Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 514

Archive 510

←

Archive 512

Archive 513

Archive 514

Archive 515

Archive 516

→

Archive 520

Open text and plagiarism

Hello teahouse. I remain puzzled as to why external text, released under a wikipedia-compliant license, cannot be simply cut-and-pasted into an article, along with a suitable {{CC-notice}} or similar. After all, the original author invited its use in this way by adding the appropriate license. And as a wikipedia article is not owned by anyone (as per WP:OWNERSHIP), no one is passing off the new material as their own. But wikipedia still maintains the more restrictive line that "public-domain content is plagiarized if used without acknowledging the source" (Wikipedia:Plagiarism § Copying material from free sources). What is the rational behind this policy? It seems unnecessarily prohibitive. Best regards. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 13:47, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, RobbieIanMorrison, and welcome to the Teahouse. The policy you have linked to does not say that material under a Wikipedia-compliant license or in public domain cannot be simply cut-and-pasted into an article and attributed using a suitable attribution template. In fact, it says you should do exactly that. Use an attribution template whether you are copy-pasting a freely-licensed or public domain text:

Attribution for compatibly licensed text can be provided through the use of an appropriate attribution template ...

Likewise

If [public domain] text is copied or closely paraphrased from a free source, it must be cited and attributed through the use of an appropriate attribution template

. Why this should be done with public domain text as well is because the term "plagiarism" extends beyond strictly copyright considerations and includes such issues as moral rights and good practices in publishing.

Naturally, it's also a good idea to disclose your source because of verifiablity reasons. If you attribute your addition, you will not be accused of input based on original research that Wikipedia does not allow. The policy you have linked to advises to use inline citations even for copy-pasted free material.

Just of note, WP:OWNERSHIP is a bit of a red herring. Indeed content on Wikipedia is copyrighted to Wikipedia contributors, who each agree to license it under Wikipedia's licensing terms upon release, and those terms require others to attribute them. In that sense, we do pass off new material as ours. That's why when third parties reuse Wikipedia material, we require them to link back to the article (and hence its page history that includes the list of contributors). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:23, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: Thanks for the comprehensive reply. It goes a long way to answering my question. I have a specific case though. Material from a news blog I wish to utilize is released under a CC BY 4.0. I take it I can exactly copy the text or close paraphrase it or more extensively modify it. And all I need to do is add a {{CC-notice}} notice to the end of the citation as follows:

References

Am I correct in this? Look forward to your reply and best regards. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 20:59, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, RobbieIanMorrison, that looks all good to me. There are a few additional steps you can take, but that are not necessary, that are outlined in the policy. Namely, it might be a good idea to first copy and paste the material you want to use unmodified, and make any modifications in separate edits. For that initial edit, in addition to the CC notice template, you can write in the edit summary something like: "Copied content by Kerstine Appunn: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/comparing-old-and-new-changes-germanys-renewable-energy-act (CC BY 4.0)".

As far as I know, requiring indication about whether changes were made is not part of the license in question, so doing this is optional. A stricter interpretation would be that by requiring this, they are licensing their text under a custom license, and this additional limitation may or may not make it a free license. I wouldn't worry about that though; based on some conversations I've had over files, I'd probably conclude that this is not a copyright limitation (certainly does not amount to no-derivatives), and we are not concerned with limitations like that. Correction: this is a condition in CC BY 4.0, but not in CC BY 3.0 – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC) There is, of course, nothing wrong with stating that changes were made. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: Hello and thank you for your considered response. I will be doing as you suggest. Here is the renewable energy article I am working on. Your help is much appreciated. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 22:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

You are welcome, RobbieIanMorrison. The article looks great; I hope to see it in mainspace soon! Using freely licensed material is a very good thing. I'm glad you chose to do it despite it being, admittedly, sometimes a bit difficult to navigate. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, RobbieIanMorrison, Finnusertop, but I've only just seen this. I'm afraid that what's been said above is not correct; CC BY 4.0 is unfortunately not a compatible licence here. Text released under that licence may not be copied into Wikipedia, and any content that has been so copied is a copyvio and must be removed immediately. What's been said above would apply to text released under a CC BY SA 3.0 licence, though, which is what Wikipedia uses. This is a confusing issue that's going to keep coming up, I'm afraid; there's some discussion here which may shed a little light. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: you are incorrect. CC BY 4.0 is compatible, see the table at WP:COMPLIC. CC BY SA 4.0, on the other hand, would not be. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: @Justlettersandnumbers: Hello. I note that the {{CC-notice}} template also allows the parameter value cc = by4. So it seems that support for CC BY 4.0 is quite deeply coded into wikipedia. It looks like a high-level resolution is needed for this question and the appropriate support documents and templates amended as required. I won't make my draft live for another three weeks and will watch this traffic accordingly. Regards. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 14:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: @Justlettersandnumbers: Hello again. More discussion at Wikipedia talk:FAQ/Copyright#CC-BY 4.0 compatibility?. That thread is however not 100% conclusive. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 22:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, RobbieIanMorrison, Finnusertop, one thing's for sure: I spoke too hastily and too carelessly – sorry 'bout that! As far as I can see with a further quick glance, CC BY 4.0 appears to be covered by "CC BY (all versions and ports)", just as Finnusertop suggests. However, since there seems to be some lingering doubt about this, I'm going to ask Moonriddengirl if she'd be kind enough to comment (and perhaps even check with the legal team if she thinks it necessary), so that we can then modify WP:COMPLIC to make this completely crystal-clear from now on (what RobbieIanMorrison said, in fact). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:56, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, all. :) (RobbieIanMorrison, Finnusertop, Justlettersandnumbers) As Creative Commons notes, BY is one-way compatible to BY-SA. You can adapt a BY source into BY-SA. You can't go the other way around. The version number doesn't matter at this point in this equation, although later versions might depending on the specific code. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying this, Moonriddengirl! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Moonriddengirl: Noted. I am about to update the discussion at Wikipedia talk:FAQ/Copyright#CC-BY 4.0 compatibility?. Thanks. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 16:46, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Rfc on splitting proposal

Can I add an rfc template to the splitting proposal at the sex doll talk page? An admin said I can't here and removed the template. Pwolit iets (talk) 11:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey PI. The issue seems to be that split discussions are...kindof...a very specific sort of RfC. A lot of times RfCs get sent out by bots to people interested in that general subject area, while a split discussion gets put on a dedicated list where people who are interested in splits per se will see it.

Of course, this doesn't stop you from going to a related project, like WikiProject Music and inviting uninvolved editors to comment. However, this should be done in a way that is neutral. I usually just say something like: "FYI there's a discussion on splitting an article here that this project might be interested in." TimothyJosephWood 12:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Well I feel silly. I didn't actually look at the article and I think I was thinking of the Sex Pistols when I posted WikiProject:Music. TimothyJosephWood 18:51, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

how do I delete an account?

how do I delete an account?Sross510 (talk) 19:05, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Also asked at WP:HD#removing an account. We do not delete accounts. As you were told at the Help Desk you can request that the account be renamed. -- GB fan 19:24, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Procedure for drafting a new article

If I create a draft of for a new article, such as user:Kamel Tebaast/ACME name here, is there any kind of protection to that draft or can any editor see it, think, that's a great article, and then just put it up? Thank you. KamelTebaast 19:18, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Kamel Tebaast: They can move your draft (it's rare, but it happens). Any copy and paste creation should be deleted as a copyright violation. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:22, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, NeilN, that's great to know. KamelTebaast 19:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Another question regarding reliable sources - CD booklets

Are booklets of CDs primary sources or secondary sources? And is there a difference if it's from the artists own band, or from another band where he appeared just as a guest? The text is about a musician, not an album or a song. Thanks in advance! Xandra73 (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Xandra73. They would mostly likely be considered a primary source, since, although they may not be written by the artist, they are, to some extent, published by them or with their permission. Even if it is from another band, it's probably not an independent source. For example, it's hard to imagine that they would put out anything unfavorable.

Having said that, it may be sometimes alright to use these, in the same way we use self published social media, as long as they're not used to support a crazy claim. TimothyJosephWood 23:20, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Timothyjosephwood. I would mainly use it as proof that the artist participated on this or that album. Xandra73 (talk) 19:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Xandra73. Having said all that, it's probably best, if you can, to use the information on the booklet to look online and see if you can find the same thing somewhere else. It would be difficult for someone to verify the information in the booklet, so there's probably a higher chance it gets eventually deleted or replaced. TimothyJosephWood 19:43, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

What is wrong with my page? It has been deleted. Hillier, Parker, May & Rowden

My name is Phil and my friend's name is Harold. He used to work for a company that was very well known in the commercial property world, which was prestigious in his day, and a household name between the wars in the period 1919-1939. I have taken up the interest and I have been enjoying researching the subject. I am not being paid, it is just something I like doing.

I keep having problems with 'editors' who seem to be doing everything they can to make this pleasant pastime difficult for me to follow. I was just about to add a bit more to it, which I got from The Times Digital Archive, but now I can't today because the page has suddenly disappeared. What am I doing wrong?

Philjones573 (talk) 23:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

It hasn't suddenly disappeared. As has been explained to you twice, the page was deleted following a deletion discussion here. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 23:46, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

For suddenly, read unexpectedly. I am told Wikipedia is not a democracy. I was happy this afternoon because it seemed to me that the argument in favour is strong. The thing I would like to do next is look in the archives of Estates Gazette, where Harold tells me the subject was discussed in detail in almost every issue for 100 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philjones573 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

The article has been deleted following a Deletion Discussion (as you are aware) due to a lack of Notability. The issues around your proposed article have been discussed at some length and there is no need to revisit that discussion. This isn't the appropriate page for your issue and I won't be replying here again - you should post a very brief summary of your thoughts here and then await a response from an administrator. Exemplo347 (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Philjones573. You (and anyone else) are welcome to ask any reasonable question here about editing Wikipedia, and I am sorry that Exemplo347 told you that this is not the appropriate page. It is the appropriate page. I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Userfication, and ask an administrator to restore the article as a draft outside of the main encyclopedia. Then, you can ponder all of the criticisms of the article, take time to research and add sources, and then use the Articles for Creation process that includes review by experienced editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:38, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen328 for your helpful suggestion. Yes, please, I would like it as a draft. At the moment it is too wordy and contains quotations that aren't necessary. It can be much more concise and I would like to do that. I was planning to go to the archives of the Estates Gazette and I would like to do that, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philjones573 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok, now restored and moved to User:Philjones573/sandbox. Nthep (talk) 22:02, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Nthep for giving it back to me.

Philjones573 (talk) 23:42, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Blocked user's signature

Is it okay to use a blocked user's signature (with my name, of course) that has been blocked indefinitely and doesn't seem like he/she will come back? Thanks -- The Pancakeof Heaven! 03:30, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

@The Pancake of Heaven!: Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm going to assume you mean using a blocked user's design and then work your username into it. It's not like signatures are trademarked, so it's perfectly fine to use. Zappa24Mati 03:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! -- The Pancakeof Heaven! 03:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

A friendly observation, The Pancake of Heaven: Human nature being what it is, please consider the possibility that a signature that reminds experienced editors of a disruptive editor may draw unwanted scrutiny to your own edits. The decision is yours, but please think about my comment. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

User:The Pancake of Heaven! may be planning to do this as a tribute to a user he believes was unjustly blocked. I can see that making sense. Maproom (talk) 20:59, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Cullen328, Maproom That wasn't exactly the reason; I just liked that user's signature. I decided to not use it though, thanks for the advice :) -- The Pancakeof Heaven! 01:01, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Robert W. Hemphill vs Robert H. Hemphill

Hi,

It seems that the former is being confused with the latter with respect to this quote floating around on the Internet.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/6454247.Robert_H_Hemphill

What can be done to avoid this confusion? Is Robert H. Hemphill notable? The quote seems to be on many web sites.

- JamesPoulson (talk) 00:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JamesPoulson. There is no doubt that Robert W. Hemphill is notable as a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives. I see no evidence that anyone has tried to add the quote to his biography, at least recently. For people active 50 to 100 years ago, a Google Books search is a far better research tool than a basic Google search. That search shows that one or more people with that name Robert H. Hemphill were active in the U.S. in that time frame, but I see no evidence that anyone by that name is notable. As for the quotation, Goodreads is a website with user submitted content, so is not a reliable source. I see the quote on a variety of fringe political advocacy websites, almost always using identical wording to describe its author, which indicates that it is passed around by cutting and pasting. The only book I could find that includes the quote was published by the insurrectionist Sovereign citizen movement. The quote may be accurate or it may be apocryphal. I do not know. But I see no evidence at this quote is worthy of discussion in this encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:14, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Draft article review

Hello,

Here's my draft article:Draft:Janine_Berdin

I need your opinion if the latest references or citations merits notability. Thanks.

Kicker2 (talk) 23:28, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kicker2. According to our notability guideline for actors, an actor who "has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" is presumed to be notable. When I look at your draft, I see no evidence that Berdin's roles are "significant". For example, she is not included in the cast lists of any of the shows. It looks to me that her roles are minor, and it is up to you to provide evidence that her roles were significant. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:03, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Adding image to post?

Hello. I made my first substantial edits to [an article tonight](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Henry_Garstang) and would now like to add a picture and sidebar so that it resembles other biographies on the site. I am not sure where the instructions are to add images/biographical sidebar and would welcome assistance. Melodykramer (talk) 04:58, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Melodykramer. I assume that what you call a "sidebar" is what we call an Infobox. That link should give you the information you need. As for adding images, that very much depends on the copyright status of the image in question. With a handful of exceptions, random images that you find on the internet are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia, because their use is restricted by copyright. On the other hand, if you take a photo a person yourself, and upload it to Wikimedia Commons under an acceptable free license, then you can use it in the article. There are many other possible scenarios, so the more information you can provide about the photo, the more accurate the answer that we can provide. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:24, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Claiming upload

Can someone please assist me with this? I'm not sure exaxtly how or where to do what I'm being prompted to do.

[1]

WikiEditorial101 (talk) 16:59, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
I've edited the link above because it originally made the section appear a little weird. See here to see what I mean. -- Gestrid (talk) 17:07, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, WikiEditorial101, and welcome to the Teahouse! Was the picture taken by you? If so, all you need to do is go to File:Lydia Canaan at MY World Partners Awards Ceremony.jpeg on the desktop version of the Wikipedia website, click on "Edit source", and, where it says {{media by uploader}}, change it so it instead says {{media by uploader|claimed=yes}}. Make sure you're logged in while doing all of this. Does that clear things up for you? -- Gestrid (talk) 17:14, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, thank you! WikiEditorial101 (talk) 10:08, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Popup message only for editors

On the article Giant-cell arteritis a couple of editors have changed the word 'latitude' to 'altitude'. The disease is more common in northern/southern (higher) latitudes. I'm sure the editors think it is just a spelling error. Is there a way to have message popup only when editing the section (or page) saying it is correct as is? Is this the best solution? Cotton2 (talk) 18:30, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Cotton2, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can try using a hidden comment. They appear in the "Edit source" window, but they don't appear in the article. To make one, put the mouse cursor next to the text you want to leave a hidden comment next to, then type <!--HIDDEN COMMENT-->. It'll only appear in the "Edit source" window like this: . -- Gestrid (talk) 18:42, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

If it's confusing to editors, that might be a good sign that it needs to be reworded so as not to confuse readers.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

This is a great question that will be helpful for other editors to read because this can happen and no one wants to be considered to be involved in an 'edit-war' which could unintentionally (on your part) get you blocked from editing! There is a three-reversion rule that describes the consequences to editors if they keep reverting each other's edits. This type of situation is usually contentious and intentional-which does not appear to be happening in your case. I strongly suggest that you leave a message on the talk page of the article explaining why you are correcting the article AND post a personal talk page message on the page of the other editor who keeps correcting your 'spelling', explaining the situation. Advice - be as courteous as possible, thanking the other editor for their good faith editing and desire to improve the article. You can even ask them to go back and revert the edit themselves. I've done this and it works surprisingly well as long as respect, civility, congeniality and a spirit of collaboration exists on the part of the two editors who might be working against each other. The Very Best of Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  11:39, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

How to include an image in the article I am preparing

I would be grateful if someone could give me guidance as to the way of uploading an image onto the article I am making in my userspace. Many thanks. (Dywana (talk) 17:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC))Dywana(Dywana (talk) 17:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Dywana. A lot of times this has to do with where the image you want to use came from, and then whether it's licensed in a way that allows it to be used on Wikipedia. So more detail on the picture would probably help in finding an answer to your question. TimothyJosephWood 18:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Timothy! I want to use a photograph that I took myself. I imagine that it should not be a problem. What do you think? I appreciate your help. I am new to Wikipedia and am trying hard to learn all thew rules. DywanaDywana (talk) 09:14, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Dywana. The easiest way to do that is to upload it to Wikimedia Commons. Once you select which file to upload, click "This file is my own work", and you can agree to release it for public use, which includes Wikipedia. After that, just answer a few questions about the pic, like when it was taken, and describe what it's a picture of, and you're good to go.

Afterward, if you need help with the markup (the computer-code-stuff) to actually put the picture in an article, feel free to ask here or at my talk page and I'll be happy to help you out. TimothyJosephWood 12:08, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Timothy that is a great help. I have now come across another problem while reading all the material about making an article. I had started to write a biography about my husband who is a Russian artist in a league with Mihail Chemiakin and Andrei Kolkoutin, also from the Caucasus and who are also present in Wikipedia I have started it in my userpage. But now I am worried if it is allowed for me to write this article. It is absolutely factual and I am not trying to promote him, just to put the information out there in the three languages I know. I do not want to pay someone to do this as I wanted to learn to become a real wikipedian myself. Is there some way that I can do this? I do hope so. I am really grateful for your time and help. Thank you! Dywana Dywana (talk) 18:17, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Dywana. Generally editing Wikipedia articles where you have a conflict of interest is discouraged. What I would recommend is that you create a draft in your user space, as you already seem to have started, and then when it's done, you can have another editor review it before it's posted as a main article. I'd be happy to do so, or I can walk you through how to submit a draft at Articles for Creation. TimothyJosephWood 18:27, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Timothy for your swift reply! You have given me new hope. I will continue the work I have started then and when I think it is ready to be reviewed I will take you up on your offer to edit it for me. Thank you so much! DywanaDywana (talk) 18:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

An alternative to spellcheck bot ideas

I noticed that "spellcheck bots" was at one point on the list of perennial proposals, though it seems to no longer be on that list. As an alternative to such ideas, I propose a bot that:

• goes through existing pages in article space at a very low (non-lag-inducing) rate, running algorithms that check for spelling and grammatical errors. The bot does not attempt to correct any error on its own. Instead, it records potential errors as entries in a log page, each entry containing the relevant snippet of text and a link to the relevant section of the article.There should be some easy method to mark an entry as non-erroneous so that it is not reported again. Perhaps there can be some mechanism to remove corrected/nonexistent errors from the listing.
• does similar things with all newly created articles as soon as they have existed for ~30 hours, the delay being to prevent resources from being wasted on quickly deleted articles.

The above is a very rough concept. An actual implementation would have to address details such as ignoring acronyms, and somehow implement the aforementioned listing/exceptions system. I apologize in advance if this whole thing has also been proposed and rejected before, and apologize also for my ignorance.

I am putting this here instead of the Village Pump to avoid wasting others' time with my crude ideas.

a CLoG? | unCLoG 14:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

In my experience, there is a lot of semi-automatic (AWB) spellchecking going on (notoriously Special:Contributions/Giraffedata, but there are plenty of other examples). This may have made the idea of actual spellchecking bots obsolete. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

You can create such a log—should you really want to—by importing the list of all article titles into AWB, enabling typo fixing and disabling all other fixes, checking "Pre-parse mode", and leaving it alone to run. Such a log won't actually be very useful; as a rough rule around 5% of articles contain at least one typo, so your end product will be a list of half a million pages, which is far too large for any human editor to fix. All typos are fixed eventually either by the edit which introduced them being overwritten or by people running AWB over random pages, so there's very little use trying to introduce automated logging. ‑ Iridescent 19:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

how to sign up on teahouse

I wonder how do sign up on teahouse i like to know what u do on teahouse. Tanishea — Preceding unsigned comment added→ by Tanishea (talk • contribs) 20:47, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Tanishea, and welcome to the Teahouse! Our volunteer work here at the Teahouse involves helping new editors (such as yourself) by answering all of your questions. Many of us are pretty experienced with how Wikipedia works. Before you start answering questions here, I suggest you edit Wikipedia articles for a while and (as a result of that) become more acquainted with our policies here (such as, for example, notability), as well as some of the slightly more technical things (such as, for example, wikilinks). I've left a message on what's called your talk page with links to some of our policies. Keep in mind that you do not need to know these policies in order to edit. (More than likely, you'll learn about our policies by editing.) Most editors here will assume good faith when they see a new editor making changes to articles and will try to help you if you make a mistake (which even experienced editors do). -- Gestrid (talk) 21:49, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

You should of course feel free to ask questions here, Tanishea. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:55, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sorry that I wasn't clear on that point. That's what I get for answering on my phone. -- Gestrid (talk) 22:00, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

You also got Tanishea's username wrong, Gestrid, so your ping won't have worked. I pinged Tanishea myself though. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

For that, I blame autocorrect. I fixed the talk page link, as well as the ping link (though I know the actual ping won't have worked without a new signature). -- Gestrid (talk) 20:50, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Review request for my draft of a musician

Hey everyone! I finally made all the changes for my declined submission. Thanks for all the help I got here at the teahouse. Would it be possible that someone takes a look and gives me some input about my draft? I don't want my submission declined again. Thank you in advance! My draft is this: Draft: Thomas Youngblood Xandra73 (talk) 07:32, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't have time to do this myself at the moment, Xandra73, but I see that SwisterTwister told you when the draft was declined that "interviews, press releases, social media (including YouTube videos) or trivial passing mentions (1, 2 or 3 mentions and no actual focus) are not acceptable sources". This is incorrect. Those things do not help establish notability, but that does not mean that they are all unacceptable sources. Please see WP:RS on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:37, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Xandra73: anyone reviewing the article will be looking for references to reliable independent published sources containing significant discussion of the subject, to establish that the subject is notable. The draft cites 49 sources, and I don't have the time or patience to check them all; but I checked the first ten, and they do nothing to help establish notability. If there are references in the article that do establish notability, you might make them easier for a reviewer to find. Maproom (talk) 09:25, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Xandra73. Welcome back. I would take the time to read through guidance at WP:MUSICBIO, and think about which of those high points you're already hitting, and which ones might need extra attention. Looks like you've already got some of those things, like being on a national chart, and performing in large tours.

If all else fails, and you think you can defend the article to a wider audience, you can always be bold and create the article yourself. Seems like it would already easily survive the speedy deletion process. TimothyJosephWood 12:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for all your comments. Very helpfull as always. I guess I had misunderstood the comment regarding interviews... I thought they are an absolute no-go. Which is sad, because reliable sources have huge interviews with him. Just not significant news aside from tour info and album info (but news often don't go further than two years anyway - don't pages have archives?). In response to Timothyjosephwood - I would love to create the article myself and give it a try, but I think it's not possible since the page exists as a redirect to another page at the moment. The Wiki help desk suggested to me to write the article and put it up for review. Xandra73 (talk) 19:59, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Xandra73, Articles for Creation is not the only way to complete such a move, and is not mandatory. Normally, you can request something like this at Wikipedia:Requested moves. However, if you feel that you've reached a point where you cannot improve the draft further, I should be able to move it for you, if you would like.

Keep in mind though, that unlike active drafts at Articles for Creation, articles that have already been created can also be nominated for deletion, starting a community discussion at WP:AfD. If the article is eventually deleted, you will have to request an administrator recover it for you and move it back to a draft. TimothyJosephWood 20:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Timothyjosephwood, that is definitely interesting information. I have to think about it, I will get back to you regarding this, if it's okay! Xandra73 (talk) 21:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Xandra73, No rush. There is no deadline. TimothyJosephWood 21:14, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

inline citation help

Recently I developed the following article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon_Aquafarms

Yesterday it showed the following notice at the header: "This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. "

However, my citations are complete, accurate and from verifiable sources and formatted according to the wiki requirements. Could anyone review and make any suggestions to alleviate this concern? Safchris (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Safchris and welcome to the Teahouse. These maintenance tags are manually placed by editors and they need to be removed manually as well. If you feel like you have remedied the problem, you can remove the tag. In this case, you have inline references, which is a good thing. But not all information you have presented is accompanied by them. I have amended the tag to say that you need more, instead of that you have none. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Please read our guidelines on conflict-of-interest editing, Safchris (naturally I'm assuming that the "SAF" in your username stands for "Sturgeon AquaFarms"). If you are receiving any kind of financial reward from Sturgeon Aquafarms you must declare your connection to the company, under the Terms of Use of this project. An editor who contributes as part of his or her paid employment is required to disclose that fact. Conflict-of-interest editors are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly, but are always welcome to propose changes on the talk page. You can attract the attention of other editors by putting {{request edit}} (exactly so, with the curly parentheses) at the beginning of your request. Requests not supported by independent reliable sources are unlikely to be accepted. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:30, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Even if you are not being paid to edit the article, we still strongly request that you declare your conflict of interest if you are connected to the company in any way. Instructions for declaring your conflict of interest (paid or not) can be found on the page I linked. -- Gestrid (talk) 21:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Help from a 3rd party

I'm not allowed to update a profile page for my boss, as it creates a conflict of interest. But I do have an update drafted and all of the information is accurate/factual. Will someone help me by updating the page on my behalf? The posting is in the "talk" section of my account. Thanks in advance for any help.

Gaff225 (talk) 16:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Gaff225: this is about the article Graham Bensinger. The best place for your request is not on your own talk page, but on the article's talk page, here. However, a request reading "please delete the entire content of the article and replace it by ... " is likely to be ignored. If you are aware of inaccuracies in the existing article, and want them corrected, your requests are likely to be accepted, particularly if you cite references for the material you want added.

Incidentally, the current version of the article is rather poorly referenced, and is therefore in some danger of being deleted. The version you would like it replaced by has no references at all, so if anyone does act on your request, the resulting article will very likely be deleted as lacking any references. Maproom (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

One way to look at it, Gaff225, is that Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that Bensinger or his employees say about him: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with him have published about him. It follows that your preferred text is unlikely to be accepted unless you work very hard to say nothing about him which has not been published by indepedent sourcess. --ColinFine (talk) 21:40, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for breaking it down, Colin.

Gaff225 (talk) 21:46, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Article

I was writing a article and i was sending it and did not go true.Derrick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derrick chan (talk • contribs) 22:21, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Derrick chan and welcome to the Teahouse! Your article has gone through; however, unfortunately, you've seem to have written an autobiography, something on Wikipedia that is highly discouraged and thus was marked for deletion by a new pages patrol user. Please check the link provided about autobiographies and maybe check WP:YFA (Your first article) for an introduction for creating articles. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 22:50, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Looking at what was deleted it looks more like a misplaced userpage, not a serious attempt at an article. Nthep (talk) 22:56, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Since the page was deleted, only admins (which, if I'm not mistaken, Nthep is) can see it.

On another note, would you like the deleted page undeleted and moved to User:Derrick chan (your user page)? -- Gestrid (talk) 23:13, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Tried to join a Wikiproject

I tried to join Wikiproject:Canada by adding my name to the list of members, but the name didn't show up. Did I do anything wrong? Verified Cactus (talk) 23:22, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

@VerifiedCactus:, you have added yourself to the section listing inactive members of the project. By default that section is hidden (who wants to see the inactive membership?) You need to move your entry up a section under the Active member heading. Nthep (talk) 23:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Much obliged. Verified Cactus (talk) 23:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Adrianna Bertola image

A girl who has a Wikipedia page asked me to help her put a photo of her headshot on her page as she is an actress/singer. Please help me add a photo to Adrianna bertola. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlykelly9917 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Where is the photo now? Who took the photo, and who owns the copyright in it? Maproom (talk) 06:29, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Charlykelly9917: I'm replying again, with a "ping" in the hope that you see my reply above. Maproom (talk) 20:17, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Charlykelly9917. I'm afraid that, like many people, you (and Bertola) have a basic misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Nobody in the entire world "has" a Wikipedia page, and promotion of any kind is not permitted. If Bertola meets Wikipedia's criteria of notability (which means that people unconnected with her have published substantial information about her), then Wikipedia may have an article about her. She will not own the article, or have any control over its content; and if you know her well enough that she asks you to do things to the article, then you probably have a conflict of interest and should not be editing the article directly. While suitably licensed pictures are welcome in articles, your reference to a "headshot" again sounds as if her and your purpose is promotional. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

ColinFine: Wikipedia has an article on Adrianna Bertola, with notability established by references to The Independent and other UK newspapers. It is competently written, and not promotional. But it lacks a picture of its subject. If Charlykelly9917 can provide one, we should give encouragement and help. Maproom (talk) 06:56, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Signature

Marvellous Spider-Man ^talk

I am not able to save the above signature in Preferences. Error message Invalid raw signature. Check HTML tags Marvellous Spider-Man (talk) 03:40, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

You probably need to find a way to fit your signature within the limit of something like 250 characters. You can either see this as a limit on your creativity or as a constraint within which to improve your art.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:27, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Don't give answer to question you have little knowledge. I have seen far longer signature codes. John Jaffar Janardan (talk) 06:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Oops, Sorry to both of you. It seems you were right. John Jaffar Janardan (talk) 06:37, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

@John Jaffar Janardan: Actually, jmcgnh is correct; the limit is 255 characters. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 06:34, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

After reading the admonitions in WP:SIGLENGTH I did a character count on my own sig block. It said 251. So it's just dumb luck that I didn't run into the limit (dumb luck and a relatively short username). But perhaps I should go back and see whether I couldn't be satisfied with something that fit into 120 characters.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:02, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

No, something else is wrong with my code as this is also not working

Marvellous Spider - Man

This is less than 255 but I get in preferences, "Invalid raw signature. Check HTML tags". Marvellous Spider-Man (talk) 07:11, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

@Marvellous Spider-Man: The major issue here seems to be a missing </span>; your signature code should look more like this: <strong><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">[[User:Marvellous Spider-Man|<b style="color:Aqua">Marvellous</b> <b style="color:LawnGreen">Spider</b>]] [[User talk:Marvellous Spider-Man|<font color="SpringGreen">- Man</font>]]</span></strong>. Someone with more knowledge of HTML might be able to tell you if there are any other issues with your signature code. CabbagePotato (talk) 07:39, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

CabbagePotato is right. Fixed Marvellous Spider-Man 08:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Bacteria and Archaea

Whenever I make a page about a bacterium, whenever I or someone else puts Template:Taxonomy onto my page, it always treats bacteria as a kingdom and not a superkingdom. But Wikispecies treats bacteria (and archaea) as superkingdoms. Can somebody explain this? Here's the link to Wikispecies. [2] Charizardmewtwo (talk) 13:47, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

@Charizardmewtwo: you might want to ask this question at template talk:Taxobox or at one of the Wikiprojects that support the template. Someone more expert in taxonomy is more likely to see the question at those locations. 08:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Charizardmewtwo - You might also try WT:WikiProject Biology or one of its subprojects. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:18, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Questions about recent edits to the TomoTherapy article

Hi, I don't know that this is the best place to put something like this but I have a few issues I'd like some advice/answers about. A little while ago I made a few edits to the Tomotherapy (a radiotherapy technique) article, primarily adding more references and improving the readability, I felt it was generally a reasonable article, in line with Wikipedia policy. Recently an [3] was made adding an "Emergence of tomotherapy section".

I personally feel this section is poorly written (uncyclopaedic? I'm sure I've seen this word used in a policy but I find it almost impossible to find them again), almost completely uncited (the single citation link is not working and not hugely relevant), covers information that should be (and can be found) in other areas of the article (for example the history section) and has several other problems (for example sounding very promotional, as was a problem with the article previously). I have put a message to this effect on the talk page but as the article is not that popular and infrequently edited, it has not been responded to. My personal preference would be to revert this (and subsequent) edits but I am reluctant to do this independently, and fear it could start an edit war.

Additionally, I am also concerned that there may be a conflict of interest as the user account used to make this large edit has also only made (numerous) edits to the page about "the other" person the new section credits with invention of tomotherapy.

I apologise for the length of this message and if any of it is inappropriate for this page, but I would much appreciate any advice for how to move forward. Thank you, Therealmorris (talk) 11:51, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Therealmorris. While the edit does generally seem to have been done in good faith, I agree that it was overall unencyclopedic. I have reverted to the previous version and pinged the editor to the talk page to discuss.

If you haven't already, it may be helpful to sign up with, and address things like this on a related wikiproject like Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine. Usually there are a few uninvolved editors willing to give it a look. Incidentally, when you come across a new editor, it's usually a good idea to ping them to a conversation by inserting {{ping|USERNAME}} into your comment. A lot of new users haven't gotten the hang of how talk pages or their watchlist works, so they may be unaware that you've tried to initiate a discussion. I'm now watching the article and will be happy to help out any way I can. TimothyJosephWood 12:10, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you I appreciate that. I will certainly join the project and follow your suggestions in future Therealmorris (talk) 12:14, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

@Therealmorris, I see you've written (and linked) "TomoTherapy" which is a trademark, instead of "tomotherapy" the generic term. Do you have a conflict of interest with respect to the Accuray company, the trademark owners? If you do have any kind of relationship with the company you are required to post a proper COI declaration. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:32, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

@Dodger67 Hi, sorry that's my mistake, I have no relation to the company at all, I've just absent mindedly written it like that, probably having just looked at the talk page where the name change is discussed. I am aware of the conflict of interest policies and mentioned what I thought was a potential conflict of interest in terms of commercial involvement with the company in the above comment. As you'll see I also wrote it in the generic way in the same comment. I made sure to use the generic term in the article and made changes to that effect as far as I remember. Therealmorris (talk) 14:30, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Family history My grandfather Walter Bollands was in WW1 & WW2

Just ponting this out,

Notability Not A VC winner ?

This does not fit your criteria either other he was age 13 a, 

3 years younger than Walter?

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

Or this one Not A VC winner ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Parr_(British_Army_soldier) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulboll (talk • contribs) 16:08, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

(as mentioned below, We don't have articles on all of the millions of people who fought in the World Wars ) Hi

Walter Bollands WW1 enlisted at age of 16, the age of enlistment was 19 years,

I was wondering if he was eligible for a page on Wikipedia,

Extended content

Notability ( Age 16 enlisted, age 17 fough on the Somme, sent back home wounded, age 18 back to the front in France, fought at Battle of the Lys, age 19 German POW. WW1 enlisted at the age of 16 ( enlisted two year under the required 19 ) age 17 transferred 1/5th Bn, the Yorkshire Regiment, joining 150th Machine Gun Corps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_Gun_Corps The 150th Machine Gun Company was formed in 150th (York & Durham) Brigade, 50th (Northumbrian) Division, They fought on the Somme at The Battle of Flers-Courcelette, The Battle of Morval and The Battle of the Transloy Ridges http://www.wartimememoriesproject.com/greatwar/allied/battalion.php?pid=10731 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Flers%E2%80%93Courcelette ) at age 17 he fought and was wounded but survived, The Battle of Flers–Courcelette (15–22 September 1916) was fought during the Battle of the Somme in France. sent home and shipped back with 14 highlight infenrty. He also fought at Battle of the Lys (1918) He was "C" Company, 14th H.L.I. taken as POW, age 19, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Lys_(1918) POW German records from Laventie, Lille, Dülmen, Hameln, Soltau POW Camps. WW1, On 18th October 2014, The Evening Gazzette, publist an artle about about him in the remeber when edition. He is listed on these site WW1 http://www.ww1-yorkshires.org.uk/html-files/photos-b.htm http://www.wartimememoriesproject.com/greatwar/hospitals/3scottishgeneralhospital.php http://www.machine-gun-corps-database.co.uk/databse_sources.html http://www.wartimememoriesproject.com/greatwar/allied/regiment.php?pid=17618 Prisoners of War. German records from Hameln, Soltau and Dulmen Camps http://4thyorkshires.com/F071POWCampRecords.html WW2 http://www.wartimememoriesproject.com/ww2/allied/royalartillery.php Private Walter BOLLANDS. 3570. Birth registered Q1 1899. (Middlesbrough). From his POW record, date of birth was 15 December 1898. Fought with the 5th Battalion Yorkshire Regiment. Wounded Sept/Oct 1916 (Hence, under age when both joining the regiment and fighting overseas). Transferred to the 14th Battalion Highland Light Infantry (No 202902). Captured on 9 April 1918 near Lille. Interned at Soltau Prison Camp. POW record shows that he wasn't wounded at the time, and that his mother lived at 35 West Terrace, North Ormesby, Middlesbrough. Married Cecilia Holland Q1 1920. Died Q1 1966 (MIddlesbrough) More info I have his serive record for ww1 & ww2, WW1 at aged 16 he joined ( 14/09/1915 ) 3/5th Battalions 6TH Battalion Alexandra,Princess of Wales's Own Yorkshire Regiment was a Depot/training units Formed in Northallerton and Scarborough, April and March 1915, Walter transferred 08/02/1916 5th Yorkshire regiment. 5th Battalion Yorkshire Regiment, Walter Landed in Rouen, in Northern France on the River Seine, is the capital of the Haute-Normandie region and the historic capital city of Normandy. 11/08/1916 he joined 50th (Northumbrian) Division = 150th (York & Durham) Brigade = transferred 1/5th Bn, the Yorkshire Regiment, then joined 150th Machine Gun Corps http://www.1914-1918.net/50div.htm The Battle of Flers-Courcelette* (15th-22nd September) 17/09/1916 Gun Shot Wound to the back, sent to Le Treport on the French coast which was the site for some significant hospital provision Walter Bollands was wounded sept - Oct. source Green Howard Gazette 1916 wounded - Killed Admitted Scottish National Red Cross Hospital, Cardonald, Glasgow. after recovering filled in form AFW 3016 - an Army form authorising a wounded man to return to duty 04/11/1916 4th Reserve Yorkshire Regiment http://www.ww1-yorkshires.org.uk/html-files/photos-w.htm he then jined 5th battalion Highland Light Infantry 2/5th (City of Glasgow) Battalion Moved 1916 to Danbury, going on to the Curragh in January 1917, Dublin in August, and back to the Curragh in November 1917. Ireland, post 14 th bat HLI France 20/02/1918 120th Brigade 40th Division 14th Battalion Highland Light Infantry 202902 (MSBD [MS? Base Depot] Joined posted to 14th Highland Light Infantry 20/02/1918 ). http://www.14hli.co.uk/contributors/ 01/03/1918 The battalion moved into the front line at FLEURBAIX relieving 2/10th K.O.L.R. POW. Service record reported missing, Red Cross records, Dulmen, list dated 20-5-1918 (previously at Lille) Hameln, listed dated 1-7-1918 (prevously at Dulmen) Soltau, list dated 20-8-1918 (previously at Hameln) He was "C" Company, 14th H.L.I. ww2 ( Corps Royal Artillery Light Anti Aircraft ) Army Rank Gunner (Equating to Private ) ( Army No 1482498 ) Posted to 4th Regiment Maritime Anti-Aircraft Royal Artillery Reported Missing at Sea ( Bombardier royal artillery Rank of Corporal ) Gunners of the Royal Artillery Maritime Regiment manned the Bofors gun. MEDALS 1939 - 45 STAR, ATLANTIC STAR, PACIFIC STAR, DEFENCE MED,WAR MEDAL Death 12/01/1966 death by cat bite

Paul Bollands

Paulboll (talk) 12:51, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

See notability guidelines for military personnel. Did he receive the second-highest decoration of the British armed forces multiple times, or the highest decoration (Victoria Cross), or did he hold flag rank? If not, he needs to pass general notability guidelines. (We don't have articles on all of the millions of people who fought in the World Wars.) Robert McClenon (talk) 13:12, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Paul. As Robert rightly points out, generally, the notability of combatants is determined by either the highest award received, or the highest rank achieved. For example, recipients of the Medal of Honor or Victoria Cross are considered basically automatically notable. Enlisted personnel (much to our dismay), are usually not notable due to rank. Other than that, if you are interested in the subject area, and it seems you are, I would encourage you to join us over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. TimothyJosephWood 15:12, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Paul, both of those articles you link to establish the notability of the subjects through widespread coverage in reliable sources. In these cases it's more the role they occupied (youngest, first killed) that is notable rather than the person who holds that distinction. In that respect you are right neither Lewis nor Parr are notable in themselves but by way of what they did/what happened to them they have become notable. I'm afraid the same cannot be said of your grandfather. His bravery/patriotism etc in enlisting underage isn't in doubt but that doesn't make him notable in the way that Wikipedia defines it. Nthep (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2016 (UTC)