Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 988

Archive 985

Archive 986

Archive 987

Archive 988

Archive 989

Archive 990

→

Archive 995

RE-SUBMISSION OF NEWLY-EDITED "REJECTED" ARTICLE

27 July 2019

I have revised/edited my LENI WYLLIAMS article. Where/how do I resubmit it for further consideration? THANKS !

   User:Paynethymaya

Hello, User:Paynethymaya. You should read this article: Wikipedia:Your first article, as there is a standard format and various rules in effect to maintain Wikipedia's standards.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:31, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi User:Paynethymaya - I've looked briefly at the draft in your sandbox, and it looks to me like you are writing about a notable subject on whom we ought to have an article. I'd be happy to help you with the process of getting it into a state that's fit to publish. The first thing you need to do though, as others have mentioned, is learn how to cite your refs properly. Please do go ahead and read the 'Your first article' page linked to above, and make sure you have a play with the 'Cite' tool just above the editing window - choose one of the templates from the drop-down menu (e.g. cite web, cite news etc) and fill in the blanks - the citation will be automatically added. You don't need to manually list the refs at the end of the article - that's done automatically by adding a reflist. If you go through and add the citations properly, and drop me a note on my talk page when you're done, I'll review the draft and either give you some next steps, or move it to main space if it's ready. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 22:39, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit, Paynethymaya I have formatted the references in a way that is commonly used here. Vexations (talk) 22:58, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Vexations, that's really helpful. Paynethymaya - I've taken another look at the article, and I think that there are a few changes that will be needed - some of the language is a bit WP:PEACOCK in places; I also think it would benefit from being divided into sections like 'career', 'personal life', 'critical reception' and, in his case, 'death' is probably a worthwhile section in its own right. I don't have time to go into detail at the moment, but if you take a look at some other biographies to get an idea of the layout of typical articles, I'll make some suggestions on your talk page probably tomorrow. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 00:55, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Quiz

Can someone help me created List of Highest amount won on a game show Fanoflionking 21:07, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Fanoflionking and welcome to the TeaHouse. Before you can start writing the article, you will need to collect the sources of information. This is often the bulk of the work in putting an article together. Every article must be based on reliable, independent sources. In particular, other Wikipedia articles are not acceptable as sources - you would need to find where those articles took their information from. At the moment the only "reference" you have is to a Wikipedia article, so your next step is to start finding those references. Then the article will just be a summary of what those articles say.--Gronk Oz (talk) 03:09, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

What other websites on mobile are like wikipedia

What other websites are like Wikipedia because. I want to make a page but I don’t want anyone to see it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamerkillerz (talk • contribs)

What is the point of making a page that nobody can see? Ruslik_Zero 14:45, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Gamerkillerz Did you mean while you were working on it, or ever? Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 04:47, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I CSDed the pages in question and the reviewer decided to indef the user as a bonus. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 07:07, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

I need help in how to enroll at Training/teaching programme

I want to be a student of Wikipedia students training's program, please help me/direct me enroll in one of the curses — Preceding unsigned comment added by DENNIS GBONDA (talk • contribs) 06:11, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, DENNIS GBONDA. I am unclear by your question whether you are a student who is trying to find a specific course that your college or university has devised for its students in working with Wikipedia, or simply whether you want to learn more from some of our general tutorial or help pages. If you are looking for a college-run course, you might need to ask your course leader for the link to the page, or you could try to look for it at the dedicated website called Wiki Education. Once you have logged in you might be able to search for your college's course at https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/explore. You may also find some useful general tutorials aimed at student at https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/training/students, which are well-worth working through.

But, if all you seek is some general help in learning to use and edit Wikipedia, then do try our interactive tour called The Wikipedia Adventure, and then perhaps follow the links available at Help:Wikipedia. I have left you a 'welcome' message on your user talk page, full of lots of links to different aspects of Wikipedia. If you then have specific questions you'd like more support with, don't be afraid to come back and ask. I do hope this helps, and good luck at the start of your very own Wikipedia adventure! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

How put new file on Wikipedia?

How I can put file on Wikipedia which Wikipedia doesn't have?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Space2006 (talk • contribs)

Space2006 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please be more specific; I'm wondering if you mean "article" instead of file. 331dot (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

If you mean a media file, take a look at Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

@Space2006: Please could I gently prompt you to ensure that before saving and publishing your changes when you edit any article or change any image, that you include a brief edit summary to explain the type of change you are making. This helps other editors quickly see what type of content you're altering. You might find other edits get a bit cross if you never do this, as it's very helpful and good manners. (A useful tip is to go to your Preferences settings and tick the box labelled 'Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary'. Then you're unlikely ever to forget. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:42, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Is it ever possible to get a living female academic listed on wiki?

I'm new to the community and have twice tried to get female academics listed. Both are well known in their fields, yet both times I failed and the feedback is that they are not notable enough. However, when I've looked at male academics, it seems easier for them to get listed, even though they have fewer achievements and less notable.

Where am I going wrong? Or should I give up as wiki doesn't list female academics unless they are a dean? Any advice or tips would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teacher2019 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Teacher2019: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for trying to work in what is likely an underrepresented area of Wikipedia. If you haven't already, you should review the notability criteria for academics, written at WP:NACADEMIC. All such persons must meet at least one of those notability criteria, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Alison Hanlon's writing of her own biography is not an independent source(for example).

As Wikipedia reflects what independent sources write, it is possible that bias in academia is reflected in Wikipedia. However, Wikipedia has no control over what is written by reliable sources.

If you are aware of articles on other academics that do not meet the notability criteria, feel free to propose their deletion; as this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, sometimes for years. Also, I took the liberty of shortening your header, for better readability. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

I'd like to add that there is a project that aims to minimise the gender gap in Wikipedia representation, at WP:WPWIR.Might be worth checking it out. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 10:25, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Katrin Wehrheim is a female academic who is on Wikipedia.--Jasper Deng (talk) 10:26, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Teacher2019: You may be interested in an Australian effort. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board#Edit_a_thon_underway If you follow the links you will see quite a few women had articles written or improved. Please keep trying.... it can be done! Regards, Ariconte (talk) 10:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

As one example of where you're going wrong, you resubmitted Draft:Dr Alison Hanlon for review without including any references and without removing all the misplaced external links. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Ending Article Redirect

I am writing a Wikipedia article on the children's magazine Our Young Folks. Currently when you search for that magazine title you are redirected to St. Nicholas Magazine. When I publish the new article what do I need to do to stop the redirect? Will deleting the redirect notification at the top of the St. Nicholas Magazine article be sufficient, or are other steps needed?

Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karenthewriter (talk • contribs) 15:02, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: If you're absolutely sure what you do, the simplest way would be opening the redirect page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Our_Young_Folks&redirect=no for editing and putting a new article there. You should make sure, however, if the new contents is appropriate as a destination for those articles which link to the current redirect, and either leave them linking to your new article or replace the links in them to lead directly to St. Nicholas Magazine.

Otherwise you should rather publish your article in the Draft: space and submit it for a review before it gets moved to the main (article) space. There are also other options, so please wait for some other suggestions.

BTW, doesn't your article coincide with Young Folks (magazine)...? --CiaPan (talk) 15:41, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Karenthewriter. Simply changing the hatnote won't stop the redirect. Is the Our Young Folks magazine you are referring to the one which was absorbed by St. Nicholas Magazine? I assume it's not the one at Young Folks (magazine). Or is it completely different from either of those? Anyhow, if you want to make a separate article about the one absorbed by St. Nicholas Magazine or a completely different one, go to Our Young Folks, remove the code #REDIRECT[[St. Nicholas Magazine]], add your article instead, and click "Publish changes". Once you have a live article, change the hatnote on St. Nicholas Magazine using the code {{For|the magazine that was called ''Our Young Folks' Weekly Budget''|Young Folks (magazine)}}. CiaPan is also correct in stating that you need to ensure that all pages formerly linked to the redirect are appropriately linked to the new article. Hope that helps. Voceditenore (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Karenthewriter. I'm going to strongly echo what CiaPan said: unless you are very sure that you can get the article to an acceptable level on the first attempt, I would advise creating a draft anyway; and that will have the advantage that when you submit it for review and it gets accepted, the reviewing editor will sort out the redirect. --ColinFine (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, yes, Karenthewriter, get the article well into publishable quality with good references in your sandbox. But I don't see why you need to go through the AfC review process, unless you want to. They have a backlog and it may take up to 8 or 9 weeks to get reviewed. You have already created two articles on children's magazines Wide Awake (magazine) and Riverside Magazine For Young People, and they are fine, although it would be a good idea to add page numbers to the book references. PS. I'm an experienced AfC reviewer. Voceditenore (talk) 16:44, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, this is getting complicated. I've written other properly sourced articles on children's magazines, so I have no concerns about writing an adequate article on Our Young Folks -- which was not Young Folks (magazine). But I have never messed around with a Redirect. I'll finish the article off-line on my laptop, transfer it to my Sandbox and then I suppose I'll ask for a review. I want the most important classic children's magazines to have a Wikipedia article, and I don't want my efforts to get tangled up by an incorrect Redirect deletion. (Sorry, I'm writing this on my Kindle, so don't know how to sign this. Karenthewriter)

Question

How does bots on Wikipedia work? BigRed606 (talk) 27 July 7:43 2019 (UTC)

Hi BigRed606. There are lots of different bots, each set up to do different task. If you have a question about a specific bot, either find the bot's user talk page and ask it there or ask the bot's operator on his/her user talk page. If you just want some general information, try Wikipedia:Bots. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:12, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Help:Creating a bot#How does a Wikipedia bot work? may be of interest.​ Eman235/talk 17:01, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

How to add citations?

I'm quite new here. Please tell me how to add citations whenever needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominicfox (talk • contribs) 17:10, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Try Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:48, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Dominicfox. Although I and others always point to Help:Referencing for beginners, I actually think it's the worst help page we have here, as it's so long and off-putting for beginners. So here are some very basic instruction for inserting a new reference to an article that already has a section at its bottom headed "References":

• As an editor adding content, you will inevitably be using one of our two editing tools ("Source Editor" or "Visual Editor") to improve the article. Both of these editing options have an obvious tools menu at the top of the page, albeit in slightly different positions.
• When editing a page, just look for the button labelled "Cite".
• Then position your cursor at the end of the factual statement in the article that you want to add a new reference to. Simply click the "Cite" button to reveal a box (or to select a simple template) into which you can enter all the author, title, date, publisher, url details, etc., etc. of your reference.
• Each editing tool varies slightly in how it operates. In Source Editor (which you will have used for editing the Teahouse page) you do have to click "Cite" and then select a further Template button on the left hand side of the editing toolbar. This lets you choose the best template into which you paste your reference details, according to whether you're citing a journal, a book, a newspaper or a website. There's also a Preview button to let you see what your details will look like before you decide to click the "'Insert" button to add your reference into the page.

Alternatively, in the Visual Editor, if you click the 'Cite' button it starts by offering to let you paste a url or ISBN number and attempts to automatically look up the reference details for you. Neither work perfectly, so manually checking and tweaking to get the best reference is always advisable. But being aware that you can add reference details from within either editing tool is something that's not really made terribly obvious in the Help page referred to above.

You can also automatically look up citations in the "source editor" (though the function isn't so obvious). After you bring up one of the cite template windows, you'll see a button beside some fields (e.g. URL, ISBN), which is a good way to quickly fill out some of the fields. This means that you can put a value (like a URL copied from your browser) in the field, click the button, and it will look up and fill in some of the fields for you (sometimes after a delay of up to 20 seconds). Either way, you'll need to check and manually adjust any errors or omissions that occur.

Be aware that, whilst the content of your reference is actually inserted after the factual statement you added to an article, the full reference text appears automatically at the bottom of the page in a section marked "References". All that appears "inline" within the article is a small number in square brackets at the end of the relevant sentence. This corresponds with the number that appears in the References section. So please don't try to add your references into that section .. it won't work like that!

I hope this also helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello again Nick Moyes. Since you believe that it is the worst help page we have, I would recommend adding a user subpage (such as User:Nick Moyes/Referencing for beginners) explaining how you would explain referencing to a beginner. Interstellarity (talk) 19:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

I would also fix your ping to Dominicfox. Interstellarity (talk) 19:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: i) Working on it (albeit slowly) - see this. ii) Error fixed, but I had also left a Teahouse talkback notice for Dominicfox. Thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Is a satirical article okay?

I'd like to know because I'd rather not get in trouble for making an article based after a satirical thing. McKaylaCookie108 (talk) 19:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, so does not publish satire in mainspace. An article about satire would be fine if it reported what is published in WP:Reliable sources, but it must not itself be satirical. Some essays are satirical. Dbfirs 19:37, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@McKaylaCookie108: By 'essays', Dbfirs is referring to user-pages that editors have written which relate to Wikipedia in some way. (See Wikipedia:Essays) Most are serious attempts to offer personal opinions on relevant topics. Though none pretend to be formal policy or guidance, they can nevertheless be very helpful. But a few, however, are intended just for humour, and usually poke fun at how seriously some of us take ourselves, or the things we should/shouldn't do. WP:LIGHTBULB and WP:PLEASEBITE are shortcuts to two such examples. Please, please don't take the latter seriously. We do welcome new editors (especially here at the Teahouse), and I'm sorry your first contact with our rules was having your userpage deleted. I do hope this won't put you off contributing, and you are welcome to recreate it, but just keep to a few lines about yourself and your editing interests/aspirations without giving away any personal or promotional information. You can ask one of us to give it the 'once over' if you want to be really confident. We're always here to help, should you need us. BTW: If you've not heard of it, you might like to visit The Wikipedia Adventure for an interactive tour of the encyclopaedia, and pick up 15 badges along the way. Whoopeee-doo!! Best wishes from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:32, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@McKaylaCookie108: If I understand your query, you might be interested in contributing to Uncyclopedia. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 00:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

How to create a page only as a redirect to a § of another page

As example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Michael_Bennet redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bennet#Political_positions.

Thx, Humanengr (talk) 00:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Humanengr. It is possible to create a page that redirects to a section using the same markup as linking to a section; that is, using a hash (#) between the article title and section title. In the example you provided, note that the link in the redirect is Michael Bennet#Political positions; thus, it redirects to the section. Cheers, ComplexRational (talk) 00:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

thx, Humanengr (talk) 01:02, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

French to English Translation

Hello, my name is Pooja. I have a friend in France who is in charge of the Wikipedia page for the French artist Mathias Durand Reynaldo: https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Durand-Reynaldo. My friend speaks several languages fluently, including English. He has been able to add translations to the page in German and Russian, however he is restricted from adding an English translation. I am a native English speaker and fluent in French. I have a restriction also when I tried translating it to English. If you could help me out I would appreciate it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PoojaCucumber (talk • contribs)

Hello, PoojaCucumber. Welcome to our Teahouse. Before answering your question, there are a few essential things to point about. Firstly, (even on French Wikipedia) nobody "is in charge" of any article. We can all contribute, though some people do like to act as if they "own" certain articles, even when they don't. Secondly, each language Wikipedia has their own policies on Notability, which is the key criterion for accepting an article. From a quick "google translate" of the French article, I suspect this whacky artist-cum-politician might well have enough published articles about him to meet our general notability criteria, though I haven't actually checked. We need two or three in depth, reliable sources that are independent of the subject to have written about that person for us to accept that they meet our notability criteria. It should also be mentioned that writing a new article about anything is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia - especially so for a brand new editor like yourself. Familiarising yourself with simple editing could be a could precursor to attempting to translate an existing article. Because the person is still alive, it's essential that all key statements about them are supported with independant references, as described in this guidance page.

To actually answer your question: because your account is not yet auto-confirmed (i.e. at least 4 days old with more than 10 edits), you may not yet create new articles. But that does not stop you drafting one via Articles for Creation and then submitting it for review and to receive helpful feedback if it isn't quite up to scratch. This is your best route to take, anyway, I think. So do read Your First Article and use the link you'll find there to create a draft. If you are literally translating from French wikipedia to English wikipedia, you must credit the original article and its authors for that content you have created. You can read more on the process of doing this conversion and crediting those authors by reading Wikipedia:Translation. Of course, you could find the sources and create the article content yourself (i.e. write it in your own words) without needing to credit the Wikipedia editors who did the work over at fr-wiki. I may have missed a few tips, but I hope this gives you the basic answer you sought. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:13, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Sorry, if I did not respond in a correct manner. I am still familiarizing myself with the editing process for Wikipedia. I actually personally know this French artist. He has independent articles and websites posted on him outside of Wikipedia. He is listed on one of Miami's art museum website also for his exposition. I guess for a lack of better word, my friend was helping to translate his wiki page to Russian and German. I don't need a translation machine to translate the page from French to English. I speak French myself and can give an accurate translation of the French wiki page to English. Would it be possible I could make that contribution after 4 days? I appreciate the help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by PoojaCucumber (talk • contribs) 00:50, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@PoojaCucumber: You have no need to apologise for anything, though you did not quite manage to reply the way we normally do (I won't bore you with that right now). Because you would be writing about someone you personally know, you obviously have what we call a Conflict of Interest and it is really important that you declare this. Sorry to give you lots of things to read, but do please click that link to find out how best to declare your connection so that everything is open and clear. It is important ONLY to write about something or someone, based on published sources and NOT what you personally happen to know about them (birth date/early life/family connections/mole on left cheek, etc!). Whilst, YES, it is possible for you to make a translation once your account is auto-confirmed after 4 days and ten edits, I strongly urge you still to create a draft article first and submit it via Articles for Creation. It is better to have your first submission turned down than to have your first attempt at an article speedily deleted for failing to meet one or more of our quite complex guidelines or policies. The last thing we want to do is put off new editors, but trying to create a page from a standing start is liable to lead to you becoming very frustrated. If you think that there are nearly 6 million articles here, we do have to avoid content appearing on the main encyclopaedia which isn't yet up to standard. So, creating a draft via WP:AFC, or by using your sandbox to draw sources and information together is really very sensible. May I ask you to sign every talk page with four curly keyboard tilde characters (like this:~~~~) so that we know who has left each comment, please? I've replied to you here, rather than to the identical post you left on my talk page. I hope that's OK. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:09, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Guidance please on how to improve an article with broken links.

I wanted to see if I could get guidance as to how to go about improving an existing article with broken links, many of which are links to pdfs which apparently over time have been moved or removed from the source website. I haven't yet attempted to update existing references that have links that don't work. Can someone who knows how that should be done help me to understand how to do it - or - work with me to update these links? Thank you? LorriBrown (talk) 19:16, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:DEADREF. David Biddulph (talk) 19:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Hi LorriBrown, nice to hear from you again. Sometimes it's simply a case that the downloadable files on a website have been relocated; other times they've been removed completely. So, if visiting the original website and looking for a new, logical place for downloads to be has failed, the next best place then to look is the Wayback Machine at https://archive.org/web/ where you can type in the website url and look for an archived version. If you can match the 'access date' on Wikipedia with the closest archived version, you stand the best chance of finding it. I'm assuming you'll already have simply searched for the title of the relevant pdf on Google, or some other search engine. If you'd like to give an example or two of articles you'd like to fix, we can look at them together. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:00, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

David Biddulph Thank you I'll review that article.LorriBrown (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Nick Moyes Thank you for your reply. The article is Yorkton Film Festival I think all the links are dead. Seems when the article was created the website was a primary source and looks like things have moved around. For example the history of the festival was linked to YFF Reference no. 1:

I believe the content may be in this link to a pdf called Yorkton Film Festival Golden Sheaf Awards: 65 Years of Film (which contains 68 pages of history on YFF.

http://yorktonfilm.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/65YearsBook.pdf

I need some guidance as to how to update the information as best I can tell the article would need a whole new makeover. Maybe I am wrong in thinking that... I didn't want to delete old references but I don't think they are available even on Wayback Machine. I also found several iinks on the winners of the Golden Sheaf Awards in pdf format 2008 thru 2015. Additional information in a book called Canadian Film and Video: A bibliography and Guide to the Literature... Vol 1 - 7, U of Toronto Press in Google Books as well as The Canadian Encyclopedia link https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/film-festivals

I am sure there is additional information available upon research which is something I actually enjoy doing. :-)

Thanks, LorriBrown (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: I'm not sure if this will fully answer your question but, whilst it's never OK just to remove an old weblink because it appears to be no longer active (and I know you appreciate that), you're most welcome to replace that reference with any other (reliable source) that supports the same statement, even if from a completely different publisher. Thus, I would have replaced the deadlink used in reference #9 (about the 1977 children's prize) with this one: As you see, I've given it a refname of "65YRS"" and used the {{rp}} template to specify the page number within that pdf for that particular statement. You could then use the same reference to mention (from page 44) the list of films shown that subsequently won Oscars, like this:

All that being said, my gut feeling (from just a skim read) is that the article contains far, far too much trivial detail from that one primary source which probably ought to be pared down. If done, I think the article would be better for it. Indeed, I'm not really sure from the current sources how well it would fare at WP:AFD were someone to put it forward, so anything you can do to precis and improve the article, so much the better. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:41, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

References

@Nick Moyes: Hey thanks! That is exactly what I needed to know. I was thinking that it would be necessary to leave a legacy of the old dead link and didn't know how that could be done. I guess if the link is dead and there is no archived link that can be located then a replacement link is needed appropriate for the content. Also, I did not know how to specify the page number of where that information can be found. Happy, happy! :-) LorriBrown (talk) 01:30, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Pages

Dear veterans,

vishwakarma.gauravk/sandox is being deleted frequently. The content I am trying to put in is for the company I am working with and company is paying me for this service. I have removed the website link and the services it provides. Please let me know what content should I put so it may be approved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishwakarma.gauravk (talk • contribs) 04:38, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

You are in breach of Wikipedia's terms of service by failing to make on your user page the declaration of paid editing. When you've done that, read the messages on your user talk page, and particular that regarding conflict of interest. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Vishwakarma.gauravk. As an administrator, I could view your deleted sandbox page, and the content was overtly promotional. Wikipedia is not a place for advertising, promotion or public relations in any form. It simply is not allowed anywhere on this website. Since you admit to being a paid editor, you must immediately comply with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. This is mandatory. Edit in full compliance with our guideline for editors with a conflict of interest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:51, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Need help fixing minor issues on …

Category:Political positions of the 2020 United States presidential candidates

The alphabetizing is inconsistent — some are listed by first name, some by last. Should the 'Political positions of' at the start of each item be included or not?

Thx, Humanengr (talk) 01:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The inconsistency might have to do with the WP:DEFAULTSORT added to the end of each article. I think the articles are going to be organized on the category page based upon that. If there's no "Default sort" code added to the article, then it will be catagorized by the first letter of the title of the article. As for whether "Political positions of" is needed, it probably is there because that is the proper title of the article, and seems to be consistent to what is done when articles of this type are categorized; there might be a way to remove it, but then you'd just have people listed by their names which might be confusing from a Wikipedia categorization standpoint; for example, Political positions of Cory Booker would look like Cory Booker even though they are different articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:57, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Regardless of whether or not a "Default sort" is specified, an individual sort key for each categorisation can be specified, such as in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: — thx for that. I now have Tulsi Gabbard properly in the G's by using 'Category:Political positions of the 2020 United States presidential candidates|Gabbard'. Why is the 'Political positions of' not showing? Humanengr (talk) 04:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Very simply because the article in the category is Tulsi Gabbard. The redirect Political positions of Tulsi Gabbard isn't in the category. Perhaps you intended to add the categorisation to the redirect rather than to the article? But if you leave the categorisation on the article you didn't need a specific sort key; it is already covered by the default sort key. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:35, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

[Slowly catching on]. I see Bill de Blasio, John Hickenlooper, Julian Castro, Marianne Williamson, Steve Bullock (American politician), and Michael Bennet each only have 'candidate' pages not separate 'political position' pages. I see the 'Political positions of' category link on the Hickenlooper and Castro pages but not for those still not in alphabetical order — de Blasio, Bullock, Williamson, or Bennet. On the category page, all 6 start with 'Political position of', but are in italic. The other 6 — Amy Klobuchar, John Delaney, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Bernie Sanders -- are 'Political positions of' pages and listed on the category page in normal font. Humanengr (talk) 05:19, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The entries in italics are redirects; the ones in normal font are articles. I'm not sure there's any way around this. Whether a candidate has a separate article for their political positions is not really related to categorization; it's more of a matter of WP:SPLIT. There simply might not be enough content to justify a stand-alone article, at least not yet; so, the information has been included as a subsection in the main article about the candidate. If you want the category entry for "Political positions of Tulsi Gabbard" to be displayed as such, then adding the category to the redirect's page (like is done in the case of Political positions of John Hickenlooper). The reason some of the redirects are alphabatized and others are not has to do with the individual sort key (or lack thereof) provided for a category. [[Category:Political positions of the 2020 United States presidential candidates|Hickenlooper]] or [[Category:Political positions of the 2020 United States presidential candidates|Hickenlooper, John]] will add an entry to the "H" section of the category's page, but [[Category:Political positions of the 2020 United States presidential candidates]] will add an entry to the "P" section. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Thx much — will consider. Humanengr (talk) 05:59, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Close a move discussion I am involved in

I have participated in this move discussion. The discussion turned out exactly as non-contentious as expected, with only minor confusion about process and scope of such a no-deal article. Normally I would have boldly moved the article, but then there was a discussion, and now it needs to be closed and the article moved. I would like to do it, but according to this, it seems that I am not allowed to. Can this really be the case? I mean, plenty have supported the move, and no-one have opposed it? I don't see any reason whatsoever, why there should be a problem with me doing it, but then again, the policy is not really vague. Am I missing something? ― Heb the best (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Heb the best. I don't think you're anything since WP:RMCI seems quite clear that those involved in the discussion shouldn't close the discussion. If you really believe the discussion has gone as far as it's likely going to go, you can ask someone uninolved to close it at WP:AN/RFC. If you want to seek additional feedback, you can post something at WP:CD or even WT:EU and WT:POLUK; just make sure you don't run afoul of WP:CANVAS when doing so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:43, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, but the part I missed was that WP:RM/CI was recently changed without discussion. I have earlier read the old version. I will bring this up on that talk page. ― Heb the best (talk) 07:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Title gore

While doing Page Curation I found the following articles:

• Golden Reel Award for Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing - Sound Effects, Foley, Music, Dialogue and ADR for Non-Theatrical Feature Film Broadcast Media
• Costume Designers Guild Award for Best Costume Design – Contemporary TV Series
• Costume Designers Guild Award for Excellence in Sci-Fi/Fantasy Television
• Art Directors Guild Award for Excellence in Production Design for a Half Hour Single-Camera Television Series
• Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Stunt Coordination for a Drama Series, Limited Series, or Movie

Surely those aren't suitable titles for Wikipedia articles? What should I do when I find articles like this? --Slashme (talk) 09:07, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Is your objection simply that they are long? I can't see any particular issue with them - the articles refer to specific awards, and there is really only one way to accurately refer to an award: 'Name of awarding organisation' followed by 'full title of award'. This is inevitably going to create some pretty long titles, but, frankly, so what?

Do you have any suggestions for a better title for any of these pages? It might be in some cases there is a shorthand way to refer to something and you could use this as a redirect, for example (and only an example, I'm not saying this is a good idea) you might redirect 'Stunt Emmy' to 'Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Stunt Coordination for a Drama Series, Limited Series, or Movie' but the latter, long title, should still remain the name of the page. Hug^syrup 09:15, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

OK, you have a good point. I guess these extremely long and specific titles were just so unfamiliar that I got a vague feeling of unease without a good reason. --Slashme (talk) 09:45, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@Slashme: You may have an argument under WP:COMMONNAME if you can demonstrate that the world at large (i.e. reports within the majority of reliable sources) tend to user shorter forms of wording to refer to these particular awards. I haven't checked if that's the case here, but you might wish to. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:12, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

About page publishing

I have created a page and it was in my sandbox. How to get it published worldwide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sivarajan29 (talk • contribs)

@Sivarajan29: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. In looking at your draft, it is a long way from being suitable as a Wikipedia article. Successfully writing a new article is probably the hardest task on Wikipedia, so don't be discouraged. If you haven't already, you may want to read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to help you learn more about Wikipedia and what is being looked for in new articles. You may also want to use Articles for Creation to submit your draft for an independent review before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia, where you can get feedback on it before that, instead of afterwards when it will be treated more critically.

I can tell you that your draft does not have independent reliable sources with significant coverage of that company that show how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company, written at WP:ORG. Not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. Press releases or routine business announcements(such as the release of a film) do not establish notability. Sources must be independent of the subject and have chosen on their own to give significant coverage to the company itself on their own. 331dot (talk) 11:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

HELLO

How do you upload stuff to Wikipedia. ThePacificMan (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@ThePacificMan: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. That depends on what you want to upload. Do you mean an image, or article text? 331dot (talk) 11:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Both! ThePacificMan (talk) 11:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@ThePacificMan: Instructions on uploading images can be found at WP:UPIMAGE. You will need to be sure that either you own the rights to the image, that the rights permit others to upload it(fair use), or you have permission from the owner of the image. Please review that page carefully.

Successfully writing new articles is probably the hardest task on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. New users are much more successful at it when they first build up experience by editing existing articles in areas that interest them, starting with minor edits like typo fixes and working their way up to more substantive edits and finally article creation. New users that dive right in to article creation often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings as their work that they spent hours on is mercilessly edited and even deleted by others. I don't want that to happen to you, so I would recommend editing existing articles first. However, if you still want to attempt to write a new article, you should read Your First Article and use Articles for Creation to submit a draft for an independent review before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok thanks. ThePacificMan (talk) 11:52, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Correct article name?

Doing cite maintenance I edited this page: "Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy". The first sentence reads, "In this Indian name, the name Ponnusamy is a patronymic, not a family name, and the person should be referred to by the given name, Waytha Moorthy." Shouldn't this page be titled simply "Waytha Moorthy"? -- User-duck (talk) 13:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Possibly - based on MOS:PATRONYMIC it seems like you might be right, however the best place to discuss this and gather consensus for such a move is the article talk page. You could also post to Wikipedia:WikiProject India for more specialist input, as there may well be factors I, and others here at the Teahouse, are not aware of. Hug^syrup 13:48, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

No. The explanation is clarifying how the subject would be referred to in the article. In general we use surname rather than given names, but the note explains that Ponnusamy is not a surname in that context. See Template:Indian name for the explanation. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:02, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

As usual I am now more confused now then before. I had assumed a "patronymic" was like a "honorific". I was obviously wrong. MOS:PATRONYMIC states, "Most of the examples throughout this section illustrate usage in the title sentence, …". I have no idea what the "title sentence" is. Based upon 2.8 Country-specific usage should it be "Waytha Ponnusamy"? (I assume "personal" is the same as "given".)

I finally found the missing clue: "... that is, the given name of his or her father." in Template:Indian name. I did not comprehend that "Waytha Moorthy" is his given name (which is clearly stated in the hatnote). The page title is correct by my new understanding.

Thank you for the quick responses! --User-duck (talk) 14:37, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

update hydro one page

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

hydro one ripped off the public to the tune of 100 million dollars. all the info is online by googling "hydro one class action lawsuit". maybe the wiki page could reflect this? I paid 1000$/month for over half a year and will never see compensation. I use wikipedia to find the truth all the time, I love it, and It would be nice if the truth about this subject was also be on wikipedia.

Sorry to hear about what happened to you. However, it's important that Wikipedia articles remain balanced and factual, and not influenced by personal feelings. It is also not the place to right great wrongs. If you think that you have reliable sources for some information that is missing from the page, then you could bring this up on the article talk page and see if another editor who does not have the conflict of interest that you have would be willing to add them to the page. Hug^syrup 15:08, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Spiceheads

I am trying to write about a very populour website, facebook and twitter page, (Spiceheads)that has newspaper stories and connections to it. I have written it, but cannot connect the citations properly. I have read several things telling me how to, but I am dislexic and have learning difficulties through illness and disabilitys, please can somone help me? Howard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylor4567 (talk • contribs) 11:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

I hope your learning difficulties through illness and disabilitys do not prevent you from reading your Talk page. There are some very important messages for you there.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:16, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

help with award thingy

So, I tried to put in something to show my progress to a award BUT, it is displaying the wrong award. I am actully a Signator. Here is the problem code ] Polar Vader (talk) 16:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC) and its showing it here did i put in something incorrectly???

Hello Polar Vader, I think you put it backwards. Exchange the things on either side of the = sign. For example: change "41=edits" to "edits=41". When you copy a code, of course, it gives the same things anywhere you put. That code doesn't know a difference between a userpage and any other page. Cheers! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 17:28, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

You seem to be attempting to evade a block by using this account. I recommend you get back to that account and request an unblock instead. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 17:28, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Publishing page

I have made a page "Prashant Kumar BJP" on Wikipedia. I want to publish it for public. People can search on Wikipedia with the help of Google.

Please guide me.

Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashant Kumar BJP (talk • contribs) 17:15, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Prashant Kumar BJP, please see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. You need to show a subject is notable by using reliable sources to verify all the claims you make in the article, in order to qualify it for publication. Social media (facebook, twitter, etc.) or any other websites/blogs that you create yourself do not count. It's better that you not create your autobiography, and please make necessary declarations of all conflicts of interest that you have before you resume editing Wikipedia. (Please click on all the blue words and read the pages that open, to understand matters fully) Cheers! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 17:48, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@Prashant Kumar BJP: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You seem to have a fundamental and common misconception about what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia has no interest in enhancing your internet presence or aiding search results. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources say about you, and has no interest in what people want to say about themselves. Please read WP:AUTO, our policy on autobiographies. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use actual social media. 331dot (talk) 17:50, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

WiKi Orlando Symphony Orchestra Corrected Entry Rolled Back

Greetings! I'm new to Wiki. So, "Hi!"

A Little about me... Being the newly appointed webmaster for the Orlando Symphony Orchestra, I am also responsible for handling its Wiki entry.

Did I mention I was new and learning? The depth of the information on WIKI is great. Which is one of the things that makes Wikipedia great! Unfortunately maybe for me, the learning curve is also great as is the language that I need to get accustom too ...and not all information is easily found e.g. where is TWINKIE on the Gadget tab? And how does one respond to an individual that leaves a TALK message?

As a newbie, I thought the community was going to be nicer and be helpful. I am learning this program by the "seat of my pants" and I am not on the computer all the time. So, it may take me a little time to respond to an individual on TALK once I figure out how to. So I don't understand why I got "bitch slapped" in Talk by two by WIKI members and had the work rolled back being accused of copyright infringement.

All the information (content and logo)that was posted was given to me by David Handel, the music director of the Orlando Symphony Orchestra, to replace the incorrect and incomplete one that was originally there. When asked who and where the source originated from I responded with either David Handel or the Orlando Symphony Orchestra. How do I stop this from continuing to happen?

Thank you for the all help and listening! Winifred — Preceding unsigned comment added by TreeofAvalon (talk • contribs)

You were not "bitch slapped" (rude term!). You copied copyrighted content into Wikipedia. This is contrary to a cardinal rule of Wikipedia. The first thing you need to do is to make the mandatory declaration of paid editing on your User page, then you need to read about conflict of interest. Content David Handel gives you is not considered a reliable source. See WP:RS. David notMD (talk) 16:49, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@TreeofAvalon: Sorry your experience hasn't been a good one so far. To learn how to edit Wikipedia, you should try a few tools for beginners: Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Tutorial and Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure.

Unfortunately there are some fairly strict rules about content on Wikipedia, copyright being one of them. The content you added appears to have been copied entirely from the website https://www.orlandoatplay.com/organization/orlando-symphony-orchestra/, where there is a copyright notice. For policy and legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted material unless it has been released by the verified copyright holder. This is explained at WP:Donating copyrighted materials.

Material in articles needs to be sourced from reliable sources that are independent of the article's subject. Unpublished personal knowledge (referred to here as original research) cannot be used, nor can organization-authored materials such as press releases, social media and other self-published sources. Primary sources like an organization's website can be used to verify basic facts and figures, but not interpretations of them.

An organization has no right of ownership or control over the content of an article about it. Disagreements should be calmly and civilly discussed on the article's talk page, where a process of discussion and compromise will result in consensus. If that fails to resolve the disagreements, the dispute resoution process provides other means to resolve it. Editors must always assume good faith and trust that those who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it.

Finally, please carefully review Wikipedia's policy on paid editing disclosure and conflicts of interest. You will need to make a proper disclosure of your employment. We discourage editors with a conflict of interest from editing affected articles directly; instead, we prefer that they post suggested changes to the article talk page for uninvolved editors to review. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:11, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

First off I apologize if what I said was rude. "Slammed" may have been a better term but after spending hours trying to get that little bit done, it was disheartening. It felt like I was in trouble for walking down the wrong side of a street of the new town I stepped in and not knowing why. Mea Culpa!

Thank you for the time and effort providing the information shared via both the Teahouse and Talk. ...and will look into the information links provided. The Wikipedia work for OSO was volunteer when it was originally corrected by me. So it was doubly disheartening when it was removed. Agian thanks for your help and have great day!TreeofAvalon (talk) 17:43, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Under unintended consequences, the article has now been reduced to a stub, with no references. Critical for you is to find at least three references and properly incorporate into the article. Content based on those references can be added at same time. David notMD (talk) 18:11, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Follow-up: How can an independent source know about me?

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.

---

||ॐ||

User:Bonadea:"Please address comments to individual editors at their talk page, in this case" why? Going by which wikipedia guideline? I guess you are caught lying and are trying save your face by collapsing the content. Shame on you if that was the reason. ॐ Tat Sat (talk) 15:58, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Kindly refer [1] for earlier discussion.
user:bonadea:

1. "On the other hand, everybody is inherently biased" how did you know about everyone? Are you GOD to know whether everyone's experiences are objective or subjective? ॐ Tat Sat (talk) 03:30, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

user:bonadea don't delete it. I might need to raise a complaint otherwise. I have not attacked, but I have questioned to you sincerely. ॐ Tat Sat (talk) 04:49, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

• Do you intend to contribute to Wikipedia in any way other than repeatedly asking this question? GMG^talk 16:12, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

1. I will repeatedly ask this question until a valid solution is found. Are you afraid of analysis paralysis? Do you want to lead a biased life? If not, you must address this issue and help me address this issue. ॐ Tat Sat (talk) 04:14, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
2. If there is a valid solution, come up with it. Else, let all the Wikipedians find one. Unless you purposely want a bias around, I don't see a good reason why you wouldn't join me. ॐ Tat Sat (talk) 04:18, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

|}

Deleting Citations

How do I delete or remove citations from a draft? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AuntJosephine (talk • contribs) 20:26, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello AuntJosephine. With the page in Edit mode, find the citation and remove it. See WP:In-line citations for the details.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

How to create a new page when it is already redirected to an article that contains that person's name

A person mentioned in an existing article deserves a new Wiki page, however, that page is currently being redirected to the main article. What is the process to create the new page and remove the redirecting? Thank you. --UberVegan🌾 22:53, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, UberVegan. Please read Wikipedia: Redirect#How to edit a redirect or convert it into an article which should give you the information you need. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:05, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Cullen! --UberVegan🌾 23:22, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Minecraft Monday Noteability

I just finished watching a Minecraft Monday stream and I was wondering if that was notable enough to make an article since Minecraft Monday has gotten millions of views across many platforms.

Welcome to the Teahouse, AndrewDuska. That depends entirely on whether or not Minecraft Monday has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Please read Your first article for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:28, 29 July 2019 (UTC)