the list, but a little box opens where the languages are grouped by geography or something.

It is rather inconvenient to have to switch to English every time in order to see the page in another language.

How to make the language selection behave the way it used to, that is to always display all the available languages in the left pane?

88.196.43.87 (talk) 10:44, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

It's a feature called Compact language links. Different wikis sometimes make different choices. Registered users have a lot of customization options. This can be changed with a setting at the bottom of ru:Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. It's free and easy to create an account and has many benefits. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:04, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Draft: China Rapid Finance

I reviewed User:Chitecfan16/sandbox and declined it as reading like an advertisement. I then received the following message from User:Chitecfan16:

Hello. I'm writing because I don't understand why my entry on China Rapid Finance was rejected. The only feedback received was "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources"

In fact, my brief article was neutral in tone and included 13 citations of "independent, reliable, published sources" including the South China Morning Post, Bloomberg, Financial Times, TechCrunch, Crowdfund Insider and other relevant sources.

Given that just about every fact in the entry is attributed to independent sources, what else do I need to do to have the entry accepted for publication?

Thank you.

I would like the opinion of other experienced editors as to tone. I declined it for tone reasons, not for notability reasons. It appears to me that it is written to promote the subject company, but I welcome the opinion of other editors.

Also, does the author have an affiliation with the subject company? If so, it must be declared as conflict of interest.

Thank you for any comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:38, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

What I don't understand is what is wrong with the tone? What specific language is seen as promotional? If there is specific language that needs to be revised, I can edit it but to reject the entire thing out of hand with no meaningful feedback leaves a contributor wondering what they are supposed to do. I've been following the China Technology industry for 6 years and wanted to start sharing the benefit of some of my knowledge with the community. The post to me reads as informational rather than promotional but if there is specific language requiring adjustment, I'd be happy to hear about it. Chitecfan16 (talk) 02:51, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Chitecfan16. Your draft article is packed full of highly promotional language like, "Beginning in 2010, CRF applied its knowledge of China’s credit market to create an advanced marketplace lending platform, using the company’s predictive selection, credit scoring and automated decisioning technologies." That is advertising and marketing language, and what we call highly promotional puffery. It belongs in a company brochure or on a company website, rather than in a neutral encyclopedia article. If you want meaningful feedback, let me offer some: Do not try to use Wikipedia to promote your preferred business ventures. Please read about Conflict of interest and comply if it applies to you. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:37, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Tone issues aside, the article should also probably have an infobox, and it should definitely have its format fixed to look more like the other articles we have on Wikipedia. -- Gestrid (talk) 06:28, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Do you have an affiliation with the subject company? (When an author says, "If there is specific language that needs to be revised, I can edit it", sometimes they just want advice, but often they really want to put an advertisement in for their employer.) Robert McClenon (talk) 12:46, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Infoboxes are optional. However, when you have put in a summary of facts about the company in something that looks sort of but not quite like an infobox, it should be an infobox. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:48, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Do I need to have an account to edit? What are the implications? How do I register?

Do I have to register an account with wikipedia to edit? What are the implications of registering an account? How do I do this? 90.206.106.34 (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

If you register an account, your contribution to article will be thanks from the page creator. Moreover, you can edit semi protection page and it will be accepted automatic (at least 200 edit/ 500 edit) instead of waiting to be accepted. You may ask other too if you need some help.

Kingsho (talk) 14:15, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, 90.206.106.34, and welcome to the Teahouse! I've left a message on your talk page that includes some of the many benefits of registering an account. It also includes a link to a page listing other benefits. Registering an account requires no personal information, not even an email address (though you can add one later on for additional benefits). -- Gestrid (talk) 14:39, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

how to avoid the speedy deletion

i just post the article named "Airwheel intelligent electric scooter“. thanks Airwheel2016 (talk) 10:03, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Airwheel2016, to avoid speedy deletion, write an article in neutral language, provide reliable sources (not blogs), and your article "Airwheel intelligent electric scooter“ was deleted because it only promotes company, or something else (not encyclopediaic).—M++ ^C++ 12:55, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I can no longer read Airwheel intelligent electric scooter because it has been deleted, Airwheel2016. Has the subject been written about in reliable, independent sources? That is a prerequisite for us having an article about a topic. If it has, Wikipedia:Writing better articles has some tips on how to write articles, and you should also consult Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Creating the article via Wikipedia:Articles for creation will allow you to receive feedback on drafts and avoid speedy deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:18, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

How to remove promotional tone from article

Hey guys, new to the Wiki community. I've written a stub about a men's lifestyle company called bespoke post, the link to which can be found below. Was just wondering if any of you could help me with fixing the problems and removing the template tags so it looks like an actual Wikipedia stub that I can later expand on. Thanks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bespoke_Post

JustinRagolia (talk) 16:10, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't look overly promotional to me, at least not at first glance. I'm going to ping @Me, Myself, and I are Here: to this thread since they added the tag, and see if they can give any more specifics. TimothyJosephWood 16:14, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I think that a bigger issue with the article as it stands is that it does not sufficiently demonstrate the subject's notability. JustinRagolia, I would suggest expanding the article based on what has been written about the company in reliable, independent sources - these need to demonstrate that the company has been the subject of significant independent coverage. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! If you think I should remove those template tags, I'm not familiar with that process. Would you mind giving me a tip for going about getting those removed? Seriously, thanks so much for your help.

JustinRagolia (talk) 16:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the advert tag, because I'm not sure it really fits right now. But I agree with Cordless Larry, the other tags are currently appropriate, and the article will need more sources to justify removing them. TimothyJosephWood 16:23, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Disregard that last post I made in the forum. I am in the wrong box. Cllgbksr (talk) 20:50, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Refilled page got added to my watchlist

I used refill on a page. The page was added to my watchlist. I removed it from my watchlist. I don't want that all pages for which I use Refill to fix bare URLs, to be added to my watchlist. Rainbow Archer (talk) 07:21, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Rainbow Archer! I think that if you toggle the Do not watch the page when using Wiki as the source option (under Toggle advanced input) then the pages you edit with the tool should stay out of your watchlist. -- MorbidEntree - _{(Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)}(please reply using {{ping}}) 07:59, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

It's a bit alarming that we have a high use tool that in its settings reinforces the painful misuse of "Wiki" as short for Wikipedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:37, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

IP block exemption

How do you get IP block exemption? Just wondering because I would like to have it. --ThunderFan109 ^{(Thunder Up!)} 17:05, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

@ThunderFan109: Wikipedia:IP block exemption states (emphasis mine) "Editors in good standing whose editing is disrupted by unrelated blocks or firewalls may request IP address block exemption [...] The right is given exceptionally and only for good reasons, and may be removed if concerns arise or when it is no longer needed." IP block exemption is not really something you should "like to have"—it is a last resort if you can't edit without it. Only 108 users currently have IPBE from specifically requesting it, and with so few edits I would imagine it is quite unlikely you will be granted it even if you have a valid reason for wanting it, I'm afraid. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:44, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good I won't request rollback or auto payroll until I hit the 500 edit count. --ThunderFan109 ^{(Thunder Up!)} 21:39, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

citation needed tag

Hi,

I have seen some articles in which in some places, after a word, where the reference number is supposed to be, it says [citation needed]. I have found some articles which need that tag, but I don't know how to put it in.

Commander2006 (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
I've modified the post above so it doesn't appear in a code box. -- Gestrid (talk) 22:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Commander2006, and welcome to Wikipedia! The template you're looking for is {{Citation needed}}. It can be used just by typing {{cn}} next to whatever needs a citation (or, reference, as you call it). You can see examples of it and how to use it here. -- Gestrid (talk) 22:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

articles for creation?

Hi I don't have much time here so I will make this brief, where can I submit a article for creation? thank you very much for your time. Zortex7161 (talk) 17:03, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for creation. The Transhumanist 17:49, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm assuming you're talking about Danrell, which was speedily deleted because there was no indication of importance. If so, you may be able to request an undeletion by requesting it be moved to draftspace so you can work on it a bit more and have it reviewed by an experienced Articles for Creation editor. -- Gestrid (talk) 22:43, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Just got a response from Wikipedia on article I submitted

This was the response. "Needs to be formatted and references moved inline"

Can someone assist me in making those changes? Cllgbksr (talk) 20:36, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Cllgbksr. Your question has already received a reply at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#20:25:16, 4 August 2016 review of submission by Cllgbksr. See also Help:Referencing for beginners. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:42, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Honestly Cordless Larry I'm not computer savvy and this is like writing code for me. Cllgbksr (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok Cordless Larry, I fixed the headers using the ==Header==. Now I have to get the references inline. Fingers crossed I can figure this out. Appreciate your help.Cllgbksr (talk) 21:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Mduvekot, Wiki had no problem with the content of the article or the sources. Only the formatting and needing inline.Cllgbksr (talk) 21:29, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Pinging Mduvekot, who is unlikely to have seen this. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:30, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Cllgbksr, reviewers at WP:AfC sometimes point out the most obvious problems first. The quality of the references is difficult to assess if it is not clear which statements or claims they support. In this particular case, if felt that it might help you to know that social media, blogs and self-published material are generally not considered reliable sources, so I didn't think that it was necessary to see the citations in context. Mduvekot (talk) 21:53, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, is this the only method I can chat with you? I have some questions if you have a couple minutes. Thanks.Cllgbksr (talk) 21:54, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

You could post on my talk page, Cllgbksr, but you are likely to get a faster response here, as I am not editing much at present. It might also be that others here are better placed to answer your questions. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Mduvekot for your expanded reply. Example, the draft of this article contains material that Dupree has appeared as a guest on MSNBC and CNN. I would consider those two news organizations as reliable sources if the internet link to those segments he appeared are provided as reference linked to the footnote. Would you not agree?Cllgbksr (talk) 22:14, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Cllgbksr, if your claim is that he appeared as a political commentator on CNN and you can provide a link to an online video that shows him on CNN, commenting on politics, then that would suffice to verify the claim IMO, and I don't think you then need a reliable source, saying Dupree appeared on CNN. We can all see that for ourselves. We tend to highly value verifiability here. Mduvekot (talk) 22:53, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Mduvekot for your last reply 22:53, 4 August 2016 (UTC). I concur. Appreciate the help.Cllgbksr (talk) 23:04, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

picture

i want to add a photo to a wikipedia account and change a picture for another wikipedia account is it ok if i get the pictures from google imageJustheretohelpu2 (talk) 05:35, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Justheretohelpu2. I presume that when you refer to a "Wikipedia account", you mean an article rather than a user account? In any case, you shouldn't just upload an image found using Google without being sure that its copyright status allows for that. Please see Wikipedia:Image use policy on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:56, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Justheretohelpu2. The vast majority of images that you find through Google Images are restricted by copyright and cannot be used on Wikipedia. On the other hand, Wikimedia Commons has over 32,000,000 freely licensed image files that can be used for any purpose, including in Wikipedia articles. Another option is to take photos yourself, and upload them to Wikimedia Commons under a free license. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Notable People Rules

I would like to be able to edit Wikipedia occasionally, but I usually am just unaware of the specific rules. I was wondering if someone could point me to the Wikipedia guidelines for Notable People. Specifically, I want to know what qualifies as being "from" somewhere. For example, I looked up a comedian who was born in one city, and raised in another. He is listed as a notable person in both cities. What about someone who has moved all over the country? Thanks, --Littledj95 (talk) 04:24, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

You can find most information about the notability of people at WP:PEOPLE. However, I'm not sure if there is any single way that is defined to determine where to say a person is "from." -- MorbidEntree - _{(Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)}(please reply using {{ping}}) 04:58, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Littledj95. Determining where a person is "from" requires reliable sources but also editorial judgement. Obviously, a person's birthplace is a significant biographical fact. If a notable person has lived for several years in a certain city or town, and multiple reliable sources indicate that they have been involved in the cultural or civic affairs of that community, then consensus may be to include that in the article. But if the person just rented an apartment in the town for five months and established no roots in that town, and moved away as soon as possible, then it would be unencyclopedic to describe them as "from" that town. When in doubt, start by discussing the matter on the article's talk page, with the goal of seeking consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:30, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response Cullen328. I suppose I should be more specific. I was really just curious in regards to putting people in lists "from" a city. Jim Gaffigan was born in Elgin, Illinois, grew up in Chesterton, Indiana, but currently lives in Manhattan, New York City. Would this warrant inclusion in three different "Notable people from" lists? Littledj95 (talk) 05:41, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

The first step is to read the sources, Littledj95. The source that claims he grew up in Chesterton, Indiana is his New York Times wedding announcement when he was 37 years old, that says his parents lived there. Maybe he grew up there, or maybe his parents moved there after he was an adult living on his own. I have no idea one way or another. So, that source does not support the claim that Gaffigan grew up there. Either find a source that is more "on point" or remove that claim. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:52, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Cullen328, I seem to have found a discrepancy on the town where Gaffigan was born. His article states Elign (as does the source), but an interview directly with him lists Gaffigan stating he was born in Barrington, IL. I also noticed him mention he grew up in Munster, Indiana. I don't know if that should be considered as a place where is from because it is the first time I have found out this information, and I know he moved to NYC when he was 19 and hasn't left since. 1 I have heard all of Jim's jokes, and watched every episode of his tv show. He is constantly mentioning how he grew up in "northwest indiana" so I just wanted to make sure my favorite online encyclopedia had updated information. Littledj95 (talk) 16:27, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Littledj95, since you have read extensively about Gaffigan, then you are well prepared to improve his article. Be bold and do so. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:41, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

WP:TWINKLE

It is enabled in my preferences, but why won't it load? Kailash29792 (talk) 07:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kailash29792. I have taken the liberty of moving your question to the top of the page, as the Teahouse questions page is a rare case where new posts are supposed to go at the top. The Teahouse is a place for new editors to ask questions. Since you have been editing since 2011 and seem to be quite experienced, you might want to make use of Wikipedia:Help desk in future. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:49, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Kailash29792. You can try doing a "hard reload" with your browser. You can usually do this by pressing ctrl+shift+r (or command instead of ctrl in the case of Macs). You can also try clearing your browser's cache if that doesn't work. -- MorbidEntree - _{(Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)}(please reply using {{ping}}) 07:53, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks guys, but strangely enough, Twinkle works in my other PC (I've yet to find out why it didn't work in my primary one). Kailash29792 (talk) 09:17, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Weird, do both computers have the same operating systems and browsers? -- MorbidEntree - _{(Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)}(please reply using {{ping}}) 09:22, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

I use Firefox on both (while my primary PC is Windows 10, the other is XP) As you said, I think I should have done Ctrl+Shift+R. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

WP:File Mover

Is there a specific place where I can request file moves (not the right itself?) Thanks! → The Pancakeof Heaven! 10:48, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi The Pancake of Heaven!. The second paragraph of Wikipedia:File mover#How it works says: "If you're not a file mover, you can place {{rename media}} on the image description page, which will put the page into Category:Wikipedia files requiring renaming." If it's at Commons then see Wikipedia:File mover#Commons files. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! → The Pancakeof Heaven! 11:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

page deletion

I submitted an article on 3 August 2016 and I cannot find it. Was it deleted and, if so, why? The article was named The Donkey Sanctuary of Canada. It is about an animal rescue charity in Canada. Thank you. SandraSandra pady (talk) 14:08, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The redlink The Donkey Sanctuary of Canada will show you the reason for deletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:22, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I was sorry to hear of Sandra's poor experience. I have made a fresh start on the topic. She may be able to get further assistance from members of WikiProject Equine such as Montanabw. Andrew D. (talk) 17:47, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Reading Andrew's stub article has made me aware of a likely conflict of interest. Please do follow the instructions at WP:DISCLOSE if you want to contribute to the article, Sandra pady. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:02, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

How can I find out what a reliable source is?

Hello! I've been writing a draft for the following entry draft: Thomas Youngblood. Today it got declined because of not enough reliable sources. My page is about a musician in the Heavy Metal Genre. Is there a way to find out which sources are reliable enough? Or shall I just use sources that got their own wiki pages? Also it was said that interviews, press releases, social media (including YouTube videos) are not allowed as reliable sources. I had been under the impression that interviews directly with the source would be reliable, since it came directly from the person the article is about? I checked lots of pages from important musicians (Nikki Sixx, Alice Cooper for example) and found interviews as sources, even youtube clips. I must admit it's quite difficult to decide what's allowed and what not. Any help would highly be appreciated. Xandra73 (talk) 18:43, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

WP:RS is the relevant guideline for sourcing on Wikipedia. Youtube videos are allowed as sources in some circumstances, but if you want an article created you usually have to satisfy criteria at WP:GNG, which means you need to find secondary sources that are independent or unconnected with the subject of the article, something like articles in news sources usually work just fine. TimothyJosephWood 18:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the information! It's clear about youtube now and I will not use it. I'm still not sure about the interviews. Lots of information about the artist are printed as interviews on the web on news pages. So are they technicallly news that I can use? I must admit I can't see the difference between a journalist writing an article or doing an interview with the subject. Aren't both reliable in the same way? Xandra73 (talk) 20:55, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Xandra73, they're reliable in different ways. Interviews are useful for information on what someone said but not necessarily information on what they've done or accomplished. It would be appropriate to use an interview to say:

In 2016 Johnny told the Devil "you son of a gun, I'm the best that's ever been."

But it would not be appropriate to use the same interview to say:

Johnny was the best fiddle player there has ever been.

Hopefully that clears things up some. TimothyJosephWood 19:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Interviews as Source

I read lots of wiki pages about musicians (big and small) and almost all cite sources from their official band pages and interviews. Yet I read in the rules that it is not allowed to use either of them. How can this happen? Or is it allowed to a certain extent? How did those pages were okayed by a reviewer? Since there are very view profiessional webzines for music online, interviews often are the only source for information (but those plenty). Especially since most webzines rely on wiki for biographies instead of research and are not usable. Xandra73 (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Xandra73, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Allowed to a certain extent" is probably the most accurate interpretation of the policy in question here. The problem with interviews is that they are not independent of the subject: it's the subject who's providing information about himself, and the nature of interviews is that's printed verbatim whether it's factual or not. If possible, you should look for the information in professionally written biographies first, where the author has critically assessed the information before putting it to print. I'd only use an interview to source statements about what the subject has said or what their thoughts are, not what about what they are or have done. For example: "I have ten platinum records" is probably something you'd want to source from a biography rather than an interview, whereas "I get inspiration from nature" might be acceptable to source from an interview. Even then, I'd only use this as a source for quoted material, and not make a factual assessment that the musicians does get inspiration from nature. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:03, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Which rules are you referring to? See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Well, I was planning to use info from interviews like hobbies of the person in question. Also some info about family that haven't been covered anywhere else, only in (multiple) interviews over the years (some of the pages are definitely reputable sources). Also info about published work that is not available in any other form anymore but interviews. I was talking about the following 'rules' I found regarding wiki Wikipedia:Third-party_sources#Press_releases and Wikipedia:Interviews Regarding press releases I wonder if a label gives out a press release, is it then a third party for the artist, or a primary source? Xandra73 (talk) 18:33, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Think of it this way, Xandra73: In order to demonstrate that a topic (such as a musician) is notable, you need to show that there is significant coverage in sources which are both reliable and independent. For a popular musician, a lengthy profile (not an interview) in a publication like Rolling Stone would be an excellent source, as that is independent coverage in a reliable source. A question and answer session with the musician published in a professionally edited music magazine would be reliable but not independent, because the content is the musician talking about themself. Such sources do have some limited use in Wikipedia, but are of no value in establishing notability. Unreliable sources like amateur fansites, random blogs and the Weekly World News have no place on Wikipedia. Concentrate first on summarizing what the reliable, independent sources say, and once notability has been established, use things like interviews with the musician and their own website in a limited way to fill in uncontroversial biographical details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:59, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Change Main Bio Photo

I am wondering how I can upload and change the main bio photo that shows just above the background info.

Thom E Gemcity (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Thom. If this is about Paul Oakenfold, then it's important to understand that the image used in the article may not necessarily be the best image from an aesthetic or contextual standpoint, but it is a free image (one bearing a Creative Commons copyright license that is suitably unrestricted to meet our copyright licenses). It can only be replaced with another free image, if that exchange is warranted. We cannot use an image of him that is non-free at all. That may make your question moot. If not (the image you had in mind was also free), then please give some specifics and we can delve further. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:27, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

I believe the photo would fall under fair use as it's being used in historical context, although it's possible I do not quite understand what can constitute free and non free. Let's chat please, guidance appreciated.

Thom E Gemcity (talk) 23:03, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi again Thom. With some exceedingly rare exceptions that would not apply here, photographs of living persons cannot be claimed as fair use at all. That is because of the doctrine's requirement of there being no reasonable opportunity for a free equivalent to be created by someone snapping a photo tomorrow and anon. That is not the case after someone dies; once someone is deceased, no photo can ever be taken and so at that point, if there are no free images in existence, a non-free photo may be able to be validly claimed as fair use.

Here, this is somewhat besides the point, because not only is a non-free photograph disqualified from fair use because the subject is living, but since there is a free photo in existence – the one already in the article – a non-free photograph would directly fail the free equivalency test. So, no valid claim of fair use could be made. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:50, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Since it seems you went ahead and uploaded this non-free image to the Commons, I have nominated it for deletion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:51, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

creating a disambiguation page

I recently created articles about two Virginia politicians nicknamed Stuart Carter, both of them active in the Massive Resistance fight on opposite sides and generally distinguished by the few histories of the era as "Stuart Carter of Bristol" and "Stuart Carter of Fincastle". FYI: lots of Virginia politicians have various variations of the names Henry, Stuart and Carter, all having long been prominent Virginia families. It creates confusion, of course.

Since "Stuart Carter" currently redirects only to the article about British Admiral Stuart Bonham Carter, I created a disambiguation page in my sandbox, but have no idea how to post it, since it's not an article but a disambiguation page. I also tried creating a couple of "See also" links in the Stuart Bonham Carter article. Perhaps one problem was that I called the page about the Virginia delegate "Henry Stuart Carter" when he generally went by "H. Stuart Carter" to distinguish himself from a nearby politician also active in that era who called himself "Harry Carter Stuart". Any ideas?Jweaver28 (talk) 12:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Jweaver28 and welcome to the Teahouse. Disambiguation pages can be moved in the same way as articles from user space, as disambiguations and articles are both in the "main" space. Thank you for creating these articles, and feel free to come back here if you have any more questions. Thanks, --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 12:18, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks but when I tried I got a page could not be moved because another page exists (which I suppose is the redirect to Stuart Bonham Carter). I hadn't created a disambiguation page before, so I tried the suggested solution of adding to the uncontested technical requests section. I hope it works.Jweaver28 (talk) 13:09, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

It worked (and quickly). Yippee! Maybe I'll be able to create another article this afternoon.Jweaver28 (talk) 14:58, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

I received "a new message" saying my recent changes have been reverted, but I haven't made any edits.

What's happening? Is my IP somehow mixed up? I checked my IP, and it's different from the User IP that showed up in the message. (The IP in this message is the same as the User page, but I haven't made any edits... so what's happening?) 68.8.171.51 (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello IP user, Welcome to The Teahouse. I just checked your talk page, I see two warnings of November 2010; if you've not made those edits, you can ignore these warning and please consider making an account. One more thing your IP is not different from the IP showed on your talk page, Hope it helps. :) — RainFall 16:30, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. You're right, I was mistaken, I was only looking at my IP in connection information on my computer, but checking a IP service (http://www.ip-secrets.com/) shows the same IP. I don't know why these edits are showing up on this IP; I was mainly concerned that it somehow might block me from Wikipedia due to a misunderstanding. Thank you :) . 68.8.171.51 (talk) 16:52, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

It is very unlikely you'd ever be blocked for anything to do with edits made by someone with the same IP address almost six years ago, 68.8.171.51. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Issues with Huggle

First-If I give the first level 1 warning on the talk page of any IP editor or new user using WP:Huggle, their talk pages get added to my watchlist. I don't want the IP talk page to be added to my watchlist. I copy pasted the codes from User:Oshwah and then from User:Serol and both times, the IP talk pages were added to my watchlist. I am sure that if I make first edit on a new editor's talk page, then their talk page will be added to my watchlist. Twinkle has options in preferences settings, not to add such pages on my watchlist.

My current huggle3 page version is copied from Oshwah. Marvellous Spider-Man (talk) 07:07, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Marvellous Spider-Man! Do you use Huggle3? I can't remember for sure, but I think you could try changing the "Watchlist:preferences" in your huggle3.css in to "Watchlist:unwatch". If that doesn't help, you can try going to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist and untick "Add pages I create and files I upload to my watchlist". Ilyushka88 | ^Talk! _Contribs 18:06, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

"Template:Cite web with more than one value for the 'website' parameter"— Which call?

I'm copyediting Patidar reservation agitation. When I run a Preview of the edits, there's a big red message at the top:

Warning: Patidar reservation agitation is calling Template:Cite web with more than one value for the "website" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used.

When I run a browser search for "website" in the wikicode, the browser notes "More than 100 found". Is there an alternative to plowing through them one a time, with a strong chance of missing this duplication just from tedium? Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 03:48, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Thnidu. Try installing and running User:Frietjes/findargdups. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:11, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit: It worked beautifully. Большое спасибо!

Hey, why not mention this script in the template that puts up that message? --Thnidu (talk) 05:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thnidu Пожалуйста. That's a good idea but I don't know how to do it. I think it's placed by MediaWiki:Duplicate-args-warning – which I doubt has many watchers, so a note on the talk page is probably not a good bet. Maybe an edit protected request would work. I just discovered that Help:MediaWiki namespace says to post to Wikipedia:MediaWiki messages, but that that page is defunct. Hmm. A post to WP:VPT should work fastest to get it done or find out why it shouldn't or is not feasible. I'll go post there.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:05, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: Thanks. You're way ahead of me in knowing about these resources. --Thnidu (talk) 19:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

I created the hashtag DemExit

Hello. I created a movement called DemExit. People have made a wikipedia page about this movement and the information is all not true. The movement started in 2012. I own the website, the twitter and the facebook. People can say its a conflict of interest but it really bothers me people are changing the page and saying this movement started from Bernie Sanders. I have zero idea on how to edit in wikipedia and its making me mad that people are making this political and keep changing the movement to their agenda.

This is not the place for an article text

I have sources but here is the jest of DemExit During the race for the Democratic Party nomination, great controversy arose around the awarding of Superdelegates. This, combined with leaked emails that were released and published by Wikileaks proved that the Democratic National Committee (DNC), under chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz, DNC CEO Amy Dacey, CFO Bradley Marshall and Director of communications Luis Miranda had been part of an hostile internal conspiracy to deprive the Presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders voter information that each candidate is legally privy to, as well as secretly try to discredit him through defamation. In the wake of the controversies, Sanders supporters latched onto a movement called DemExit and began organizing protests against the practices of the Democratic Party such. It has also been embraced by Presidential candidate for the Green Party, Jill Stein. But DemExit has been around since before the convention, and did not initially stand for a walkout. The person who started the DemExit , whose first posts were in 2012, claims to have originated the hashtag, and she did so as a republican supporter encouraging people to vote leave the Democratic Party. Her idea came from the Brexit movement. Brexit (and its early variant, Brixit), is a portmanteau of "Britain" and "exit". It was derived by analogy from Grexit.The term Brexit may have first been used in reference to a possible UK withdrawal from the EU by Peter Wilding in a Euractiv blog post on 15 May 2012. Like the Brexit movement, Demexit started as a movement against illegal immigration other policies by the Democratic party she felt hurt all Americans. After having her account suspended on Twitter a new account surfaced two years later again trying to push the DemExit movement. A post from the official DemExit page reads: DemExit is a universal message to all other Americans that politics can be about change and not just about defending the status quo. Even tho I started this hashtag as a right winger which came from the idea of Brexit #DemExit is not the property of the political right. Sure enough, people on the left have been using the hashtag to express their intent to leave the Democratic Party. There's a #DemExit subreddit dedicated to discussions of how to re-register, and disenchanted voters have taken it up on Twitter. But it's important for folks to note when their primaries are for state and local elections; if you want to #DemExit, but you also want to vote in down-ballot elections, you should wait until after those to change your affiliation if you're in a state with closed primaries, as explained by Inquisitr earlier in July. Though Sanders himself will be participating in #DemExit by reverting to an independent, the non-affiliation under which Vermonters elected him to the Senate, he's still pushing for people to vote for the Democratic nominee. Based on the way the hashtag is being used on twitter, it seems highly unlikely its users will be following his lead there. The movement's logo's is the hastag #DemExit. ===2012=== DemExit forms (and its early variant, Brixit), is a portmanteau of "Democrats" and "exit". It was derived by analogy from Grex Hashtag reappears in blogs promoting the idea to leave democratic party In the run-up to the Democratic National Convention and after Hillary Clinton's acceptance speech, thousands of Democrats, including delegates for Bernie Sanders, planned to quit the party in a #DemExit protest.[2] The demonstrations were in direct contrast to the party unity that the convention had been trying to demonstrate over the four day event. Concerns cited by those involved included: environmental policies, Obamacare, Clinton's uncertain stance on the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the ongoing Clinton email controversy. Following Brexit on June 23, DemExit started to build. === August 2016 Dozens of Sanders delegates organized a last-minute walkout during the roll call. These delegates walked out when Sanders called for Clinton's nomination by acclamation. They linked arms in and around a media tent outside the convention center and placed duct tape over their mouths to symbolize being silenced. As voters continued to weigh options on what to do after leaving the democratic party, some decided it necessary to show the Democratic National Committee that its behaviour during the 2016 primary was unacceptable while some voters decided to leave the The movement has also aided Jill Stein's overall recognition. Some have also argued that the two-party system does not offer enough choice to voters

What should I do here. Should I just continue to let people deface my movement on wikipedia?DemExit (talk) 06:21, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

You are going about this the wrong way.

Because you have a conflict of interest with respect to the article, you should not edit it. You should identify that you have a COI on the talk page and request corrections. Unfortunately, your testimony is not considered by Wikipedia a reliable source, so facts in the article need to reference some third party source, such as a newspaper, magazine, or book, whenever possible.

What I expect will happen is that your most recent edits will be reverted. You will get a warning about Conflict of Interest policies on WikiPedia.

You can then begin working with other editors by pointing out needed corrections and reliable sources that can be referred to.

And welcome to Wikipedia! Some of the ways things work here may seem a bit unusual to newcomers, but by reading the style guides and interacting with other editors, it should start to make sense.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:37, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

BTW, DemExit, where you have "jest", the word you want is "gist". Check 'em out; there's a big difference. --Thnidu (talk) 19:44, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Logging in

Could somebody please explain why I get automatically logged out after a few days, even though I have checked the 'Keep me logged in' box? Could they also suggest a potential cure to this problem ? RASAM (talk) 19:54, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

RASAM: The issue may be a setting in your browser, not in Wikipedia at all. --Thnidu (talk) 20:22, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Trying to post a "first" article, clearly need help.

Last year I tried to post an article on "Lester Cohen", a best-selling novelist, playwright, etc. who is mentioned frequently in Wiki. Lester is also my grandfather, and I have emotional baggage. The article was not accepted for publication with any number of criticisms, most of which I totally got, but the experience was humbling enough that I abandoned the attempt. I am ready to try again and have prepared a new draft. It is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lester_Cohen. I would hugely appreciate help making it worthy of posting. I am clearly a novice at this and will be indebted to all who can provide me feedback.Danielcohe (talk) 18:37, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Danielcohe. There are a number of problems with Draft:Lester Cohen as it currently stands. The first one is that it is not clear what the sources for the majority of the material in the draft are. Everything on Wikipedia needs to be verifiable, which means that a reliable, published source needs to exist for it. Nothing in an article should be based solely on its author's personal knowledge that is not reflected in published sources. Another issue is that you have included Wikipedia articles in the references for the draft. Wikipedia articles shouldn't be used as sources for other Wikipedia articles - that way lies circular referencing chaos - but I sense that what you intended to do was simply link to other relevant articles. The way to do that is by using wikilinks in the text. Thirdly, you need to declare your conflict of interest with the subject by following the instructions at WP:DISCLOSE. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Will get on it.Danielcohe (talk) 19:26, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Danielcohe. I've made a bunch of edits to start you on the way. I've left a few edit summaries (which you can view in the draft's page history) that may give you some direction. What you should focus on is i) finding reliable sources that verify the content, and ii) citing them properly.

As to the former issue, although it may seem like an advantage to have personal knowledge regarding a topic – and it can be in some respects because you know things that should be included and so can look for sources that verify that content; so too, as an "insider", you may know the location of sources that exist to find that a stranger to the topic might not, e.g. newspaper articles from the sixties and back that are not easily findable online – but in practice the way it works is often as seen in this draft. That is, you have included lots of facts without references because you know them (including possibly whole swaths of content that cannot be sourced). The better way is to gather sources to see what they say and only then include content based upon the information found, rather than to write what you know and then try to back into sources. In sum, every last item of information needs to be verifiable, and if you cannot find a source to cite, it should be removed, regardless of whether you know it to be true

As to the latter issue, all of the citations you've provided have been naked URLs, rather than transparently attributed citations to sources. I've fixed two: one for a newspaper citation and another for a book citation, hoping you might use those as models for reforming others. Please also see Help:Referencing for beginners, Help:Introduction to referencing/1 and then seeing Wikipedia:Citing sources for a more involved treatment, noting that each contains see also sections linking to additional help pages, guides and tutorials. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:49, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

And again, thank you. I so appreciate it.Danielcohe (talk) 21:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

where find photos?

My first article review was accepted. But, the photos are missing. I submitted the completed wiki photo permissions to the OTRS weeks ago. I am still new to this process, so can someone please tell me do I just wait till they get to the photos and will they place them into my article, or is there a place I can go look and see if they are there for me to add to my article? thanks Spacestar7 (talk) 20:18, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Where did you upload (or try to upload) the images, here at English Wikipedia, or Wikimedia Commons? I can find no evidence of either upload. Maybe it was was Wikimedia Commons, but you used a different username? Maproom (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

@Maproom: I found this which is included in source code of Scott Nute: commons:File:BASEBALL_(3).jpg. Seems to be deleted in 21 July 2016. Not sure if the same thing Spacestar7 means. Ilyushka88 | ^Talk! _Contribs 21:56, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

you are correct. I uploaded on wiki commons weeks ago, but, due to being brand new on wiki I did it wrong. So, they then sent me the OTRS form, that was completed and then sent to the wiki email 3-4 weeks ago. Also, it was suggested I use a different user name so I changed it. Learning how you all do things here on Wiki has been enlightening to say the least...ha! It is overwhelming how much info and such is here. So, suggestions on photos? Spacestar7 (talk) 22:06, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Add references or AFD?

I've spent a few hours reviewing AFDed articles and find it interesting that people are so quick to delete a page instead of gathering references and making an update. Is this common? Callsignpink (talk) 21:43, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Callsignpink. I have participated in thousands of AfD debates in the past seven years and have often added references to articles and expanded articles in order to save them. My impression is that poorly researched AfD nominations were more common a few years ago than today. Some editors have more deletionist tendencies while others are inclusionist. There are often good arguments for and against deletion. AfD is not a quick process. It usually takes at least a week and often several weeks. I commend you for participating there. It is an area of the project that always needs more help. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:16, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Callsignpink. Can you point out specific examples of AfDs where the page would have been saved by "gathering references and making an update"? The ground for most AfDs is notability, and the heart of notability is not a question of whether the existing content of an article cites sufficient reliable, secondary, independent sources treating the topic in substantive detail, but whether such sources exist. Accordingly, an AfD, brought on the basis of lack of notability, and which focuses on the sources in the content rather than sources in existence for the topic, is all pear shaped. This is also why WP:BEFORE focuses on that distinction in its instructions for what to do before nominating an article for AfD. I have occasionally seen AfDs that take that wrong path, but in my experience, they are relatively rare. Again, please provide some examples, so we can discuss more concretely. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:17, 6 August 2016 (UTC)