Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 829

Archive 825

←

Archive 827

Archive 828

Archive 829

Archive 830

Archive 831

→

Archive 835

new movie page

I'm new to creating pages on wikipedia. I tried to make a page for a new film. It is in post-production so there aren't a lot of web links to include. It got rejected though, and I'm not sure what else I can possibly add to legitimize it.

Any help appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:204:AD02:D887:B82B:F3FB:B8BD (talk) 18:23, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Follow the guidance at WP:YFA regarding notability and references. If there are not enough references, then it may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. RudolfRed (talk) 19:09, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

It may be that you can't. Wikipedia:Notability (films) could be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:08, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Apple

Please eat my granny smith apple? Chickeo 11:27, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

AWB

Is there any difference in operating AWB and PyAWB.--PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 03:10, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

@Path slopu: the information page for PyAWB is at Wikipedia:PyAutoWikiBrowser, and it seems more-or-less abandoned. Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) or Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser would be a better forum to ask AWB-related questions. That's beyond the scope of the Teahouse. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:30, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Delete mistake

Please delete the article below, it's created by mistake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%8B%A0%ED%99%94_%ED%86%B5%EC%8B%A0

Goodtiming1788 (talk) 04:21, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Done by Explicit —AE (talk • contributions) 07:32, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Using New Books and Newspaper information

Hello ! I just wanted to know, whether we can use Books and Newspaper for more information or detailing a topic? If yes, Where can I put the citation or reference or link regarding it? And,what if the book is not on internet,but if its a local book or newspaper? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saee Patil (talk • contribs) 05:25, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Saee Patil. Yes, you can use books and newspapers as long as they qualify as reliable sources. Some books and some newspapers are garbage. Others are excellent. You have to evaluate the reputation of the publisher. Sources do not need to be online but you should provide complete bibliographic detail for paper sources. Please read Referencing for beginners for instructions on how to format references. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:07, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Saee Patil. The Referencing page Cullen gave you is an excellent resource. I suggest you head to the Visual Editor section of that page to learn how to easily cite using a dedicated button in the VisualEditor toolbar. A popup window will ask you for relevant information, which you can find in the actual book such as author, publisher, year of publication, ISBN and page number. Good luck! Darwin Naz (talk) 12:53, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Signature

How do I fix my signature? As you can see its kinda... idk yeah. #bodyContent a[title="User:LFlamel"] { background-color: #ffa300; color: #aaaaaa; font-weight: bold; } (talk) 12:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Special:Preferences has an option to restore defualts. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:01, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

You can make a default signature by blanking the Signature field at Special:Preferences and having no checkmark at "Treat the above as wiki markup". If you want to make a customized signature then this has the colors you are apparently trying to use but it looks bad: LFlamel. It requires a checkmark at "Treat the above as wiki markup". Your code from Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing how you see your signature is only intended for Special:MyPage/common.css where it only affects what you see yourself. Do not try to place anything like that in the Signature field. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:01, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I am an actor....a credited actor....my name is mentioned in several publications as proof.

but yet i still cant make myself a wikipedia. a lot of people do not understand that even if you can afford a publicist, it doesnt mean they will take you on. this isnt such a cut and dry business. it is not easy. i am just simply trying to make myself a wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gothamfan13 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Gothamfan13. The problem is one of Notability. Actors have certain criteria they must meet in order for us to justify having an article about them. In order to prove that an actor meets those criteria, we need reliable sources. Also, we have a general policy of discouraging editors from editing articles on themselves.

Finally, I want to point to our rules about using Wikipedia for self-promotion. Essentially: don't. If you don't meet the notability guidelines, then you may not have an article. I'm sorry if that's disappointing, but we have these rules for a very good reason. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

@Gothamfan13: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You seem to have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and is not social media for actors or any person to write about themselves(be it directly or through an agent/publicist). Wikipedia strongly discourages people from writing about themselves here per the autobiography policy(though it is not forbidden), as people naturally write favorably about themselves. If you have appeared in notable productions, you may merit an article per the notability guidelines at WP:NACTOR, but you shouldn't be the one to write it. Wikipedia has no interest in your internet presence or you posting your resume of work. That's what social media is for. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources with indepth coverage state about article subjects.

Also understand that an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. If there is a Wikipedia article about you, almost any information found in an independent reliable source is valid article content, be it good or bad. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Rusty & cannot update article - please help

Hi editors. I’m the original author of the entry Keith A. Schooley. I’m having trouble updating several reference links that no longer exist on the web. I want to replace one link in two different spots (#1 and #10) with a powerpoint, or pdf equivalent (or it's link) that is the same exact information from the original link including the byline. The third spot (#13) is being replaced with another link that also contains the same exact information on a pdf from the original link. I am copying the unedited sections that need updating along with the new links. Would somebody please insert these for me? I would very much appreciate your expert assistance. Thanks so much. Hillary Chase. PS (I noticed what appears in my message has extra numbers & error warning for some reason)

1. 1: Keith A. Schooley (born 1952) is an American author and former stockbroker at Merrill Lynch, who brought attention to fraud and corruption within the firm at the Oklahoma and Texas offices in 1992 as a whistleblower.

1. 10: Schooley lost his case in arbitration and in subsequent courts. Murdock Global Advisers listed Schooley along with seven other very notable whistleblowers as a result of his actions.

1. 13: In 2012, a fictionalized story "Robber Barons of the Big Board," was written as a screenplay by Chandra Niles Folsom about Schooley, and published as an e-book.

1. 1 & #10 pdf: (Here is replacement link to powerpoint): https://www.auditnet.org/system/.../BuildingEffectiveWhistleblowingPrograms.ppt

1. 13 replacement link: https://thecostcouldbefatal.com/pdfs/Robber%20Barons%20Amazon%20Reviews.pdf

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hillary Chase (talk • contribs) 17:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

References

Living Dead Media

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello, my edits were rejected on the "Night of the Living Dead" film page. We recently got the rights to this film and are the sole distributors and handle media/licensing and merchandising. I am trying to update the page, and have documentation to prove it. How should I go about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.41.74 (talk) 02:36, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Here's how you go about that:

Step 1) Read our policies on editing with a conflict of interest and editing articles with which you have financial ties to.

Step 2) Don't edit the article.

Step 3) Make edit requests on the article's talk page, citing reliable sources (in your case, independent) sources that verify your claims.

It's that simple. Other methods are not likely to work but are likely cause trouble. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:51, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Could I get in contact with someone who can edit for me after provided with the adequate sources to do so?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.41.74 (talk • contribs)

That's what the article's talk page is for. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you.

In the Los Angles area Craigslist it is common to see posts wanting to hire someone to edit WP for them.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 17:52, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

To the OP, we can't prevent you from going out and hiring someone to write for you; many who claim to offer this service are at worst scammers who will just take your money, and at best cannot guarantee any particular result for you(such as the article not being deleted, or content remaining). They must comply with the paid editing policy and declare any paid status they have. As Ian.thomson stated, your best bet is to use the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 17:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

For an institution that goes out of its way to caution about slander do you understand what statement you have just made about people that get paid to make WP edits, some of whom are registered users?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 18:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

It's not me who says this, but Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning. I didn't say "all paid editors". I'm sure the vast majority act properly. 331dot (talk) 18:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

The statement is correct. Paid editing services are not vetted, endorsed by or affiliated with Wikipedia. Many of them are scams, and those who are not still cannot guarantee they will deliver on their "product", because they cannot control whether an article gets deleted or substantially changed. GMG^talk 18:07, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the statement that someone has slandered a group of people is correct. You cannot say that people who get paid are scammers when there exists those that are not. I do not have support for those that take money for editing WP but i am not about to issue a general statement on their activities when there are always exceptions. Yes, it is totlly objective to say that paid editing services are untried but it is not okay to say that it is an act of a scammer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 18:15, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

IP, that is not what 331dot said. Stop misrepresenting them in order to pick a fight. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:21, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry but i am not IP but "2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488" The statement made was not a maybe it was stated as an aosolute with what seems toi be the annointing of what they may have interpreted from WP content.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 18:30, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

If you don't want to be referred to as "IP", you should create an account. No one is going to refer to you by your entire IP address. I have nothing else to add about this line of discussion. 331dot (talk) 18:33, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Are you aware that WP endorse the use of IP addresses as identifiers and to "suggest" that in order to meet your standard that i register?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 18:36, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Websites on WikiPedia

Hello everyone,

I would like to know that what is the minimum requirements for websites/online publications to get listed on WikiPedia? Do they also need to provide the references of a News link, or any other source that can indicates their notability?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farooqahmadbhat (talk • contribs) 17:20, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Farooqahmadbhat. The overall rule is that for a subject to quality for an article on Wikipedia, it needs to meet our standards for notability, which requires sustained in-depth coverage in reliable published sources. This usually means things like newspapers, magazines and books, and excludes things like content written by the site itself, things like press releases, and routine coverage like generic site rankings or passing mentions. Like the vast majority of people, the vast majority of websites do not meet this standard, and do not qualify for a Wikipedia article. GMG^talk 17:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you GMG for your quick and clear reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farooqahmadbhat (talk • contribs) 17:34, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

There is a single notability guideline for web content that may be a bit easier to meet, Farooqahmadbhat. It can be found at WP:NWEB, but reading GNG will give you a better feel for what is required overall for notability. Also, please remember to sign all your posts at project pages like this and talk pages, but not articles, by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end. This automatically adds your signature, a link to your talk page and a timestamp. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 19:37, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

looking for help in understanding

I am looking for early versions of articles on TurboCad, likely they will be the earliest maybe in a backup somewhere. Will i need to become an administrator ( and what is that and how to become one? ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BogusAurelius (talk • contribs)

Hello BogusAurelius. You can access a complete version history of any undeleted Wikipedia article by clicking the "History" tab at the top of the page. This is the history of TurboCAD. You don't need any special user rights to do this.

You can find more information about Wikipedia administrators, including the process of requesting administrator rights, at Wikipedia:Administrators. However, these days the community expects considerable prior experience (generally several years' active editing) before they will grant such a request. – Joe (talk) 18:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Review the history on articles with it included in its content. You do not need to become an administrator to do this. That is a distinction that you may not want to pursue at this time if your wish is to find articles. The history will be peicemeal based on what was changed. Start of with a word or stirng serach and as you review the hits eliminate those articles that may not suit your interest. I do it all the time for spelling and grammear problems. Good luckj.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 19:10, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

TurboCAD, right? When I click on View history, I can leaf back through the edits list (about 170 edits) to the creation in 2007. Choose an edit and click on the date in that line and you will see what the article contained on that date. The article is a history of TurboCAD, but if you want a history of the article, that's how. David notMD (talk) 19:22, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

finding backups of deleted articles

This is sort of an extension of my earlier question. Let's say an article was deleted, and perhaps it was backed up or not. Then how can i find the article from a backup: will i need to download the entire year ( i've seen that they are pretty large files) or can i somehow search thru an index to find it, then go to the proper backup? What years are available for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BogusAurelius (talk • contribs) 19:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Are they archived in a deletion file?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 19:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

BogusAurelius, if an article has been deleted, it is only visible to administrators and others with advanced permissions. If you want a copy of it, the deleting administrator may at their discretion, email you a copy of it, but they will not if it was a copyright violation, and likely will not if it was deleted for being promotional. Type the deleted article's name in the search box and follow the redlink that comes up. That will take you to the page the article used to be on, and the name of the deleting administrator will be there. John from Idegon (talk) 19:32, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Just to add: although you have to ask an admin to see some of them, every single version of every single Wikipedia article is retained permanently. Any individual version can be retrieved. You don't need to download database backups. – Joe (talk) 19:38, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

• See WP:REFUND for how to go about requesting an admin restore a deleted article to draft or your user space. Be aware that an admin is not obliged to restore the article; they must use their discretion to determine whether it's good for the project to allow you to continue to work on it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:40, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

This is an aside situation. Can talk page content be retrieved through this process?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 20:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Nothing on Wikipedia is ever deleted. It's just hidden from public view. There's even a super hidden that administrators themselves can't see, but even that doesn't actually get deleted. GMG^talk 20:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

@BogusAurelius: You might also be interested in Deletionpedia, which keeps a record of deleted articles (though not their page histories). I've just had an amusing trip down memory lane by looking at my own personal AFD stats (i.e. articles I've expressed an opinion on in deletion discussions), and quite a lot of those that have been deleted can be found and viewed on that site. Go to : http://deletionpedia.org/en/Main_Page. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:10, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

There's something called Deletionpedia, but I don't know how helpful that is. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:06, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

How do I get rollback?

I wonder how I can get rollback to revert vandalism. HorsesARENice^{Ride me to my talk page} 19:05, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi HorsesAreNice. The answer to your question is easily found at Wikipedia:Rollback. You're unlikely to be granted advanced permissions like rollback if you don't fully read the relevant guidelines. – Joe (talk) 19:36, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

I would hate to scold someone for something if they are unaware of a section? Anyways, anyone can read a section but i hope that they understand it in order to be effective. I would be more concerned with understanding. Some activities within WP are not the easiest to be in total command and your awareness of them can grow with your use of them. I hardly know a soul that find great comfort in reading WP guidelines etc for fun or light reading.2605:E000:1301:4462:904E:DC75:3814:4202 (talk) 11:07, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't think Joe was intending to scold anyone, but they are correct that advanced permissions are not usually given out on request, but on showing a need for them and that one can be responsible with them, part of which is showing that they are familiar with guidelines. One can also activate Twinkle which gives a rollback function, but the user is responsible for using it properly. 331dot (talk) 11:14, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

No one needs to caution that irresponsible behavior is going to be rewarded. I would avoid the opinion and keep with the referral to what is rellevant reading. By offering an opinion it comes across as if you must not be the right WP material? Unfortunately, there are those that feel that way. Not a negative statement but just a fact that not everyone at WP share the same objectives and styles. But it is great to know that no permission is necessary to activate Twinkle.2605:E000:1301:4462:904E:DC75:3814:4202 (talk) 11:46, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

You are entitled to your views, but as I work in an industry that deals with the public, I can tell you that sometimes people do need to be cautioned about such things. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

You are not the only person that works with the public and i have absolutely no desire to get into a one-upsman. The point seems to be missed.2605:E000:1301:4462:904E:DC75:3814:4202 (talk) 12:05, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

I am not attempting to one-up anyone, just posting my views, as you are. This is, however, not a democracy as your edit summary states. 331dot (talk) 12:08, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

While we're talking about our professions, I'm a teacher, and in my experience a straight answer is not always the most helpful answer. – Joe (talk) 14:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

No comment about the strategy except that jumping through hoops is probably best when the route is established for all to see so that people avoid thinking the worse of what may never be the intention. 2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 02:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Not alive, how can I change this?

I made an account, and it instantly asked me to edit a page here:

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

It says on the page that he is a "living person". However that is wrong. What is to be done? Clingvogue (talk) 01:24, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Clingvogue. I removed the erroneous tag regarding a "biography of a living person" because this painter died 120 years ago. Thanks for noticing the problem. I added another tag that more accurately describes an obvious problem with the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:35, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen, I will check your edit for the method. Clingvogue (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

I added some links on your talkpage @Clingvogue: Read them. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:16, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

That article appears to be a direct translation of the original in German, in the same format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 02:33, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Responding to an alert

SO if I ask a question, and get a response from an editor, is there a way to follow-up with that editor directly without asking a whole new question? I can't figure out how to do that. T/Y — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navysaylorgirl (talk • contribs) 02:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Most conversations on talk pages and other talk-like pages, such as this one, are organized by "section". To continue a conversation with someone, you simply "edit" that section and add your response at the end (or, sometimes, directly underneath the thing you're responding to). If it's not the other editor's talk page where the conversation is happening, it's generally considered courteous to {{ping}} the other editor. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:59, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Image from Commons not showing up

For some reason I can't get this image to display at Draft:DeCost Smith File: The Death of Pontiac - De Cost Smith ; Goupil & Co., Paris. LCCN00649614.tif It's on Commons as a .tif and .jpg. I have no idea which is better to use or if it makes a difference. I can't get either to work (show up). Not sure why. FloridaArmy (talk) 01:36, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Spelling, capitalization, spacing, and punctuation can all be potentially significant: File:The death of Pontiac - De Cost Smith ; Goupil & Co., Paris. LCCN00649614.jpg. I think we prefer .jpg over .tif for web display. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like a capital D might be the problem. [[File:The death of Pontiac - De Cost Smith ; Goupil & Co., Paris. LCCN00649614.tif|thumb]] worked for me. Gab4gab (talk) 03:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Editing Livestream or Twitch

I would love to see an experienced wikipedia editor livestream their editing process (and verbally narrate what's going on). Peeking over an experienced editor's shoulder would be sooo helpful. There are plenty of how-tos, but seeing something like this would help inspire me to decide what I need to learn.

Are there already videos like this? I couldn't find but maybe I wasn't using the right keywords. Thanks fam! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben.james (talk • contribs) 03:43, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Have you consulted you tube?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 04:49, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I believe there may be a formatting situation here with a run-on post with that of anoither. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 04:53, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Adding a logo to a page about an organization

Hi, I would like to add the organizations logo to a page about the organization (European Women in Mathematics). The Copyright belongs to the organization, so it's not free. I guess I have to add a page to explain the copyright situation that looks like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Mathematical_Union?wteswitched=1#/media/File:International_Mathematical_Union_(emblem).jpg

How do I do that? Thanks in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laura Fainsilber (Chalmers) (talk • contribs) 20:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Laura. Official logos are permitted under a claim of fair use. You can upload it using the Upload Wizard. Just fill out the questions in the form it provides, indicating that it is a non-free logo of an organization, what article it will be used on, etc. The Wizard will take care of most of the fancy formatting for you. Feel free to ask any follow up questions. Thanks for contributing, and welcome to Wikipedia! GMG^talk 21:04, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Laura. Adding a logo to the article is fairly simple to do if you use the Upload Wizard mentioned above by GreenMeansGo, but I think there are a couple of of other more important issues regarding European Women in Mathematics that need addressing first.

Your account is quite new and the first edit you made was to create this article; while such a thing is not unheard of, it's not really the norm for a new editor such as yourself, so it sort of gives the impression that you might be connected to the organization in some way. If you are, you would have a conflict of interest with respect to anything written about the organization on Wikipedia and would be expected to adhere to the guidelines the Wikipedia community expects COI editors to follow. I've added a little more about this to your user talk page.

Another issue with the article is that it's not clear if the organization meets Wikipedia:Notability (companies and organizations) to justify a stand-alone Wikipedia article be written. While I have no doubt the organization exists and most likely does some pretty good/improtant things, existence and doing good work are not really how Wikipedia assesses whether a subject is suffciently Wikipedia notable to support a stand-alone article. What you're going to need to show is that the organization has received the kind of significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources required per WP:CORPDEPTH. If you or someone else is unable to do such a thing, then the article is probably at risk of eventually being deleted. Basically, Wikipedia wants to know what independent secondary sources are saying in depth about a subject and not what the subject or those connected to the subject or those only mentioning the subject in passing are saying. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:52, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I can't publish translations !

Hello everybody,

I am writing to you because I am a new contributor to Wikipedia.

I am trying desperately to publish a translation of a page into English. I know this feature is not allowed for brand new contributor like me as I receive this error message when I try to publish ?

An error occurred while publishing the translation. Please try to publish the page again. Error: Hit AbuseFilter: Content Translation Edits

The original page is here : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_fran%C3%A7ais_d%27Estonie My translation is here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:French_Institute_of_Estonia

Can anyone help me to publish it or give me hint ? Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleroux56 (talk • contribs) 06:23, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sleroux56. It looks like you're trying to use the Wikipedia:Content translation tool to add the article to Wikipedia, but use of that tool has been suspended for new editors suchj as yourself. This is probably because machine translations are not really considered to be reliable enough for Wikipedia's purposes per WP:MACHINETRANSLATION. So, if you're trying to translate an article from another language Wikipedia into English Wikipedia, you should probably carefully read through WP:TRANSLATE. Bascially, you are going to be expected to to translate the article yourself and then add it to Wikipedia. You need to be careful though since not every Wikipedia project follows the same policies and guidelines when it comes to Wikipedia notability, reliable sources, etc. and English Wikipedia's standards tend to be higher than other language Wikipedias. In other words, an article about the French Institute of Estonia on French Wikipedia does not also automatically mean there should be one also about it on English Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

The translation is really not the issue here because there are many other means of translating than WP apps, or any newness of your interaction with the English WP. It would be difficult to believe that anyone would determine that such an article subject has its merits but the intended article is already bearing the insufficient sources advisory. It could be used in translation for the base of an English WP article but a mere translation would not meet the standard for sources in the English WP. The sources are the work of the institution without any other review of sources to independently verify any statement. So regardless what means are used to translate it would still result in a substandard article proposal. What have you in mind about improving the quality of the sources which then could applied to the article as well?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 08:32, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion Needed

Hi, can this a reliable source? saisumanth Javvaji (talk) 07:00, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

The website's about us page states that it is the website for a travel magazine and lists people who serve as editors who appear to exercise oversight and control of what's written. I would suggest asking the reliable sources noticeboard for further clarification. Vycl1994 (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@Vycl1994: Thanks for the suggestion.

(edit conflict) Hello, Sumanth699, and welcome to our Teahouse. I think I would be quite happy to use that source as a reference, although I'd have to qualify that by saying it always depends upon the precise context in which you plan to use it. It looks to be an online travel magazine with a named editorial team, and presumably therefore some editorial control. It has the potential to be over-promotional when talking about place to visit, but looks OK to use. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:55, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thanks for the suggestion.

Hello, Sumanth699, as mentioned, WP:RSN is specialized for such questions. But to offer 2 quick cents: an established magazine would seem fine for occasional uncontroversial information. I would not use such a source for any kind of more complex historical, cultural or religious information though. Per the site's own About page they focus on "quirky, stylish and elegant" writing. "Honest" is only mentioned in passing as 5th qualifier ("accurate" and "well-researched" are completely missing) --> information on more complex details and academic topics should be verified by acknowledged experts. GermanJoe (talk) 08:59, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@GermanJoe: Thanks for the suggestion.

Merging of pages

Can I merge one user page with another? If not, how do I redirect a user page to another one? The Mathlete (talk) 10:03, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I do not know about merging but you certainly can provide a link from one to the other just as you would do for any other "linking". Or does this have anything to do with redirecting capabilities at WP since there are those that have multiple take pages created overtime used for various functions by registered users?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 10:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh, these are not the sock puppet people.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 10:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh. Well, then, thanks for the reply. The Mathlete (talk) 10:20, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

• @The Mathlete: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There usually isn't a need to merge two user pages, as you can simply copy and paste the content from your prior user page to your new one. Articles would need to be merged to preserve the edit history, but that is not as important with user pages. You can change one user page into a redirect by adding #redirect [[Target page name here]] to it and removing all other content. 331dot (talk) 10:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
• @331dot: Thanks for the reply. By the way, do you know how to create custom Userboxes? If yes, how? The Mathlete (talk) 10:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

On the left of the screen is a "help" section that depending on how you can navigate through it will provide answers.The following is a direct link to what you may want: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userboxes 2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 10:32, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Starting/Publishing a Wikipedia page

I created an account, input the info and couldn’t publish it properly. When I try to post content it would say it was posted but then I couldn’t find it when I searched for it and signed back in. I also couldn’t figure out how to input any pictures or info under where pictures should be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1:B10E:1AE6:CC9E:A3FC:A81B:BDE9 (talk) 17:17, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey anon. You may want to consider reading through our tutorial on writing your first article, or registering an account and taking our interactive tutorial at The Wikipedia Adventure. These can help answer a lot of your questions and help orient you to the way Wikipedia works. GMG^talk 17:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Also, you could try telling us what page you were trying to edit or create, or at least what account you were using so we can see what actions it took and make an educated guess. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:27, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Without knowing your account or what you were editing, it is difficult to help you- but it sounds like you created the article in Draft space, where it will not be visible to either an outside search engine or a standard Wikipedia search. I also suggest you do what GMG suggests above. 331dot (talk) 17:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Off-topic discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

A person in order to take the tutorial must be a registered user? That seems rather exclusionary?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

And coercive!2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 17:32, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I think you need an account to be able to use the tutorial because it makes use of your user talk page. You are free to edit without using an account, and there are introductory pages that don't require an account to read- but having an account provides benefits, including hiding your IP and the ability to participate in certain community decisions. 331dot (talk) 17:39, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Yep. The interactive tutorial makes use of your user talk page. For an unregistered user, your user page would change if you changed IP addresses. This could happen for lots of reasons. For example, on mobile, your IP will change by just driving far enough down the road. So it's not that you need to register per se, but that you need a single persistent user page, and the only way to do that is to register. GMG^talk 17:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

No amount of reasoning as to "benefit" can be made by "registered users" to those of us e that are not as invested in WP as others. A registered user name is in no way a guarantee that someone cannot gain access to your IP address and to suggest that it just might because you are a registered user is not an absolutely correct characterisation. Unfortunately for some at WP, use of an IP s=address identifier seems to be thought of as unsocial and the start of vandalistic activities. That is an unfortunate perception.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 18:45, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I would suggest that you take your IP/account battle elsewhere. 331dot (talk) 18:52, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Please stop stalking me or I will report you to the appropriate board.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 19:15, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Please assume good faith or we'll have to assume that your pointless bickering is just trolling. Your reasoning A registered user name is in no way a guarantee that someone cannot gain access to your IP address is frankly ridiculous when you are editing with an IP address. Only specific users, whose real life identities are known to the Wikimedia foundation, are allowed to see a registered user's IP address. Also, the first thing you said was that you created an account, which means you are a registered user. Your arguments are hypocritical paranoia and nothing more. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:54, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Assumption is not always a very good strategy. Your point is rather topsy turvey. After I had given it thought, use of a registered name is not necessary to have a talk page otherwise it would not have been possible for Ian to send a message to that page. Therefore just what does use of the tutorial have to do with having a registered user name. I have no qualms about others knowing my IP address and it seems that people within WP have access to that information since I have seen in the past that type of information being disclosed in order to identify alleged sock puppets. So use of an registered user name with WP does not eliminate people being able to determine that information therefore that is not a very well thought out strategy as a benefit promoted by some within WP especially as it seems to be a feature on the template that is sent out in the "welcome". When did I say I created an account? This is what leads me to find your statements and strategy confusing. I am certain that you do not mean to be confusing but just as people so freely send out communications that start off as " I do not think" they in fact believe that they think and have just fallen prey to lazy composition. I have not created an account and if the statement that have because my IP is being used as an identifier by WP I that is done by WP as an ordinary act of activity without an overt action on the part of the IP user. It is rather difficult to comment on specific details when it appears explanations need to be made. This is not an act of contentiousness but merely getting what is correct established. There is little need to have flying about misunderstandings.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 03:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pharmacy management page

Hello everyone,

please take a look at the page I created: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pharmacy_management_system

I never had drafts but this one. It was declined. So you know what that means? Wikipedia will not have any pages involving "Pharmacy management software programs" which is one of the most used software programs in the world. The reason: because there isn't any non-commercial/academic source that names most referred pharmacy management systems existing in the market. For your information, nowadays (from a few years ago), every pharmacy on the globe is completely depended on at least one pharmacy management software program to function, no matter which one it is. I gave up already. If anyone interested, please go ahead.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Behzad Azarmju M.D. (talk • contribs) 04:49, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I can understand your frustration. What has to be recognized with at least the English WP is that it is not in the tradition of 19th and 20th efforts to be the all-in-one source for everything and instead concentrate on those areas that are within its view worthy of being preserved based somewhat on demand of the public. The weight of popular culture versus what is needed to restart the world should civilization as we would like it to be crumbles. That is an over simplification but when you side-by-side the number of lists of characters from episodic television or film series against the breakthrough of medical science or DNA or even practical things such the components and interactions of machinery etc. the only overall plausible explanation is what demand is there for it, who is around to write it, and can be be presented in a clever manner.

As applicable to the content of your article, this software is known to much fewer than other types that many more people use or come into contact with. But that does not mean that at some point in time it too will be recognized for what it is. That is such the case with the "A Beautiful Mind" or Turing's work on decifering. Some things have to be around long enough to reach their time. I have not read your draft so unaware of its content but if the issue of significance is involved and there being a great reliance on popular use of that technology weighing in that "anecdotes" from those propounding on the significance of its use in popular society be found and maybe that will tilt the windmill in the draft's favor.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 10:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

At a Wikipedia-practicable level, lists with articles are not appropriate unless the items in the list have their own Wikipedia articles (yes, this is an oversimplification). I suggest you delete the list from the draft and work on writing content - with references (!) - about the history and function of pharmacy management software. Good luck. David notMD (talk) 13:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

The Gavel and the obvious typo

I havnt and really have no interest in editing Wikipedia. However, if you go to to wiki page for: Gavel. You will notice that Richard Nixon broke it in the 1700s trying to deal with nukes.

If anybody knows how I guess the world may be a slightly more typo free place.

Cheers

The section indicates that it was broken in 1954, but that the item itself had been in use since 1780. GMG^talk 14:35, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Copyright violation

My first Wikipedia article (Multi-tip scanning tunneling microscope) was deleted overnight by someone due to possible copyright violation.

1) How can I know which parts text or images may violate copyright? The guy who deleted my article did not make ans specific comments.

2) If I obtain the permission from the copyright owner to incude this information in the wikipedia page: Do I have to publish the permission somehow? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bert Voigtlaender (talk • contribs) 14:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Courtesy link, Courtesy ping. GMG^talk 14:04, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

It is not deleted. It was moved from your Sandbox to Draft:Multi-tip scanning tunneling microscopy so it can be reviewed via Articles for Creation. David notMD (talk) 16:07, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

A copyright checking program indicated that there is direct copying and close paraphrasing from this website. http://www.fz-juelich.de/pgi/pgi-3/EN/Forschung/Nanostructures/Multi_tip_STM_development/Multi_tipSTMdevelopment_node.html General advice is to write the content in your own words rather than seeking copyright permission. David notMD (talk) 16:13, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Redirects

How do I make a redirect? I want to redirect "List of Ig Noble Prize winners" to "List of Ig Nobel Prize winners". 🔥flame🔥^talk 12:54, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Type "List of Ig Noble Prize winners" in the search box and press ↵ Enter. If the page is not created, you will see the message "You may create the page "Whatever whatever"." Click into the red link and type #REDIRECT [[Article you wanna redirect to]]. Publish changes. I have created List of Ig Noble Prize winners for you. —AE (talk • contributions) 13:35, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Have you searched to see if another article(s) of the general type that you wish exists or a section in another article. That way there can be some coordination of what gets created and not create more duplication of content which then may have to be resolved later.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 16:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm a vandalism stopper.

Vandalism stopper

—AE (talk • contributions)

How can I stop vandalism? Please tell me how to... — Preceding unsigned comment added by DabbleDabbleBabble (talk • contribs) 13:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, DabbleDabbleBabble. If you have time and patience, you can monitor Special:RecentChanges. If you see some obvious vandalism, you can get rid of it on sight. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

First, understand what it is that you are doing and not doing it in an emotional manner. No institution benefits from zealots.2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 17:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Me too [[User:Lflamel|🔥''flame''🔥]]^{[[User talk:Lflamel|''talk'']]} (talk) 12:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I put together some basics here, which may be of help. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

You may also request a trainer in WP:CVUA. However, the trainers are busy in real life and cannot be very active. Reading vandalism related policies, guidelines and essays such as WP:DENY, WP:RBI, WP:TROLLFOOD, WP:IDT, WP:ATWV, WP:IP!=VANDAL, WP:MOV, WP:VVT, WP:VOA is also a good way to be a great vandalism "stopper". —AE (talk • contributions) 13:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Is that for a perfume bottle or alcohol decanter?2605:E000:1301:4462:B816:3E82:AC1B:A488 (talk) 17:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

PSG.LGD <-> LGD Gaming pages division

Hey everyone, I'm new here. I'd like to help (but don't know how) to separate the pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSG.LGD https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LGD_Gaming&redirect=no

Basically LGD Gaming and PSG partnered over 1 (out of many) team in Dota2, however someone changed the whole LGD Gaming page to redirrect to PSG.LGD, making it look like PSG acquired the whole lGD organization, which is very far from the truth. It's simply a means of partnerships over 1 team. The moderator in there quoted "no sources" for lack of activity and action over many months (it would appear this has been a problem since the PSG.LGD deal was signed in Spring of 2018. LGD continue to have teams in other game titles, and so do PSG-Esports. The only one they share is PSG.LGD, the Dota2 team so the pages should be distinguished. Liquipedia, which is a wiki-style encyclopedia for esports & gaming has most of the information right and up to date, so it's a shame that the biggest and the best wiki (from which the name comes) isn't. If there's anything I can do to speed up the process, let me know. I'm not part of either organization, if that's a disclaimer I must add, I just wish esports be taken more seriously and reflected more precise in all media. Worldless0 (talk) 17:33, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Your best bet is to share these concerns on the PSG.LGD talk page, where there's already a discussion going. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Attempt in Creating an Article About My High School

My high school, with its name of "the High School Attached to Northwest Normal University(HNNH)", is the most famous high school in the northestern region in China. With its great facility and effort in education, has been granted with numerous certification and recieved lofty reputation in Gansu, China.

I am hoping to present my school to everyone who use wikipedia, with an attempt to help my almamater recieve more authority. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edward Ted Chen (talk • contribs) 13:31, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

• @Edward Ted Chen:, attempt[ing] to help my almamater [receive] more authority is not a valid reason to have an article on Wikipedia. See WP:NOTPROMO. Topics may have a Wikipedia page only if they are "notable", which means roughly "has been talked about by numerous reliable, independent sources". We have multitude of topic-specific guidelines for what this means in practice; for schools, it's... complicated. Up until recently they were considered notable by default, but that changed, and the resulting guideline is not exactly clear.

In any case, such an article would need to reference at least one reliable source (so that a reader can verify that the school exists) and be written with a neutral point of view (which means that loaded language such as great facility, lofty reputation, etc. should not be found in the article). Finally, you are encouraged to review our policy about conflicts of interest before editing yourself on that topic. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 13:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

My suggestion would be to create a section in the article on the university the school is associated with rather than an independent article. Even the name of the school itself suggests that there is little in the way of what we term notability for this subject. John from Idegon (talk) 20:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC)