Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

→

Help With Image?

I'm working on improving this page, Aileen Fisher. Someone put up the photo that's there, and when I thanked them and asked if they'd cleared the copywrite issue, they were vague. How can I tell if it's OK or not? (I'm assuming given it's age it needs to be cleared up or listed as fair use and I don't know where to look for that.)

Also, I found this pic of her as a child, which would be before the copywrite laws apply, but I have no way to trim out her brother, as I have no photo editing software or savvy. Is it asking too much for someone to do it for me, or send me someplace that will walk me through it clearly? I have no clue how to work with photos on the computer. Thanks so much! Tlqk56 (talk) 19:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tlqk56! Had to remove that, couldn't make it work. Do you want to add it back but put square brackets around it this time? like this, [picture url] I'm sure someone can answer your question, regardless :) heather walls (talk) 19:18, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, again. If you click on the pic in the Infobox, it'll take you to the complete history of the image which shows details of justification for fair use and such. I didn't intend to be vague. As far as cropping out her image, I recommend the GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program) that's available as a free download from http://http://www.gimp.org/. It's extraordinarily powerful. Go to http://http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/GIMP to learn how to use it. Or send a link to the image to me and I'll take on the job. DocTree (talk) 20:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Here is the image Tlqk56 originally linked [1] Why do you want to crop out her brother? Seems like it would be perfectly nice with them both. :) I am curious now about PD and photos, if they are published in a recent book are they still public domain just because they are old enough? heather walls (talk) 21:08, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Doc Tree, Thanks for the answer-- I didn't really mean to imply you were vague, only that I was lost. It's not your fault I don't know what I'm doing at all. :) Thanks for the explanation.

Heather walls, Sorry, didn't realize the link needed the brackets. Thanks for letting me know. I wanted to crop him out if I needed to use it for the main photo, but since the one that's there is OK, I guess he could stay and it could go somewhere else. It is cute with both of them, isn't it? And the article briefly mentions him. Since Doc Tree is being so nice, I think I'll let him deal with it. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlqk56 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Heather is correct. The copyright clock doesn't start ticking until after a photo is published. Previously unpublished photos first published between 1978 and 2002 are copyrighted until at least the end of 2047. Because the photo is already out on genealogy web sites and the book [2] is out of print and unlikely to be reprinted for sale, a downsized image probably meets the fair use criteria. DocTree (talk) 23:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

multiple issues

Hej to the makers of teahouse. Thanks for inviting me. I wrote my first article about Nigel_Wright_(musician) and I have been asked to improve it. I put in a citations for verification and more references. What will happen next ? Do i have to wait ? Please help! Jaanus Parker (talk) 21:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Wait. For now, just edit it to remove the 'red links'. A new page patroller marked your article as patrolled. You did improve it but at 19 years old, Nigel ain't no Huddie Ledbetter. His notability is borderline but, in my opinion and within the niche of those interested in American folk singers, he meets (barely) the standard. You're obviously a fan but the article isn't a 'fan site' type of article. Watch your article, its talk page and search engines to add to and improve it over time. Add a couple more truly reliable sources and you can remove the notices at the top of the article. Pretty good for a first article, by the way. Take care, DocTree (talk) 01:06, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Hej Doctree. Thanks for writing back. Yes i'm a fan based in Germany. And yes he is no Lead Belly and he is 18 years old (:. He reased my attention, because almost every blog in Germany was writing about the "Wunderkind" form the Blue Ridge Mountains and he is rotating on MTV and Viva. This was my reason to translate from Germany and doing my first Wiki article. Personal i liked the approach to open folk a lot (hope once there is more discussion about this, to make an entry about it) and the unexpected and positiv reaction he is given in the news in Germany. Thanks for pointing out the 'red links' i didn't saw them. I will look out for more eng. articles and reverence more in time. Thanks Doctree for your kind words. Take care, Jaanus Parker (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Where did Twinkle go?

Click [show] to unhide content >>>

Hi everyone. I just noticed that the Twinkle tab disappeared from "toolbar." I turned off and back on Twinkle and again, no luck. Thoughts? Sarah (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The mediawiki software got updated today: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#1.20wmf1_deployment_complete. It should work, but it doesn't for me either, and a load of other editors. Rcsprinter (natter) 19:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Uh oh. *insert dooming music here* Sarah (talk) 19:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Ode to Joy - Twinkle's back. NtheP (talk) 20:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Huzzah! Thanks to you both! Sarah (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

A tough one?

This one might get a bit complicated (at least for this noob)... Relating to a subject where who said what, and when, is important: there is an Audiobook on cassette which predates the (hardcopy) book 1st edition. I can't find any reference stating that they are verbatim; but they are cataloged with the same ISBN. Without having an actual copy of the cassette (or means of hearing it), would it be improper to reference the Audiobook's "publish" date? ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 18:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC) (Re: The Night Lives On at WorldCat) ~E 18:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC) Forgot to sign? 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)(...and is it okay to replace those annoying "unsigned comment" Bot signatures with "~~~~~" ~E 18:48, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

This is hardly my area of expertise, but I would think that it would be preferable to cite the publication date of the edition of the book that you are using, rather than the audiobook. Another teahouse regular might have a better idea than I do, but if you're additionally curious you might want to check in at WP:RSN. Sorry for the lack of a perfect answer, but this is a bit more out of my range than most questions here get :) Kevin Gorman (talk) 00:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Like Kevin says, I don't think that there will be a perfect answer for this. If I were you, I'd simply use that which is easier to see, but very clearly lay out what's going on at the talk page so that generations after can understand what happened. Hopefully that will keep problems to a minimum, and remind you later so you don't forget. How on earth do you run across these problems? I've been here for years and never come across the fascinating conundrums you hit so regularly. :P Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 03:07, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

You should see the one I've researched regarding "Davy" Crocket / Alexander Graham Bell / and the word "hello" <-- no, I'm not kidding. ~E184.76.225.106 (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleting articles

I found an article called Lyndon Lawless which is about a high school music teacher. I don't think the subject is significant enough for an encyclopedia article and I'm wondering how I can propose it for deletion? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Downwoody (talk • contribs) 15:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! To nominate it for deletion, visit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, scroll down to "Past and current articles-for-deletion discussions (AfDs)" and click "Add a new entry". Does this help? ReelAngelGirl Talk to me! Tea? 15:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

When you make a nomination, make sure you explain why the subject isn't notable. Point out appropriate Wikipedia policies, such as WP:BIO, and watch the debate take shape. It's actually rather interesting sometimes, depending on the particular subject. Some controversial and newsworthy people have been the subjects of articles that wound up being deleted, or at least merged into other related topics, after rather lively discussions. --McDoob AU 93 16:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Tarot Island?

Hi, I love pressing the button (I mean clicking on the link) on the GOCE page that gives me a random page to edit. Where will I end up? The suspense is wonderful (if short lived)! I went via the link to "Tarot island" in Saudi Arabia but as I got going, I had the sinking feeling "Tarot island" is the same as "Tarut Island" with its own page and the same as "Tarout island" (the name on google map). How do I find someone who knows about this and if all are the same island, how do I suggest a merge of pages? Cheers and thanks, Myrtle. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 07:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Myrtle -- could you please link all of those articles so we can follow your train of thought? Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 07:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Of course - should have done that first time. Thanks Softlavender.Myrtlegroggins (talk) 08:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this up, Myrtle. The articles do both refer to the same place. I've nominated the new one for deletion (which can include merging). If you'd like to add your opinion to the discussion, the link is: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tarot island. Softlavender (talk) 09:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Note: I've moved the original article to match the spelling of the citation and of the Google map, so that it's now at Tarout Island. Even so, there's the issue that the new article Tarot island needs to be deleted (or merged). Softlavender (talk) 09:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll go back and start a copy edit so that it might be considered for merging. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myrtlegroggins (talk • contribs) 09:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

It's a GoogleTranslate version of the Arabic Wikipedia article: [3]. No point in attempting a copyedit because it's so incomprehensible that there's no possible way of accurately knowing what the original said or meant, and no possible way to source any of it. Softlavender (talk) 03:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

about wikimania?

How is wikimania in your opinion, what it's like? do you recremend normal users to go there? and have you been there before? Dominicskywalker (talk) 01:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dominicskywalker! Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm glad you're interested in maybe attending Wikimania. I went to my first Wikimania last year, and for me, it was formative in shaping my Wikipedia experience. I was able to not only learn more about what Wikipedians, and people interested in "wiki" stuff in general (people who write on other wikis, like WikiHow, come, as do lots of people into anything free culture, and of course curious people who just want to see what Wikipedians look like ;) ) are doing around the world, but, also share my own projects. I got to meet people that I have been collaborating with online for years (or days!) in person, and brainstorm great ideas and make new friends, too. It was also the first time I got to also meet a lot of women who write Wikipedia, which was very empowering. Honestly - the Teahouse might not exist if I wouldn't have attended Wikimania last year, as a project that I started working on, after I attended a luncheon with women Wikipedians, was inspired by my experience. So yes, for me, Wikimania was epic and awesome and I can't wait for this years event in Washington! I hope you'll come! Sarah (talk) 02:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

p.s. Wikipedians know how to party^{[citation needed]}, that's for sure! Sarah (talk) 02:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I Can't wait to see you there! I will try to go and you and other wiki users! Dominicskywalker (talk) 23:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)dominicskywalker

Questions with Wikimania registration

Hi all! I posted my questions about the Wikimania registration on Aude's talk page, but it seems she got very busy and has not responded to my question. To avoid repeating my question here, you can see it at Wikimania question section on her page. Thanks for any response! --TheBlueWizard (talk) 03:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Good question TBW! I'll ping some folk on the Wikimania team and see what they say. Sarah (talk) 03:55, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Alessandra Kersevan

Hi everyone, Boy, do I need a cup of tea! (and maybe a little lie down). I copy-edited Alessandra Kersevan using only the content which was there. It was tricky because it seemed to have been translated from another language. I thought I had added neutral language and tidied it in a reasonable way. Then, a user who has had issues on the talk page about the content, reverted to an un-copy-edited form and removed some paragraphs. I am feeling a weeny bit miffed. Should I forget about it and move on? (I have no interest in the subject whatsoever). Should I request an arbitration somewhere? Any advice gratefully received, Myrtle.Myrtlegroggins (talk) 22:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Myrtle, and welcome to the Teahouse! Whether you want to pursue this or not is pretty much up to you. If you do want to pursue it, the next step would be to discuss it with the conflicting editor at the talk page. Since talk pages aren't always frequented often, you might want to drop the editor a line on their talk page if they don't seem to be responding. If, after you've discussed it, you still can't come to an agreement, then you can try dispute resolution; the first step there would probably be either the dispute reolution noticeboard or the third opinion noticeboard (which is a place I do some work at).

Don't take it personally, though! Edits and reversions happen all the time here; we call it the bold, revert, discuss cycle (usually abbreviated as BRD). Basically, the way it usually works is that someone will make a bold change; another editor, disagreeing with the change, will revert it, and the two editors will then go to the talk page to discuss things. So changes, edits, and reversion are all natural parts of the process; don't take it as a reflection on you or your edits personally! It's all just trying to make the encyclopedia better. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Writ Keeper for speedy sage advice. I will let some time go by to think about it. Feeling better now, Myrtle Myrtlegroggins (talk) 22:49, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Template usage

Hi, how can I check if a certain template (Template:2TeamBracket-Tennis3) is used anywhere in the article namespace? Thx. --Wolbo (talk) 21:32, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Go to the template page and click on "What links here" in the toolbox links on the left, it'll bring you up a list of the articles the template is used in. NtheP (talk) 21:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)\

Thx! That was surprisingly easy. Registered here about 5 years ago and never saw that link. ;) --Wolbo (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Images, what's the difference?

To add the image of an author I pasted Elizabeth_Enright,_children's_author,_photo.jpg. but to add an image of one of her books I had to add [[File: ]] to get it to work. What's the difference, and how can I tell without all the trial and error which one I should use? Thanks.Tlqk56 (talk) 18:32, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Tlqk56! Welcome to the Teahouse! Alright, well I have some experience with photos so I'll try my best to explain. Sometimes inserting a picture is easy as just putting the name, and other times it requires something like [[File:Elizabeth_Enright,_children's_author,_photo.jpg]]. You can insert just the Elizabeth_Enright,_children's_author,_photo.jpg into userboxes that have the option to put a picture so I'm guessing it would look something like |image: Elizabeth_Enright,_children's_author,_photo.jpg. That's the best I got, if you need further help then please feel free to ask other Hosts! --Abigail was here :D _{Talk to Me.} _{Email Me.} 18:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Let me just add a tiny bit to that; the Enright photo is inside of a template (like a userbox), which means that the template takes care of some of the issues of formatting. Templates are intended to be really simplified ways of entering data so that it visually matches what happens on other pages (as well as it can). When you just place an image on the page by itself, you need to add the wikimarkup of brackets [[ ]] and include "where it comes from" (what namespace) in this case, "File". heather walls (talk) 19:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

OK. That helps clear that up. Thanks again, both of you. Tlqk56 (talk) 19:23, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Making Sections that don't show up in TOC?

If you go to this page Aileen Fisher you will see that in the TOC the Selected works section has 7 more divisions listed under it. I want to keep the sections in the article as they are now, but don't want all those sub-sections to be listed in the TOC. I'm pretty sure I read someplace how to do that, but now I can't find the instructions again. Thanks. Tlqk56 (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tlqk! Welcome back :) Perhaps you're referring to this:

Making a section that doesn't show up in the TOC

To do what I just did there, all you do is place a semicolon before the words like this: ;New section

Do let me now if that helps! Sarah (talk) 16:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Sarah, that's what I was looking for. Thanks for the info and the page, for some reason I couldn't find it anywhere. I'll save it in my growing file of pages to refer back to. :) Tlqk56 (talk) 17:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Image licenses for a particular type of images

I wonder what licensing information should be added or used for the images which are taken from sources like GettyImages, or any press like Times of India,NY times, Press Trust of India and all ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivek Rai (talk • contribs) 07:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

None of images from the news organisations are free images so using them would only be permitted in very limited circumstances - the Non-free content criteria. I would steer very clear of gettyimages as they do allow commercial and non-commercial reuse but only for fees and therefore they aren't available to us at all. NtheP (talk) 16:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for posting the clarification. As for the Indian Publishers, I'll personally try to contact them over this issue. If they give the permission, then it would be fine to use them over here, wouldn't it be? Vivek Rai (talk) 05:37, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vivek! Absolutely, however, you'd have to get written permission from them stating that they release the images Creative Commons Share Alike and then you have to email that permission to our volunteer team. Take a look here for further details: how to ask for permission. There you can find an example letter you can send to them, and the email where you need to send it once they give you permission. I hope this helps :) Sarah (talk) 05:41, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Certainly it helps. Thanks! Vivek Rai (talk) 05:45, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

New article declined

My article was recently declined as need to have footnotes. Actually I have been using footnotes throughout the article for reference/citation. Would really need help to find out how to improve it. Thank you so much! Clientwiki (talk) 07:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Clientwiki, welcome to the Teahouse. I've looked at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ernest So and you have started to use the <ref> </ref> syntax you;re not quite using it in the same way. What you appear to have done is insert a reference marker (the <ref> </ref>) at th correct point but then have not gone on to fully define the reference at that point. As an example if the section on charitable work

Ernest So is involved with the Au Kim Hung Love & Care Association<ref name= Charity>Charity Event</ref>
== References ==

{{reflist}}
<ref name= Charity>http://www2.akhlovecare.org.hk/?p=182</ref>[http://www2.akhlovecare.org.hk/?p=182'Charity Event']

this can be rewritten as

Ernest So is involved with the Au Kim Hung Love & Care Association<ref name= Charity>[http://www2.akhlovecare.org.hk/?p=182 Charity Event]</ref>
== References ==

{{reflist}}

which produces

Ernest So is involved with the Au Kim Hung Love & Care Association^[1]
References

^ Charity Event

In essence, put all the information about the reference in between the <ref> </ref> tags and the software will take care of converting it for you. You only need to use {{reflist}} once and all the references will be listed at that point. You can find more guidance at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners.

Looking at the article you have reproduced the entire text at least 5 times. I think you might have doen this in response to each article review. You don't have to produce a new version for comparison every time you submit the article, just keep one set and revise that e.g by inserting all your references into it, what each revision contains can be picked up from the article history. I would agree with the last review and not include the repertoire section and there are quite a lot of statements that need to be verified, for example - most of his educational details and statements like "So is a keen student and practitioner of the sartorial arts, wearing only bespoke clothes and choosing all of the fabrics, and even buttons, himself from the source producers".

Hope this helps and feel free to ask here or at my talk page if you need a bit more explanation. NtheP (talk) 08:16, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nthep, thank you so much for your response. I doubt if you were looking at the previous version of my article. In the latest version, I have already shorten the content & taken out repertoire section, also using the correct format <ref> <ref/> & references {{reflist}}. Do you mind checking again the latest version which I have slightly updated today? Thank you so much! Clintwiki

Hi again, the version in your sandbox is looking a lot improved, I've done a little bit of tidying to insert section headings. I see for one reference you have used {{cite news}} which is great though you might need to spell out what HKEJ is for those of us not familiar with Hong Kong newspapers. There is a similar template called {{cite web}} which does the same for web pages - if you used this template the refernces would not only look better but be less susceptable to Link rot. I'll have a fuller look later on and leave you any more feedback at your talk page. NtheP (talk) 09:58, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Finding older discussion

Hi folks, I'm back and wanting to refer back to answers I got about "my own words ...," but it's no longer on this page and using the archives index didn't seem to help. (What I need is where to send an appeal on an article declined because I'd already published it on AskART.) HarZim (talk) 16:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi HarZim! It is in the most recent archive list here. You can check for titles in the table of contents of each archive. You can look at those after you press show over on the archives box. heather walls (talk) 16:39, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Heather. I'm still confused, because I couldn't find any clear instructions on WP:OTRS or elsewhere about where to send documentation to get my "blanked" article released. Should I write to the guy who did it? I received the following today from AskART:

Dear Ms. Harlow,
Thank you for submitting a wonderful article on Anne Bremer to AskART. We very much appreciate it. I am not sure why "Wikipedia" editors are giving you a hard time, as our site terms (under heading of "Use of Information" http://www.askart.com/AskART/help/AskART_terms2.aspx) clearly state that you are giving us ", nonexclusive right" to use your article. This means that you can post the same article on Wikipedia. Here's the full paragraph from our site terms: " By uploading material to any forum or by submitting any comments, recommendations or data ("information") to us, you automatically grant (or represent and warrant to us that the owner of such rights has expressly granted) to us a perpetual, royalty-free, irrevocable, nonexclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, sublicense, translate, create derivative works of and distribute such information worldwide and/or incorporate such information into any form, medium, or technology now known or later developed. In addition, you represent and warrant to us that all so-called moral rights in the information have been waived."
I hope this addresses Wikipidia's editors' concern. Best regards, Tea Gebbie COO
AskART.com

(Cool, I just figured out how to put that in a Quotation box!) Now . . . will this turn up as a new question at the Teahouse? Anyone else who reads this want to suggest what I should do next? Thanks all, Ann Harlow, aka HarZim (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I think theoretically the next step would be to have askart email OTRS, but that just seems unnecessarily bureaucratic. Your explanation of why the material you submitted on AfC appears on askART also is good enough for me. I'll un-reject your AfC in a minute, and move the article live. Thanks for being so persistent with this - and thanks for contributing a solid article about a notable painter to Wikipedia :) Kevin Gorman (talk) 18:41, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

New Article

Is there anyone that reviews articles for us or can... before we wait in line to get approved? I would hate to wait all that time just to get kicked out again? :) Jenray1980 (talk) 14:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Jenray, welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse! A few things: first, to answer your question: there's not really a place like that; Articles for Creation (which is what you've submitted your article to) is the first port of call. You can always ask us, though, or try the AfC help desk.

Next: I took a look at your AfC submission. It looks like you copied and pasted the article from a different wikipage, since it has lost all its formatting. May I ask where you copied it from? For future reference, if you want to copy something from one place in Wikipedia to another, you should click on the edit tab (or view source tab, depending on the page) and copy the text in the editing box; this will preserve the wikilinks and formatting.

The other thing is it looks like you have multiple accounts: User:Jenray1980 and User:Jennyray1980. You should know that the rule on Wikipedia is generally "one person, one account"; editing using multiple accounts as if they were run by different people is known as sockpuppetry, and is generally frowned on. Don't worry about it, though! You haven't done anything wrong with your multiple accounts, and I'm sure you just didn't know about the rule. Just, keep it in mind for the future, and try to stick with just one account going forward. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:45, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I didn't copy it from somewhere, I typed it in that way... I did a search and there is nothing in retlation to the article I sumbitted... this whole process is pretty frusteating to say the lest:( i didnt know about the two accounts and honestly i didnt remember is i had done one before... how do I add the write formating? Jenray1980 (talk) 16:56, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

The extra account is not a problem if you do not use it in a manipulative manner. It is permitted to use alternate accounts for differing purposes anyway. A good way to learn formatting is to look at similar articles and open the edit window to see the formatting. Cancel the edit when you are done.--Charles (talk) 17:42, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Can someone explain how references work to Jenray1980? That would go a long way to making this article Wikipedia-style, I think. Thank you! heather walls (talk) 18:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC) Thank you in advance! Jenray1980 (talk) 21:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the article (how did Writ Keeper find it?), but Jenray might go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Referencing_for_beginners (WP:REFB). HarZim (talk) 21:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with that HarZim. Writ Keeper probably clicked the "user contributions" link on Jenray's talkpage to see all the edits Jenray has made.--Charles (talk) 21:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you EVERYONE for the help!!! I will check out the referances page ASAPJenray1980 (talk) 14:09, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Submitting an article that's in Wikipedia to a print publication

If I have the opportunity to submit an adaptation (expanded version) of an article I wrote for Wikipedia for publication in a print journal, are there any restrictions about that? Mrs Skylark (talk) 12:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Mrs. Skylark, welcome to the Teahouse! I have a bad habit of answering questions about copyright issues that I don't always fully understand, but what the heck, I'll go for it anyway. You don't have to ask anyone's permission; the text of Wikipedia is available for reuse under the CC-BY-SA license. In a nutshell, this license allows you to do whatever you want as long as you provide attribution for where you got the text from, license any modifications under CC-BY-SA or a compatible license, and include a notice that the text is licensed under such, along with a URL or copy of the text of CC-BY-SA. You can read more about the particulars in the "Information for reusers" section of the Wikipedia terms of use and the Reuser's rights and obligations section of the WP:Copyright article.

Now, the question I guess becomes: are you reusing the text of Wikipedia? If you basically wrote the article in Word or something, copied and pasted it into Wikipedia (non seq.: a bad idea for weird formatting things that Word does), and then continued to work on the article in Word, and the version you want to submit is the new Word version, then I think you can do whatever you want with it, since it's still yours. But if the base version of the article you want to submit is from Wikipedia (particularly if there had been edits by other people between the time you submitted it and the time you used it as the base of your article), then I believe it'd be classified as a derivative work and you'd be bound by CC-BY-SA.

Again, I am not a lawyer, so this is far from authoritative, but I think that's basically how it goes. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Integration of information into an already existing page

Hi,

I wish to contribute a section of a page, but there is already some information there regarding the topic. How do I best integrate the new information I want to add? Should I just re-write the section using some of the information already presented, or cherry-pick my way through, adding a sentence here or there?

Thanks =)

Saeadame (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Saeadame, I have seen your Contribution page but can not understand which article you are talking about, can you give the URL. and in my opinion, it'll be better to expand/re-write the section adding a sentence here a there! If you give the article URL and also the text you are trying to add, we can provide better suggestion! --Tito Dutta ^Message 00:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, yes, sorry I haven't started writing it on the Wikipedia page, it's all in a notepad file on my harddrive right now, I should have linked it. It's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Penglai, specifically the section "In Japanese Mythology." I have a book (Waka Anthology Pt. 1, and a couple other books) which explicitly says a Japanese version of this mountain/paradise is Tokoyo. Now, I don't want to say that the person who put up all that information about Horai is wrong, because they may be right, but the entire section is uncited except for the mention of the book at the beginning. Anyway, I'm not sure if I should just replace the information with my info, since Tokoyo seems closer to the Chinese version than Horai, or if I should add my part at the beginning and keep the older info as well.

Thanks again =). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeadame (talk • contribs) 01:33, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes you can start working in that article! I have added the article in my watchlist, yet, if you have any question related to formatting etc you can send a message in my talk page! --Tito Dutta ^Message 01:42, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Looking for some help with an article

Hi!

Would anyone be interested in helping me out with this article? regarding:Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/University_of_Essex_Fencing_Club

Thank you! :)

Rmlundin (talk) 00:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I had a quick look at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/University of Essex Fencing Club and agree with the notability concerns. If you can include some more secondary sources, and the club's notability can be demonstrated then all well and good. It's worth noting that the list of students' unions in the United Kingdom doesn't include many unions themselves which meet the notability requirements, let alone individual societies. I hope this makes sense and doesn't dissuade you from further contributions. Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 07:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Username change

There's a typo in my username. How do I fix it? Downwoody (talk) 00:07, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Downwoody, you can have a look here: WP:UNC Since you have a relatively new account with 87 edits, you can simply create a new account and add a notice in your older account, that you have stopped using that account and using a new account.. --Tito Dutta ^Message 00:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Or you can change your username outright at WP:Changing username. If the username you want is not already taken, then it's a fairly simple process to get renamed. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 20:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Posting a picture on a page

How to post a picture on a Wikipedia article NJIT HUM LouieC93 (talk) 15:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello LouieC93! This is one of the trickier parts of Wikipedia. There is guidance for inserting pictures into articles at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial, which has details on how to insert and format pictures into an article. If you are having trouble uploading a picture, Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard is probably the easiest way to do so. Be aware that you need to be autoconfirmed in order to upload at Wikipedia, autoconfirmation happens automatically when you have 10 edits, and when your account is over 4 days old. That should cover the technical aspects of using images. However, Wikipedia has some rather strict policies covering when it is appropriate to upload and use images. See Wikipedia:Image use policy for more details on that. I hope this helped answer your questions! --Jayron32 17:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Here's an easy description Doc Tree sent me, I hope he doesn't mind my reusing it:

"Adding photos is pretty easy.

Search http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page to see if someone already uploaded a suitable image or images
Find the picture you want/need on the web
Right-click and choose 'Save as...' and give it a logical name, then save to your Pictures folder
Go to the Wikipedia article you're working on and look in the 'Toolbox' on the left, then click on 'Upload file'
Right in the middle, click on "Click here to Start the Upload Form"
Fill in Steps 1 and 2 (The first blank under Step 2 will become the name of your picture)
In Step 3, click on the button "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." and a new form will grow from it
Choose the most appropriate option
Write about how the reduced quality thumbnail won't hurt the copyright holder and may enhance sales of a book and so on, (he added this for me, you will need to use your own rationale)
When you've written enough and filled in all the blanks, the "Upload file" button will appear clearly (rather than fuzzy and faded). Click it.

The file will upload and WP will give you the file name to use. Copy it down. In an Infobox, don't use the [[File:xxx|thumb|name]], just the name. You should be able to see it when you Preview. Then save the page and you're done."

Good Luck.Tlqk56 (talk) 17:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Help with inline citations

Are you able to help out and take a look at an article to see whether I am on the right track regarding the inline citations that are needed in my article? I defiantly had it wrong in the beginning but have now gone in and made some changes. I can post the link to the article for creation if this is possible. Thanks Cjven (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I reviewed your article and you seem to have a lot of parenthesis at the end of sentences followed by a reference. These are unnecessary because the reference is clearly linked under the "References" section. --I am a Ninja, and this is my master. 16:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Cjven. I've edited your article a bit but most of your references were fine, and I've moved the links to the text of the books to the external links section. What needs improving now is the lead paragraph as another editor saw it as a copright violation of the Salts Healthcare website and deleted it. So now there is no general introduction to the firm. NtheP (talk) 17:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you all for the help and comments. Cjven (talk) 20:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

How To Manual versus Encyclopedic Criteria Question.

I found out that one cannot write a "How To Manual" type entry into a Wikipedia article. Nevertheless, is not a little "How To Do Something" necessary sometimes in order to be able to inform the reader about a subject? I read that an encyclopedia should "inform, but not instruct."

When wanting to understand some complicated topics like certain types of photography. I would have thought that a brief explanation on how a technique is accomplished would clarify in a pretty efficient manner? How is an author of a topic supposed to explain it without going into some measure of instructions? It seems quite a difficult thing to author something without. Are there any good examples anyone knows of that achieve this in line with Wikipedia's encyclopedic criteria? Thanks.

WJ WikipedianJones (talk) 13:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello WJ, and welcome to the Teahouse :) First of all, you are right that it is a little subjective; each person will see "informing" a little bit different. However, most how-to's have one thing in common, and it is why they are disallowed: they are generally originial research. To take a goofy example, think of the article on Peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Now, everyone can agree that "informing" would, at the very least, means telling what is in the sandwich. However, Jim from California has decided that the article needs a step-by-step instructional on how to make one. So, he thinks about how he made his last PB&J and writes that in. Of course, he realizes that other people might so things a little differently, so he writes little notes in. Now, who has done all the research? Jim. He isn't basing his work off of other, reliable sources but instead is taking his own experience and publishing it. That is the essence of original research. While your article is undoubtably on a slightly higher level then PB&J, the idea is still there. You are taking your experience (or maybe also that of others like you) and publishing it. There is no source, so the material is not verifiable. That's why it isn't allowed broadly. Now, more specific steps might be accepted, if you have a source. Everything on Wikipedia should hypothetically have a reference, and a good way of quickly checking if something could go into an article is if it can be sourced or not. I don't know if the material you added to VR photography can be sourced, but it wasn't. Hence, Luke was right to remove it. If you were able to find sources for the stuff you added, I would suggest adding a note to the talk page inviting others to look at the prose and citations and maybe format them before adding it. I can't garuantee it will be added - in fact, if you kept the exact same content just with sources, it probably wouldn't - but that's your best shot. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 16:06, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

WJ, welcome to the Teahouse. An interesting question, I can only suggest that you look at articles like Shutter speed and Motion blur and see how they are written. They tell what the topics are and how they are used but only briefly touch on how you achieve the technique. NtheP (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the replies. I suddenly realize that a lot more forethought needs to go into writing an article before posting it up. Getting others to look at the article before posting is a really good idea. It has made me think though of another question which I will post up above about things for which there are no source. WikipedianJones (talk) 12:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Question on article creation

Hello, I'm working on creating: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bath Fitter and am running into a few difficulties in getting it created and approved by Wikipedia editors.

First, the article was lacking independent, neutral sources. So I added a references from NYT.com and TN.gov.

Then the article was lacking a neutral point of view, which I have since changed the article to look more like an encyclopedia article.

I would love some more ideas from other editors that could give me some additional advice that I could use to improve my article and help get it submitted. Thanks for your help! Upwordsem (talk) 12:38, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello Upwordsem, and welcome to the Teahouse! Well, I think that if you want acceptance to be a lock you should go for one or two more good independent sources. A lot of your current sources (the charities, the Hammers, and of course the Bath Fitter sites) are all affiliated with the company in some way so are considered primary sources. A couple others, like the NYT article, don't really discuss the company in any detail. Instead, they used as examples or employees are interviewed. Those really don't help you (from a Wikipedia perspective) as much as you might think. Remember, all articles need wp be supported by multiple reliable, independent sources discussing the subject in some detail. You aren't quite there yet, but you're very close. :) Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 15:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! Can you verify if this is an independent reference (http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=5bee8b0c-142a-4db1-a6a4-d640019863da) that I could use? I also have another resource that is only a press clipping (photo copy) that is stored on Bath Fitter's site: (http://www.bathfitter.com/pdf/gazette.pdf). This is originally from the Montreal Gazette (http://www.montrealgazette.com/index.html) but a digital version doesn't exist on their site. Is it possible to cite this as a reference? Upwordsem (talk) 17:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The problem with the canada.com source is that it doesn't really discuss the company in as much detail as you want. Also, your already using the Gazette article as a source (reference 2: http://www.bathfitter.com/mydocuments/topsintubs.pdf). Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 20:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Here are two more references that talk more about the company. The first is a video from a news channel talking about the company and products (http://www.indianasnewscenter.com/insight/Transformations-with-Bath-Fitter-128338163.html). The second is from a remodeler magazine that ranks this company the highest in its respective category (based off revenue)(http://o.qualifiedremodeler.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=1&id=2742). Can I cite videos the same way that I cite an article? Would these be considered indepedent, reliable sources that discuss the company in detail? Upwordsem (talk) 15:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

You can cite video articles, there is a template specially for that purpose {{cite video}}. Having had a look at the video, is it a news item/story or an advert - I'm not quite sure. The qualifiedmodeler site looks to be reliable enough to me. NtheP (talk) 16:12, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey

Hey Teahouse i was wondering if you guys could look at the Foss Maritime wikipedia page, i have been working on it but i may need some help with the reference errors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foss_Maritime Thanks Evan96779 (talk) 03:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Joined there as an editor, you can see my edits in edit history, BTW, are you working anonymously there? I can't find your name in contributors' list there! --Tito Dutta ^Message 06:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It must be this edit. I've tidied the ref URL errors. -- Trevj (talk) 11:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

When not to link

Are there guidelines somewhere about what words in an article should be linked to other articles by that name? For example, in today's Featured Article about Iguanodon, there were links to articles on Asia, Europe, and North America. That seems kind of silly to me. The more words formatted as links, the more likely the reader will wander off into some other subject, right? HarZim (talk) 03:44, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

See: WP:OVERLINK. Softlavender (talk) 03:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Common words aren't usually linked to, but if in the context of the article it's likely readers will want to know more about a related subject that's when we link. Individual articles often have their own related consensus approach, although some WikiProjects may have their own guidelines which could inform decisions related to specific articles. You could always be bold and remove some the extraneous links in Iguanodon, citing WP:OVERLINK in your edit summary. -- Trevj (talk) 11:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, and I now have the MOS bookmarked. HarZim (talk) 17:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

What is drop-down box called?

There's a handy drop-down box on this page, Beezus and Ramona, under See Also. What's it called and where can I find the info to make one? Thanks. Tlqk56 (talk) 02:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tlqk56, welcome back! I think what you are referring to is a template. This one is Beverly Cleary books which is a specialized version of a Navbox. To include that Cleary box on a page you type {{Beverly Cleary books}}. To make changes to that box, you have to go to the template's own page to edit there. To make a new box you can follow the directions on the Navbox page. They are pretty confusing sometimes so feel free to ask more questions. heather walls (talk) 02:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Right, I should have been clear that I'd like to make a different one to use on another page. So I'll go to the pages you recommended and take a look. thanks. Tlqk56 (talk) 02:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, looking at it I guess that's not what I need. Ideally I'd like a drop down table with four columns across. (That's because one of the subjects I'm working on has a number of important publishing credits that I think should be included, 25 rows long. But they really are all important to her career.) I could use an annotated list, but it would be awkward in a few cases where a little more info is needed, and not as neat looking. Is there something like that kind of box available? (The chart would have date, title, author, comments.) Thanks again. :) Tlqk56 (talk) 02:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Tlqk, can you give a sample of what information you're trying to encapsulate. If not on here on a sandbox page of yours and linked here. I think that if we can see what you're trying to do we might hacve a better idea of how to help you do it. NtheP (talk) 08:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't think of that. I've put a few of the entries in my sandbox. As you can see, some require more space than other, so it doesn't work as a list. (The Caldecott Medal is for illustrations, so illus., and writers names need to appear, etc.) Maybe I should just make separate lists, Caldecotts, Newbery, Hugo etc, and then work the other stuff into the article.I'd originally thought a drop down box would be simpler, :) and would keep the page from being overwhelmed by lists. (BTW, I'm only putting in the major awards the books she published won, I really have tried to trim it down.) Thanks again. Don't know how to link to my sandbox, does this work? [4]Tlqk56 (talk) 15:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

An aside: that does work to link to your sandbox, but an easier way is to just make a wikilink like this: User:Tlqk56/sandbox (which in the edit box looks like: [[User:Tlqk56/sandbox]]). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

HI Tlqk56, I've made the list in your sandbox into a simple "wikitable" you can learn about formatting them here. There are lots of ways to change the formatting, make the table sortable, change the colors, etc. Let us know if this is going in the right direction for what you want. heather walls (talk) 15:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Heather -- That's perfect. I'm just concerned that it will be so long, so I'd wanted to make it a drop down. But if that isn't feasible, I'll play with this. Thanks for the work and the links. Tlqk56 (talk) 16:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Cool! I have collapsed the box in two different ways in your sandbox, still not *entirely* sure this is what you want :) The link to the help page has lots of other things you can do with the tables. heather walls (talk) 16:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

That's it exactly! Now I have one more question and I'll go away for a while. :) Will it only hold 20 rows max? (I think I read that someplace about the Navbox.) If so, can I get around that by, in my example, losing the separate date for George Washington and filing it under 1949? How would I do that? I did read the pages you listed and didn't see it. Tlqk56 (talk) 16:30, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I copy and pasted a bunch of extra lines in, I am pretty sure there is no kind of limit. Thanks for adding all this awesome info! heather walls (talk) 17:51, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I'm having a blast but couldn't do it without you guys here! Tlqk56 (talk) 17:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Interwicki cite Q?

An article I'm working on Matthew Landy Steen cites the Wikipage of Scott Steen, a brother, who has released 17 music albums. It seemed a quick ref but after reading Teahouse comment on this practice, should I cite his website or cite his latest album release or what? The article only identifies him as a brother and his "notability", the moves on to the body of the article with diff subject matter. The article is a BLP. How to handle? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weathervane13 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Weathervane13! I just have two requests if you don't mind. Can you tell me if the "Ask a question>>" link/box works for you? If you use that for your question, hosts and guests will more easily find your new question at the top. The box also prompts you to sign your posts with 4 tildes like this ~~~~ and that is my second request, please sign your posts so we know who you are. Thank you! And thanks for hanging out at the Teahouse, I learn a lot from the questions that people ask here. heather walls (talk) 00:38, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone have an answer for Weathervane13? heather walls (talk) 16:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Weathervane. Sorry, sometimes questions get lost in the shuffle. Anyway, what I would do is go to Scott's wikipage, see what refs are used there, choose a good one, and copy it over to Matthew's page. As you know, Wikipedia can't cite itself as a reliable source (think of the recursive nightmares!), but the beauty of verifiability is that, for nay information in Wikipedia, a reliable source is (or at least should be) just at hand. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:06, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, sweet recursive dreams. I'll think of something appropriate then. Thanks.Weathervane13 (talk) 02:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

discussion?

Do we have any discussion page for wikipedia?--Al Sheik!Woiu!I do not fish! (talk) 05:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

(Remember:Checkuser is not fishing, nor I'm kidding.)

I don't understand your question. heather walls (talk) 05:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia Have a discussion page of itself which is an active place?--Al Sheik!Woiu!I do not fish! (talk) 05:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi! You may be looking for the Village Pump, which is for various focused discussions about aspects of Wikipedia. - Bilby (talk) 05:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

What the?!--Al Sheik!Woiu!I do not fish! (talk) 05:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC) Or let me see--Al Sheik!Woiu!I do not fish! (talk) 05:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Where in the village pump?Proposals?Techinical?I want to discuss an inactivity of a workshop on wikipediaAl Sheik!Woiu!I do not fish! (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

In that case I'd try the WikiProject Council, as that's probably the best place to look for advice on how to proceed with a WikiProject. There is also some general advice about how to handle an inactive WikiProject at dealing with inactive WikiProjects. If it is inactive there isn't a great rush, of course - the main thing to do is to confirm that it is inactive as opposed to just quiet. :) - Bilby (talk) 05:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Not an Inactive wikiproject. You may know the Map Workshop in wikipedia. ([[Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Map workshop ]]). That has no graphists to do the work there. The requesters and the bots which are at duty there are the only editors.--Al Sheik!Woiu!I do not fish! (talk) 06:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

In that case, the workshop doesn't appear to be inactive - there were posts from volunteer graphists in the last few days. It doesn't seem very active, but does appear to be badgering away. Given the recent posts, the best place to raise concerns would be the talk page. My guess is that it is a fairly difficult area to work in so there may not be a lot of skilled volunteers with the time required, leading to a backlog. - Bilby (talk) 06:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I had a request which is more than a month old. They have still not finished it.Al Sheik!Woiu!I do not fish! (talk) 10:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

As Bilby suggested above, post on the Talk page, which is very active. Softlavender (talk) 10:12, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Finally , a graphist from Sharemap.org came there and he is currently working on it.--RDF Energia (talk:Nordak Island Communication Station) 11:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Moving BLP stub AFC article up the assessment scale to Start or C Class or Other Matthew Landy Steen

Hi WikiEditors --

Like many others, I am very new to this process. And have questions. One was already answered browsing Teahouse q and a's, the cite tool in the edit bar. I'll try it for I've been trying to understand the difference in cite styles for different sources -- books, articles in magazines, newspaper articles, archived materials, wiki refs, etc.

Second, clutter in an article. I've decided to include cites in the lede; I was afraid their inclusion would "clutter" the lede, and so kept the cites in the body of the article. Should I remove these cites from the body after I've placed them in the lede. Or -- can I shorten the duplicate cites in the body by footnoting as "ibid"??

Third, I've removed massive overlinks problem entirely I think. I've also eliminated many, if not most, redlinks. According to the new template you folks inserted at the top of the article, there are references that are not germane or are somehow indirect. I can understand this. So, back to the article to edit things not germane. How do I work with this last template. Apparently others in WikiWorld are looking. I ended up in the "top 30" buzzlist a couple of days back. I have chosen to do this BLP the hard way due to the subject matter, thus the AFC. Anyways, I'm hoping (many) others will assist in this.

Fourth, I'm learning Wiki MOS, fast as I can. Navigating all the nooks and crannies of WikiWorld can be challenging. Please bear with me. I've entered q's and comments in my usertalk page and Teahouse guest page and have received some help, mainly with templates, format and cites, which is much appreciated. However, I think this is the place lto go for action, so to say. R/W? You folks are just great! Weathervane13 23:06, 22 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weathervane13 (talk • contribs)

Glad to see that some of your questions have already been answered Weathervane13, and I'll try to answer the others here in order:

As a general rule, if you have a statement in the lead and the body, it's better to use the citation once, in the body. You can decide to use citations in the lead as well, but as you say it generally results in a cluttered section so general practice is to keep all references out of there as much as possible. If you do put citations in the lead, I would put references at both locations. How do you do this cleanly? Well...
Nope, not ibid. Because of Wikipedia's style, it's very easy to break that system of references. What happens if you have reference one filled out and reference two says ibid, but then someone inserts another reference between the two? Everything goes kaput. Instead, what you want are "named references". You know how a normal reference goes <ref>SOURCE CONTENT</ref>? For a named reference you do <ref name=SOURCENAME>SOURCE CONTENT</ref>, and then just put <ref name=SOURCENAME /> where ever else you want to use that exact source. Did that make sense? This is how you use duplicate references.
One of the main problems with your references is that no one can really see them! For example, reference 7 right now is "New YorkTimes.com/archives/1969/"People's Park Rebellion". Instead of that, could you use the actual URL and just link to it?
Just remember that there is no deadline! Take your time; the article won't disappear in a day.

Now, I think those were our main questions. Is there anything in particular in the article itself that you are looking for help with? Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 03:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmmmm. OK. A couple of three cites in lede. No ibid, huh. Ok. How 'bout cf.? I thinK I can use et seq. for successive pages. I know I can use et al. for a list of persons. I see the problem. Oh, well. I had trouble with your suggestion, but I'll try it again until it works, the good old work ethic. Thanks.Weathervane13 (talk) 02:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

ibid is possible by the above solution using the |name=. Simply give the reference you want to use multiple times a name by placing that into the ref tag (so e.g.: <ref name="nytimes">http://www.nytim....</ref>) and when you want to reuse it you simply use <ref name="nytimes" /> and the references are listed under the same number. Regards, mabdul 13:17, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

[Charity-1] Charity Event

[1]