Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 698

Archive 695

Archive 696

Archive 697

Archive 698

Archive 699

Archive 700

→

Archive 705

Commons

Hello editors, can someone talk to me on how to fix images in my userpage from commons. I tried fixing some today but I was unable to get th right link. Thanks in advance Spurb^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:27, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia - relax and enjoy! You can edit this caption to your preferred wording, but never change the filename itself or the image will disappear

Hello, Spurb - welcome to the Teahouse. I'll paste in a reply I gave to another user who recently needed help on the same subject, which worked for them:

I am assuming you have already found an image on Wikimedia Commons (like this one of a cup of tea) that you want to use, rather than are asking how to upload your own photo from scratch. If so, click on the link in the previous sentence, or click the photograph you see here - you're taken to the same place - and look just above the picture, and beneath the filename where you'll see a line of five small links. Look for the link with the tiny Wikipedia 'W' logo and the words "Use this file". Click that link and select the text offered to "Use this file on a Wiki as a Thumbnail". (The convention is always to add an image as a thumbnail, no matter how much you'd love to make it larger.) Copy the link to your clipboard and then go to the Wikipedia page you want to add it to (let's assume we want to add it to the page we're on now). Edit the page (ie click the tab labelled Edit Source). Scroll down to the section you'd like to add it to, and paste in the text you copied at the very top of that section. By default, this adds the thumbnail picture and its caption on the right hand side of the page, as you see here. To change the caption text, just edit the text to the right of the vertical bar - or 'pipe'. Don't change the filename.jpg text itself or the image link will be broken. There are some useful links on this help page: Wikipedia:Images with further guidance and tweaks, or detailed layout possibilities at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial.

Of course, if you use the Visual Editor (which is a bit more WYSIWYG), the process is slightly different. You once again navigate to the section where the image is needed, then, in the editing toolbar, click Insert > Media. At the search bar in the popup that then appears, type the keyword to search for certain image types, or just type in the filename of your image you've already chosen from Wikimedia Commons. Select the image and then click 'Use this image'. Before inserting it you'll be prompted to add a caption. Captions can include hyperlinks, but that's probably best left for another time. I hope this helps. If you need advice on actually uploading your own image first, that requires a slightly different answer and a mention of copyright issues. Let us know if you need further help on that. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

What is "rescuing sources"?

I have encountered numerous edits which are commented as "rescuing sources". I thought these were web references were the web content is no longer available and archived versions were retrieved. I just encountered an article with 43 rescued sources but all were tagged as "deadurl=no". What exactly is "rescuing sources"? I tried searching "help:rescuing sources" which got exactly ONE, worthless match. User-duck (talk) 02:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

The bot in question is User:InternetArchiveBot, but you will see a description under another version at User:cyberbot II/FaQ/DeadlinksBot. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

So my initial thought is correct! However, the bot now seems to be adding an archived page to the reference (archiving if needed) and marking the reference with "dead-url=no". Is this correct behavior?

P.S. I have spent a LOT of effort retrieving archived pages. User-duck (talk) 02:57, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi User-duck, I have been wondering about that as well, as the practice produces an enormous amount of code bloat on pages with many references. However, this actually appears to be encouraged behaviour: WP:WAYBACK states that Editors are also encouraged to add an archive link as a part of each citation, or at least submit the referenced URL for archiving, at the same time that each citation is created or updated. So currently at any rate there's consensus that it's fine to slap archive links on everything. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:41, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the quote, Elmidae. I do not remember reading "add an archive link as a part of each citation" part, but it makes sense and I do "at least submit the referenced URL". Some web pages change (sometimes quite dramatically) and having the actual version archived would be useful. User-duck (talk) 20:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Visually editing Talk Pages

I seem to remember editing a couple of Talk Pages using the Visual Editor (perhaps I'm wrong about this). In any case I can't use the VE anymore on Talk pages. Is this due to my settings? Or is the VE disabled for Talk pages? I can work with wikitext on Talk pages but I'm just curious about VE options. Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikemorrell49 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

@Mikemorrell49: Perhaps in the past this was possible, but now the Visual Editor is not enabled for talk pages. See WP:VE for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 17:30, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks RudolfRed. Mikemorrell49 (talk) 20:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

notibility

Hello. I have recently submitted an article about a musical artiste and they said that the subject is not notable. Can google be used as notability for his singles?(Frankpowers (talk) 14:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC))

@Frankpowers: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would note that a similar question to this about the same singer was asked above by someone with the username XploJan(Musician). I would ask if you either used that username previously, and/or if you represent this musician. If you represent this musician, you must read the conflict of interest policy (at WP:COI) and the paid editing policy (at WP:PAID) if you are a paid representative. The latter is required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use if you are being paid to edit Wikipedia specifically, or doing so as part of your job duties.

Regarding your question, please read the notability guidelines for musicians at WP:BAND. If this musician meets at least one of them, you will then need independent reliable sources to support the content of the article. These can be found using Google, but Google itself is not a source. Neither is brief mentions of this musician or places to obtain their music. 331dot (talk) 14:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi there, Frankpowers. 331dot has really said it all (above) but, as our edits clashed, I'll just add in what I was going to say, anyway. Whilst you can obviously use Google to find sources about a subject which might demonstrate that independent, third-party sources have written in some depth about a person, you cannot (as your question seems to suggest) use the fact that Google goes off, searches, and digs up all sorts of stuff about all sorts of obscure subjects. (If that were the case it would justify me having a page about myself here, too, and I'm simply not notable enough.) The problem is that search engines aren't intelligent - they can't tell fact from fiction, YouTube links or social media fansites from detailed newspaper articles or a nation's music charts. We have to look at each search result carefully and assess them against established Wikipedia guidelines for different topics. In the case of musicians, you should, as has been suggested above, take a look at the criteria set out in Wikipedia:Notability (music), which I hope will help you. It covers bands, solo artists and music tracks, concert tours and composers. If you don't think that artist (Draft:Xplojan(Musician)) can match even one of those criteria, then there's little hope for now. Of course, if they do become more well-known later on in life and have hit songs, awards or chart toppers (or whatever) or have in-depth articles written about them, then that would be the time to reconsider. Should you want to read about the issue of being a bit premature in a bit more details, this is an interesting essay on the subject. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello again. I am not writing about some close to me or who I know personally. I am not getting paid either but if I should say that someone is paying me will the article be accepted? Its just merely a musicians musical article its not for promotional use but if someone search for the artiste on Google I want his bio and so forth to show up you understand? By the way can u create the article for me please please or atlease accept it?(Frankpowers (talk) 15:26, 7 December 2017 (UTC))

@Frankpowers: If you aren't a paid editor, then you shouldn't say that you are, and doing so will not cause the article to be accepted. If you are a paid editor, however, you do need to declare it. However, you have not answered my question above as to your username use. If you are not associated with this musician, why are you so interested in search results for them? Wikipedia is not for merely posting a "bio" of someone; they must be considered notable as I state above. Have you reviewed WP:BAND yet?

If you want someone else to create the page, you can make a suggestion at Requested Articles, however it is severely backlogged and it may be quite some time before someone writes an article, if at all. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

By the way, if you have any follow up comments, please simply add them to this section instead of starting a new section, by clicking "Edit" at the top of this section(next to where you wrote "notability"). 331dot (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes I read WP:BAND but I dont really understand it. Can you explain what the article really needs?(Frankpowers (talk) 16:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC))

And the artiste has not received any awards or so yet. So the only notable source is google/ YouTube which has his singles and performances.(Frankpowers (talk) 16:13, 7 December 2017 (UTC))

@Frankpowers: A video of this musician performing and recordings of their music are not independent reliable sources. What the article needs is sources written by third parties, such as news stories, independent reviews, or anything not associated with this musician. WP:BAND spells out the specific criteria that merits musicians articles on Wikipedia. If an artist meets at least one of them, and it can be shown with independent sources, they may merit an article here. As an example, an artist's album making the music charts of a country merits that person an article- as does an artist's album being Gold.

I again request that you answer my question above; If you are not associated with this musician, why are you so interested in search results for them? 331dot (talk) 16:24, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I dont know the artiste personally but I was just suggesting that if the article is created will it show in search results?(Frankpowers (talk) 16:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC))

It will eventually show up in search results if an article is accepted, though not immediately. 331dot (talk) 16:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Please understand, Frankpowers, that Wikipedia is not interested - not even a little bit - in what I know, what you know, or what some random person on the internet knows. It is only a tiny bit interested in what a person (or band, or organisation) has said, written or published, or what their friends or associates have said about them. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with a subject have chosen to publish about the subject in a reliable place (with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking). It follows that unless there is reliably published material about the subject by people who have no connection with them, there is literally nothing that can go into an article. That is what we mean by the requirement of notability.

One more point: you say "but if someone search for the artiste on Google I want his bio and so forth to show up". That is exactly what we mean by promotion. Wikipedia is not for bringing something to the world's notice: it is for collecting the information together that the world has already said about the something. --ColinFine (talk) 19:30, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

hi Frankpowers regarding WP:BAND which of the numbers don't you understand? "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself." Has the artist had any articles written about them, features, etc? in magazines or newspapers or (quality) websites? Egaoblai (talk) 02:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Profile of my company's CEO

Hi I would like to create a profile of the CEO of my organisation. I understand that there'll be a conflict of interest if I do it myself, can anyone else help me with the same? How do I go about it? Laddoo0684 (talk) 06:22, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Laddoo0684. Thank you for coming here and asking, rather than plunging into it. I'm afraid that the advice I'm going to give is not encouraging to your project, for various reasons. The main one is that when you talk about a "profile", that suggests to me that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.

Wikipedia does not contain profiles: not one, not even of Jimmy Wales. What it contains is encyclopaedia articles about subjects. These are (or should be) neutrally written articles summarising what people who have no connection with the subject have published about the subject in reliable places. What the subject or their associates have written or said about them is of little interest to Wikipedia; and how they wish to be portrayed, of absolutely no interest.

If you want to proceed with this project, the ideal approach would be to post a request at requested articles; but the truth is that the uptake of suggestions there is very small. If there is an active Wikiproject relevant to what the organisation does, then it is possible that posting a request at the WikiProject's talk page will attract somebody's interest in working on an article about your CEO.

Or, provided you comply with the procedures in COI and if relevant in PAID, you are permitted to try writing the article yourself: in that case I would advise you to start by reading your first article carefully, and getting some experience editing elsewhere first.

In any case, if you or anybody else is going to work on an article about your CEO, the first step is finding several independent reliable sources that write about him in some depth: nothing written or published by the company or its associates; nothing based on an interview or press release; nothing in a blog, forum, wiki, or social media; but places where somebody who has no connection with the company or the CEO has chosen to write in depth about the CEO (not just the company) and had it published in a place with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking, sch as a major newspaper, trade magazine, or a book from a reputable publisher. It is worth your looking for these in any case, because if they do not exist, then your CEO is not currenty notable as Wikipedia uses the word, and no article will be accepted however it is written. If you do find some, then the project is more practical, and you can go ahead and look for a collaborator, or try writing it yourself using the article wizard to create a draft.

But my advice would be to abandon the project, and (if you are interested in helping us improve Wikipedia) find some topics you are interested in but do not have a COI. If your CEO is notable, then sooner or later somebody will write an article about them. Cheers. --ColinFine (talk) 11:05, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Colin. I have just added his name along with external sources (Website links)in the requested articles list. Will wait for someone to perhaps consider it for creating a profile.

Thanks for your suggestions. As for me, I will go ahead and see if I can edit any article to which I feel I can add value. Laddoo0684 (talk) 05:47, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Footnotes

Please can i BE ASSISTED on how to input footnote on my article 'John Nkemngong Nkengasong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kusi David Toh (talk • contribs) 08:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Kusi David Toh and welcome to the Teahouse.

I assume we are talking about Draft:John Nkemngong Nkengasong’s Biography. You have successfully added a number of in-line citations to your draft, so it just requires a little more of the same sort of careful work to take care of the rest of the references. There is good guidance at the article Help:referencing for beginners for some of the details.

It looks like you took a somewhat backwards approach to writing this biography. To do it right, you assemble your sources and write only what the sources give you, writing in your own words, but referencing your sources as you go along. You managed to write a good deal about your subject but left out the sources. I don't think the reviewers are going to accept an article where the references don't back up what is written. Not to worry, if your subject is notable, you can leave out anything that you don't have a good source for. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

how to create a wikipedia biography page for a living person

I have been asked to create a wikipedia biography page for a friend. He is living. I made an attempt and it has been completely deleted. I need help please.

Jeff BrownJazzilover (talk) 20:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@Jazzilover: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If a friend has asked you to create a page about them, it is a conflict of interest; please read about conflict of interest at WP:COI before editing further. If your friend is paying you to do so, you are required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use to comply with WP:PAID and declare such status.

I cannot see your page since it was deleted(though an administrator can and will likely comment here) but the log indicates that it was deleted because it was promotional. This would be because it encouraged readers to visit a website or buy something, or it would be because the page merely provided information. Wikipedia is [{WP:NOTSOCIAL|not social media]] to just post biographies; this is an encyclopedia. Wikipedia articles cannot be promotional in nature, and they must do more than provide information. They must indicate with independent reliable sources that give in depth coverage how the subject is notable. If you can do that, I would highly suggest that you visit Articles for Creation to do so. If all you want to do is tell the world about your friend, you will need to use actual social media to do that. 331dot (talk) 21:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. An example of what i'm trying to accomplish is if you go to the 1st polemarch of my fraternity whose name is Elder Watson Diggs. He is deceased, but the person i'm trying to create a wikipidia for is the 27th polemarch. His name is Robert L. Harris. So i'm confused on not being able to create the page?Jazzilover (talk) 21:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok, that helps a bit. I can see why there is an article about the 1st polemarch, based on reading it, as he was a founder of the fraternity and has a school named for him, among other notable aspects. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the 27th one would merit an article, either. He would need to have been written about in independent sources(as the first one is); merely holding the same position wouldn't be enough. If you read the notability guidelines for biographies at WP:BIO you will get an idea of what is being looked for.331dot (talk) 21:37, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@331dot:

I believe when I google Robert L Harris' name it references the independent sources. I also read the notability guidelines and I believe it meets the criteria. How would you suggest I proceed?Jazzilover (talk) 22:01, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

You need to forget that you know the subject, and ignore everything that you know about him, then collect all the documents where Robert L Harris has been written about in independent WP:Reliable sources, ignoring his website, and all social media, then summarise what these independent reliable sources have written about him, using the appropriate source as a reference for each statement. The first two of your references seem to about Watson Diggs, and the third might be just a mention (or it might give more detail -- I don't have a copy to check), but it seems to be a self-published document by the Fraternity, so is not entirely independent. You might like to read this guidance. Dbfirs 23:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I see that you have tidied the copied article so that it refers to the correct person now, but you still need independent sources. Dbfirs 08:52, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

can i (Re)create an article who was deleted?

i wanted to "re"create an Voice actress deleted article only,but i can recreate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Watashi-wa-diemonds (talk • contribs) 23:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

You can, Watashi-wa-diemonds, but it probably isn't a good idea. Unless you resolve the problems that lead to it being deleted the first time, it will simply be deleted again. Writing new articles is a difficult task for beginner editors. It is better to get some experience editing existing articles first. – Joe (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

If you do decide to try again, Watashi-wa-diemonds, I urge you to use the WP:Article wizard to create a draft. Have you read Your first article? --ColinFine (talk) 00:07, 8 December 2017 (UTC)'

Yes you can. In extreme cases the admins may have protected it. If you were working on a draft or you want to resume work on the old article you can go to Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion and request the old article to work on. Egaoblai (talk) 02:05, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Watashi-wa-diemonds, it is hard to answer this question without knowing which article it is. With some kinds of deletions it is uncontroversial to create a new article, but if the article was deleted after a community discussion, it cannot be recreated without first talking to the administrator who deleted it. I am guessing that this may be about Yume Miyamoto, since you have started to create a page about her in your sandbox? That article was deleted after a deletion discussion a year ago, and another article about her was also deleted in October this year. You can ask the administrator who deleted it after the discussion (here is that administrator's talk page), although I tend to agreee with Joe Roe that it is best if you get some experience editing Wikipedia before you start to create articles. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:13, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

How do I submit my draft?

How do I submit my draft? Musikerin97 (talk) 18:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Musikerin97. I've added a template with a submission button to the top of your draft. You can click the button to submit it whenever you're ready. – Joe (talk) 18:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Musikerin97 Do you want to submit your draft for review, or do you want to publish it straight to wikipedia? Egaoblai (talk) 02:07, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

To submit the draft for review when it is ready you would add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. It is, however, not yet ready for submission as you have no references to published reliable sources. You ought to read the advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Are we looking at the same draft, David Biddulph? I see references in User:Musikerin97/sandbox. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

It's likely David was responding to Australian stockman's request (which I've moved to its own section, just below). — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Indeed I was. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:09, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

How do I submit my draft? (2)

I have a draft, in my sandbox, which I'd like to submit for review (in the very near future).

I can't find any kind of "submit for review" button or link..

Can anyone help me with this?

Australian stockman (talk) 03:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Australian stockman and welcome to the Teahouse.

I've added a {{userspace draft}} template to the top of your sandbox which provides a submit button. There's no point submitting until you have supplied some references. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

David Biddulph's suggestion of adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft is a self-help way to achieve the exact same result. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:26, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

References for lists List of private schools in Long Beach, California

This article has been tagged for references for a decade. The criterion for the list is self-evident. Why should there be a reference? The corresponding Category would not require a reference. If there were a reliable source, it would be out of date as soon as a school opened or closed. What to do? Nominate it for deletion, make it into a category, or just remove the tag? Rhadow (talk) 23:44, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

@Rhadow: A common approach to referencing lists is to only include: a) entries that have their own articles, so the references in that article serve as verification; or b) entries whose inclusion is supported by a citation to a reliable source. But the real issue in that list is the misuse of external links, not references. If the external links were converted into inline citations, it would be fine. – Joe (talk) 23:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Joe -- Including the three notable entries is a no-brainer. Looking up twenty-two independent reliable references? Not a single entry has one. I guess that's why no has bothered. Rhadow (talk) 01:18, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I wonder if the person who added the "citation needed" tag to all those schools which had links could have used that same time to actually change the formatting properly. Egaoblai (talk) 02:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Rhadow: They don't have to be independent. The school's website is presumably sufficient to verify that it exists and is in Long Beach. – Joe (talk) 07:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Rhadow and Joe Roe: My reading of WP:LISTCOMPANY is that this is the policy that would apply to this article and that policy specifies a reference to an "independent, reliable source" is required when the list entry is not to a school with its own article. So, unless someone knows of a more specific consensus agreement that overrides the policy for this case, I'd think that all of the links to school websites would have to be deleted. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:05, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Jmcgnh and Joe Roe: If an "independent, reliable source" is required, it will affect the following articles:

• Education in Toronto
• List of private and independent schools in Arizona
• List of private schools in Atlanta
• List of private schools in Iowa
• List of private schools in Mississippi
• List of private schools in San Jose, California
• List of private schools in Texas
• List of private schools in Washington

I am the person who added the "citation needed" tag because it was faster than searching NCES database, I was time limited. Rhadow (talk) 11:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the special provision in WP:LISTCOMPANY; thanks for pointing that out, jmcgnh. But in this case I'd invoke WP:IAR. The criteria for inclusion on this list is that the entry is a) a private school and b) in Long Beach, California. Those are two very mundane details and, just applying common sense, I can't think of a reason why we wouldn't trust an official website to verify them. If somebody disputes an individual entry (because they think it's a fake school? or something?) then by all means they can insist on an independent source, but going around culling all these entries based on WP:LISTCOMPANY strikes me as pointless wikilawyering. – Joe (talk) 11:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

'Interference' vs 'intervention' in article titles

In various articles titles and categories, some nations' actions are referred to as an 'intervention'; in others as 'interference'. The former has more positive connotations; the latter more negative. AFAICS in en.wikipedia.org, the term selected is generally from the perspective of U.S. government. This appears to violate NPOV while adhering to overwhelmingly U.S. and western-based RS. Which forum would be appropriate for raising the issue of this inconsistency? Humanengr (talk) 07:24, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Humanengr and welcome to the Teahouse.

I think it's quite possible that Wikipedia editors have not been entirely neutral and consistent in how they treat those two words, but I doubt they are following the wishes of the U.S. government, at least not directly. I think you recognize that the bias you are seeing more likely comes from the choice of sources, sources that are generally considered reliable but nevertheless have biases of their own. You could start an RfC process to try to get some sort of master agreement on how these words should be used, but I suspect that it won't be easy to get consensus to say something different from what the most-used sources say.

So don't start a big battle at first. Try challenging just one or two articles where you think the words intervention and interference are being used in violation of NPOV. If that's successful, try one or two categories. By building up a history of policy-based precedents, you'll be much better armed for trying for some sort of blanket policy proposal. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:45, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Humanengr: You didn't give examples but I searched for every title and category with "Interference" in the name and only found one example referring to nations: Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections (and the related Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and Category:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections). Nearly all sources I have seen call it interference (or alleged interference) so Wikipedia should do the same per Wikipedia:Article titles# Use commonly recognizable names. Intervention usually implies more direct action like intervention (international law) and Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War. I see nearly all your edits are about Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections so I guess your post is actually about a single name you don't like. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:45, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes Nog?

I created a new template for offering other editors eggnog. Would anyone like some?-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐) 06:31, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks, that is probably what happened. Will be sure to note that I am logged in when I save. Rgroman (talk) 12:33, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Saving a draft

Hello , I saved a draft of a first paragraph and then could not find it again. I have written an article that I would like to save. Where can I locate it again to continue work such as uploading photos and creating links. Thanks, ReginaRgroman (talk) 14:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

@Rgroman: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are no other edits logged in the edit history of your username, so I would suspect that you created and saved your paragraph while logged out. It's probably still under the edit history of whatever IP address you used. Either that, or you created it under a different username. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I do think this is what happened. I will be sure to note that I am logged in when saving. many thanks (I hope this appears in the right area - when I clicked on "join this discussion" on saving a draft, my response appeared elsewhere on another question? Rgroman (talk) 12:37, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Translating article

Hello, I need to translate a biography of a person that has a Bulgarian biography on Wikipedia. He wants me to write it in english. Should I create a new one or is there a way for me to translate it so that we have the same article in 2 languages ?? Duniakc (talk) 11:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

• Hello, Duniakc. First of all, when you say you need to translate a biography page, if you mean you are paid to do so, please read WP:PAID and make the mandatory disclaimer.

This being said, yes, you can make that translation, which is easier than rewriting the article from scratch - as long as the article complies with en-wp policies (stuff such as the notability rules is not always exactly the same across all languages; give us the article name if you want more input). See Wikipedia:Translation for details, the most important parts are:

1. Do not use automated translated tools (e.g. Google translate) without manually checking the output afterwards - no page is better than a poorly-translated page
2. Comply with the license - you need to provide attribution for the translated material (cf. the linked page for the recommended way to do so)

Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:33, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Duniakc. While I agree with all that Tigraan has said, I want to give an answer that is focused a little differently. First, please note that Wikipedia has very little interest in whether the subject wants an article or not: if the subject is notable, then by English Wikipedia's rules somebody can write an article in English Wikipedia about them (even if they don't want an article written); conversely, if they are not notable then nobody can write an article. But the main point I want to make is that you should definitely treat it as creating a new article, even if you choose to take the content from the Bulgarian article (in which case you must attribute it, as Tigraan says); so please read Your first article, if you haven't already. But whether it is a good idea to translate the Bulgarian article or not depends on the quality of that article. Is it a well-structured, well-referenced, neutrally written article? If so, then by all means translate it. But if it is unsourced, or promotional, then I would advise it is better to ignore it and start again, working from the independent, reliably published sources which you must have in order to establish notability. (The sources do not have to be in English, but if some of them are it would be helpful). --ColinFine (talk) 14:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Adding photos

Dear sirs, I have a photo I would like to add to a page. The photo was taken by a friend and she gives me permission to use it. Do I have to fill in a form or do I need to send her written permission somewhere? Thank you for any advice. Athenaathena07 (talk) 14:34, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Athenaathena07. It is far, far easier if you ask your friend to create an account on Commons and upload the photo herself. There is an easy-to-use form there that will guide her through releasing the work under a proper license. Otherwise, you will have to use the OTRS system. In my experience this takes several months and they are very particular about how exactly the permission is worded, so I would strongly recommend avoiding it. – Joe (talk) 14:38, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

• The gist of it is you must make sure you friend agreed to release the photograph under a compatible free license (i.e. CC-BY-SA 3.0 or something more permissive). This means mostly that once it is published on Commons, everyone, everywhere and forever will be able to use it for any purpose, not just Wikipedia (though they must credit the original author). See Wikipedia:License for the most boring details.

This being said, assuming she does not object to that... If you can sit your friend through creating an account and uploading the photo on Commons, yeah, it would be much simpler than using the OTRS paperwork (though "this takes several months" may be a worst-case scenario rather than typical experience). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Commons OTRS currently has a backlog of three months, unfortunately. – Joe (talk) 15:27, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah, OK, it is a backlog thing rather than a "time from start to end" thing. I was not familiar with OTRS, it just was that taking many months to just sign the damn release form looked odd, so I assumed the problem was with weird cases where the photographer insists on their own permission wording. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Advice on creating a new article

Hello, i want to create an article about an indian television show name : Detective Didi please help me sir thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by We 3344 (talk • contribs) 17:50, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Have you tried reading through the guidance at Wikipedia:Your first article? It has some good advice. --Jayron32 17:54, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

question re recent community process

hi. where is the page that was recently posted where a whole slew of community ideas for Wikipedia were proposed, then discussed, and then voted upon? so sorry for this basic question, but I have not been able to find it. I appreciate any help with this. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Sm8900: It's at the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey. Thanks, MT Train^Discuss 18:01, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Sm8900. Are you talking about WP:VPP? --ColinFine (talk) 18:01, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Create an article about Zee TV's ne show

Hello, i want to create an article about an indian television show name : Detective Didi the show is on air in 2017, 9 November , 08 pm on Zee TV ok please help me sir thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by We 3344 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@We 3344: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to contribute. You should be aware that creating an article is often a difficult task for new users, and it is often better to start by working to improve an existing article instead. Read WP:YFA on what is needed to create an new article and if you want to proceed, use the article wizard there to create a draft for review. RudolfRed (talk) 18:43, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I just noticed this question is a duplicate. RudolfRed (talk) 18:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@We 3344: This page already exists. CoolSkittle (Ask me something here!)

Is there a template to signal that a chapter/paragraph/part of an article needs it's own standalone wikipedia page?

Hi! I am still rather new to Wikipedia. I think some time ago (well, maybe a long time ago) when I was a regular reader I've seen a template that that was used to signal other editors that a paragraph in an article needs it's own standalone article. I just stumbled across a paragraph, that, in my opinion, needs its own article, but after googling for a while I couldnt find this template. Does it actually exist? Or is it just my memory pulling jokes on me? Karl.i.biased (talk) 17:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey Karl.i.biased. Are you maybe looking for something like Template:Split? GMG^talk 17:22, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, probably not, at least that's not how I remember the template. But more importantly I don't think that these templates would fit for the two pages I was thinking about when asking the question. These pages (paragraphs) are:

1) Alt-right#Alt-left Alt-left is actually marked a high importance article on the socialism project page. Even though it's not, you know, an article.

2) Pay2Win now this might appear unencyclopedic , but it's actually a pretty common term. When working on the article for Battlefront II (and it's recent controversy) we've actually came to the conclusion that when using wikipedia interlinks we would interlink the words like pay2win to Pay2Win instead of Free-to-play#Criticism exactly because we expect someone to write an article about this someday.

Now I am not sure the split templates would fit for both these cases, but maybe I am wrong. Maybe my memory fails me and this is the only template that would fit. Karl.i.biased (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Well Karl.i.biased, lucky for us we can create a template that says pretty much whatever we want. Maybe something like this? GMG^talk 18:02, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! :) That will work perfectly! Karl.i.biased (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Karl.i.biased, gimme a second and I'll put it in a bona fide template so you won't have to copy paste the whole thing. GMG^talk 18:29, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

{{Split section}} already does this. Nthep (talk) 18:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

And... that's a better option then. GMG^talk 18:49, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! That's exactly the template I saw looking for! Karl.i.biased (talk) 19:06, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikimuseum

How can I generate tests for Wikimuseum? There are someone interested in helping me with this? Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 16:51, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Please check pt:Usuário:Felipe da Fonseca/museum too. Is just an sketch. --Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 20:07, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Contributions disappeared

Until about two days ago, whenever I clicked on the contribution tab I was rewarded with a listing of my contributions. This no longer happens, nothing pops up. I've tried perusing my preferences and searching for an answer, figuring I couldn't be the only one this happened to, but I'm stumped. Any suggestions? Ifnord (talk) 22:33, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

All I can write is that I clicked on your user name, and then View history, which allowed me to click on your Contributions, which are many. David notMD (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Welcome Ifnord to the Teahouse.

Rest assured, your contributions are still there. We can see them, so the question is: why can't you? What happens if you go to the underlying URL? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ifnord

If that works, then there's something local to you and your settings and your browser. If it also fails, then we need to look at what could be filtering between you and the general internet. Maybe the Illuminati are at work? — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:52, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

When I go to the URL, I get the same empty log. It's strange because I also see nothing at the other location (different computer, location, and network) that I edit from. So I assumed it was something in a preference somewhere. While I would like to blame the Illuminati, as it would feed my narcissistic ego that I was the focus of such attention, I fear it's something mundane that I'm missing. Ifnord (talk) 23:11, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Do you have your preferences said to "hide probably good edits" in Recent Changes? I had the same issue. Apparently some kind of new update broke the contribution links if you have the box checked. Unchecking it should fix it. A lad insane talk 23:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Yup, that's the issue. Thank-you for your help. I hope this gets fixed as it's now really much harder for me to sort through the muck at Recent Changes. Ifnord (talk) 23:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Once you get to Recent Changes, just click "Hide probably good edits" near the top and it should display as before. A lad insane talk 23:22, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Help with Citations from Foreign Language Sources

I am about to start updated a page on a town that is currently located in Belarus, but during the past 120 years has been part of the Russian Empire, Poland and the Soviet Union. I have found sources to cite, but have some particular questions. I've read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources but continue to be puzzled about these particular issues.

First, some of the material comes from foreign-language pages on Wikipedia that has never made its way to English-language pages. Should I cite the source that page cites or should I cite the page on Wikipedia?

Second, when creating a citation for material that is only available in a foreign language, what is the correct form for giving the title of the book? In the original language with/translation or transliteration (for non-Latin alphabets) of title?

Third, one of the primary sources for some of the events during World War II is a book published in 1945 in Hebrew that is hard to come by. The citations page talks about what to do about this. The book has been translated into English, is available in print (in English) does not have an ISBN and is a limited number of libraries. What is the best practice when making citations from this book.

Finally, the book mentioned in the third question has page numbers assigned in the Hebrew-language edition. The English-language edition print (and electronic versions) of that document have page numbers for the English edition while also maintaining embedded Hebrew-language page numbers for reference back to the original. The original document has many pages that are primarily photos and do not include page numbers. They are numbered in the English-language edition. Tips regarding this issue would be appreciated, and obviously depend on the answer to the third question and issues about citations of foreign-language sources in general.

Thank you

Bob 68.174.127.34 (talk) 20:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Bob, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are correct that there is little guidance in WP:Citing sources regarding non-English sources, but they are absolutely acceptable as long as they meet the relevant criteria. All else being equal, English-language sources are preferred, of course, but they are by no means mandatory. There is a bit more information on non-English sources at WP:Verifiability § Non-English sources that may help as well.
In answer to your specific questions:

1. It is never appropriate to directly cite another Wikipedia page; Wikipedia is not recognized as a reliable source, as it is user-editable content. You are definitely encouraged to use the sources that the page cites, though I would still recommend that you evaluate those sources for reliability and independence before using them.
2. The {{cite book}} template (and all citation templates, if memory serves) provides the ability to cite a foreign-language source with the following markup:

   {{cite book |last= |first= |date= |title= |trans-title= |url= |language= |location= |publisher= |isbn=}}

   Note that the "title=" should be the foreign-language title and the "trans-title" should be the English translation of that title.
3. If the book does not have an ISBN, then you don't have to include one. Just be sure to include all of the other relevant details such as publisher and date of publication. If your reference is challenged, you can following the instructions on WP:Citing sources: If a citation without an external link is challenged as unavailable, any of the following is sufficient to show the material to be reasonably available (though not necessarily reliable): providing an ISBN or OCLC number; linking to an established Wikipedia article about the source (the work, its author, or its publisher); or directly quoting the material on the talk page, briefly and in context.
4. If there are no page numbers, WP:Citing sources says: If there are no page numbers, whether in ebooks or print materials, then you can use other means of identifying the relevant section of a lengthy work, such as the chapter number or the section title.

I hope this helps! Please respond here if you have further questions. CThomas³ (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Why order trumps chaos in Wikipedia?

Trying my first question. Anyway, serious answers will be appreciated.Pawsys (talk) 01:56, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Pawsys. More people are interested in promoting order than chaos, at least among the people who set out to edit Wikipedia. Billions of people find Wikipedia useful. Tens of thousands of those people are committed to editing Wikipedia actively, regularly and productively. The vandals and trolls are also out there in large numbers, although only a very small percentage are committed to disruption in the long run. Most vandals lose interest quickly when a bot or an alert editor reverts their foolishness within seconds or minutes. The more persistent vandals and trolls get blocked, over and over, and their favorite target articles get protected. It is an ongoing fight, but so far, order is on top of chaos. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:23, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Pawsys. Our prime directive at Teahouse is to encourage new editors by helping them wade through the chaos that Wikipedia is. We are a lot less ordered than a traditional print encyclopedias, which are almost all ordered in strict alphabetical order. Our indexing system here is based on modern search algorithms much like Google. So I don't think that order does trump chaos here. Very few Editors would be able to draw comparison to how a traditional encyclopedia is edited vs how Wikipedia is edited, as the traditional encyclopedias do that behind the scenes. That all being said, Wikipedia functions much like a Utopian society, and in that regard, we are the one of most successful Utopias to ever exist. Is there anything we can do to help you wade through the chaos? John from Idegon (talk) 17:07, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for chiming in. I guess it's not so easy to understand how Wikipedia works. There is a learning curve there. So it filters out a lot of people. Pawsys (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Pawsys. Fortunately, the bulk of Wikipedia editors seem to be good willed and preserve article quality where their strengths are. Rolmops23 (talk) 02:18, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Making an article

Do I need to have requirements if I want to make an article? --Jtarvin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtarvin (talk • contribs) 03:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Suggest you read WP:YFA on what is needed to create an new article and if you want to proceed, use the article wizard there to create a draft for review. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 04:04, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Reason for the speedy deletion of my page ZiCE Mobiles

Dear All,

I've created a Wikipedia page named ZiCE Mobiles and now it has been moved to the category of Speedy Delete but I want to know that is there any way it can be on stopped from being deleted because it is about a brand ZiCE mobile powered by MWIT India Pvt. Ltd. and therefore we request you all to please suggest me some way that it can be stopped from being deleted.

Thanks and regards ZiCE Mobiles. 08:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.42.145 (talk)

Welcome anonymous to the Teahouse.

I managed to glimpse the content of the article before it was deleted. It was purely promotional material without references and written as if it were the "About" page from the company's website. I didn't get a chance to see if it was actually copied from the company website, but if that's how you started your draft, you have to understand that copying copyrighted material to Wikipedia is not allowed. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I'm afraid you are making the (unfortunately very common) mistake of supposing that Wikipedia has anything - anything at all - to do with promoting your company or your products. Please have a look at What Wikipedia is not, especially the section on Promotion. --ColinFine (talk) 10:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Article declined due to lacking references - how to resubmit?

Article declined due to lacking references - how to resubmit?

References have now been included.

Thank you 02:49, 6 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SWISICT (talk • contribs)

@SWISICT: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You accidentally removed the template to enable you to resubmit it; it can be readded, but I regret to say that your draft is unsuitable as an article, as it reads as a directory listing or advertisement. This is an encyclopedia and not a school directory or advertising forum. Your username also suggests that you represent the school, and as such you must read about conflict of interest and paid editing at WP:COI and WP:PAID. You also will likely be asked to change your username to indicate use by an individual. 331dot (talk) 03:09, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If you hadn't removed the previous feedback (including the rubrick "-- Do not remove this line! --"), you would have had a resubmit button. I have reinserted the relevant line. But you would be wasting your time, and that of a reviewer, if you were to resubmit in its current state. None of the text in the draft is referenced. The feedback includes a number of useful links, including to Help:Referencing for beginners, so please read them. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:16, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

What article? Please include a link so we know what you're talking about. Egaoblai (talk) 03:18, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Shen Wai International School. A lad insane talk 03:26, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

... which has now been deleted as a copyright violation. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@SWISICT: I think you need some better references. For schools on Wikipedia, normally you need sources/references from places like newspapers, magazines, books etc that talk about the school. Egaoblai (talk) 14:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Declined article, reference potential problem?

Semantron (talk) 10:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC) Hello, I hope somebody here can help me. I created a new article basically translated it from Serbian to English, here is the link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saint_Joanikije_Devi%C4%8Dki), very detailed and without mistakes. The problem is as I see that my references are not correct or reliable as the one who should approve say. But they are as my first reference I have redirected to the Wikipedia article written in Serbian language and have told that I translated all from there which can be saw and checked any time, the second is from some book on the internet about the Saint that I written in that article. So what should I do now to prove them that all that is in the article is correct ? Semantron (talk) 10:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Semantron. The problem is not whether the article is correct, but whether the information in it is cited to reliable sources. Without reliable sources, wiki articles are worthless: a reader has no way of telling whether it is correct or not. Please review our policy on Verifiability. For that reason, Wikis - including Wikipedia - are not regarded as reliable sources. So your reference to srwiki is not acceptable; and the book you cite, if I read it correctly, is a collection of prayers, one of which is addressed to Joanikije. All that tells us is that the writer of the prayer regards Joanikije as a saint. What we require for a Wikipedia article in English Wikipedia (it may be different in other Wikipedias) is references published in reputable places (such as books from major publishers) that give in-depth information about the subject. If you can find a published book or two about Joanikije, (or at keast with several paragraphs about him), that would be adequate, and then the article can be written as a summary of what those sources say. They don't have to be online, or in English. (I also notice that the article - in Serbian as well as English - does not give even a hint of what century Joanikije lived in).

Creating an article in English Wikipedia is a difficult process (and it makes no difference for this purpose whether it is translated from another Wikipedia or not - see translation). Please study your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Semantron In order to establish Notability, could you be a bit more clearer about Joanikije's current legacy. You said the relics are at the monastety and Christians believe they are miraculous. Which book, news story, article, etc exactly says this about the beliefs of current christians? Egaoblai (talk) 16:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Badges

How do I view my badges for completing the Wikipedia Adventure Tutorial?Limabean1997 (talk) 17:11, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Limabean1997. Welcome to the Teahouse. I hope you enjoyed you trip into wiki-space on The Wikipedia Adventure. All the badges you won are automatically placed on your user page.  So you can find them at User:Limabean1997. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

How might one search for …

‘Categories’ with the greatest number of pages? Thx Humanengr (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Humanengr. I don't know a way to do that. Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Categories and templates says Category:All stub articles is the largest. Category:Living people is also large. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Humanengr! Another place to look would be Special:Categories, though unfortunately I do not know of a way to sort on that page. CThomas³ (talk) 19:03, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, that helps. Humanengr (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2017 (UTC)