Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 526

Archive 520

←

Archive 524

Archive 525

Archive 526

Archive 527

Archive 528

→

Archive 530

Is it good to use emphsis instead of double quotes

I see a lot of pages using double quotes (") to emphsise things. Is it better to use emphasis provided by wiki markup such as ('') or (''') instead of double quotes ? Kaartic (talk) 05:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @Kaartic:. Quotation marks should not be used for emphasis in articles, and neither should bold type. Emphasis is shown by use of italics, but this is syntactically different than the use of italics for species names, foreign words, book titles and the like. The preferred way to italicize for emphasis is by using Template:Em. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Are you sure that the quote marks are being used to emphasise things, Kaartic, or is the text inside them a quote? Cordless Larry (talk) 06:57, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

There is further discussion of this issue on my talk page. Emphasis is only one of the purposes of italics (preferred on Wikipedia) or boldface, and some of the examples given in my talk page are not at all matters of emphasis. The Manual of Style explains the proper usage of quotation marks, italics and boldface in various circumstances. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:21, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

My page is set for speedydelete .. please help

A week or two ago I had created a wikipedia entry known as 0seccon based on a cyber security community I'm in. But then few days ago I got a message stating it to be set for deletion. What shall I do to save my page.? pls help E7H1C5 (talk) 08:29, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

E7H1C5, our article 0SecCon was deleted on 3 September as it did not " credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject". I cannot read the deleted article, but reading your post on Talk:0SecCon it sounds as if you were trying to promote "an ongoing effort build up of cyber security community" whereas Wikipedia reports what reliable, independent, secondary sources have already said about a subject. Unless/until, 0SecCon receives extensive coverage in reliable, independent, sources, it is ineligible for a Wikipedia article - Arjayay (talk) 08:39, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, E7H1C5. "Providing insight" into things is not among the purposes of Wikipedia. Please read your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 09:53, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Languages for article

Hi!

I have created an article Snorrastofa in English, but now I see that there is one like that in Icelandic already. How do I connect these two, so that when you enter one you can see the option of it in the second language? Sagatrail (talk) 09:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Sagatrail, welcome to the Teahouse. That needs to be done via Wikidata, which I have done for you at wikidata:Q16426829. See also Help:Interlanguage links. And, one small tip: when asking for help, please link to the article if you can (I found it easily enough this time, and have linked it in your message, it just helps avoid confusion). Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 10:10, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much !

Any chance you could also help me with adding a picture to this article and map location somehow? I looked for it everywhere but I dont seem to find an appropriate anwer. I own the picture I would like to include, but it doesnt seem I can complete the process.Sagatrail (talk) 10:50, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Sagatrail, I would focus on making sure that the article content is properly sourced as a priority instead, if I were you. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability on the importance of this, and Help:Referencing for beginners for the details of how to do so. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:49, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Sagatrail: Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup should get you started with images. You will (generally) need to own the copyright and release it under a suitable free license, or use an image which is already licensed under a suitable free license. In general, it will need to be hosted on Wikimedia Commons, and comply with their content policies (which should be explained in that help link). Cordless Larry is correct to emphasise focussing on the text content as the first priority, although we are an illustrated encyclopaedia; so good, relevant, and useful images are generally a good thing. For the map location (also lower priority than the text), this would normally be part of an infobox, and needs some quite specific markup. If you provide GPS coordinates (latitude and longitude) on the article's talk page, someone should be able to assist with adding a suitable infobox including a map. Murph9000 (talk) 11:48, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Map and picture in article

Hi !

How can I insert a picture and map to my wikipedia article? I think I have an autoconfirmed account, but it doesnt work. Thank you!

Sagatrail (talk) 13:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sagatrail - Autoconfirmed accounts need 10 edits and 4 days - you have 11 edits but only two days and a quarter - your first edit was 11:04, 13 September 2016. You could wait until 11:05, 17 September 2016, or apply at Files for upload - Arjayay (talk) 16:50, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Sagatrail: See also the answers in your previous question. Murph9000 (talk) 11:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

What is the best way to notify other WikiProjects about a discussion?

Is there a template I can use to notify several WikiProjet talks about a discussion I started? (Please {ping} me in the response).--Bolter21 (talk to me) 16:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bolter21: not that I'm aware of, you'd need to leave a message on each project's talk page. Make sure it is neutrally phrased so that you don't get accused of WP:CANVASSING. Nthep (talk) 17:47, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bolter21: For specific editors I've used {{Talkback}} and under its "See Also" section there are a bunch of others - but these have to be posted individually to each talk page. {{WikiProject please see}} seems about right, following it with a little context. - Reidgreg (talk) 21:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bolter21: In addition to the above good advice, I suggest being careful to avoid being spammy about it. I.e. a good neutral pointer posted in the reasonable minimum number of locations likely to be interested in it. Enough to draw it to the attention of people who are likely be interested, without being excessive. In the past, I've just left a simple (non-template) and fairly brief message on the most relevant WikiProject talk pages. Keep it short / minimal, and let interested people read the detail by following the link you provide. Murph9000 (talk) 12:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Wanted to know about autoconfirmed user to edit

Hi

I am a new user to the wiki..

I have seen some errors or incorrect entries in some of the links.. but those are semi-protected..

I want to edit those with reliable sources.. But i have no access to those.. How can i go ahead to edit that.

I need help regarding that.

Regards Hareesh Doppalapudi.hareesh (talk) 12:06, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Doppalapudi.hareesh, welcome to the Teahouse. Your account will be autoconfirmed in 15 hours. Then you can edit semi-protected pages. Until then it would be possible to submit an edit request by clicking the "View source" tab, but I suggest you just wait. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:17, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

How do I get a pin map and a dot on it?

Im working on this draft by translating from fr:Conneux. How do i get the map and pin? Pyrusca (talk) 23:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Pyrusca: Welcome to the Teahouse. I do not have much experience with adding maps but you can find useful map information at Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Conventions. I hope that you find it helpful. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@Pyrusca: The simplest way is to use Infobox settlement in the article. If you enter "Belgium" in the "pushpin_map" field and the geographic coordinates of the place (50°15′00″N 5°03′36″E) in the appropriate fields, the "map and pin" will automatically appear in the infobox. Deor (talk) 13:34, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I am New here

...This unsigned entry was added by Shark32322 (talk | edits) 16 September 2016
(and the signature was added by CiaPan (talk) 11:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC))

Welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse, Shark32322. Please feel free to pop back when you have a question to ask. Murph9000 (talk) 13:48, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Wiki

How can I help my children through wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 9OO6 (talk • contribs) 12:22, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, 9OO6, welcome to the Teahouse. I really can't answer that question, it is just too open ended, and does not seem to pertain to editing Wikipedia. Please ask any specific questions about Wikipedia editing that you may have. Murph9000 (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, 9OO6. Please see Wikipedia:Advice for parents for general information. For home-schooling or supplemental schooling, Wikipedia:FAQ/Schools may also be of interest. - Reidgreg (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC). Oh, you might also be interested in Wikipedia for Schools, a set of 6000 articles edited for suitability for children. If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask! - Reidgreg (talk) 15:18, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Template deletion

How do I put up a template for deletion?*Treker (talk) 16:56, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, *Treker! It's probably best to go through Wikipedia:Templates for discussion where template editors can discuss the template in question and take appropriate action. (HA! Star-Treker - I just got that!) - Reidgreg (talk) 19:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Reidgreg, .*Treker (talk) 19:31, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Article Creation

I need some help. I am thinking about creating an article called "Air Operations in the Korean War", and I don't know how to go about it. I'm twelve, and don't have experience doing this kind of thing, so if anybody could help me, that would be great.

Thanks, Jak474 (talk) 17:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@Jak474: Welcome to the Teahouse. You are taking on a major challenge. Start by reading Korean War#Aerial warfare and all related articles and links. Read as many of the sources as you can get your hands on. Search for new sources, and book length academic sources are best. Start active editing by improving the existing articles and interacting with other editors interested in the Korean War. Explain your actions in the article talk pages and defer to other editors until you gain experience. Read and study Your first article. You have a lot of work ahead of you. Come back to the Teahouse any time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:50, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

You might also want to post at WP:WikiProject Military History. They would probably be willing to help and mentor you through the process Cullen328 described above. In any case, you might want to join the project if you're interested in wars. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Multiple personal sandboxes

Am I allowed to create multiple sandboxes in my userspace? Doonagatha (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Doonagatha. Yes, you can create as many sandbox pages you want, as long as they are being used to improve the encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:27, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Just to expand a little on Cullen's answer, Doonagatha, those sandboxes will have different names. Those names will start with your user prefix, like "User:Doonagatha/sandbox" (the default one) and "User:Doonagatha/Butterflies" (for an article you are writing about trains). If you wanted, you could call them "sandbox2", "sandbox3" etc. Even though only one of them actually has the name "sandbox", they are all referred to as sandboxes.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:37, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Doonagatha (talk) 03:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

page name

Hi, I am a new editor and I have a lot to learn. I'm working on/trying to clean up a page on the Terrace Theatre in Robbinsdale, Minnesota. It is currently the subject of a lawsuit and there are some strong feelings on both sides of the issue (some folks want it torn down; others want to preserve it; a county judge will soon rule on its fate). I tried to take out the subjective info and someone overruled me, but I am persisting. So far the edits I made last night are holding. I want to edit more, without causing a reaction from the people who want the theater to be demolished.

That's just my story, but here's my question: The theater was originally called the "Terrace Theatre" by its owners. Its current supporters also refer to it as such. However, the Wikipedia page is headed "Terrace Theater (Minnesota)." Can I change that? Or can I create a NEW page called Terrace Theatre (in hopes of circumventing those who would try to express their opinion via Wiki)?

Thank you! KIRTIS (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

KIRTIS: it seems unlikely that Americans would call anything a "theatre". Wikipedia already has an article Terrace Theater, about a theatre in Long Beach, California. The article about the theatre in Minnesota is called Terrace Theater (Minnesota) to distinguish it from the one in California. Please don't change its name. Maproom (talk) 17:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

KIRTIS, Maproom: American theaters are often named "Theatre" due to our feeling that the British spelling makes for a classier name. Since the references use the "re" spelling, the title of the article should too. I will move the page to Terrace Theatre (Minnesota). StarryGrandma (talk) 19:10, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

StarryGrandma: I never knew that! Thank you for the correction. Maproom (talk) 20:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Seems you've got a bigger problem than just a page title. Fuhghettaboutit has placed {{Copyviocore}} on the page and RevisionDeleted almost all the revisions because it seems to be, in its entirety (including its history), a possible copyright violation of several pages. I suggest fixing that within the next week. Otherwise, the page will be deleted. (You can, of course, always create a new page with the same name, provided that it is not a copyright violation.) -- Gestrid (talk) 06:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Need advice on how to make several updates to a particular Wikipedia page

I have been asked to make several updates to a the John Langeloth Loeb Jr. page on Wikipedia. The updates are in the middle of several different paragraphs, they include switching the order of some of the paragraphs, and also adding to some items to bulleted lists.

I got advice from one seasoned Wikipedia editor to post the updates to the Talk page of the Wikipedia page that I want to update with the template: {{request edit}}. Do I have the option (or is it proper) to post the ENTIRE Wikipedia page with all my updates in one post to the Talk page? Or maybe there is another preferred method?

I welcome your advice on this. Thanks!

Mybestwords (talk) 21:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

The article in question is John Langeloth Loeb Jr.. If you are saying that you want to provide a complete rewrite of the article, then, as a paid editor, you would be well advised to provide the proposed entire rewrite of the article on the talk page. Of course, there is no guarantee that the edits that you request will be made by the volunteer editors. In particular, promotional or non-neutral language will be trimmed out ruthlessly. (I thank you for making the required paid editing declaration.) Robert McClenon (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Robert - Thanks for your response! When you say "you would be well advised to provide the proposed entire rewrite of the article on the talk page" do I post the source text of the article, like the text that starts with

{{Infobox person |name = Ambassador John L. Loeb Jr.

etc? Or would it be better to post sub-sections of the article, one at a time?

Should I insert the "request edit" template at the beginning before I paste in the code?

Do I have the option to make all the edits on my personal sandbox page and have the volunteer editors review it there?

Thanks in advance for your help with this. I'm very new at Wikipedia and want to be sure to proceed correctly.

Mybestwords (talk) 01:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Mybestwords: in my experience, an attempt to get the entire content of a section replaced by a new version is generally ignored or criticised. Experienced editors do not like to take instructions from an inexperienced editor with a conflict of interest. On the other hand, a request to correct erroneous information, backed by a reference supporting the correct information, is very likely to be respected. Maproom (talk) 07:52, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mybestwords, I concur with Maproom - pasting an entire re-write turns the reviewing editors task into "spot the difference" and, unfortunately, people have tried sliding subtle re-wordings and blatant falsities through in such re-writes. A specific request "please update the staff from 100 to 1000 as supported by this reference" is clear, and can easily be checked.
Please remember whoever considers your proposed changes is a volunteer, who is under no obligation to update the article, and is likely to go and find something more interesting to do if you make it too difficult, or onerous. - Arjayay (talk) 08:49, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

For an example where I have rewritten a section and had my suggestion accepted, see Talk:Bradford Playhouse (I put the proposed text on a user subpage of mine and linked it from there). I did my best to make it easy for a reviewer to see what I had done, and to make their job easy. --ColinFine (talk) 09:47, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@Mybestwords: If the request turns out to be a bit more than "Change this thing to this thing", I suggest using {{request edit|R}} instead of just {{request edit}}. The former will let the reviewing editor know that it may take a bit to review the edit. -- Gestrid (talk) 07:13, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

original research threshold

WP:OR says to only state things from primary sources which "can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge". I wanted to check if something would be obvious to an educated person (by Wikipedia standards) or break the OR threshold. On this TV show, sometimes shown in close-up, is what exactly appears to be a human breastbone or sternum, a very distinctive bone. Characters say that it was pilfered from human remains, and through character actions it is closely related to the center-front of a person's chest (where the breastbone is located). But it is never stated on-screen that it is a breastbone. So, is it a reasonable conclusion to make (and state in plot summaries) that it is a breastbone, or would secondary sources be required? - Reidgreg (talk) 16:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC) (moved to top Reidgreg (talk) 16:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC))

Welcome to the Teahouse, Reidgreg.

My vote would be to stay conservative and just call it whatever the characters call it. To use the word sternum, when the characters do not, is to play loose with the policy WP:NOR.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:07, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

jmcgnh, unfortunately the characters don't actually call it anything in the scenes, they simply handle it or react to its presence. And another editor has referred to it as something which it is clearly not. I would prefer to use the more common breastbone (than sternum) and was hoping most "educated persons" would know that much anatomy. (It's not as recognizable as a skull or femur but still fairly recognizable especially in context.) Maybe I should just summarize and write around it so it isn't mentioned at all? - Reidgreg (talk) 12:11, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Reidgreg, why is it important to be precise? Why not just call it a bone? --ColinFine (talk) 09:56, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

ColinFine, wow, how come that didn't occur to me? Bare, simple, concise solution. I guess I got stuck overthinking it. Thanks! - Reidgreg (talk) 14:21, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Can reference sources be in a different language than the article is written in?

Paragraphman (talk) 14:08, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I have thought about it as well. I am writing an article about the history of South Africa and included sources written in Afrikaans. South African may well understand them, but not others. I think about Switzerland and Canada, where more than one language is used. Regards, Vaaljapie (talk) 14:20, 17 September 2016 (UTC) Or should it be "are used"? Vaaljapie (talk) 14:23, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi both, Non-English sources are allowed, but if available, English sources are preferred - see WP:NONENG for the full detail.
"One language is used", is correct, but it would be "multiple languages are used". Language is singular in the first and plural in the second. - Arjayay (talk) 14:59, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I think Vaaljapie is referring to the usage "more than one language", which is correct. Maproom (talk) 15:12, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

How to post a comment on someone's talk page

Hello, thank you for your help with the article on the Terrace Theater (Minnesota). I was pleased that you were able to change the title. However, since that time, a user named Fuhghettaboutit has filed many objections. These may be legitimate. I wanted to contact this user through his/her talk page, which shows the statement, "If you leave a comment for me below I will likely comment back here as well, but I might also duplicate on your talk page, depending on context or if you request. Please sign your comments by placing ~~~~ at the end and note that new posts belong at the bottom of the page. Thanks." But I cannot find a place to leave a comment (at the bottom or anywhere else).

I believe this user is trying to help, and so am I. I want to volunteer to work on it further, but it appears I can do nothing due to investigation of potential copyright issue.

As I said, I'm new to this. Please advise. Thank you.

KIRTIS (talk) 00:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi KIRTIS. Click the "New section" tab at top of User talk:Fuhghettaboutit to a start a new discussion. See more at Help:Using talk pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

KIRTIS All copyright violations must be removed from Wikipedia immediately upon being detected. That does not mean that you cannot add new, properly referenced content that does not violate copyright. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:19, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey, KIRTIS! As PrimeHunter said, click the "New Section" button and fill out the form, including the "Subject/headline" blank that appears. That will automatically create a new section at the bottom of the page. You will continue to leave your own comments at the bottom of that section, even if someone else adds another new section below the one you created. If you come back, say, a few days later with a different question, it's usually best if you create another new section.

Also, I'm pinging Fuhghettaboutit to this discussion since it is their talk page. They may have some helpful input. -- Gestrid (talk) 06:26, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for responding. Hi KIRTIS. You can post here or to my talk page, I will see either. The issue with the page is that it appears to be a copyright violation, or at least it needs to be investigated. The problem is that the content (some of which you copied into the architecture section, without noting where you had taken it from at all), even though it comes from a CC-By-SA 4.0 licensed website, may be taken or parts of it taken from a 2007 book.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:20, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

When to use merge template?

Hi there, I've just edited Talk:Australian National University § Proposed consolidation of related articles to propose something of an overhaul of related article. Am I supposed to use {{Merge}} straight away, or do I wait to see if other editors respond? With a few of the changes the article I'm proposing they be merged into hasn't been created yet – does this mean that I can't use {{Merge}} in those cases? What do I do in the event that no one responds? Doonagatha (talk) 11:57, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Doonagatha, welcome to the Teahouse. Since you have a declared CoI, I suggest giving it a day or two, remembering that there is no deadline, to see if anyone responds. It might look better if any merge was formally proposed by someone without a CoI, although I don't know that is strictly a requirement, just for the sake of appearances. For cases of more complex splitting and merging, I suggest allowing at least a week for discussion and responses, longer if needed, after the formal merge tags are placed, and not moving forward on anything until the discussion has reached a reasonable consensus. Murph9000 (talk) 16:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Doonagatha. As Murph9000 said, you should wait a couple of days to see if anyone formally starts a merge proposal. After that, if no one has started one, follow the instructions at WP:MERGEINIT to start it yourself. -- Gestrid (talk) 17:26, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Article deletion prevention tips for Apache Solr and Rails

Hi I have create a new article Apache Solr and Rails which is regarding how to integrate Apache Solr with Rails and has been cited with necessary references but for some reason the page is proposed for deletion and I am still not able to find out why! Can someone please guide me how to improve the article and prevent itfrom deletion!Mhpandya (talk) 05:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Mhpandya, welcome to the Teahouse. I've had a quick look at the article, and I'm not certain that it is appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia. Please see WP:NOTMANUAL, as we don't normally host technical guides / manuals / how-to type pages. The content looks like it is probably useful, it just does not strike me as being something for an encyclopaedia in its current form. It looks like something which should be hosted somewhere within apache.org, where I know they have many examples of similar content for their various projects, some of which are even hosted in their own wikis. There are also many other wikis out there which would be glad to have such content (assuming, on good faith, that your instructions are good and accurate). Murph9000 (talk) 05:18, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Mhpandya: The Apache Solr Wiki is probably the appropriate place for this content. Murph9000 (talk) 05:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Mhpandya. Your article would only be appropriate for Wikipedia if reliable sources completely independent of Apache Solr, Sunspot and Rails have devoted significant coverage to the topic, and if the article was written as a neutral overview of the topic summarizing those independent sources. We do not host "how to" guides. There are many other websites that welcome such content. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:20, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi I just wanted to inform you that this article Apache Solr and Rails is a part of the curriculum of a course https://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/efg/517/f09/syllabus. So I kindly request you not to delete this page as it is an academic article.

Thank you.Mhpandya (talk) 18:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

The appropriate place to make that argument is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apache Solr and Rails, Mhpandya, though the fact that an article is being used as part of a curriculum isn't usually considered a valid reason for keeping it. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:46, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and wikilinked this discussion in the AfD discussion, and I've brought up the author's claim that it's part of a college course, though I'm a little doubtful that it is. I looked at the syllabus they linked, and I saw no evidence that a Wikipedia article needed to be created.

Mhpandya, you should still comment there with any additional information. -- Gestrid (talk) 18:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Also, I suggest you read Wikipedia:Student assignments so the same problem hopefully doesn't come up in the future. -- Gestrid (talk) 18:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia is not a web host. Please do not use Wikipedia as the vehicle for hosting materials used for a college course. Presumably you can use the university's own web site for the purpose. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Mhpandya I sincerely do not want to be harsh here, only I think it's important to set realistic expectations and avoid last minute unwelcome surprises. At this point, it seems inevitable that the article will either be deleted or changed beyond recognition within a matter of days. It is extremely unlikely to remain for long in its current form. The University should urgently put a copy of this article onto one of their own servers (I'm certain they will have a vast computing infrastructure, possibly even some servers running MediaWiki), and update their course materials to point to that. Alternatively, you can probably just upload it to the Apache wiki that I linked above, and they would probably be glad to have it.

You can certainly make your case at the AfD discussion, but I do not believe it would be supported by any Wikipedia policies or guidelines. AfD results tend to place great emphasis on the most compelling arguments based around policies and guidelines. Again, this may seem harsh, but Wikipedia essentially does not care if someone has created an external reliance on any particular content, especially when the content is out of scope for the project. Please do make your case, I absolutely encourage that, just keep realistic expectations. It may be used in academia, but that does not change the fact that it is not what Wikipedia would normally consider a good encyclopaedia article suitable for inclusion. Wikipedia does not host all types of academic content.

Murph9000 (talk) 19:17, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Flickr

I am still confused about Flickr. I want to add some pictures for Klára Koukalová, but most of her pictures on Flickr say All Rights Reserved. Bryson483 (talk) 23:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Bryson483. Finding a photo or other image online does not automatically means that it is accpetable to upload to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. You need to verify whether the licensing of the image, etc. is compatible with the relevant policies of each site. Commons only accepts content with is unequivocally freely licensed or within the public domain. Flickr images can be uploaded to Commons, but they need to be licensed as explained in c:COM:FLICKR. Only the creator/copyright holder of the image can freely license it; you cannot download it to your computer for "free" (i.e., without paying money for it) and then upload it to Commons under a free license. The only way you can do that is if you get explicit permission from the creator/copyright holder of the image to do so. You also have to be a little careful with Flickr images and make sure to the best of your ability that the Flickr account holder is actually the creator copyright holder of the image. Some Flickr users simply upload images they have found on other sites, whose copyright may be held by another person.

What above I wrote pretty much applies to Wikipedia as well, except that Wikipedia does allow certain copyright-protected images to be uploaded as non-free content. The use of such images, however, is highly restricted and must comply with WP:NFCC. Bascially, anything for which a freely licensed equivalent either exists or which could be expected to be created is not allowed as explained in WP:FREER. This almost always means that non-free images of living persons are almost never allowed to be used. Klára Koukalová is still living and still active as a tennis player, so it almost certain that any non-free images of her will not be considered acceptable per WP:NFCC. If you're unable to find any freely licensed images on line, then you can try seeing if someone can create one by asking at WP:RP or c:COM:PR. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC); [Posted edited by Marchjuly after it had been archived to add the word "not" which if left out completely changes the meaning of what was written. -- 21:48, 3 October 2016 (UTC)]

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Hello I recently came back to the wikipedia article on DWS I just edited to explain the significance of events surrounding the resignation of Debbie Wasserman. I received a message from a user named "Neutrality" that because I edited the page too much it went back to it's original wording. I apologize for I am new and it was my first time ever editing a page on wikipedia. Speaking as a former Bernie Sanders volunteer I can attest that "bias" against the Sanders campaign is a complete understatement. The very behavior conducted by the DNC throughout the primaries is an indictment that they worked to actively sabotaged the presidential campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders. The wikileaks archives just confirm what we all saw during the primary season. Sure the resignation chapter towards the bottom of the page goes into a little more detail but still seems to whitewash the significance of the betrayal committed against the parties own base of supporters. (Redacted)

Now on to my real question. I was told by "Neutrality" that I needed to speak the editor and article creator as to why the page was reverted after my edit so I can debate it within a discussion page but I can't seem to find either one of them. I would like to know who is the article creator so I may speak with the creator to discuss why I believe the wording should be changed to include "sabotage" and "conspired" because that's exactly what transpired.

Herm3s Tresmeticus (talk) 00:47, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Herm3s Tresmeticus, I have redacted the BLP violation in your post. You may not post that sort of thing without high quality sources anywhere. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:54, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

To answer your question, Neutrality told you to "discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page". So, post on Talk:Debbie Wasserman Schultz without making any unsourced/poorly sourced contentious assertions please. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:09, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Herm3s Tresmeticus: Welcome to the Teahouse. We have something in common because we both supported Sanders in the primaries and are both unhappy with Schultz. But I have been editing here for over seven years and you are new. Let me give you some friendly advice: It is a very bad idea to begin editing Wikipedia by working on the biography of a person you hate. Editors must comply with the neutral pint of view and this is especially true when working on controversial biographies. Trying to turn a biography into an exposé or a "hit piece" is never acceptable, no matter how deeply you disagree with a person's actions. Any material you add in such circumstances must be referenced to the highest quality reliable, independent sources. You are expected to comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and our biography of Schultz has to summarize what the full range of reliable sources say about her conduct as DNC chair, not just the most extreme voices. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Where to ask?

where should we request for closure of page move discussions? --HamedH94 (talk) 03:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse, HamedH94. According to the Requested Moves page, Any uninvolved editor in good standing may close a move request. Basically, anyone that has not participated in the move discussion can close it if such a move doesn't require administrator action (such as, for example, un-salting an article name). You should definitely wait for someone uninvolved to close the discussion because, if you ask someone else to close it, another editor may consider that to be canvassing, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Generally, requested moves stay open for about seven days. After that and after the consensus seems to have formed, someone will come along and close the discussion. If there doesn't seem to be enough of a consensus, the requested move will be relisted for an additional seven days. I hope that answer wasn't too much to handle. Much of the information I just gave you can be found at Wikipedia:Requested moves. -- Gestrid (talk) 04:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Issues about two wikipedia pages

I have noticed two pages about railway stations. Both have similar content and different titles. Kolanukonda railway station is located just north of Pedavadlapudi railway station. Please have a look into this. Because I am a new user, I don't want to attempt major changes.

• Kolanukonda railway station
• Pedavadlapudi railway station

Thanks Jazze7 (talk) 07:53, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Jazze7, for pointing this out. It was clear from the first reference that the two articles were about the same railway station. I have therefore replaced Kolanukonda railway station by a redirect to Pedavadlapudi railway station. Maproom (talk) 08:05, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Maproom. There is a minor issue on Pedavadlapudi railway station page. At the bottom of pane on right, Kolanukonda directs to Pedavadlapudi railway station page. Maybe the link should be removed.

Jazze7 (talk) 08:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help - it seems that there was a problem when the Kolanukonda article was first created. I've corrected it, and the links should be correct now. Thank you! - Bilby (talk) 09:19, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

how to add an image of a painting to a wikipedia entry

Hi, How do i add a jpg of an oil painting to a wikipedia entry?Steviehutch (talk) 15:28, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Steviehutch, and welcome to the Teahouse! I understand that images and copyrights can sometimes can sometimes be tricky. To start, I'll need to know some basic information on the painting and the image of it, like the age of the painting, where the painting was photographed, who took the photo, and when the painting was photographed. Also, if you are trying to upload a picture for David Pennefather Thomas More, you may wish to wait until the deletion discussion has finished. -- AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 16:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Steviehutch. You've actually almost done it correctly, except for one very small thing and one very large and problematic thing.

The very small thing is this: You need to remove the <gallery>...</gallery> tags from the picture for it to display.

And now, on to the very large thing. The picture appears to be a copyright violation, especially since you uploaded it as your own work. Contrary to popular belief, if you find something on the Internet, that doesn't mean that it's free from copyright. In fact, you still must obtain permission from the copyright holder to be able to upload anything to Wikipedia. Only under certain conditions may copyrighted content be uploaded here without the copyright holder's consent. Those conditions are mostly documented here. All ten of the criteria listed on that page must be met in order for the content to be usable here. Also, copyrighted content doesn't belong on Wikimedia Commons (a sister site to Wikipedia), which is where your image ended up because you uploaded it with no copyright and as your own work. It will likely be deleted from that site soon. All of our rules about copyright, however tedious, are there to protect you, us, and the Wikimedia Foundation from legal problems.

-- Gestrid (talk) 17:34, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Tried to rate article

I attempted to state the article's importance while editing the Wikiproject template, but the edit didn't show up. What am I doing wrong? Verified Cactus (talk) 18:16, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi VerifiedCactus. It looks like you were trying to add |importance= to {{WikiProject Warhammer 40,000}}. Not all WikiProjects assess the importance of articles, and it looks like WikiProject Warhammer 40,000 only assesses articles based on quality, see Template:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000/doc. Mz7 (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Verified Cactus (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Citation request

An editor has rejected our Sandbox article on the basis of lack of citations. The problem is that the data in the article on John Robert Mills originated from his own CV and therefore references from other sources have not been used. How does one overcome this?

Article: User:PhilipMillsUK/sandbox

PhilipMillsUK (talk) 12:02, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, PhilipMillsUK, and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, it appears you may have a conflict of interest with the subject of the article you are creating. Please follow the rules set out at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Second, everything in your article must be cited by a reliable source. Articles must not contain original research. Third, since you appear to have a conflict of interest, you must remember that any article that Wikipedia is not a means of promoting a product, person, etc. and any article found to do so can be speedily deleted without any kind of discussion. I realize some of this can be difficult to hear, but it's the truth. Without these sorts of policies, Wikipedia as it was meant to be would've been dead a long time ago. -- Gestrid (talk) 15:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Also, I must ask you since you've used the plural "our", is your user account being used by more than one person? -- Gestrid (talk) 15:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC) (Words 'user account' added by CiaPan (talk) 19:06, 18 September 2016 (UTC))

The only way to overcome the problem is to rewrite the article based on what published, independent, reliable sources say, PhilipMillsUK. Those sources might include books, newspaper articles, scholarly journal articles, etc. CVs are rarely appropriate sources for anything but very basic and uncontroversial information about a subject. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

PhilipMillsUK, Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that anybody says about themselves, or what their friends, relatives, employees, employers, agents, or associates say about them: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about them. If there is no such independent material published about them, (the Wikipedia jargon is that they are "not notable") then it is impossible to write an acceptable article about them. --ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi PhilipMillsUK. I have deleted your sandbox as a copyright violation (under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion). The CV file you uploaded at the Wikimedia Commons and copied from to make this draft article has been nominated for deletion there (not by me), in part, also as a putative copyright violation. Even if the CV content was suitable as the text of an article (as noted above, it is not), that content would have to be verifiably released under a suitably-free copyright license (or into the public domain) in order to be uploaded to the Commons, or to be copied from for the text of a proposed article. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:58, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Presumably the message you left at User:PhilipMillsUK should be at User talk:PhilipMillsUK, Fuhghettaboutit? Cordless Larry (talk) 22:25, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

I created a page and it is my first having trouble...

my page is Keli_Rosensteel it is an auto biography of a living person. I am confused regarding reliable sources. please please help urgently. Schwerha6 (talk) 23:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse, Schwerha6. Have you read our page on identifying reliable sources?

Also, after looking at your article, I can't tell why we should have an article on someone who appears to be a normal high schooler. That's another reason the article could be deleted. I don't see how she is notable enough (in Wikipedia's special sense) for inclusion on Wikipedia. If you don't quickly explain in the article why she is notable, the article may be deleted, no matter ho many reliable sources you add. You must tell us within the article, while citing reliable sources, why she is notable.

-- Gestrid (talk) 23:42, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

thank you gestrid, i believe she is notable because she will be a division one soccer player in college, and she could be a potential player for the olympic team, she may receive all- american honors for her athletic ability. She is a prosperous athlete on the rise to success. I believe that is truly notable. Schwerha6 (talk) 23:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

The "will"s and the "could"s and the "may"s don't count. WP:TOOSOON – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Advice re: direction of homelessness articles

Hello,

I am seeking advice re: how to help direct efforts to edit on the topic of homelessness. I have recently created a footer navbox and have linked pretty much every related article. I have seen there was once an attempt some years ago at created a WikiProject but that never materialized.

How can I find/attract interested editors on the topic and have a set page for directing overall editing efforts (articles needed to be created, etc.)?

I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 06:40, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Enough time has elapsed that there should be no barrier to re-introducing the proposal. You could post to the talk page of the old proposal to notify anyone who had been following the issue there.

General WP:CANVASsing for supporters is frowned on, but you could post notice of the proposal as an RfC-type comment on the talk pages of articles where you have been adding your navbox, at least, if you haven't been getting lots of resistance to your adding it.

And Welcome to the Teahouse, I.am.a.qwerty.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy removal

I have an article "Brandon T Michaels" which was awaiting approval by an editor which was just flagged.

The person who flagged it wrote false claims and opinionated statements on the subject of the article.

I am new to Wikipedia, does anyone recommend the next step in making sure my article stays up!

Thank you Business of Today (talk) 06:51, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@Business of Today, I'd recommend that if you cannot find more sources to contest the deletion, make a copy the page to your sandbox so you can work on it and perfect it before publishing. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 07:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Business of Today!

You have attempted to create a second article about the subject Brandon Michaels. There is no way that your creation of a second article can be allowed to remain. One subject, one article. That's the way Wikipedia works.

That's not the end of your options, though. Rather than creating a new article - something that most Teahouse hosts will tell you not to do as your first effort as an editor - you can work on improving the existing article. You may well have more recent sources, or at least sources that have not yet been used in the article, that you can work from to expand it.

Working this way will be seen as collaborative editing and welcomed. Disputing with reviewers is not helpful.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

It appears that Business of Today created both Brandon T Michaels and Brandon Michaels, jmcgnh. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:15, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

And bear in mind that there was a previous version of Brandon T Michaels, deleted yesterday. It appears that the previous version was created by Fortune Inc, now blocked for inappropriate user name, but I assume probably the same individual who is now Business of Today. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:36, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) again!

Ah, yes. The conflict between responsiveness and thoroughness of research.

Business of Today, I think some of my advice is still valid, but what's almost certainly going to happen is that both of your two versions of the article will be deleted.

That's not the end of the story, though. You can do more research and establish, through reliable sources, that Brandon Michaels meets Wikipedia standards for notability. This is not necessarily an easy task, the standards are pretty stringent. What we write in a Wikipedia article about a person must predominantly be based on what independent, unrelated, disinterested third parties write about the subject. Most of the time, this means that multiple articles have been written about them in newspapers or substantial magazines.

You can develop your article in your Sandbox as you gather information on the subject. While this may be patrolled for copyright violations or unsourced statements about living people (WP:BLP), it is understood that your article is still under construction and won't be summarily tagged for deletion. The article WP:your first article may give you some guidance.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Is there a special Tag for listing edits that deletes more than a certain number of characters

For the RecentChanges pages I want to list edits that deletes more than a certain number of characters

65.93.215.245 (talk) 05:02, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 65.93.215.245.

Since the RecentChanges page is the result of a database query, there is almost certainly a way to get a version of it that is conditioned on the size change being more negative than a given value. To do that, however, you may need to use Lab tools. I think your best bet to get an answer to this particular question is to ask over at The Village Pump (technical). There might also be a way with a userscript to re-present the existing RecentChanges page in a way that does what you want.

But the size change variable may be different from how many characters are deleted. It would be interesting to know if there's a low-level variable that corresponds to "how big" a change is overall, not just the net difference in size (Before – After). It's not necessarily easy, if you want to, say, distinguish a moved paragraph from a paragraph deleted and replaced with new material.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:04, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Karen Krizanovich : "Hey wikipedia, stop re-editing my correction of premiere of Mad Max: Fury Road

• https://twitter.com/krizanovich/status/596562736089202688
• Krizanovich (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email)
• KKrizanovich (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email)
• any notes for her not previously given, anything of administrative interest ?

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 08:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

That Tweet is dated May 2015. Too long ago for any response beyond "whatever...".

But welcome to the Teahouse anyway, Xb2u7Zjzc32. Is there anything else we can help you with?  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:13, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

gawker.com

gawker.com has been shut down. Where to request a bot to update links to archive.org ? Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 08:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Xb2u7Zjzc32 You might ask User talk:cyberpower678 about this. As I understand it, the bot will replace them "all in good time", either after they are marked dead by an editor or on some slower pace as they are discovered to be dead.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:49, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Writing a new article

Hello Mr. Editor, I am new to Wikipedia. In Wikipedia, I have not found a story named "Not Just Oranges" which is written by "Isai Tobolsky," a russian writer. So, I want to write a new article on "Not Just Oranges" and corresponding author "Isai Tobolsky". We studied this story as a lesson in our UG(Under Graduation).

So, Please let me know that whether I permitted to write this article or not.Being Myself Indian (talk) 09:15, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Being Myself Indian, welcome to the Teahouse!

Individual stories are seldom sufficiently notable, by Wikipedia standards, to have their own article. Not all authors are able to come up to this standard, but you should check the page WP:GNG for more details.

If you are able to find good reliable sources that discuss Isai Tobolsky, you may have the makings of an article about him which you are encouraged to try to write.

You should probably first read the information at my first article. Most Teahouse hosts will advise you to spend some time making smaller edits to start with until you learn the ropes at Wikipedia. Try your hand at some of the small tasks that can be found at WP:Community portal for a while until you've made a few successful edits and had some productive interactions with other editors. Watch what other editors do for a while as well. That way, you can learn how Wikipedia works without bumping into problems that may be frustrating or discouraging.

But, yes, you are definitely allowed to edit Wikipedia. Please keep with it.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

User:Rizhopper=User:TheMagnificentist userspace pages deleted

User:Rizhopper has been renamed to User:TheMagnificentist, I want review his wikipedia behavior in general, because of his actions toward me. However :

• User:Rizhopper (804 edits) was renamed 09:33, 16 September 2016 by User:K6ka to [User:TheMagnificentist]] (Per en:WP:CHUS)
• User:Rizhopper was deleted 23:55, 13 September 2016 by User:Kelapstick (U1: User request to delete pages in own userspace (CSDH))
• User:Rizhopper=User:TheMagnificentist EDITED WITHOUT SIGNING User talk:Xb2u7Zjzc32
• Can User:Rizhopper userspace pages (CSDH)) be "undeleted" for review ? Is permanent deletion, a good idea ? Is permanent deletion of anything besides inappropriate uploads and inappropriate pages done ?

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 09:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Xb2u7Zjzc32: The User Contributions page for User:TheMagnificentist appears to have followed them through the name change go back far enough to allow you to review their activity in the past 6 months. If you have a concern older than that, it may not fruitful to pursue it. Under the right circumstances, you might be able to get an administrator to look into deleted pages.

Are you using the Teahouse in the way it was intended? As a place for new users to ask new editor questions about using Wikipedia? This is not the place to request investigations into the behavior of other editors. There are specific noticeboards for each type of misconduct and WP:ANI for anything that you can't find a more appropriate place for.  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, this isn't a teahouse type question, but I will answer it anyway Xb2u7Zjzc32, permanent deletion of a userpage is absolutely acceptable if a user requests it. There is a specific speedy deletion criterion for it (U1 - user requests deletion in their own userspace). I just reviewed the contents again, and I will not be undeleting it. It's nothing more than some personal information, interests, and userboxes. I don't know why you are making a big deal of editing without signing. jmcgnh is correct, if you want to review another user's conduct, the Teahouse is not the correct venue. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Wtf lol! Who are you people? What do you want from me? I changed my username because I wanted to. It's nobody else's business. What's the problem here? Can someone explain what's going on here? - TheMagnificentist (talk) 09:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Nothing is going on except that Xb2u7Zjzc32 was suspicious of your name change (possibly because of all the warnings on your new talk page). You attracted his attention by posting on his talk page. Everyone else here is of the opinion that there isn't a serious problem on either side, so just continue making good edits. Dbfirs 12:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)