Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 74

Archive 70

←

Archive 72

Archive 73

Archive 74

Archive 75

Archive 76

→

Archive 80

Underscore in wikilinks - yes or no?

I have been taking care to include the underscore in the direct (invisible) part of a wikilink eg. [[Winston_Churchill|Winston Churchill]], although I am aware that the link will work either way. Keeping the underscore just seems more correct to me, from a programming perspective. I see editors using AWB doing 'cleanup', which in this case means removing the underscore. I cannot find anything in WP:MOS which specifies whether or not the underscore should be included or left out. Any advice? David_FLXD (Talk) 17:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi David FLXD and welcome to the Teahouse. Technically, having or not having an underscore doesn't matter, but not including it is preferred by most editors (including me). I recommend that you just use [[Winston Churchill]]. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 17:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! David_FLXD (Talk) 18:04, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. If you ever have any other questions, feel free to come here again. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 18:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:STiki

I have rollback right, but less than 1000 article edit. Can I use STiki? --PlanetEditor (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the question. The Tea House works a little differently from other help pages and new questions should be added to the top so I have moved your question up here. According to Wikipedia:STiki#Using STiki the requirements are alternatives. So, as you have the rollback right you should be able to use STiki. Please be careful though - as with all of the other automated and semi-automated tools, you are still responsible for the edits that you make using it.--ukexpat (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. --PlanetEditor (talk) 17:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• In case you can't, you can request permission at WT:STiki --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:47, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Article review

Could someone kindly review the article i've written to make sure it's within the Wiki guidelines, I've endeavored to follow everything i've read and would like to prevent any possible speedy deletion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Murklemark/sandbox Thank (Murklemark (talk) 15:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC))

It looks fine to me, just that you should remove the image (which does not exist). Other users may have other opinions. Cheers! Arctic Kangaroo 15:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

how to add a reference

I have edited an article on DVT (deep vein thrombosis), adding a reference. I seem to have something wrong with the syntax, as everything I type within the {{}} appears in the main body of text, and an error message appears in the reference list. Help! 81.98.55.53 (talk) 14:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the question. Reference formatting can be tricky until you get hang of it. I fixed it in this edit - you had a "closing" ref tag rather than an "opening" ref tag. See WP:Referencing for beginners and WP:NAMEDREFS for further help.--ukexpat (talk) 15:02, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

to add a reference,start to edit the page, first,clicks where you want to add (next to a date, a name, where you want to add it) above the edit box ,there a box that says templates click templates after on web cite,will open a little window : in Title add the title of the web site,in URL "add link to the page,in access date clicks the small calendar on the right side,the date will appear automatically and in Publisher the web site's name or company Carliitaeliza TALK 15:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I wonder which preferences you have set which gives you a box that says templates? I have no such box. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

It's under "Cite", on the right of the edit box bar - open that menu, and you should get the templates option. Yunshui 雲‍水 17:00, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I also have no such box, but I've been around long enough to have significantly customized my preferences - and the defaults have changed many times since I joined. On that note, is there a page anywhere stating which preferences new users have set by default? Such a page would be useful in trying to replicate any error/answer questions. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 21:04, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Just a thought, I have a legitimate alternate account just for that purpose, used for troubleshooting and testing, as described at Wikipedia:SOCK#LEGIT. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 05:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiProjects

Hi there, I am extremely interested in Technology and decided to join the WikiProject Technology to help improve the articles on the subject. I already added my name to the list, but I am still a little bit in doubt about where exactly I can find the list of pages needing improvements other than the 5 pages listed in the main WikiProject article. Can you assist me? Thank you very much! Cheers, Zalunardo8 (talk) 10:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Howdy, Zalunardo8. Go to the WikiProject Technology Assessment page and check the Progress chart near the top. All of the articles with a Quality rating of less than A could use improvement. I suggest working on Stub or Start class articles because those need the most improvement. If you click on any number in the Total pages column of the Progress chart, toolserver.org will generate a list of page titles. Browse through the list and choose an article that interests you as an article to improve. Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 11:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answer, DocTree! Best, Zalunardo8 (talk) 12:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• See also Wikipedia:WikiProject_Technology#Work --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

PDF files on the internet

Hello again! Today I am working on a page in my sandbox at User:Anne Delong/sandbox and I found a couple of sources that I want to add to my article. They are PDF files, one of a newspaper page and one an announcement of a fund-raising event. The URLs are very long and the Wikipedia editor rejects them. To get one of these sources I typed "central ontario bluegrass awards academy theatre" into Google. Does anyone know what the problem is? —Anne Delong (talk) 07:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Anne. At a glance, I think you're copying search strings rather than URLs. I take it you're referring to this PDF and this one. The correct URLs are http://media.cottagecountrynow.ca/special/huntsville/data/pdfs/144/FORB04.pdf and http://www.highergroundbluegrass.ca/Promo/MediaRelease/MediaRelease.pdf, respectively. Hope that helps, Yunshui 雲‍水 08:48, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I have a new Windows 8 laptop that has a built in PDF reader that doesn't show the URL at the top. I'll have to figure out how to reconfigure it. In the mean time I will copy the links you have given me and that should solve my immediate problem. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Just a technical note, if you are going to continue using Windows 8 for PDF viewing, I'd suggest going ahead and getting Adobe Reader. The built in 'reader' app is really bad in terms of features. Then use the desktop version of Internet Explorer, and it'll let you pick how you open the PDF. Hope you like the new computer! gwickwire^talk_edits 14:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Good advice. I'm a FireFox user, but it also gives you the same options. I hadn't downloaded Adobe Reader because I find it invasive (on my old computer it was constantly updating and adding toolbars, etc., to my browser), but it looks like I need it. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Images from free ebooks - okay, or not okay?

I'm writing a draft for the non-existent Milling (machining) article in my userspace. I want to include images for a section, and the source I'm primarily using for this section has the perfect images to include. It's an old engineering textbook, from 1922; it's free on Google Books. Would I be able to use images from this book freely in the article? I'm guessing that due to its age, the work entered the public domain some time ago. --Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 05:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

As the no-longer-red link above shows, I created Milling (machining). I haven't added the images in question, because I'm still not sure about it, but I think the article is sufficient to be pushed into the main namespace. --Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 05:34, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Kierkkadon. Welcome to Teahouse! It is a safe bet that a photo from a book that old is in public domain. If you have any more questions, please come back. Happy editing. Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

And just to double-confirm, because I don't want to do something horrible, public-domain is A-OKAY to use? --Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 05:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes. See public domain. Under U.S. copyright law, all works first published before 1923 are in the public domain, which means that no one owns the copyright on them, and they are free to be copied, modified, and used without having to secure rights from anyone. --Jayron32 05:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• Just to clarify though, it's definitely PD in the US. If it was published elsewhere it may be copyrighted (but that's a bit more advanced) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• I can not see the link "Books on Google Play is not available in your country yet.", but, if the book is in public domain in both US and its publishing country, then, yes. BTW, what is the image about? Chances are you may find the image somewhere else too! --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Just a couple of diagrams illustrating a concept in milling. I've added them to the article, but you can find them here and here. They're really simple images, I could have just made my own versions really, but I thought posting them from the source would be a lot easier and I was pretty sure their age made them usable. --Kierkkadon ^{talk/contribs} 14:46, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

What do you like about Wikipedia?

Good early morning if we're talking UTC time. What I like about Wikipedia is the Articles for Creation because I can review articles. I like the Teahouse because I can ask and answer questions. Are there any other interesting things about Wikipedia that I haven't figured out yet? If so, please let me know. Also, is there a page where I can find a variety of other things Wikipedia offers, beside articles? Thank you. JHUbal27 ^Roar! 02:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

There a lot of Wikiprojects like here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Active_WikiProjects You can add your name to "Participants" as well you can join in freenode.net a network of chat on IRC at #wikipedia-teahouse ^connect and share experiences with new users, make friends, among other things, that step by step you will get to know Carliitaeliza TALK 02:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia for every occasion of life

• New born: WP:WELCOME
• School days: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user, Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy
• Celebration: Wikipedia:Birthday Committee, Wikipedia:Barnstars
• Taking responsibility Wikipedia:Requests for permissions
• More responsibility WP:ADMIN
• Assistance: Wikipedia:Help, Wikipedia:Teahouse
• Frustration: Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention
• Last phase: Wikipedia:Retiring
• We're going to miss them: Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians, Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

There are noticeboards that cover almost everything:

There are also a wide variety of maintenance categories that list articles in need of various kinds of improvement or enhancement.

If you want something to do on Wikipedia, the best thing to do is just say "I want to do x, how can I get started?" Because we probably have a project, noticeboard, or category for you! – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 21:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Need help on article

I have written this article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/YMedia_Labs which got declined. I have given enough references. Can anyone help me out on this article.

Arnabme (talk) 07:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Arnabme! I do see you have references, but unfortunately you don't have any inline citations. This will help editors see which statements are supported by which sources. That should help at first. Also, as the declining editors noted, the article reads like an advertisement. For example, the statement "Y Media Labs takes pride in creating ..." is not very encyclopedic. It should be more like "Y Media labs creates ...".

If you work on those two issues (inline citations and neutralizing the language), I think you'll be in good shape. Let us know if you need more help! --McDoobAU93 16:42, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Are the cleanup tags I added relevant?

I added four tags to this article. I was just wondering if they were all relevant. Also, when I was adding {{Multiple issues|refimprove|cleanup-reorganize|notability}}, I had to add {{Underlinked}} underneath it because it wouldn't work. Why so? Thank you. JHUbal27 ^Roar! 03:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back!   I reformatted the {{multiple issues}} template, thus:

{{Multiple issues|
  {{cleanup-reorganize|date=January 2013}}
  {{refimprove|date=January 2013}}
  {{notability|date=January 2013}}
  {{Underlinked|date=January 2013}}
}}

This works - but, I don't know why the other way didn't.
Re: "Are they relevant?" Looks like it to me. ~E: 04:07, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Updated:74.60.29.141 (talk) 04:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey JHUbal27. The syntax that 74.60.29.141 posted is the correct syntax to use; the syntax that you used isn't supported by the template. For more information about the template, see Template:Multiple issues. Also, Twinkle is a great tool that can add these tags for you in code after you √checkmark which tags you want. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 05:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Tom Hanks photo

Hi, can you find someone willing to upload a new Tom Hanks pic from Google. Thanx.207.224.196.27 (talk) 23:08, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

think you would need permissionMicrosoftPaint (talk) 23:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Is the image you are here about in the public domain or freely-licensed with such license being one compatible with Wikipedia's free licenses? The reason I ask is that Wikipedia strives to contain only free content. We allow certain exceptions under the doctrine of fair use, but only if the material meets the strict criteria set forth at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. Generally, images of living persons cannot meet fair use because they are potentially replaceable with free content, e.g., you could see Tom Hanks walking down the street tomorrow, snap a photo and upload it with a release into the public domain or with a free license.

Even more of a problem, because we already have a public domain image of Mr. Hanks (as seen at the top of the article), meeting fair use criteria would be essentially impossible for a copyrighted, unfree image, because we are past having to suss out whether a possibility of replacement interdicts; a free image already exists. If the image is public domain or freely- (and compatibly-) licensed, I will gladly do the upload (at the Wikimedia Commons) once you provide the details. If not, we really can't use it. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't live in Hollywood, I live in Utah so maybe someone could use commons.207.224.196.27 (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the group selection page needs editing

I have read over the group selection page (my area of research). In evolutionary theory this is a very controversial field. In reading over the page I find it is very scattered, and there are passages that I think simply should be edited out. That said, I am shy about doing wholesale editing on these pages, since I am a partisan, and many would probably disagree with the edits I would make. Any suggestions on what should be done about this? CharlesInVermont (talk) 22:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Charles, welcome to the Teahouse. If you are going to do something which you think might be controversial then the thing to do is to discuss it on the the article talk page first. So you might consider drafting your entire revision of a section (with references) on the talk page and then adding why you think your revision is justified. If your argument is persuasive enough then you might find that the consensus among other editors is with you and the eventual change to the article isn't opposed. Assuming this isn't the case then you need to be able to debate your reasoning until consensus is reached. NtheP (talk) 22:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello! As NtheP says, the talk page of the major relevant article is a good place to start. You could also start a discussion at the talk page of a relevant WikiProject, such as Evolutionary biology (though it doesn't seem very active), Genetics or even Molecular and Cellular Biology, which is usually reasonably active. Good luck! Espresso Addict (talk) 15:06, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

How to create a wiki page for characters that has a short summary, but not wiki page

I'm trying to create a wiki page for a character on a show, but the character has a small summary about themselves on the characters list. I want to know how do i go about creating a page for that character so i can expand it.Tokijin (talk) 19:39, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the question but it is a little unclear. Perhaps you could tell us which characters you are referring to?--ukexpat (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

i want to create page for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibbler_%28Futurama%29#Nibbler

the character has a short summary, i want to create a page for the character. Tokijin (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

OK now I understand. To create a new article about the character, I suggest that you use the articles for creation process. You can draft an article at your own pace following the instructions there and then submit it for review. If it is accepted, it would then be moved to the main article space, probably at Lord Nibbler. Before you start down that path though, has the character received a lot of coverage in reliable sources? If it has not, then it probably doesn't qualify for its own article.--ukexpat (talk) 20:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

You could begin by simply expanding the section in the article a bit. It would be great to include cited sources (the article could use some). At some point, it may become obvious that this character needs its own page; and you can discuss this on the article's talk page. ~Just a thought, ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 20:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Deleting an article Report on a National Bank

Dear Editors: I was helping to edit an article, and then the author of the article left this message for me, which I think belongs here:

I recently made a request for this new article Report on a National Bank, and wrote the material. I blush, but I was confused by my sources, and this is actually an alternate name for the Second Report on Public Credit. The "Report on the National Bank" needs to be removed; it is a duplicate article. The editor who presided over the original request - "Bonkers" - has not responded to my talk messages.

Can you assist me on this matter? 36hourblock (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I will contact this user and tell him or her about the Teahouse. —Anne Delong (talk) 17:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the simple solution is to edit Report on a National Bank so that it becomes a redirect to Second Report on Public Credit. Any material that it is in the former but not in the latter should be merged into the latter before it is redirected.--ukexpat (talk) 17:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you sent 36hourblock one of your teahouse talkback messages so that he will know what's happening? Thanks. —Anne Delong (talk) 17:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done--ukexpat (talk) 17:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Sandbox to article

Firstly thanks alot for your help! Hugely appreciated. I've tried to move my sandbox into an article but it doesn't look like it's worked. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Murklemark/sandbox - thanks again. (Murklemark (talk) 15:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC))

Yes it worked, the article is at Vygon (UK) Ltd, though it should be moved to Vygon (UK) to comply with our naming conventions for companies - I will take care of that. Your sandbox had a redirect as a result of the move and I have edited the code so that it no longer redirects.--ukexpat (talk) 16:25, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done, I have moved the article to Vygon (UK), for the reasons mentioned above.--ukexpat (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Uncategorized articles of WikiProject India

Is there any way to find only those articles which are uncategorized and under WikiProject India? --Tito Dutta (talk) 08:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey Titodutta. Besides using a bot to search for them, I don't know of any other way. If you want to try with a bot, please file a request at WP:Bot requests. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 16:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

If an article is under WikiProject India it should by definition be categorised (in Category:WikiProject India articles). You can use CatScan to check for crossovers between this category and others, but I fear the only way to find India-related articles that aren't categorised at all is to search the uncategorised pages list manually. Yunshui 雲‍水 20:41, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

It should also be categorized by its quality and by its importance. 180.200.156.180 (talk) 06:52, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Non-English sources and quotes

Greetings to everyone!

I'm new to Wikipedia and couldn't find a confirmation in Help of whether I will be right or not... I created a page of a business person. There are a dozen of reliable sources about she, but most of them are in Russian. Please, advise how I should format them and where I should put the translation. Another related question is how am I better to put a quote of this person: some of such sources are articles from leading newspapers, which she commented as a spoke person. Thanks in advance!

Irina Gabi Irina Gabi (talk) 11:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Irina, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not strictly necessary to provide translations for sources you are citing for information, although adding the relevent text as a footnote is a helpful addition for non-Russian speaking editors. If you use a {{cite}} template you can add a |quote= parameter to include this text; otherwise just include it in quotation marks in between the <ref></ref> tags.

For actual quotes in the text, a translation does need to be provided; you can either include this in the article or add a footnote. If you choose to use footnotes, you can create a separate section header called "Notes" at the bottom of the page, and use the code <ref group="notes">translated text goes here</ref> in the article text to separate the translations from the references. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:34, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, very much! Will try and return for your help, if will not succeed.

Irina Gabi (talk) 11:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• Editors note: Their article has been nominated for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renata Akhunova. They may need some extra help here!
  Hello Irina Gabi
  Just a few days ago, I created an article on Russian fashion model Anna Litvinova. Since this was a recent death, few best of the best editors have checked the article and citations and the article is currently a DYK candidate. Reading from the Wikipedia guidelines Wikipedia:NONENG

  it is not always necessary to provide a translation. However, if a question should arise as to whether the non-English original actually supports the information, relevant portions of the original and a translation should be given in a footnote, as a courtesy.

  Now Russian language can be easily translated using Google Translator. So, if the information is clearly in the source, then just go ahead, an do it fast to save the article!--Tito Dutta (talk) 13:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Team, I've tried to put a quote and did it in section "Notes" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renata_Akhunova. I am not sure that it is the best way it should look like... Could you please, check and correct me?

Many thanks in advance! Irina Gabi (talk) 21:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Can someone help me format my page?

My page has many issues and I have no idea how to format it to look like an actual artist/band page? C an anyone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.64.214 (talk) 04:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you be more specific as to what page you mean? GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 14:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

photo on wrong wiki page

masada miniseries page is missing the movie poster.

masada history/archeology page has the movie poster in error(?)

shift photo to correct page to properly authenticate both pagesTedloveslisa (talk) 02:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Articles for consideration

I have contributed articles for consideration and have one on the list now. I am very discouraged at the process as it appears that obstructionism is the rule or policy rather than notability. My current article is glaringly missing from Wikipedia. I have a great many references and have deleted anything which could even be imagined to be a personal opinion. Could the vague implication of a political bent to the article may be causing its rejection? Brhebert (talk) 03:02, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Brhebert and welcome to the Teahouse! When you say articles for consideration, are you talking about articles for creation? If so, the delay is likely that there's a massive backlog there, and a shortage of reviewers. I understand this is frustrating, I really ought to get back into reviewing, but anyway, can you link the article here so I can take a look? Sorry for your frustration; we need a better system, but thus far no one's come up with one. Go Phightins! 03:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Phightins, The article is: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cambridge Somerville Youth Study Brhebert (talk) 03:24, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

All right, I commented there. It looks good to me and I wanted to thank you for your persistence; Wikipedia is far from perfect, and editors like you are definitely part of the solution, so thanks! Go Phightins! 03:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate your effort. Please not that I have absolutely no connection to this article in any way, its just a glaring omission. In looking over the other submissions, may of which are clearly personal I understand the need for rejections, but I have had the same number of rejections for an article I was connected to (Burger & Jacobi Pianos) as one I wasn't (Doug Larson).

Thanks again! Brhebert (talk) 03:53, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, there are lots of glaring omissions throughout Wikipedia, and if you can help fill them, that's terrific. There's always more to be done. Happy editing! Go Phightins! 03:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for your contribution! I find it interesting how much people consider not being instantly accepted from Articles for Creation as a "rejection". The truth (most of the time) is that the reviewers just don't accept an article until it is ready to be in Wikipedia. Usually what appears to be "finding a new thing wrong" with the article is just another step in making the article more inline with the rest of Wikipedia. Reviewers don't tend to mention everything that is wrong with an entry at once because that would be overwhelming. I wonder if there is a way to impress to people more of the idea that "steps to being created" are happening, than "you are being rejected over and over." heather walls (talk) 08:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Thanks!  :-) Brhebert (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

What is the process for article deletion?

Sorry if this is a silly question but I can't find anything that directly relates to it on the FAQ.

I have found the following article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giridhar_Vyas which seems to relate to somebody who is a local character, but not more notable in any way. The text itself is verging on nonsensical and is referenced by a single article, plus two pictures. A google search did not anything meaningful. Rather than completely rewrite 90% of the article, I suspect it should probably just be deleted, BUT I'm unsure of the following things:

1) Who has the power to do this? 2) Can a single editor make this decision or is a greater consensus needed prior to deletion? 3) How is deletion best achieved in practice?

Thanks in advance for any advice. Tallestdwarf 23:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tallestdwarf (talk • contribs)

Hi Tallestdwarf, welcome to the Teahouse! If you would like to nominate an article for deletion, I would suggest you firstly read the deletion policy. If you still believe the article in question should be deleted, then submit it at an appropriate venue, in this case, articles for deletion. In response to your specific questions, administrators have the powers to delete articles or determine consensus by closing debates. Only under very little exceptions, may a non-admin close a debate – see WP:NACD. Deletion is best achieved per Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, in most cases, what Wikipedia is not, notability, and verifiability. TBrandley ^{(what's up)} 23:16, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that - I'd spent 30 minutes in vain searching for those policies. Sounds silly I know, but I kept getting related articles that didn't quite answer my question. Thanks again! Tallestdwarf 23:30, 1 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tallestdwarf (talk • contribs)

how do i change my user name?

I have accidently spelt my name wrong so am having difficulty remembering what spelling i have used to login. Is there an easy way i can change my user name without deleting my account? ElsepthPaterson (talk) 12:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Greetings, Elspeth (I assume that's your name). Since the user name "ElspethPaterson" isn't already registered, all you have to do is go to Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple and follow the directions to request a name change. Alternatively, because you have made only four edits (including your question here), you may choose to simply create a new account at the correct spelling and abandon your current account. Deor (talk) 13:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Does a Subpage name also get reserved in Main?

Hi... I am new and in need of some assistance about Subpage and Main.

I want to create an article with a certain name but having checked it isn't clear if:

1. I create this as a draft in Subpage whether that name automatically gets reserved in Main as well? Ideally I want to reserve the name in Main as well so that when ready to move over it is available rather than having to add a redirect because someone got in there first.

2. Can you create draft articles in Main without them going live until you are ready or at least reserve the name?

Any assistance greatly appreciated, thanks.

Accypedia (talk) 11:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer to your question is no, article names are not reserved, even if you make a subpage. However, it's not all that likely that someone will beat you creating an article if you work on it in your userspace. If they do, you can always help improve there's, if it is in main space first. Go Phightins! 11:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Go Phightins! both for your welcome and reply.

On the second point then can you create a Main space and leave as draft (as in not live) until ready to share?

Thanks again.

Accypedia (talk) 11:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Not really; you can use the article wizard to create a userspace draft, though. Go Phightins! 11:44, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Entry below was relocated from the subsequent thread.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Thanks Go Phightins! both for your welcome and reply.

On the second point then can you create a Main space and leave as draft (as in not live) until ready to share?

Thanks again.

Accypedia (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry posted in the wrong discussion... newbie error! :-)

Accypedia (talk) 11:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Page view statistics for a newly created page

Dear editors: I was looking at the Page about Peterborough, Ontario, and I noticed that there was a red link "Peterborough Canoe Company", and since I own a book with a chapter about this company I decided to create that page. Shortly after I did so, I clicked on the page view statistics button, expecting it to show that the page was new. To my surprise, it showed many accesses of this page over the last several months. How can this be? Does the counter increment every time someone clicks on the red link? Or was there a page about this topic that was deleted? —Anne Delong (talk) 08:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I do feel the same. People used to click on "red link"! I don't think "article was deleted" is a reason. I studied on 15 to 20 newly created (but popular topic) articles eg. NML Cygni. The result was more or less same everywhere! --Tito Dutta (talk) 08:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

How to use a map as a reference

I wanted to edit an error in the article in the A27(road). The article states that after Havant the next junction eastwards is Chichester. In fact the next junction is Emsworth. I know this because I drive that section of the A27 regularly -- but that counts as original research and not acceptable as a reference. An inspection of any on-line map will show the relevant junctions. As a newbie here I have no idea how to reference a map. Help or directions wold be much appreciated. dcluley 15:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcluley (talk • contribs)

Hey Dcluley! Welcome to the Teahouse :) Sometimes on Wikipedia articles about roads, we leave out some of the junctions. If we included every single junction a road has, some articles would be way too large to even load! If you want this junction included and another one left out, you can ask on the article's talkpage (found by adding Talk:<name> to the article name in the search box, replace <name> with article name) and see what others have to say. gwickwire^talk_edits 18:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Why was my original question flagged as unsigned when, to me, it appears quite demonstrably signed? dcluley 22:58, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dcluley! Signatures need a link to your userpage and talk page. Your signature should look like [[User:Dcluley|dcluley]] ([[User talk:Dcluley|talk]]), which will produce links to your user and talk pages. It will be easier when you type "~~~~" to sign your name. Hope this helps. JHUbal27 ^Roar! 23:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I suspect four tildes are already being used. Dcluley, if you are currently signing manually, just type "~~~~" which should automatically format as your linked signature with a time stamp when you save a page. If you are already doing that, then the reason your signature isn't linking is likely because of a setting turned on in your Preferences. Go there, scroll down to "Signature" and uncheck the box that says "Treat the above as wiki markup." That should fix the issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I have now unchecked the box; but my last questoin seemed OK and appeared propeerly signed without the unsigned bit. dcluley (talk) 10:44, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Policy requires one's signature to link to any one of your user page, user talk page or contributions, though the software's default when using four tildes is to link both user and user talk pages. The unsigned bot only recognizes a signature having been placed when at least one link is present, so even though your signature appeared, since it was entirely unlinked, it was unrecognized.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Signature creation

Is there a page to get types of fonts and colors to creat a personal signature/wiki-markeup? FOX 52 (talk) 06:31, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi FOX 52. Colour codes can be found here; Wikipedia will render most standard fonts (use the {{font}} template) but their appearance depends on what font families a reader has installed on their computer. Have a read of this section of the signatures policy and the pages it links to (specifically Smurrayinchester's essay) for more suggestions. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Yunshui, I just have one wrinkle can you help me with font itself? Here FOX^Chat I'm trying to make the font style Papyrus. just not sure how. FOX 52 (talk) 21:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear God, why on Earth would you want to do that? Well, if you insist: {{font|FOX|font=Papyrus|color=green}} is your magic code to make graphic designers everywhere weep into their lattes. It produces this: FOX. Yunshui 雲‍水 00:30, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

LOL just experimenting Yunshui, I will probably settle on something more subtle, but Thank you FOX 52 (talk) 02:06, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

At least you didn't go for Comic Sans; that's a blockable offense... Yunshui 雲‍水 02:30, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

• This page is not actually on the same subject, but, very helpful (I think).. keep reading from here Wikipedia:User_page_design_center/Style#Text_formatting --Tito Dutta (talk) 08:55, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I've got the truth but is the documentation acceptable?

I've made a couple of attempts to edit my son's bio with facts that have been 100% ignored by the media. Unfortunately, however, the media outlets are regarded as acceptable cited references, whereas the actual facts are a little harder to document. I have several documents to hand -- such as hospital reports, psychiatric findings and such, but they are obviously just documents in my possession, as opposed to things you can find in a media outlet on the internet. It's a little frustrating because people react to the "facts" as reported by the media, whereas the actual truth is utterly different. I thought possibly I could consent to an interview from "People" or some such, and then cite the resulting article and quote myself; or refer to my message board posting on the IMDB or some such. I am open to suggestions. Thanks! Gershtenblurber (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

• Hi Gershtenblurber, and thanks for dropping by the teahouse. That's a great question. Unfortunately, wikipedia doesn't do "truth": we're a summary of what exists in what we call reliable sources, which are basically newspapers, magazines and books (basically anything that has an editor doing a modicum of fact checking, so blogs and self-published books are out). If the evidence you have turns up in a news story, then we can quote it, but not before. You might want to start a blog as part of the process of getting a news organization interested in your story, but I'm afraid that if you start here first you're going to go through a lot of frustration as other editors remove your contributions. If you want to read up on all of the finer details about what constitutes a reliable source, start here: WP:RS. Good luck! GaramondLethe 01:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

• Hello Gershtenblurber. Sorry you're having such trouble here. The issue is, Wikipedia is not the source-of-first-record for any information. That's been built into the system since the beginning, and is one of Wikipedia's core policies since its founding (see Wikipedia:No original research). Trying to correct information at Wikipedia is admirable, and yes, we do want information here to be as correct as possible. However, starting at Wikipedia is actually putting the cart before the horse, if you catch my meaning. Wikipedia is an aggregator of already published information. Information which is true, but not published anywhere else, unfortunately cannot be published at Wikipedia first. This does lead to the unfortunate situation that sometimes, our sources are wrong, but unfortunately the converse is much worse, since if we allowed Wikipedia to be a source of first record, it would allow people to publish there own original research here. That would mean that we'd then have a system of "taking the writer's word for it", which is far easier to abuse than the current system. No system is perfect, but the way Wikipedia works, by insisting that everything is published elsewhere first, works more often than the alternative. If information about your son is wrong, then it should be corrected in the public record; however fixing it at Wikipedia is several steps down the line. Your efforts should be spent on correcting the information out there first by getting reliable sources to investigate your information and then publishing the correct information. After that is done, Wikipedia will reflect the newer, corrected information. --Jayron32 20:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to the responders. You've given me more understanding as to the parameters and the sequence I should use in getting the facts out there. I appreciate your time and concern. Thanks again. Gershtenblurber (talk) 01:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

article notable?

is the vgmaps article notable? it has a few deleted requests MicrosoftPaint (talk) 21:24, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I have to say that I find its notability marginal at least and the two previous deletion discussions haven't exactly been clear cut. So if you want to have a third try because you think it's non notable, then feel free but I would suggest that before proceeding you check out the notability criteria closely and have some good points lined up to say why you think it's not notable. NtheP (talk) 22:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

could you help me with it? MicrosoftPaint (talk) 22:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

We can help guide you through the process of listing an article for deletion but the content of that listing i.e. why you think it should be deleted you'll have to work out for yourself. Make sure you understand the General notability guidelines, what reliable sources are and what the previous deletion discusions covered. That way you should be able to shape an argument as to why the article should be deleted. Of course the opposite option is to look to see if the article can be improved by finding more sources and information about it. NtheP (talk) 12:30, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

graphic application

what are the security maintained in graphic applications? 59.183.51.48 (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the question. That sounds like something the regulars at the computing section of the Reference Desk can help you with. Please go to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing and click the Ready? Ask a new question! button.--ukexpat (talk) 17:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

• Which graphic application? --Tito Dutta (talk) 08:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Finding an infobox template

Dear editors (me again): I found an article in which the infobox was malfunctioning, and I thought that I would help out by fixing it up, but to see what's wrong I need to find another instance of the same type of infobox. I tried browsing in the infobox categories to no avail (total ignorance of football). I realize that you can't use the regular search engine because it searches text, and ignores wikimarkup. Since I know the name of the infobox, how can I find another such box on Wikipedia? —Anne Delong (talk) 23:04, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Did you try the "What links here" link in the Toolbox in the menu at the left? - David Biddulph (talk) 23:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Anne! Welcome back. The complete name of the page you will find the infobox at is Template:whatever the name of the infobox is. If that doesn't get you there, when you get to the search results page, you will see a link that says "Help and Project pages". That will narrow your search to just Wikipedia stuff, not the encyclopedia. Come back whenever you have a question. Remember, your questions also help others! Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I found the correct template, found that some of the parameters were misnamed, corrected them and now the box is working, I hope as expected. —Anne Delong (talk) 00:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

trying to edit a page a created and I am having trouble

I just created a page in my work in progress space and I want to add something else to the body of my article. When I hit the edit button, it only shows me my references and will not let me change anything else. Any ideas?

Adrianne Byrd (talk) 15:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Adrianne Byrd. What you have appeared to have done is clicked the edit button for the references section. What you need to do is click the edit button right at the very top of the page, which will allow you to edit the entire page. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 15:37, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Life After Deletion

I’m trying to contact administrator, Michig who deleted my article on Women Live. I can’t see where on his page to leave a message. So could you pass on the message below to him, please - or inform me where I go to leave a message for him. I see no textbox on his page.

Messagge follows: As someone who voted to delete the page on Women Live, it was suggested by a helpful administrator to contact you to request the page be saved so I can amend it in various ways. I’m not sure I’m placing my question in the right place but here goes.

See my enquiry posted yesterday which I paste below:

The Women Live page was recently deleted after a flurry of comments about notability and lack of evidence. I was dismayed by some of the comments and their tone - eg. because the article only had six issues it can’t be notable. I don’t quite get the rigour in that one!! However, another guy made some useful comments which I can’t now find. Is there a way to see the conversation leading to deletion? I have tried to find it.

I would like to reinstate the page when I have carried out the following: regarding notability - I intend to include a link to the Women’s Library where the archive is housed. Also, to a Guardian article about the magazine. Presumably these will contribute to the page’s notability? Also, I intend to list some of the more significant writers published by Women Live - and could link to a few who have Wiki pages. Will this help? Will it also help if I link to writer’s websites if they are not mentioned on wikipedia??

Could you please indicate whether the suggestions above will improve the article in Wiki terms.

thanks. Gillian Young (talk) 13:56, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

You can find the deletion discussion here [1] and you can contact Michig here User talk:Michig All good wishesTheroadislong (talk) 14:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and undeleted/created a userspace draft. It's here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gillian_Young/Women_Live. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:54, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing warnings

Say you vandalize a certain article. I warn you and you brazenly and defiantly removed my warning. Is that against policy? Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 09:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Nope. The only thing an editor cannot remove from his own talk page is a block notice or a sockpuppet tag. Hope that helps, bonkers! Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bonkers! Further to Gtwfan52's comment, my assumption has always been that if they remove it, they must have seen it. :) That way I know they've received the warning, whether or not they then choose to take it not consideration. So generally I see removing the warning as an ok thing - it is more frustrating when you try to engage someone and don't see any response. - Bilby (talk) 16:03, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Password reset

Hi,

I've forgotten my password, and I (stupidly) never listed an email address for myself, so I can't get my password back that way. Is there anything I can do? 71.173.16.244 (talk) 23:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. To my knowledge, there is no way to recover your password. However, you can fairly easily create a new account, and use that one instead. If you want to use the same username you had before, you can even usurp it, as long as you didn't have too many edits. I hope that helps, and good luck! —Rutebega (talk) 01:04, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I had almost a thousand edits on my account, so I can't really usurp it. But the thing is I was also a reviewer and rollbacker, so if I got a Checkuser to confirm that my new account is the same from the same IP as the old one, I could get those rights back too? Thanks,

71.173.16.244 (talk) 01:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, you can ask one, but I'm afraid you may be out of luck. :( Go Phightins! 01:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually, now that I have a new account, is it possible to merge it with my old one?King jakob c 2 (talk) 19:41, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Not yet, as the account merge feature hasn't been enabled, and won't be in the foreseeable future (AFAIK). Sorry about that. —Rutebega (talk) 03:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles that should exist, but don't

I was wondering if there's a place to find articles missing from en.wiki. I like creating new articles (Bow Ditama is my work) far more than editing existing ones. Would prefer if such missing articles are actually worthwhile instead of the typical porn star/SEO firm garbage. HoldenPhoebeDB&Allie (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sounds as though you might enjoy joining the Missing Articles Project which has a huge list of ongoing initiatives to locate and create articles which we should have, but don't. Yunshui 雲‍水 18:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Or if you have a specific interest area, you can check out the list of Wiki-Projects and either ask the point person listed, or, if there isn't one, click the link and go to their talk page. Some projects already have to-do lists, while others, you can get an answer from asking. Thanks for your interest! We always need active content creators, like you plan to be. Go Phightins! 22:55, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for doing great article creation work!

1. I think this is just what you're looking for:Wikipedia:Most_wanted_articles.
2. You can also see a list of article topics other editors have requested here by subject area: Wikipedia:Requested_articles.
3. And editors who have requested lists as well: Wikipedia:Requested_lists.

Cheers :) Ocaasi ^{t | c} 16:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Most active editor of the month!

Greetings, "One of top 100 most active editors of the month" I saw a similar message is someone's talk page (... surely before Sept 2012)! Does anyone know where this record is tracked? --Tito Dutta (talk) 09:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hey Tito Dutta. I've searched for that language and portions of it being added to talk pages both internally and using Google and haven't located an example to work from to track its origins. Can you give one example of where it was added? Anyway, the statistic might be gleaned from Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of recent edits.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

• I did the same thing too, but no luck! --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I think I've got it, err, maybe.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:47, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Excellent work! Most probably that's the message I saw last year. But, unfortunate an IP was giving that barnstar! No, WikiProject involved! --Tito Dutta (talk) 06:49, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Is there Life after Deletion?

The Women Live page was recently deleted after a flurry of comments about notability and lack of evidence. I was dismayed by some of the comments and their tone - eg. because the article only had six issues it can’t be notable. I don’t quite get the rigour in that one!! However, another guy made some useful comments which I can’t now find. Is there a way to see the conversation leading to deletion? I have tried to find it.

I would like to reinstate the page when I have carried out the following: regarding notability - I intend to include a link to the Women’s Library where the archive is housed. Also, to a Guardian article about the magazine. Presumably these will contribute to the page’s notability? Also, I intend to list some of the more significant writers published by Women Live - and could link to a few who have Wiki pages. Will this help? Will it also help if I link to writer’s websites if they are not mentioned on wikipedia?? Gillian Young (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Gillian, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you'd like the page back, track down the deleting admin and ask them if they can save a copy of it to your user space. Then, you can work on it and build up its sourcing without fear of deletion. Hope this helps! --McDoobAU93 16:37, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello! The discussion that led to deletion is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Women Live. If you want to save the article to your sandbox to work on improving it, then you can ask any of the people listed in Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles, by leaving a note on their talk page. Linking to a Guardian article about the magazine would definitely be helpful in demonstrating that it was notable, despite being short-lived. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 17:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Userspace draft created here, you can continue to improve it and submit/recreate it when it's ready: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gillian_Young/Women_Live. Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:55, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

How to add a language tab in to a page that doesn't have a translation?

Hi, I'm interested on translating English in Spanish. I have found a page that seems interesting that could benefit others if it was in Spanish. Do I have to create a new page in Spanish linking to the article in English? Any thoughts? Thanks GloriaXfilesrock (talk) 07:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Gloria. Yes, you have to create a new title at the Spanish Wikipedia, just as if the English Article didn't exist, and then manually perform the translation. After you have done so, you can link the articles to each other by placing at the bottom interlanguage links. That is, in the English article you would place at the bottom [[es:Exact name of Spanish title]] and at the Spanish title, [[en:Exact name of English title]], which will make interlanguage links in the Languages sidebar on the left hand side of each page to the other. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Also, please remember in your edit summary to mention where the article came from originally by linking to the English page. That satisfies the 'attribution' requirement of our copyright license, where you say where you got something you have copied or reused. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I don;t understand the explanation but it appears to be normal behaviour.dcluley (talk) 16:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)