Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 879

Archive 875

←

Archive 877

Archive 878

Archive 879

Archive 880

Archive 881

→

Archive 885

Using/uploading a nonprofit logo

New to Wiki! I am writing an article about a non profit support organization and would like to use their logo in the info box. I can't seem to find information to do that correctly. I have verbal permission to use the logo, she sent me the photo...but I assume I need more. I found a template here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Non-free_use_rationale_logo, so do I just add this to the info box template? How then, do I upload the photo of the logo? Do you have wiki tutors? I would even consider paying a bit. I am in the US. thank you for any suggestions!! MaryBB2009 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:01, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia MaryBB2009. If the logo is in a file on your hard drive, you can use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. In step 3 select "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use" and "This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc" —teb728 t c 21:04, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

MaryBB2009. That's how you upload it. To use it, copy the filename you uploaded to (not including the File: prefix) into the logo parameter of your infobox. —teb728 t c 21:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

MaryBB2009, just note please that you cannot add the image to the article until it is actually published. If you're working on it in draft or userspace, you'll need to wait until it is actually an article in mainspace to add a fair use image. Also note that you'll need to upload it to English wikipedia, not commons, as they don't host free use images. Further, any free use image on wikipedia will be deleted after about 10 days if it isn't being used on an article, so don't upload it until your article is ready to publish. John from Idegon (talk) 23:00, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Reporting bad edits

Is there a "report" feature where you can notify mods about false information and bad edits and so on? Cause my librarian told me that it happens a lot on Wikipedia. The Giants 0 (talk) 16:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Once you get more experienced on the site and have an understanding of what is appropriate in terms of content, tone and sourcing, you can go to the history section and revert edits that are clearly vandalism or otherwise inappropriate. Hope this helps. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:11, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, The Giants 0, welcome to the Teahouse. I presume this is the librarian at Ridge High School who told you that? They were correct. We have a shortcut abbreviation for it, known as WP:AIV. One more bad edit from you, and I'm afraid you're going to find yourself named there. If that happens, one of our administrators will pop by and block you from any future editing. So now's your chance to consider whether you're going to actually contribute constructively to the world's greatest encyclopaedia, or are simply going to fool around and get barred from ever editing anything again. You choose. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:15, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Update: User now blocked from editing. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Hamster Sandwich (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Well that went south pretty quick. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:07, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Difference between disambiguation page and set index article

From what I understand, pages like First Baptist Church, First National Bank, Washington High School, and other pages where all entries are the same type should be set index articles. I see no difference between the Washington High School page and USS Virginia, which is a set index article, and the only difference between the first two and the other two is that the first two use a mix of "of [place]" and parentheticals instead of (almost) exclusively parentheticals. Am I missing something?

I'm also wondering which disambiguation page/set index article has the most entries. First Baptist Church has 151 (unless I counted wrong), excluding red links. HotdogPi 14:37, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

There's some info about the differences on Wikipedia:Set index articles. Hope this helps. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:11, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

The Lasting Bible

I served as the Editor of The Lasting Bible, published this year (2018). You can learn more about it here, https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20181017005728/en/LASTING-BIBLE-CR-Ministries. This is my first article I am trying to draft for Wikipedia, and I seem to have failed. Wiki has an article for “Weymouth New Testament”, “World English Bible”, etc.—why not for this new one? I think maybe Wiki thought the title was, “User:Paul G. Humber/sandbox.” Well, of course that should be rejected. I did not even intend it. Could someone write to me and be willing to serve as a reference person to help me get through my first “article.” I am 76 and may not be as computer “savvy” as I wish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul G. Humber (talk • contribs) 23:01, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, so I can't see the content which has been deleted from your sandbox, and therefore can't answer your question. But I had a look at the link you provided. You should be aware that "I went down to the land whose bars closed upon me forever" is likely to be interpreted by an ordinary sinful English-speaker in a way different from what I assume is intended. Maproom (talk) 23:29, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

It's not you. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia based on published content about topics, not written by the people involved. It appears that "The Lasting Bible" has only recently been published, and the link you provided was a press release probably written by you. Thus considered promotional and speedy deletion. (You can send to the person who did the SD to get your draft back.) As an article topic, this may or may not ever achieve Wikipedia's definition of notability, but right now it is definitely too soon. Note that the "Weymouth New Testament" was published in 1903 and got a Wikipedia article in 2007. And even that is at risk, at the article has only one reference, and the last paragraph is unreferenced/promotional. David notMD (talk) 23:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Duplicate articles

Greetings, While working on Articles needing additional categories from December 2017 for the first time I found these two articles that look like duplicates. Wondering how to get one of these deleted?

• Zata in title, but spelled Zatta
• Zatta (kebele in Ethiopia)

If an expert could do this correctly instead of me muddling it up that would be great. Thanks. JoeHebda (talk) 03:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi JoeHebda. Both articles were created by the same editor ("Zata" in December 2017 and "Zatta" in April 2018) and are basically identical content wise. My guess is that the title of the older article was incorrect; so, the creator just did a copy-paste move to create the new one because he/she didn't know how to change the page's title. An article about another town Zatta already exists; but it's not clear (at least to me) which of the two Zatta's should be the WP:PTOPIC. Since the content of the two you found appears to be identical, there doesn't appear to be the need for a WP:HISTMERGE; so perhaps the easiest thing to do with be to redirect "Zatta (kebele in Ethiopia)" to "Zata" as explained in WP:A10 and then figure out if the "Zata" article needs to be moved to correct the spelling of the town's name and disambiguate it if necessary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:21, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Donations

Why doesn't Wikipedia use Ads? i wouldnt mind having 1 or 2 ads on a page while tryninga to do some research — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.173.234.200 (talk) 04:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello anonymous user, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can read the main arguments against having ads on Wikipedia here. Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 04:43, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Can I create a page for b374k shell.

This is one of the most popular webshell ever made. check out it's image at https://i.imgur.com/nJcg2pjl.jpg

And it's source is available at the following repositories/archives.

https://code.google.com/archive/p/b374k-shell/

https://github.com/b374k/b374k

It's also in the news check them out at https://www.google.com/search?q=b374k&source=lnms&tbm=nws

And yeah its open source. (MIT License) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatcha (talk • contribs) 04:52, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Eatcha (talk) 04:46, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Eatcha. The question, as always, is whether the subject is notable, in the special Wikipedia sense of the word. That comes down to the question, have several people unconnected with the subject chosen to write at some length about in reliable sources? - because those are the only sources which should be used for the content of the article. An article should be entirely based on reliably published sources, but very little of it should be based on anything by people closely associated with the subject - which means in this case, anybody involved in writing or maintaining it, I would say. The Google link you mention seems to give four results, one of which is a blog (blogs are hardly every regarded as reliable sources), the second and fourth (the German one) just mention the shell in passing; I don't read Korean, so I don't know about the third one. But I would say that these come nowhere near establishing it as notable. Please read your first article.

stock market

My little brother used to run projects for a major bank. He is smart. He says that stock markets are artificial gambling rings run by bookies. He says if you invest in a company listed on the stock market, that company will never get your money. Rather, you will be betting on the company which only gets your endorsement and not your money. Does that make sense? Thanks! John Martin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.33.159.81 (talk) 00:19, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The Teahouse is not the place to ask that question. You might try the Reference Desks, but the question is really asking for an opinion, and that is not the purpose of Wikipedia. The Reference Desks might be able to tell you what articles give the opinions of reliable sources on the stock market. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:08, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The article Day trading describes a practice that some banking gamblers engage in. In my opinion, your little brother is right about that sort of trading. For original share issues, the money goes to the company, so your claim does not make sense. Subsequent purchases have an element of gambling, but long-term investment, at least in theory, is investing in the growth of the company and a share in the profits (see Dividend). Apologies for the opinion, but do read the links. Dbfirs 09:14, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Signing a contribution

How do I sign a paragraph that I have added to a page? Cyrusep

This question was answered, but the answer has been removed, possibly by accident? The ~~~~ can be typed using SHIFT# on my keyboard. Dbfirs 22:26, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Mysterious: Cyrusep asked a question, 26... hijacked the question, Ian answered, Nick answered, 26... then deleted all that and returned the entry to the original question. So, to recap Ian and Nick - no one signs contributions to articles. The View history shows a chronological list of editors' changes, with their names. Everyone is supposed to sign comments here at Teahouse (as you did), at articles' Talk pages and on the Talk pages of other editors. David notMD (talk) 22:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I'd assumed that Cyrusep and 26... were the same person. Neither of them used tildes. Dbfirs 10:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

kindly review and guide whats problem in this article

Draft:Husnain Chaudhary - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Husnain347 (talk • contribs) 10:32, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

(removed entire article) Don't post the entire article on this page. Could you please expand on the specifics of your question as there are a number of things wrong with the article. - X201 (talk) 10:38, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Husnain347: You have submitted the draft today. Just wait. Someone will sure review your draft anytime soon. Anatoliatheo (talk) 12:14, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

A list of videos, and external links to the subject's own websites can never replace WP:Reliable sources. If you want the article to be approved, then you need to find independent writing about the subject, and summarise what these sources say, using in-line referencing. See WP:Referencing for beginners. Dbfirs 12:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Help with formatting

I have a mathematical article (with just a few special symbols, about 1,500 words) that I would like to contribute to Wikipedia. It would be my first contribution so formatting the references, fonts, citations to Wikipedia standards presents a challenge and I am pressed for time. I would like to engage an experienced editor/contributor to help me with this task.

What is the correct way to engage somebody for this service? (I would leave my email address, like in a teahouse, for one-to-one follow-up discussion but I read somewhere that I should not, and I want to be a good citizen).

Miro Benda, Seattle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirobenda (talk • contribs) 07:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mirobenda. If this question is about the article you have started in your sandbox, it sounds interesting, but Wikipedia is not the correct place to publish WP:Original research. If you can find WP:Reliable sources in which the subject is discussed, then please add them to your draft before submitting it for review. You might like to read WP:Referencing for beginners for the formatting, but if you add the references in any format then we can help you to include them in the appropriate way as in-line citations. Ask again here when you need more help. Many editors read this page, but if you need specialist help then Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics might have some specialists who would help. Dbfirs 09:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Mirobenda. Please have look at MATHS for how to embed symbols and formulas in an article. As for whether your sandbox is appropriate or not: it matters crucially whether you are writing an article about a term which has been widely discussed in the literature, or introducing a new term. If the first, then the article is probably very welcome (but note that your sources are where you should start, not something you add at the end: the article should not contain one single definition, argument, or conclusion, that is not already wholly contained in at least one existing publication). If you are introducing a new term (or you have previously done so, but it has not so far been picked up and discussed by several other writers) then this is original research, and not acceptable in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 16:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

priority of units and conversions

Hi, I had a question about the priorities of metric vs. imperial units.

Should the metric unit come first, for example "4 meters (13 feet)"? Or should the imperial unit come first, as with "13 feet (4 meters)"?

In addition, which form of spelling is preferred? (I'm asking because I know that meter can also be spelled as metre) Firey828 (talk) 16:21, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Firey828; good question. Wikipedia does not mandate any answer to either of these questions: it just says that the convention should be consistent within an article. See UNITS and ENGVAR for more details on the two points. --ColinFine (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I want to publish an article on Wikipedia.

Hi i am new on Wikipedia and i want to publish an article on Wikipedia as soon as possible.Mbasit718 (talk) 18:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Mbasit718 and welcome to the Teahouse! Read through this page before you begin; it's super helpful, containing the key information you need to know before creating an article. Once you're read that, to actually create the article, go to the Article Wizard. After all the screens of the Wizard have been clicked through, you'll be able to create a draft and submit it for review; once a draft has been submitted for review, a reviewer will come along and if it's suitable for Wikipedia in its current state, accept it, and if it's not, decline it. I hope this helps!--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 18:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Create categories/Sidebar

Was just wondering how to:

1. Create categories - that appear like the others - with the title

 and then a line dividing the title and text below.

2. How to input that sidebar with the photo and some personal descriptions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeblucreative (talk • contribs) 19:24, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Mikeblucreative: Some more pressing issues you need to take care of first:

• You must disclose your employment on your user page. I'll be leaving you instructions on that.
• Drafts should not use copyrighted text. When in doubt, don't copy text from other sites.
• The draft should just be a summary of professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are independent of the subject but still specifically about it. I'll also post some instructions on how to write articles on your user talk page as well.

Ian.thomson (talk) 20:14, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Had My Page Rejected And Accidentally Made A "Wikipedia:(Insert Name)" Page And Do Not Know How To Remove It

I ended up making a mistake in creating a page for myself on Wikipedia, as I wanted to provide a proper information page to accompany the info panel Google had already created in my name. What I failed to realize was how the WP pages worked and accidentally created a page titled "Wikipedia:Raener Lewington" and do not know how to remove it. Worse yet, the page I had intended on making for my account was rejected because it "did not seem noteworthy" of inclusion. I made sure to only include information on the books I have published or contributed to and cited all three of them in the article. Nothing more was said and no attempts to make myself look more appealing outside of making a simple information page were made. My own audience has asked for one to be made for a while, but no one knew how to create one. I ended up taking it upon myself to make a simple and (hopefully) unbiased page for people to find my works under on Wikipedia but failed to realize the scope of what needed to be done.

What can be done to remove the pointless "Wikipedia:Raener Lewington" page and what can be done to help get my actual page approved?

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. --Raener Lewington (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Raener Lewington: and welcome to the Teahouse. I have posted a request to have Wikipedia:Raener lewington deleted, so that will probably be sorted very soon. As for the draft that was rejected, the thing is that an author needs to meet these criteria to be notable enough for a Wikipedia article, and unfortunately the draft doesn't show that you do meet them, or the more general criteria for biographies. It's not that you were writing a lot of promotional text - you weren't - but Wikipedia's notability criteria can be rather strict. Merely existing and having been published is unfortunately not enough. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:15, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Article rejected because references deemed invalid

Hello, I'm trying to publish my first article. It is about Dave Darlington, who is kind of a legend in the music business. I love his work and believe that he deserves to be represented on Wikipedia, but when my article is reviewed, the sources that are available online as references to the work that he's done for some reason don't qualify. I'm trying to reference IMDB, Discogs, All Music, and a couple of interviews that are done with him through reputable sources. If I can't use these sources, then I'd have to take pictures of albums that he's worked on to prove that he has the credits that I want to include in the article! I've seen other articles on Wikipedia with much worse referencing, like this one that someone wrote about my old band- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little-T_and_One_Track_Mike#cite_note-2

Obviously, whoever wrote this article knew someone in the band because they included information that only one of our friends could have known, and there is no way for them to have referenced it.

Why is my article being rejected even though I'm making every effort to reference correctly a person who is more notable than other people who have Wikipedia articles on them? I want to contribute to Wikipedia, but this is very discouraging! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dave_Darlington — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelsflannery (talk • contribs) 20:18, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Michaelsflannery: The problem is that you need professionally-published sources that are specifically about Darlington but not dependent upon nor affiliated with him. IMDB and Discogs are written by site visitors, pictures of his albums only prove that he exists (which is not the same as being notable).

The state of other articles doesn't matter, two wrongs don't make a right. If you want to nominate that other article for deletion on the grounds that it lacks sufficient sourcing to demonstrate notability, the process is explained at Wikipedia:Deletion policy and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. You'd have a good case: many of the sources aren't actually about the subject (only mentioning in passing), it looks like there's only one verifiable source that is professionally published, and of the two other sources that might count one appears to be a (now deleted) campus newspaper and the other is a personal site hosting a copyrighted newspaper article that doesn't seem to exist outside of that personal site. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The two sources listed are both him basically talking about himself, hardly a reliable source. The other source in the other article, while a badly made website, is a third party source and therefor better than him talking about himself. also sign your post with four ~ in a row WelpThatWorked (talk) 20:47, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Article Brian Rosenworcel

Hello. I am working on my first submission, and would like to do whatever it takes for it to be published. So far, it has not been accepted, by Robert McClenon.

Please help me correct my errors so that this can eventually be published. I have read and understand much of the guidelines and rules of Wikipedia, and would like some feedback to improve this article.

Specific questions I have are:

• When attempting to put a title in italics, I used what the guide instructed (' before and after), but in the preview, it merely shows as BOLD.
• How do I enter a photograph that I have filed for use?
• When listing demographic information, I have listed in rows. But the preview shows it all together in a paragraph. The same occurred with References.
• At what point can I move it into Draft Space for review? Robert McClenon said that I could not have it there at this point.

I truly appreciate any help and feed back that you can offer! My ultimate goal, again, is to have this article published.

Many Thanks, Carole Basinger — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carole Basinger (talk • contribs) 15:11, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

First, please remember to sign your comments here by typing four of ~ at the end. Frankly, your draft is an unacceptable mess. It lacks a neutral point of view, the majority of content appears to be your opinion rather than sourced from references. I recommend you look at articles about the other members of Guster (the band he is in) and model on that. You can probably copy content from the band's and the members' articles, but then in your Edit summary you will need to attribut your sources. David notMD (talk) 15:32, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Technical: If you want items on separate lines, type a * at start of each line. It will show up as a bullet. References are inserted in the text - this automatically creates a reference list at the end. See the examples and tutorial to learn how. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Carole Basinger. To get italics: Type 2 apostrophes (not 4) before and after. The page that Robert McClenon said not to move to draft said only "I am looking for articles to edit!" —teb728 t c 20:59, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Resaca, Georgia

Could someone have a look and see if you can figure out why the image I swapped into the infobox isn't showing up? I'm having glitchy issues so maybe I added a character somewhere but I can't fogure it out. Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 18:44, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, FloridaArmy. You seem to have used the file name FileResaca Confederate cemetery gate.jpg, when it should be Resaca Confederate cemetery gate.jpg. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Cordless Larry I've tried removing the "File:" portion several times and something glitchy is going on. Maybe another editor can give it a try and see if they have better luck. I  think I've cluttered the edit history enough trying to fix it.FloridaArmy (talk) 20:14, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I identified the further error by using the edit preview button, FloridaArmy. It seems that there were some strange, invisible characters following the image and caption parameters. I fixed this by replacing them with spaces here. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:01, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia page about employer?

I've been asked by my boss to create a page for the museum where I work. In reading the guidelines, this seems like it COULD be a conflict. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreggMuseumNCState (talk • contribs) 21:07, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@GreggMuseumNCState: Being asked by an employer to write an article about your workplace is pretty much the archetypal example of a conflict of interest. Even if you are not being directly paid for it, the paid editing policies still apply to you. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

regarding edit

Dear Tea House Good Morning

Excuse me. Now i am not interested in wikipedia because you deleted my edit every time though my information was not wrong. This is my family history. God bless you.

Best Regards,

Masroor Chaudhary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masroor Chaudhary (talk • contribs) 08:37, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Masroor Chaudhary. You need to understand that Wikipedia includes only what is reported in WP:Reliable sources. Your own family tree would be regarded as a reliable source if it is published in an independent reliable source. Your edit was reverted not because we believe it to be wrong, but because you didn't include a reference. Readers need to be able to check the facts claimed in Wikipedia articles. Dbfirs 08:47, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Masroor Chaudhary Please understand that your word is not an acceptable source for Wikipedia. It must be possible for readers to verify the information given in Wikipedia articles. It is not possible to do that with your word- and even if it were, such a source is not independent, which is also required. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

See earlier section of same title (#regarding edit #regarding edit) above, & previous sections referred to therein. There is no point in asking questions if you don't read the answers. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Archived.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:52, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Reference

Hello Tea House Good Day

Once again your friend is with you. I told my relatives for reliable sources regarding noorun nisa on maghfoor ahmad ajazi page. He will send us references with in two days.Then I will provide you citation. Good Luck.

Best Regards

Masroor Chaudhary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masroor Chaudhary (talk • contribs) 12:47, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The article has many, many, many other statements of fact that are lacking citations, so if you have reliable published sources to support other parts of the article, those would be welcome. Do not have to be in English. P.S. Please remember to sign your User name to comments by typing four of ~. David notMD (talk) 15:19, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Refers to two earlier sections of same title (#regarding edit) above, & previous sections referred to therein. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:39, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Had article rejected

I have an article rejected Draft:Mareeg Mediaeven though it has has lot of sources from web that I have cited I have cited. The reason they are saying it needs to be sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. However all similar site are included in wikipedia with less references? Is acceptance depend on the editors.Why firt rejection seems fair as it only asked to Fix reference errors. can some one shed a light on this to tell me the next step. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warsamedhuje (talk • contribs) 2018-12-14T00:45:56 (UTC)

Do a web search for "mareeg mediaeven" and you will see why your article was rejected. Outofmario (talk) 18:08, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@Warsamedhuje: What Outofmario is trying to say is a web search for the exact phrase "Mareeg Mediaeven" doesn't create any results. When the source for your question is viewed it becomes clear that you ment "Mareeg Media", but because of a missing space it displace as if the next word was part of the link. At Draft:Mareeg Media a notice appears saying that RHaworth deleted the page for being "unambigous advertising or promotion", I can't see the article myself so I can't make a judgement but it seems that RHaworth thought that your draft was not meant to be informative, but instead entirely as a vechile of advertising or promotion. —The Editor's Apprentice (Talk•Edits) 04:02, 19 December 2018 (UTC).

This Mareeg Media has a lot more reference than cited and very old news web. As knew to this community I am still in confusion as why it was deleted. I am not sure if Mr RHaworth is aware but I had declared an interest on said media never the less was only informative when I drafted. I am not going to do it I leave it to other editors to investigate if it notable enoughWarsamedhuje (talk) 00:35, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree, from what I can see Mareeg Media does look to be a very important. From your disscussion with RHaworth on his talk page it seems that he is aware that you are willing to share your close relationship with Mareeg Media. I think in the end, as you said, it is best to leave it for others to work on the page for Mareeg Media. I hope your experiences so far do not discourage you from editing in the future and that you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia and other related projects.—The Editor's Apprentice (Talk•Edits) 01:52, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Sand

How can I edit the sandbox? 182.16.170.54 (talk) 05:37, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi IP 182.16.170.54. I believe that only registered accounts have a user sandbox, but I think IP accounts can edit the project-wide sandbox. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:33, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

How to and should I ask for an article deletion

Hi, I started editing an article called 'History of Samos' only to find its contents already exist (verbatim?) in the article called 'Samos'. Is it necessary to have both articles? If not, what's the best process for deletion? Shillings1005 (talk) 07:50, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome Shillings1005. History of Samos shows no significant difference from Samos#History, and the general article on Samos at about 40 Kb is not too long, so the simplest would be to make the History article into a redirect pointing to Samos#History (of course removing the banner at the top of that section). Alternatively you could do what the banner recommends and edit down the History section into a summary, retaining the Main article link at the top of that section: Noyster (talk), 09:41, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Would somebody please delete this empty category I created?

If I am able to delete it myself I'd appreciate knowing how. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 12:57, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: You may just request deletion by putting {{db-catempty}} in the category page.
See Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. Unpopulated categories for more explanation. --CiaPan (talk) 13:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Done, User Deor removed the category. --CiaPan (talk) 09:59, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Stott's Theorem of the Pictorial Condition

I've made an article page called Stott's Theorem of the Picotiral Condition. I think folk have asked for it to be deleted because that title is not known although I have put it on social media sites.

This research is known on the Internet as 'transcendental imaging' in fact I have been no.1 on google/bing and yahoo for it, for over 10 years.

'transcendental imaging' is merely an application of the base and ubiquitous fact of the Italian Rennaisance which is that '2D shape represents (portrays) architectonic form i.e depicts 3D objects'.

I am saying that that is 'the pictorial condition' because it's the one thing one can say about a picture with any certainty. Wittgenstein says the same in the tractatus but casually and not fully described.

That basic fact can be said also of imaginary 3D objects i.e. (all the forms that a 2D shape could represent) and it can aslo be applied to the whole of visual culture made up of 2D data fields. That's the transcendental pictorial context put forward and accepted in both the patent application and the article referenced.

Here I have just presented the facst in one whole sentence just to clarify. I can provide a breakdown of points with explanations and illustrations from both sources but instead I say just go the links and references.

I had a rule two which I deleted because I thought there might be issues regarding original research, although it's very basic stuff on the level of 1+1=2. I was sorry to delete it because it's a valuable information resource.

I've tried to change the title to 'transcendental imaging' so there is no problem about 'original research.' I'm the only one who has used it and for over a decade on all the iternet search engines. I've tried but when I edit the page it won't let me change the title.

I added the category 'artificial imagination' and it said that the category did not exist and yet there is such a page. ???????????

I can't seem to access 'talk' People have left messages but when I try and reply there doesn't seem to be a way to do it that i can see, so I've written this here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan Van Carloads (talk • contribs) 12:28, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you comment on this page? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stott's Theorem of The Pictorial Condition. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:11, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Dan Van Carloads: Being number 1. for 10 years would sound much more impressive if you could say who was number 2. and number 3. in that time. And, of course, who was 1. before... --CiaPan (talk) 14:19, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Uploading images that i own

Hi , I have been trying to upload images i own but keep getting a pink message rejecting my efforts , stating that the system failed to confirm i own the work? How do i convince the "system i own this work?

File:Mobiklift photo

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51jjOG3Oc4L._SX425_.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack kiragu (talk • contribs) 16:10, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Jack kira, there is no requirement for you to own the work. But you do need to own the copyright to the work, and to convince the authorities (at Wikimedia Commons, not here at en:Wikipedia) that you own it. Maproom (talk) 16:59, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up to Is there a good way to include the page from which I acquired data with the data so that it can be easily updated by another editor in the future?

Hi some has asked to see the Mareeg Media text that has been deleted by RHaworth

here are the text

Mareeg Media File:Mareeg logo.jpg Type of site News Available in Soomaali, English Website mareeg.com Alexa rank Increase 1,144,728 (December 2018)[1] Registration 2001-05-16 Launched 2003 Current status Active Mareeg Media is an independent news agency based in London, Somalia

Contents 1 History 2 See also 3 Notes 4 References 5 External links 6 Mareeg Media History Mareeg meaning " A Web ") was created in 2003 by a Group of Somali journalist in Somalia and UK. Its objective is to inform the public on current affairs, particularly domestic matters as well as world news. Mareeg Media began operation as a news website with Bilingual of Somali and English language.

See also Media in Somalia mondotimes.com

Notes

"Mareeg.com Site Info". Alexa Internet. Retrieved 2018-12-11.

References https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32573160 mondotimes.com Lund University Publications media-directory/websites/ amediaagency.com https://whois.easycounter.com/mareeg.com https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14094550

External links Mareeg Media https://mareeg.com/news/somalia/ https://mareeg.com/news/soomaali/

Mareeg Media — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warsamedhuje (talk • contribs) 17:02, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Citation and Copy Right Content Related

Hi, i want some clarification about the content to be used in the Wikipedia. For example, when some universities has used the common citations and got the content approved and when the same citations are used in our Wikipedia page it has been removed stating promotional activities. So let me know about the citations and the promotional activity content which should not be used on the wiki page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinoth aadaikalam (talk • contribs) 11:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Vinoth aadaikalam, I assume this is about the content and reference you added to Jain University. The reference was to a blog. Wikipedia requires reliable sources, as explained at here and more specifically here: a blog is very rarely a reliable source. Maproom (talk) 16:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Vinoth aadaikalam: There also appears to be some undisclosed paid editing going on here, so please read and heed the notice I left on your talk page. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:07, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism

can someone please deal with this guy?. Thanks. PaulCHebert (talk) 20:14, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

The user has been blocked. In future, the place for you to report vandalism is WP:AIV. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:15, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I find the process of figuring out where to go to get admins' attention incredibly Byzantine. PaulCHebert (talk) 21:19, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:UNTV Cup Season 6 Playoffs was reviewed but not accepted

Hi,

I was wondering why the review for Template:UNTV Cup Season 6 Playoffs (still under retrieval because of deletion) was tagged as an advertisement. The UNTV Cup is a public service league with only a few advertisers, and the teams participating are Philippine government agencies that are willing to help their chosen charities in need. This is not a commercial league to start with, and it doesn't have profitable intentions. I'm trying to create playoffs templates for different seasons based on Template:UNTV Cup Season 4 playoffs, but unfortunately my first attempt was denied. I would also like to seek advise and tips on how to create sports wiki pages from the ground up, including this type of playoffs brackets.

Thank you in advance! Elivic (talk) 21:07, 21 December 2018 (UTC) elivic

Template:UNTV Cup Season 6 Playoffs has never existed; you presumably intended to refer to Draft:Template:UNTV Cup Season 6 Playoffs? --David Biddulph (talk) 21:12, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Hey, It appears to be because this type of template does not need to exist, as the Season 4 one you linked to just uses another template without any modification. It likely has no need to exist too. It currently uses Template:RoundN, and you could try to just copyedit the season 4 one right into the article, no need for a template. WelpThatWorked (talk) 21:19, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Bio Page

Hi,

I want to know how can I make a biography page about myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgmtz23 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome. It is discoraged to make a bio about yourself. (see Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:CoI) If you are notable, someone else will likely make a page about you. Who are you? WelpThatWorked (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Mgmtz23. If you are not notable enough for a Wikipedia biography, there are sites like Facebook and LinkedIn. —teb728 t c 21:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I am a professional soccer player — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgmtz23 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Mgmtz23: If you meet the notability criteria for soccer players written at WP:NFOOTBALL, the best that you can hope for is to make a request at Requested Articles that someone write an article about you, or that editors take note of your career on their own and decide to write about you. You should not attempt to write an article yourself. You should also understand that it isn't necessarily desirable to want an article about one's self(please read that link); in fact, there are good reasons to not want one. As noted above, if you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media or a personal website. 331dot (talk) 21:54, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

How to create a redirect?

Could some create a redirect for me? I would like PNGHS to redirect to Palmerston North Girls' High School wiki article. I tried to make it my self but failed. I would appreciate anyones help!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NPCtom (talk • contribs) 22:05, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done NPCtom, MarkZusab just did it for you. Since you're a new account, you couldn't create the redirect, and so your creation still sits in Draft format [[1]]. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Editing highest grossing indian movies

I am unable to edit highest grossing indian movies. This movie the villain(kannada) has grossed more 100 crores and is still not in the list.why is it so?you guys can check it in any other websites.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anchitya (talk • contribs)

@Anchitya: It appears you asked this question earlier. The article you speak of is protected from editing due to the persistent addition of poorly sourced information. If you have a properly sourced edit you want to do, please make a formal edit request on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 10:03, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

User: Blue Square Thing

Please see this user's comments on my talk page. Is it appropriate?Dominick333 (talk) 03:19, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

He was right, but much too aggressive. Try to deescalate, but if that doesn't work, ask an admin WelpThatWorked (talk) 03:43, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Ok.Dominick333 (talk) 15:19, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

All "timeline-related" articles on Timeline of the war in Donbass

Hi all,
I have a question related to "timeline-related" pages on wikipedia, specifically Timeline of the war in Donbass. Many articles related to the mentioned page (such as this & this) are on Special:LongPages with page sizes ranging from at least 400-500kB, the most having about 550kB. Although User:Pigsonthewing split some articles into respective months, they still have a page size of about 200kB. My point is that it seems to violate WP:TOOMUCH & WP:NOTNEWS, shouldn't timelines be a summary of what happened instead of a detailed explanation? In addition, majority of the information is added by 2 users, namely User:Pietadè & User:DagosNavy. Not all might agree with me but I would suggest that the pages to be summarised & unnecessary portions to be removed. To add on, the timeline about World War II only have a maximum page size of ~74kB. ‑‑V.S.(C)(T) 08:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

As for me, You are welcome to summarise, and make much smaller articles (by the way, the current 'timelines' (not correct word for the war) falls into size limit), in some 80 or so years (e.g., if we take for start of the WWII JAP CHI "relations" in 1930s, then it makes some 80 yrs, give or take), to start new "counting"......
currently, people are killed, injured, displaced, in a daily basis, not only 1 (one) reader is interested in the subject (vedi page views)...
'cause, 1 (one) could consider titles like "War, Russian-Ukrainian, S01E01", et cetera...
can anyone hint some date in human history where no (known) war was "enterpris(z)ed"...—Pietadè (talk) 16:20, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

---

And, shall we start a new article, à la, The list of non-war days in human history, my first entry would be the day Mr Jean stepped on the Moon, since, so far, no known wars on this soil?—Pietadè (talk) 17:37, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Information on deleted article

Hello!

I am attempting to publish a page. I have discovered that a page with the same title was deleted in 2015 by a User. I would like to contact the user to determine more information as to why she deleted the page, but cannot find a way to contact her through the links! Any suggestions are appreciated, thank you! The User's name is "Liz". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carole Basinger (talk • contribs) 17:43, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Pinging Liz. She'll now be notified of this discussion. But you'll have to tell her the name of the article. Maproom (talk) 17:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, @Carole Basinger:. You can check the status of an article's creations, protections, and deletions using Special:Log, and typing the article name in the "Target" field. There, you will might find the user who deleted the article. Good luck on your article. –eggofreason^talk 17:59, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Carole Basinger. I see from your user page and your sandbox that you are interested in Brian Rosenworcel. —teb728 t c 19:36, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Carole Basinger, the deletion log for that article shows that it was deleted because it didn't show that he was notable by the standards of WP:MUSIC. For future reference, right after Liz's name in the deletion log is a link to her user talk page; you could have contacted her there. —teb728 t c 20:10, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Someone call me? I heard a ping. The Brian Rosenworcel article was only a few sentences long and didn't indicate why he was a notable drummer and should have an article on Wikipedia. Because it was PROD'd, I can recover the page information and put it on a user page for you to work with, Carole Basinger. The article would have to be substantially improved to before it is moved back into the mainspace. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Responding to User: talk:Liz Thank you, Liz for your explanation and help! How do I access the recovered page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carole Basinger (talk • contribs) 19:02, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

My apologies for forgetting to sign these entries..I will do better in the future Zuzuroo (talk) 19:06, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Can I make an article for MEMZ Trojan?

I don't know whether to put it because it's user-made. It's been spreading around the net and I'm not sure whether it should be in this Wiki. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WernerHFan (talk • contribs) 12:12, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Generally wikis like enwiki are slow (WP:NORUSH), and "in the news" can be too soon to judge how relevant yet another malware will be in the future. OTOH, it's your decision, if you have reliable + relevant 3rd party sources (cf. WP:42) and want to create an article or stub, be bold. Maybe your article will be deleted, if folks disagree with your judgement call. And don't copy the Wikia (FANDOM) malware wiki MEMZ page verbatim. –84.46.53.231 (talk) 13:24, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Is this the Trojan you are concerned with http://malware.wikia.comOldperson (talk) 20:01, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Listing cultural references from The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana

A question about the page The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana, a novel by Umberto Eco.

Umberto Eco was a semiotician: he worked with words, assigning meaning to words, connecting words by meaning, context, etc.

The novel contains hundreds of quotations/allusions from poems, novels, songs, sayings, paintings, illustrations, etc.

Intertextuality is the main thing in this novel: by identifying and connecting the quotations/allusions that spring into the main character's mind, the competent reader learns about the story and inner world of meanings of the main character, a guy who has lost his autobiographic, episodic memory but not his semantic memory, i.e. he only remembers words — in fact, a Hell or a Heaven for a semiotician.

Any competent reader can identify the quotation/allusion, the original author, the work the quotation has been extracted from or the allusion points to, the year of publication, etc. These pieces of information are not owned by Umberto Eco nor by anyone (except a few quotations might be copyrighted, i.e. owned by the original authors).

I would like to add these pieces of information to the main article, or perhaps to new articles:

Quotation/Allusion

Name of Author

Date of Birth

Date of Death

Nationality

Language

Title of the work being quoted or alluded to

Year of Publication

Website address as a reference for verification purposes

Wikipedia rules seem to allow the possibility to declare, with adequate references, the cultural connections that an author has chosen to reveal in their work, for example here or here, or even here, or here.

In the case of Umberto Eco's novel this would take up considerable space - probably many articles, perhaps one for each of the 18 chapters, as this project shows.

Would someone let me know what they think about it?, i.e. if such a project meets Wikipedia's criteria.

Unarosaèunarosa (talk) 08:05, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Unarosaèunarosa for proposing this article and beginning work on it; it could become an interesting expansion to Wikipedia's coverage of Eco. All I would say is that such an article would benefit by referring to any published critical commentary that discusses these allusions and associations in The Mysterious Flame. In carrying out an analysis like this, it is important to avoid Wikipedia's prohibition on "original research", and not to be tempted to air any new thoughts of one's own: Noyster (talk), 14:52, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I have made a draft which has been rejected. I asked advice here. Unarosaèunarosa (talk) 20:22, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Unarosaèunarosa: It is much appreciated that you sought advice here. In my view, and looking at your rejected draft, your proposed article would simply be highlighting innumerable phrases used by one artist and linking them to their original sources. I see that as a bad idea unless it is especially noteworthy in its own right. I'm sure large numbers of other writers have employed the exact same device in their own works. Of course, if you can cite independent, reliable sources with a high degree of academic rigour that demonstrate why this is notable in this particular instance, then you could add or enlarge a section on the page about Umberto Eco, giving a small number of example, plus a citation to allow readers to find more for themselves. Anything else would, as Noyster stated, be Original research, which we do not permit here. I would certainly avoid bloating any content with details like DOB/Date of Death/language/nationality of the donor artist. A simple wikilink should suffice.

And, whilst I've not checked for it, I very much doubt we have an article listing all the musical references to The Smiths deployed by BBC TV naturalist Chris Packham during his BBC Springwatch broadcasts in 2009, despite there being a reliable source to demonstrate that he did. All three topics are notable, but the linkage between them is not. Whilst I'm not saying that Eco's use isn't noteworthy - you would have to work hard to demonstrate clearly that it is to have a separate article about it. (But maybe I'm just being a bit of a cultural philistine here?) Unless it were very carefully constructed, I would not be surprised if a stand-alone page along the lines you're currently thinking of didn't then quickly appear at a deletion discussion on the grounds of notability and original research. That having been said, I think it could still be a very interesting piece of research to collate and to put online in a blog or discussion forum for others to find via a normal Google search, though not here). Nick Moyes (talk) 00:46, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thank you for taking the time to reply. I will continue this work here, where a great deal has been completed, although it probably needs many improvements, more sources and maybe a general restyling. Unarosaèunarosa (talk) 02:05, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@Unarosaèunarosa: You're welcome. That looks the ideal place to publish your studies. Obviously Wikipedia doesn't regard other wikis as 'reliable', but that shouldn't stop anyone making genuine and worthwhile contributions there. Best wishes for Christmas and the New Year. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:08, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Who changed the search options and why?

The basic search I have done for years now no longer works. Now I have to select image types to search instead of just doing a search that delivers all the images mapped to a specific date. Who thought that was a good idea? Find that person who made that change and tell them they are an idiot. You took something simple and jacked it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Which-moron (talk • contribs) 04:29, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I suspect the changes being referred to (by this now-blocked-user) are those described here. They came about as a proposal in a Phabricator request. See here for details. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:28, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Please give my grandson a bengali hindu name.

 Sir,
     Kindly give my son a bengali hindu name very uncommon but not lengthy. 
 
     The name should start with B.

     Thanking you,

     Mr.Ranjan Mitra.

     Kolkata.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.66.8.166 (talk) 07:21, 23 December 2018 (UTC) 

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to an account name, the person registering it can choose their own account name, they are not assigned one. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 23 December 2018 (UTC)