Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 732

Archive 725

←

Archive 730

Archive 731

Archive 732

Archive 733

Archive 734

Archive 735

Reference

Hello! I need to write about how many citations a professor has on all of his works. If I do that, I need to get reference for it. Can I use Google Scholar for it. The professor doesn't have any profile there. But if you search for his name on GS you will get all of his articles and see how many citations he has. So, would Google Scholar be a good reference for this purpose? Nimbo.lo (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

• @Nimbo.lo: I highly doubt that you need to write in Wikipedia how many citations a person has. It sounds like the kind of WP:TRIVIA that would best be avoided, and it does not establish notability. If we are talking about Draft:Jan Lexell you would do well to look at the criteria outlined at WP:NACADEMIC, none of which include citation count. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 17:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it's the article about Jan Lexell. But citations is used to show notability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)#Citation_metrics It explicitly says in criteria #1 under specific criteria notes.

The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates. Reviews of the person's work, published in selective academic publications, can be considered together with ordinary citations here. Differences in typical citation and publication rates and in publication conventions between different academic disciplines should be taken into account. Nimbo.lo (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

• @Nimbo.lo: Citation count can be used as a means to prove that someone made a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed. I stand corrected that the letter of policy allows this to be established based on the raw numbers solely, but from my experience, this has never happened; there is always a couple of independent review papers etc. The obvious reason is that since citation numbers vary across disciplines etc. evaluating the edge cases reeks of original research.

Unfortunately I don't think you are ever going to have an answer such as "you need X citations to be considered notable in that field". You could try to contact one of the reviewers who previously declined your article and present them the sourcing you have.

On a side note, since you found a link to Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)#Citation_metrics, there is a passage about GScholar there. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:55, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

3 markup problems

1) Why doesn't the following give me an indented quote?

{{quotation|.....<ref name="Hume"/>{{rp|515}}

2) Why doesn't the following give me an encyclopedia citation?

<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|last=Cohon|first=Rachel|title=Hume's Moral Philosophy|section=5|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/hume-moral}}

3) How do I find templates 468 and 472? Many thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 13:18, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey TBR-qed. Assuming I understand your question correctly, number one and two are because you did not close the markup properly. In the first, the opening {{ requires an additional closing }}. You currently only have one closing }} which closes the Template:Rp, leaving the Template:Quote open. (Although I'm not tech savvy and this is probably the wrong terminology.) Similarly, any time you have an opening <ref>, you have to have a closing </ref> at the end of the reference.

As to number three, I'm not totally sure what you mean. As far as I'm aware, templates on Wikipedia do not follow a meaningful numerical order. GMG^talk 13:31, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Coding to link a specific fact to a specific footnote?

I've seen, just a handful of times, some kind of coding so that when you mouse-over a section of text, the text associated with a given footnote is highlighted. Seems a useful way to avoid someone assuming that, say, a footnote applies to the previous three sentences when it only applies for the previous one sentence.

Can someone point me to the right template or whatnot to do that format? And is that something that's going to become more encouraged on Wikipedia, or does it have major drawbacks and is just a niche practice? Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:52, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey MatthewVanitas . The only time I've seen something like this done is for cleanup tags. For example, Template:Citation needed span can highlight certain portions of text to indicate what content needs additional sourcing.

As a general rule, citations cover the content immediately preceding it, up to the previous citation. So for example:

Content covered by source number one. Content also covered by source number one. Content covered by source number two. Content covered by source number one again. Content covered by source number three.

References

Using citation templates and the quote = parameter, you can include short quotations to indicate which content is covered by which source. Other than that, since our policy on verifiability means that everything (or nearly everything) should be supported by a citation, I'm afraid using highlighted references similar to Template:Citation needed span would wind up just having everything highlighted, which would probably just wind up being unnecessarily distracting for readers. GMG^talk 13:55, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello GreenMeansGo. Ah, so it's just for "cn" and it's pretty visually obtrusive, got it. I somehow thought there was some more subtle way where you had to mouse-over to see which text is which cite. I know the cite follows the fact, but again the issue is sometimes there are five facts in a row, but the cite only applies to the last two, so I guess the only solution is to use a "cn" to cut off where uncited text ends. I'm doing a major cleanup of Shivaji and it's a real tail-pain having to verify sources to see if the whole paragraph is covered by the footnote at the end, or just the last sentence. (talk) 19:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Personally MatthewVanitas, when I write I just abuse the crap out of Template:efn in order to be as clear as possible. These footnotes allow you to comment more on the sources, their content, and what may or may not be clear from each one. GMG^talk 19:40, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Photos are Upside Down

Hi, When I try to upload several images they are turned upside down. How do I fix this and why is it happening? AAbrahamsen2016 (talk) 16:19, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello AAbrahamsen2016 - welcome to our Teahouse. Looking at one of the images you uploaded, the image metadata shows that your iPhone7 camera rotated the picture by 180 degrees when it was taken. This often happens if you hold an iPhone or other device to photograph a book or map the wrong way round- the autorotate function makes it look OK to you, but the reality is the image has been rotated. If I were you I'd either retake the photo with the camera held the other way around, or I'd delete all the EXIF data using a wonderful little free program which I swear by called Irfanview, and crop/rotate/enhance the image as well. (I doubt it's available as an iphone app, though). Forgive me - as I'm about to nip out to a Jake Bugg concert, I've no time to comment about any copyright issues of the images you uploaded. I'm sure another host may do that. Regards from a snowy UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:43, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey AAbrahamsen2016. As to the copyright issues... There's... a lot to unpack here. Probably starting with the fact that simply saying evidence will be provided upon request is not sufficient to justify uploading images to Wikipedia. Looking through your recent images, many of them are from the 1950s, which means unless they were proactively released under the license you claim (which would need evidence, usually in the form of a link or an email following the instructions at WP:CONSENT) they would most likely not be usable for Wikipedia.

For faithful reproductions of two dimensional works, such as photographs of paintings or photographs of other photographs, taking that picture doesn't affect the copyright, which is still retained by the original author. For works published after 1923 in the US, copyright generally expires 70 years after the death of the author, and since these pictures are themselves only about 70 years old, this is highly unlikely. Even if this was the case, we would need to be able to identify the original author to verify their date of death. For an overview of US copyright, see c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory#United States. Unless you can provide evidence that the files you have uploaded are suitable for unrestricted public use under the licenses you claim, then they will need to be deleted, or you will have to show that they can be used as non-free media under our policies on non-free content. GMG^talk 17:04, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I will work on the copyright issues, but the pictures were not taken by an iPhone. How do I fix the rotation of them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AAbrahamsen2016 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

• Pretty much any photo editing software will suffice. Ravenswing 20:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey AAbrahamsen2016. Sorry again for blowing up your talk page with all those notices. If you can sort out the copyright on the images, they can be pretty easily transferred to Wikimedia Commons and there is a bot there which preforms automated image rotations. GMG^talk 20:44, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry I had to dash off, AAbrahamsen2016 (great concert tonight, though). Unlike images on Wikimedia Commons, those uploaded to Wikipedia can't be rotated as far as I know. But you can replace the image by uploading a new version which you rotate yourself beforehand. (It's odd that the exif data has been changed to indicate it was taken on an iPhone7, when you say it wasn't.) Like you, I'm a Museum Studies graduate, though now retired after 35 years in the profession. I know from personal experience that many museums fret long and hard about releasing images of works of art they possess (my own included). It looks like GreenMeansGo has given you some useful advice and a lot worries and things to think about with your institution in terms of permissions for releasing images. Whilst you may have access as a curatorial assistant to those images, I would advise you, assuming you've not already done so, to speak either to your Director of Collections & Interpretation or your Executive Director to ensure they approve you uploading such high resolution images of the museum's collections for commercial use, and lower res ones too, for that matter. Many museums still like to strictly control access to these as they can bring in small amounts of revenue through charging for reproduction fees, whereas they may be happy to release much lower resolution images for free use by anyone. Either way, as GMG has advised you, you are going to have to get the museum to formally give its permission - relatively easily done via an official museum email address sent to our OTRS team, linking to the images already uploaded, or sending them again if they've already been deleted. Let us know if you need a link to the relevant page for how to do this. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Images

It is advisable to have two images in a Wikipedia article section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midnight Dreams (talk • contribs) 18:26, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Midnight Dreams and welcome to the Teahouse! Having more than one image can be appropriate, it really depends on the length of the article, size of the images etc. If you want an example of an article that does have more than one image in a section, take a look at The Rolling Stones#1965–1967: Height of fame or (to a lesser extent) Mick Jagger. If you have any questions or would like anything explained further, please do let us know. I will keep an eye on this discussion for the next little while. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:16, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I certainly don't think it is 'advisable' to have two images per section, Midnight Dreams. As TheSandDoctor says above, it all depends on the article itself. In many cases it would be definitely inadvisable. The question to ask is "does having this image enhance the information-giving purpose of this page or section?" If "yes" then use the image - if in doubt, leave it out. You might want to look at a page for the Mont Blanc massif that I built up some while ago. It covers a large geographic area, spanning three countries, many sub-topics, and is very lengthy. In places I've used three images per section, some of which are on the left side of the page which isn't normally recommended, though here I felt the alternation gave balance. You may well feel it was inadvisable for me to use so many in this way. I'd say there's no definitive answer to your original question. But do check out: MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE and the nice, short Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:22, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping Nick Moyes. I agree with what you said (in the case of the Stones, main reason the images are so prevalent is the fact that they have a larger sized article and the fact that there is 56 years of history to cover of one of the most commercially successful bands of all time). Those links Nick gave are definitely worth checking out Midnight Dreams. -- Any questions? Feel free to reply here & let us know! TheSandDoctor (talk) 01:31, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Robot Coding

Hi fellas. i created a new Robot in another language (persian/farsi) of wikipedia, but i can't fix the errors. Can somebody show me the Instructions of Python Coding, cause i can Use this Software. thanks a lot. Dandamayev (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello there Dandamayev and welcome to the Teahouse! I would recommend Googling any errors and/or googling for tutorials. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Dandamayev: If you need more specific wiki-related guidance on that coding, there's a very small chance that a posting to Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard might yield some useful replies. But this is just a guess on my part. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:32, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Talk page message from guest

Hello from en.wiktionary. Could not find 'Feedback', so I left a message at Template_talk:Greek_language#Periods 17 FEB 2018. I did not know how to alert or whom (with {attention} {ping} etc). I was wondering if anyone read it. Thank you, sarri.greek (talk) 2018.03.03. UTC 00:41 Sarri.greek (talk) 00:43, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Sarri.greek. Unfortunately there is no way of knowing if anyone has read any post. The problem with templates is that very few people watch them. Often the best way is to ping individuals who have previously edited that template, and I can confirm that two other editors who did just that are both still very active at the moment. The other way to reach people is to consider where a particular template might get used, and to post a message on the appropriate wikiproject - in your case Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece. Or use the "What links here" button to find articles using that template, and post on the most likely candidate - in your case Greek language. Hope this helps, regards Nick Moyes (talk) 00:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Nick Moyes. I proofread a lot, I never edit. But my messages go un-noticed. Same problem at wiktionaries. There is no designated 'watcher' for each page. I presume (being new around here), that this is an inter-wiki.. problem. Ok, thanks, I'll follow your suggestions. sarri.greek (talk) / Sarri.greek (talk) 01:16, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

You're most welcome. I fear that most editors (like me) work within the one language project and don't stray beyond it. To be frank, I don't think I've ever tried to 'watch' pages on other projects I've edited - I'll give it a try - but there are certainly no designated 'watchers' for any pages. As you know, all volunteers simply follow their interests and desires, so it would be impossible to establish a formal system, I fear. Nice idea though. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:40, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Bosman Twins or The Bosman Twins - How to get page restored.

The Wikipedia page for jazz artists The Bosman Twins was deleted. The Bosman's didn't do anything wrong, but yet their page was deleted. They are in fact notable jazz artists, with a global following. There is evidence. They are notable and recognized as international artists, as is evidenced by them being featured in a new book, "All That's Jazz". This book was commissioned by Tomahawk Press, written by Sammy Stein, and includes jazz artists past and present. Their music has been played on jazz radio stations all over the U.S., right alongside other jazz greats. I've seen artists' pages on Wikipedia who doesn't have 1/2 credentials and their pages just indicate: There are issues with this page. Those pages were taken down.

How do we get the page restored? How can I appeal this decision? Is the page at least archived?Pr1775 (talk) 10:00, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, the article The Bosman Twins was deleted in May because it was created by a user who abusing multiple accounts to evade a block. If you want the article restored, you can make a request at WP:REFUND to do so. Iffy★Chat -- 10:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Pr1775. It's unfortunate when an article is deleted only because its creator is behaving disruptively; but I'm sure you understand that this is to avoid rewarding disruptive behaviour. However, please understand that a Wikipedia article is absolutely not for the benefit of the subject (it doesn't belong to them, they have no control over the contents, and sometimes it will contain material that they would prefer it didn't), so it is not a "punishment" for the subject when an article is deleted. (Note also that I am not using the phrase "taken down": that is something that happens to "pages" on social media. This is an encyclopaedia, which consists of non-promotional articles). --ColinFine (talk) 11:44, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Pr1775, rather than restore the page that was deleted I would suggest that you and others start it from fresh at Draft:The Bosman Twins and when it is ready it can be moved to The Bosman Twins. Occasionally it is better to start fresh than to salvage. ϢereSpielChequers 12:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I need to hire someone to create a wikipedia page for me. How can I do that?

I need to hire someone to create a wikipedia page for me. How can I do that?Rsgraves1 (talk) 11:46, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Rsgraves1: - please provide more information, so that we can give a concrete answer. Hiring people to create articles (not pages) is really not how Wikipedia is supposed to work. What exactly do you want your potential employee to do? Stormy clouds (talk) 11:53, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

If this concerns Sinner, an article which you have attempted to create yourself, there is a litany of issues. The article would struggle to avoid deletion, as it lacks notability. For an article to be created about the book, it must receive coverage in reputable and reliable sources. In your sandbox, you have used citations which are not permissible, and do not establish notability - particularly, do not use Wikipedia articles as citations, as they are user-generated, and so are not allowed. Moreover, your username indicates that you have a relationship with, or are, the author of the novel in question - this means that you have a conflict of interest, and should not be editing anything which is associated with you or someone who you are closely related to. Finally, regarding your initial query, you should not hire anyone to create an article here, as it is a violation of our paid editing policy, and will likely result in any article created being deleted and removed from the encyclopedia. Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a means of free publicity. Any edits made must conform to the relevant guidelines. So, in summation, and to succinctly answer your question - I need to hire someone to create a wikipedia page for me. How can I do that? - you don't. Hope this helps, Stormy clouds (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2018 (UTC).

Hello, Rsgraves1. If you mean, you want to hire somebody to create a Wikipedia article about you or something you are associated with, my advice is a very strong DON'T. If you go ahead, they will be required (by our terms of service) to declare that they are in a paid capacity, and will be required to write it in a neutral manner. They (and you) will not have control over the contents of the article, and will not be able to prevent other editors changing it, even in ways that you do not like.

If you are philanthropically proposing to pay somebody to improve Wikipedia, then I'd say, cautiously, Go ahead! Your agent would still have to declare their paid status, and probably find themselves subject to people who were suspicious of your motives; but we all contribute to Wikipedia in the way we choose. --ColinFine (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Rsgraves1 I would add that Wikipedia would not have a "page for you", it would have an "article about you", and only if you met the notability guidelines for biographies at WP:BIO(there are also more specific ones for certain professions like musicians or athletes). As Colin notes quite well, you would not have exclusive control over such a page, and it may not be a good thing for you for there to be an article about you here; see this page. Your best bet would be to wait for an uninvolved party to write about you, which would be one indication that you meet the notability guidelines; however, if you still want to proceed, your agent/employee would need to use Articles for Creation(after they make the declarations Colin mentions) to submit a draft for review by an independent editor. Your agent would need to have independent reliable sources that discuss you in depth, and they would need to forget everything they know about you and only write based on what those sources state. 331dot (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Rsgraves1: - given that you are apparently Rebecca Soler, please refrain from editing that article as well, as you once again suffer from a conflict of interest. Rather, use the talk page to bring up issues you have, and other editors may address them for you if you can bolster your points with reliable sources. Stormy clouds (talk) 12:11, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

interesting pages

A friend of mine once showed me a page of odd articles but I can't remember what it was, can someone help?2602:306:32CF:34D0:549:C629:342D:4B87 (talk) 12:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

That Wikipedia List. Stormy clouds (talk) 13:16, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Article Notability

I have been asked to create and publish a wikipedia page on the Northern-English artist Tony Huggins-Haig. Could i please get some advice as to whether this is a notable enough, or acceptable subject to have as a wikipedia page? Many thanks MichaelHuggins91 (talk) 11:31, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, MichaelHuggins91. Welcome, and thanks for coming to ask before plunging in. Creating a new article that is accepted is difficult, and I advise you to get some experience editing existing articles first. I suggest you start by studying your first article, which has a lot of useful advice, including pointing you to where you can read about notability. But a quick summary: the article should be almost entirely based on where people who have no connection with Huggins-Haig have chosen to write in some depth about him, and been published in reliable places, such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers. If you can find enough such independent published material to say anything substantial about him, then he is notable (in Wikipedia's special sense of the word) and an article is possible. If you can't then he is not currently notable, and not article will be accepted. In any case, things said or published by him or his associates are of little relevance.

One other point. From your name, and the fact that you "have been asked" to create the article, I'm guessing that you are a relative. This does not prevent you from writing an article on him, but it makes it more challenging, because your conflict of interest may tend to make it harder for you to write sufficiently neutrally - in my mind, the fact that you have been asked to write it is of greater concern than your relationship. At the least, you should be open about your COI, and expect to submit your work for review Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 11:53, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Colin, thank you for your help. I just have a couple more questions if that is okay?

Firstly, what would you classify as "in some depth". Is there a certain size article needed for example? Secondly, do the articles I currently have about his work in the art community, etc have to be digital (or have digital copy) or can they also be physical paper versions? Does there have to be a certain amount of cyber-based 'evidence' on Tony? Would it be more advised to have a third-party who isn't connected to Tony or the family?

Sorry for all of the questions, I just need to get all of the information before I begin writing and then jump through hoops of rewrites or get turned down. I hope you understand.

Thank you again! MichaelHuggins91 (talk) 14:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@MichaelHuggins91: Hello, sources do not need to be online, as long as it is possible for someone to verify them. (like a book in a library) As Colin indicates, you will need to read WP:COI. If your relative is paying you, you are also required to read and comply with WP:PAID, the paid editing policy. 331dot (talk) 14:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Just because you know something to be true - for example, his date of birth - can only include that in the Wikipedia article if there is a published source to reference that fact. This is why it is harder to create an article about someone you have a connection to. Does not preclude you, just means references trump knowledge. David notMD (talk) 15:18, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Passcode to join an event

I'm trying to Join an Event, but whenever I click on join, It goes to a page informing me that the passcode is already expired.

Where can I get a passcode for Join 'wiki4women UNESCO 2018-03-08'?

Or Can I go start researching, writing and editing even without the passcode, and even without joining the event?Hazellamaria (talk) 03:53, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

This appears to relate to the following event, which requires a Wikipedia login: https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/UNESCO,_Ambassade_de_Su%C3%A8de_en_France,_Ambassade_du_Canada_en_France/wiki4women_UNESCO_2018-03-08?enroll= --Gronk Oz (talk) 07:21, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Hazellamaria welcome to our friendly Teahouse, and thanks for expressing an interest in wanting to join the #wiki4women UNESCO event. I see your problem and (as soon as I've answered here) I am going to send a personal email to John Cummings who has organised this event. It's possible that a password is needed for those physically wanting to attend UNESCO's International Women's Day editathon in Paris. I'm honestly not sure, and rather confused by this, myself. I can only apologise, but we will find out for you!

Secondly, there is absolutely nothing whatsoever to stop you researching/writing/editing before you sign up to the event. In fact, I would actively encourage you to do this. You might like to use your own user sandbox to work in (see the link at the very top of the page in desktop view). For a list of ideas for creating biographical articles about women see this list of redlinks, arranged in various orders), and you might also like to see Ten Simple Rules for Women in Red, or this longer "Primer for creating women’s biographies".

Come back if we can help you in any other way. Looking forward to seeing lots of activity on International Women's Day on 8th March! Nick Moyes (talk) 09:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

PS: I've now emailed John - so hope to have this sorted out soon for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:25, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Dear @Hazellamaria: and @Nick Moyes:, thanks very much for the message, I've messaged the person who set up the sign up and hope that it can be fixed very soon. Please can you try signing in again? If you still get the message can you copy and paste it here? I've tried the same link and it works, so it may have been a temporary issue that is now resolved.

Thanks again John Cummings (talk) 10:04, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi John. Thanks for responding so rapidly. There's no change in the function over the last couple of hours. I'm first prompted to sign in as a cross-platform user via OAuth, which works easily. This takes me here. The 'Actions' box at the bottom right of that page has a link to 'Join programme', which I presume Hazellamaria assumed she needed to do. Clicking this link then prompts for a password, displaying the following text: To join this program, you need to get the passcode — or link that includes the passcode — from the facilitator. Enter the passcode to join: With the incorrect password entered, the next page is a Programmes and Events Dashboard which displays (note the typo) this message: Incorrect passcode. :-( The passcode for enrolling in this course in incorrect. Please ask the instructor for the current passcode to enroll in this course. Hoping this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:01, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Nick Moyes:, the password has actually expired. I corrected it, should work now. Thanks for joining! Kvardek du (talk) 16:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Kvardek du. This is a ping to @Hazellamaria: to ask if you would try to join again now, and let us know how you get on. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Jerome-Adika Vincent Sator Jr

I reviewed Draft:Jerome-Adika Vincent Sator Jr and declined it, saying that it appeared to be written to praise its subject rather than describe him neutrally. Its author User:Powerd By AMAS then replied (twice, probably by accident) on my talk page, asking me for examples, and saying that they thought that they had been careful to be neutral. I would like the comments of other experienced editors. My first observation was and is that referring to the subject as “multi-talented” in the lede sentence in the voice of Wikipedia is non-neutral. That is just one point at the beginning. Other than that, I notice the specific example: “His on-air charisma and technical skills behind the scenes, catapulted him into the film and television industry. ” Beyond that, I had issues with the overall tone, but it might have been just my personal response. Comments?

Robert McClenon (talk) 16:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Gods, no, you're dead on. It's a superficially well-written article, but it's dripping with peacock verbiage, devoid of inline cites to back it up, and quite free of reliable sources which meet the GNG. There was a quickie resubmit which I just declined. Ravenswing 17:46, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Translation from another language

Hi there, I wanted to create an English page about the Froissartage (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Froissartage), to help English speaking friends to understand what it is. So my question is can I reuse the French version and just translate it into English ? I'd still say it's a translated version and add a link to the french version if needed, and I would use the french sources too. Thank you for your answers.

Captain Hornblower Captn Hornblower (talk) 18:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translation. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer.

Captn Hornblower (talk) 18:40, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Where should I put inline citations

Hi, I have looked at a couple of articles, and I am not sure where to use inline citations (such as in infoboxes and lead sections). Could someone explain where and where not I should use inline citations?

Thanks

Peterye2005 (talk) 23:39, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Peterye2005! Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Citing sources/WP:INCITE should have all of the information that you need. Essentially, citations should be used to cite sources and back up any claims made in articles or information that could be disputed. Include citations "allow the reader to associate a given bit of material in an article with the specific reliable source(s) that support it" (from third link). The third link contains information about how to add them. Hope this helps! If you have any questions, please let us know. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

St. Xavier High School (Louisville)

Just curious, but what do you think about my edits on the article St. Xavier High School (Louisville)? I’ve added several citations to the article but I just would like to know what you think about the article. —LovelyGirl7 talk 20:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Truth to be told, the article gives the impression that the high school is a Potemkin front for an athletics club; the amount of prose you devote to sports for this ostensible educational institution is about five times that devoted to academics. You've also got a number of the superlatives sourced to the school's own website; if, for instance, the article makes claims of notability such as it's the only school in Kentucky to win a particular honor four times, you need some outside source to say so. Ravenswing 22:34, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ravenswing: I’ve been trying to find a source for the sentence “and had been the only school in Kentucky to have won a state championship in every Kentucky High School Athletic Association (KHSAA)-sanctioned sport open to boys before the KHSAA began sponsoring coeducational championships in archery and bass fishing in the early 21st century” but I can’t find one. I need help finding a source for the sentence. —LovelyGirl7 talk 23:33, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

• I haven't been able to find one myself, which suggests that it's best left out of the article; one of our catchphrases on Wikipedia is "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." Ravenswing 23:46, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ravenswing: since we both can't find one ourselves, do you think I should remove it? I also can't find sources for "With the conclusion of Project X, St. Xavier now boasts some of the best high school athletic facilities in the nation" either. Should I do the same with that sentence (remove it)? --LovelyGirl7 talk 23:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I've got some concerns about the sourcing too. I can't tell whether you added them or simply moved them, but there are several citations that claim to be from the KHSAA but are not. Additionally there is a citation ourpoting to be from Sports Illustrated that is actually from "somerandomwebsite.com". There is also a considerable amount if superlative content sourced to dead links on the Courrier Journal's website. Now the CJ is one of the finest newspapers in the country, and is certainly a reliable source, but given the overall promo tone of the article, I think actually looking at them is in order. John from Idegon (talk) 00:24, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Message

I received a message from Wikipedia that makes no sense at all. "User talk:207.177.111.158 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia September 2011 Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Kira Buckland with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tgeairn (talk) 17:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC) Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kira Buckland with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Breawycker (talk to me!) 17:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)" It makes no sense because I have never, ever contributed, or edited, anything on Wikipedia. Furthermore, I have never heard of "Kira Buckland". Not sure what to do about this or where to post it. Gary "Gig" Giegerich 207.177.111.158 (talk) 00:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

You are using a dynamic IP address. The message is from 2011. You may want to consider creating an account. This will allow you to have a stable talk page and contributions history. Jbh ^Talk 00:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Gary. You are editing anonymously using an IP address, which may be shared among many internet users. It seems that someone used the same IP address seven years ago to vandalize an article twice. I suggest that you register a Wikipedia account, which eliminates such confusion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:03, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Create a Category?

I was trying to add some categories to the page of an author (Peg Kehret). The author is a polio survivor. Unfortunately, there isn't a list for this. Is this deliberate to avoid linking people by a illness or is this something that could be added? Or should I use the category "poliomyetlitis?" I don't want to mess something up! 222H (talk) 02:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Nevermind. I just found it! It's "People with poliomyelitis." 222H (talk) 03:02, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Having trouble getting this active

Having difficulty getting an architecturally significant building listed. I need help, please.

I'm also appealing any decision that this piece of architecture isn't notable or significant. Simply because the building hasn't yet been NRHP (not NHRP :-) listed doesn't mean it isn't significant - it's merely a superficial qualifier. In this particular building's case, it was not listed because the owners saw no benefit in doing so. Having personally listed buildings on the NRHP I can say this particular structure chances of getting listed are quite high - if the owners decided to go that route. It was built by the most important early 20th century architects on the west coast. I can understand that if one isn't interested nor understands architectural history why they would brush this off since it isn't their purview. However, for those who are interested architectural history, this is an important building to reference.

As for notability references, what exactly do you want? I'm sure I can find something.

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

Apollodorus1982 (talk) 02:39, 4 March 2018

Hello, Apollodorus1982 and welcome to the TeaHouse. Every article on Wikipedia (including architectural ones) should qualify as having a "Notable" subject (in Wikipedia's special meaning of that term). Notability in Wikipedia is mostly driven by how thoroughly the subject is covered in independent, reliable sources. In addition, certain official recognition (such as NRHP) can also strongly indicate notability, but they are not required. So to establish notability, start by collecting the sources that discuss the subject - books written about it, newspaper and journal articles that discuss it in depth (not just a passing mention), television shows about it, etc. There is a good article that covers the topic here. Or for more detail you can see the "General Notability Guildelines" here. Good luck.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:56, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

i have news channel called news1india in india want to publush my page

hi this is zeeshan want creat page in india for newschannel if any one can help me within the same i would really appreciate or guide me how to creat one Zee101010 (talk) 11:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I would recommend reading Wikipedia:Your first article first, it will help you a lot. FlyingShrimp (talk) 11:29, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

A question about Wikipedia guidelines

Hi! Recently, I found a problem about Wikipedia guidelines. In WP:V, WP:REFB and WP:RS, and other guidelines about reliable sources, only paper sources(Such as books, journals and newspapers) are given as examples of reliable sources, no website sources. Does this means only paper sources can be reliable sources of Wikipedia? And any website sources (even notable medias with editor reviewing) are not reliable sources of Wikipedia? Or paper sources are more reliable than website sources? However, paper sources are much more difficult to find than website sources. This may mislead newbies. Omega68537 (talk) 05:45, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello Omega68537 and welcome to the TeaHouse. Yes, web sites are acceptable as references, provided they are independent and reliable. Even conventional media such as newspapers often make content available on the Web as well, which makes convenient links for readers who wish to follow up the source.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:42, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Omega68537. Yes, websites can be reliable sources, even though 99% of websites are not acceptable. Reliable source websites will meet the same standards as reliable books, newspapers and magazines. They will have professional editorial control and an established reputation for accuracy, fact checking and correcting errors. If you take a look at Wikipedia:Citation templates, you can see that citing high quality websites is very common. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:56, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

In medical arena there are reputable organizations with websites that are accepted as references: WebMD, Mayo Clinic, etc. This does not automatically extend to websites created by individuals or small organizations or companies promoting their own products. David notMD (talk) 11:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Do you know any interesting names of food named after Greek gods and goddesses?

i need them for a menu I have to create for a class. Please help and give me any you can think of. THANK YOU! Any types of food will work. Ashlyn2838 (talk) 04:36, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello Ashlyn2838 and welcome to the teahouse. Unfortunately this question is not the kind of thing that this page is for. Please post your question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities where answers will be forthcoming. MarnetteD|Talk 04:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ashlyn2838: Do a Google search for "Nipples of Venus" a confection. You will see photos and receipts. Also, see Ambrosia. Look in the "see also" section for Idunn's apples, etc. Good luck! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 06:55, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Typing in "foods named after Greek gods and goddesses?" into Yahoo gets plenty of answers. BeckenhamBear (talk) 11:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Discrepancies between articles.

Refer to this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Numbers

It says, "In general, write whole cardinal numbers from one to nine as words" but in the main article for the section,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Numbers

it says, "Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words."

Please fix this discrepancy. It can cause confusion. I have no permission to edit either article.

175.193.153.88 (talk) 17:07, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Fixed. In the future, you should be able to use the relevant talk page for these issues. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:11, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

How to get drafts reviewed?

Hi. I've created two article drafts, one of which was a request on a WikiProject page. However, I'm unsure of what to do next, I believe it has to get reviewed to go live. Can you guide me on how to go about that? Thank you, this newbie is appreciative of all help! TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 08:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@TheOneWorkingAccount: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume this refers to Draft:The Bath Item Gift Hypothesis and Draft:Suhail Chandhok. It appears that you have submitted both drafts for review already. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

"The Bath Item Gift Hypothesis" is already in an existing article, The Big Bang Theory (season 2). BeckenhamBear (talk) 12:16, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi BeckenhamBear. Thank you for the welcome. The link you mentioned redirects to a part of the main Big Bang Theory page. According to the project page, some special episodes need a full new page and it is that instruction I followed to create the page. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Television/Episodes_for_creation Also, does the other draft look good? Appreciate your help! TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 14:17, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi 331dot. Thank you for the welcome. Yes, those are the two drafts I'm talking about. So once submitted for review, there's nothing further that I need to do?TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 14:19, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Your a man after my own heart. I was not aware of that page. However I think you may find a request such as "Episodes_for_creation" is not an automatic sanction for inclusion of said article. Especially from a loooong running series like this. Notability rules still apply. Oh, as a PS I would have separated out these two different requests. --BeckenhamBear (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Oh! What a waste it would be in that case :(

P.S - I'm a woman :)

For Draft:Suhail Chandhok, there was already an existing, deleted article that I simply cleaned up in terms of advertorial sounding language and added a lot of references, which the original version was missing. Would that be enough to have it published?

Noted your suggestion on separating the requests, thanks! Will do so going forward — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheOneWorkingAccount (talk • contribs) 15:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Once submitted, you just need to wait for them to be reviewed. As this is a volunteer project, it may take a bit. 331dot (talk) 16:44, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok. Yes, fully aware of that. Just wanted to make sure it's submitted and there's nothing more that I need to do on it. Well, on to look for some other tasks now. Thanks! TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Filmmaker seeks help in adding external links to 4 documentaries on his Vimeo site, pertaining to 4 Wiki biographies

I am a retired documentary filmmaker, and recently uploaded my four best docs to my Vimeo page, just to keep them available to the public. I'm not selling them, and they cannot be downloaded, just viewed with online streaming. Wikipedia already has a biographical page for each of the four subjects, and my wish is to add the Vimeo URL to the "External Links" section of those pages. I have read through much of the info on how to encode, on markup, etc., but it feels like a very long and steep learning curve for me and my 83-year-old brain! Any help or advice will be much appreciated. Kelvin52 (talk) 02:29, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kelvin52! Sure, I'd be happy to help; what are the four articles? Ravenswing 07:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Kelvin52. I think I can help. What are the four articles and the Vimeo URLs? TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 16:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Mission accomplished! Thanks for your help, Ravenswing!Kelvin52 (talk) 18:09, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Faisal Jama Omar

Faisal Jama is a public figure and Somali  retired international Athlete. He have 3 National Records in 1500,3000m and 5000m

He was born in Hargeisa on March 24 1987. He is one of most decorated Somali Athletes He also played soccer where he was nicknamed Figo after the Portugal and real Madrid legend, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faisal Jama Omar (talk • contribs) 21:09, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Faisal Jama Omar - this is the Teahouse, where editors are able to ask questions regarding editing on Wikipedia. You appear to have errandly attempted to create an article here, which is not the intended purpose of this forum. Moreover, your username indicates that you have a conflict of interest in creating this article, and that it is autobiographical in nature. Editors are urged to refrain from penning articles about themselves, so please do not do so. If you wish to make another article, consult your first article prior to doing so. Stormy clouds (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Update of Smoky Dog, wikipedia

Much is still happening with Smoky. For example she now has 11 memorials in the U.S. three in Australia and as of July 21, 2017, one at the 1st International Animals of War memorial in Pozieres, France. She also has been awarded-- 1)The first War Dog combat medal of Australia, backdated in 2012, in large ceremony at the Royal Brisbane Womans Hospital formerly the U.S. 109th Fleet Hospital where Smoky served as the first therapy dog in Aug.'44. The Aussies had no war dogs until the Vietnam War. Today a War Dog must serve 28 days straight in combat to receive the award. Research shows Smoky was born in Brisbane, Queensland at 101 Queen Street in mid 1943. At about five months old sold to a US Army couple. She served 24 months with the 5th USAAF serving 18 months straight in combat from New Guinea to Korea. In 2015 Smoky received the extremely rare and highest honor Animal Hero can receive, Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, "RSPCA Purple Cross " medal of Australia. She is only the 10th recipient animal hero to receive the award for bravery in 164 years, dating back to Crimean war, 1864. In 2017 the United States War Dog handlers Association awarded Smoky the "Unofficial War Dog of WWII" its Service Medal and title of "MWD Smoky." Another memorial is underway. Sincerely, Bill Wynne, Smoky's owner trainer. Age 96. (photos available for proof) Can this be inserted in Smoky's Wikipedia? 2607:FCC8:67C9:800:78ED:8918:9F8E:EB43 (talk) 20:45, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi IP user. Yes, all that can be added to the article as long as there are references to prove it, like newspapers, magazine articles, etc. If you have them, could you post the links on the article talk page? Somebody can then use them to add the relevant information to the article. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Picture

Hello! I have found a picture of a person that I'm writing about and I want to use it for my article. The photographer have taken the photo for a medical newspaper and they did then publish it. If it's still the photographer that owns the copyright for the photo what do I need to do to be allowed to publish it here on Wikipedia. Is it enough if I just email the person and he or she sends back and tells me it's ok? And if that is ok, does the language have to be in english or can we make the agreement in another language? Nimbo.lo (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Nimbo.lo, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, I'm afraid that would not be enough. One of the goals of Wikipedia is to provide a sources that anybody can freely use, and so almost all of the material in Wikipedia is licensed under a licence such as CC-BY-SA, which allows anybody to reuse it as long as they attribute it. You would need the photographer to carry out the procedure outlines in donating copyright materials: they may well be willing to do this, but you probably need to make the consequences clear to them. --ColinFine (talk) 21:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Nimbo.lo and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, plain permission is insufficient because the photo has to be released under an appropriate licence, and it's possible that the newspaper owns the copyright. See Wikipedia:Image use policy for details. Dbfirs 21:43, 4 March 2018 (UTC)