Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 110

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 105←Archive 108Archive 109Archive 110Archive 111Archive 112→Archive 115

Uploading a document with photo

I have a biography, in English, along with a photo of Servando Cabrera Moreno, a renowned Cuban and world artist which I would like to submit to Wikipedia for publication in the English language pages. It has already been published in Spanish at Wikipedia. How do I upload from my computer to your website for the four page submittal which has the sources listed on the last page?

Thank you for your help.

C. Cabrera CMCabrera (talk) 21:12, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello CMCabrera, and welcome to the Teachouse. If the photo is used in the Spanish Wikipedia article, then it is probably at Wikimedia Commons and you can use the same photo here. Please take a look at our Articles for creation page, which will help you create the English article. The sources should be presented as inline references rather than a list at the end. This will get you started, and you will find many helpful editor here at the Teahouse to answer any questions you have as you work through the process. If you are translating from teh Spanish article into English, please read WP:TRANSLATE. Good luck, and thanks for helping expand our coverage of Cuban art. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
If the English biography you have has already been published anywhere else it most probably will not be suitable for the English Wikipedia, but if it is your own translation of the Spanish Wikipedia's article please see the WP:Translation guideline page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:26, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Doubtful about article sources

Hello! I am working on cleaning up some bare URLs for Skip Jensen, and many of the sources seem to be personal blogs, tumblrs, and commercial sites (like poster and music sites selling his merchandise). These don't really seem like reliable sources (at least, compared to the sources I've seen on most articles), but I'm not really sure what I should do about it. Are they okay sources? Is there a tag I should add to the article? I'd appreciate any help. Thanks! rchopman (talk) 19:42, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse rchopman! The majority of the things you have listed are indeed not considered reliable independent sources and may be removed from the article with an edit summary stating that is the case. That being said, if they are not the only sources for the article but simply add a little flavor, then they may be okay to leave. Technical 13 (talk) 20:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Rchopman, and welcome to The Teahouse. I once used a source that appeared reliable but at the time, I wasn't familiar with the Wikipedia definition of reliable sources. I was looking at the article where I used the source and the tag "unreliable source" is gone. A very picky editor had used it multiple times on the article, and he/she explained to me why the source I used was unreliable. At the time, I thought the university hosting the site had declared the source to be official, but the university was merely hosting and no one was responsible for making sure the content was accurate. The editor suggested going to the sources the site used, but they weren't all accessible. The editor who added the tag said he believed we should remove all information whose source is not reliable by Wikipedia standards. I take the side of those who believe it's more important to have the information if we feel we can trust it, but always work to find better sources.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
(e/c) Hi Rchopman. Yeah, the sources are not so great. If I was going to tag for that concern I would use {{unreliable sources}}. To find the appropriate template, If I don't know offhand, I start at Wikipedia:Template messages (and from there you would navigate to Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles). Of course, taking a look for reliable sources to replace the unreliable is always a good idea, but that is often not possible. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)
I didn't know what had happened to "unreliable source" but when I went looking by clicking on "edit" it was in the reference itself. "{{verify credibility|failed=y}}" goes before "</ref>".— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:50, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you both so much for your help! I will indicate the unreliable sources for now and try to find some more reliable sources to replace them. It's good to know where the message templates are stored as well. I really appreciate your advice! rchopman (talk) 14:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

User notification

Hi, I read in a talk thread somewhere that there is a new user notification feature. That is, if you cite the user as: User:ABCDEF in your comment, then that editor is automatically notified that they have been mentioned in a discussion. Is this true? Does it work on all pages? How is the user notified? Thanking you in advance. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Keithbob and welcome back to the Teahouse! If you have notification settings turned on for "mentions" in your preferences on the "notification" tab, then yes, you will get notifications whenever you're mentioned on any page (at this time, there is talk about being able to add a few "special circumstance" pages to the Echo-blacklist, but that has not yet materialized). Technical 13 (talk) 20:52, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks T-13 !! -- — Keithbob • Talk • 13:17, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Why aren't my Signatures being recognized?

I'm signing with the 4 ~'s, but the bot doesn't recognize it.

Aggie80 19:06, 31 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aggie80 (talk • contribs)

Let's see if that fixes it!

Aggie80 (talk) 19:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again, Technical 13! Aggie80 (talk) 19:10, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I see you found my answer in the other section. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 19:11, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I wanna konw why my page is always deleted

Hello This is my second time I create a page and get deleted. I find it hard to deal with wikipedia, it is so sophisticated and I can't understand the reason. my page has the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/_Mahmoud_Abo-Elnasr&action=edit&redlink=1 I hope some one can help me (in plain simple English) ThanksMustafa.salahuldin (talk) 18:53, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, that page doesn't exist. Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:58, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
The draft was deleted, as explained on User talk:Mustafa.salahuldin, because it was deemed to be blatant advertising.--ukexpat (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Why don't editors actually check my sources

I have been in contact with a lot of different Wiki editors. No one really has a problem with my content once I start emailing, but it continues to be declined. It irks me that the reason it is declined most frequently is because sources aren't "reliable or verifiable:.

My sources all contain links, and all link to articles from very prestigious industrial design and trade magazines. I even got so frustrated as to visit industry similar Wiki pages and use some of the reference links they had, because it seems apparent than no one understands the industry my page describes.

I know Wiki editors are super busy with thousands of pages waiting to be reviewed everyday, but I'm legitimately trying to offer information about processes that have been around for fifty, thirty, twenty years and yet still have limited general understanding.

I appreciate anyone's help. Alyssacles (talk) 18:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Alyssacles, and welcome to the teahouse! Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Solid Concepts Inc. seems to be about a company, not about industrial processes. Anyway, I see that you've removed some (hopefully all?) of the press releases from the references, so perhaps when it's next reviewed again the result may be better. You could also do more to improve the formatting of your references so that they are not bare links - this helps reviewers to see what is what more easily. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Why are they so quick to slam the door in a noobs face?

I'm getting really frustrated. Twice I've had entire pages deleted and sent to oblivion. No rejection with a note to fix, no help provided, just deleted. And the warning on their talk page that they don't want to hear about their rejections. They can't be bothered to communicate with anyone.

The review process is supposed to give noobs a chance to learn and fix, not slam the door in their face.

"Not notable" - I call BS on that. Just because they haven't ever heard of a person or site doesn't mean they aren't notable and don't have value. To wipe out the work based on an opinion isn't helpful and doesn't promote cooperation, learning or community. To the individual's credit, they tried to reinstate the previous version.

"It appears" that the page violated copyright. If you aren't going to take the time to really find out, don't just trash it! I'm sure there were similarities, it can be pretty difficult not to be similar, but there were multiple references and much more information than the source they felt it violated. Just because they don't want to take the time to really check it out, they just zap it all away. If my understanding is correct, they can reject without blanking the entire thing.

Help me out here, but it appears that Wikipedia is making it extremely difficult for new contributors to participate and become established.

Aggie80 17:10, 31 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aggie80 (talk • contribs)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Aggie80! I'm sure that no-one would argue with you that the article mainspace (where all articles go for everyone to read) is extremely hostile at first and it can seem like there is a barrier to prevent new editors from contributing... This actually couldn't be further from the truth! New editors are welcome to contribute and to help them along there is a wonderful service called the new article creation wizard to help you build your first articles! What this process does is it places your draft idea for an article in a much less hostile environment to allow you to create it and develop it. When you are done (citing lots of reliable independent sources of course), there will be a button (or is it a link, I forget) that will allow you to submit your draft for review. Due to the backlog, it may take up to a month for this review to take place (Wikipedia has no deadlines, so quality of articles is more import than quantity of articles and how fast they can be reviewed). After the review, your draft will either be accepted and moved into the more hostile article space as something that won't likely be deleted soon, or it will more likely be declined (at least a couple times) with some comments and reasons why it wouldn't survive in that hostile article space. Here is the good part, it won't immediately be deleted from there! So, you will have time to read the comments and suggestions for improvement and act upon them, maybe adding more reliable sources that prove notability or the ability to reword something that "may" be a copyright violation (note: if the entire article is a copy paste from another site, it will quickly be deleted even from this "safer" drafting place due to legal concerns, so try to put everything in your own words).
Now, as to the articles you have previously written that were deleted... Can you offer me redlinks to where the pages were located? It is likely possible to have those articles undeleted and moved to the safer drafting place. Technical 13 (talk) 17:40, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
New editors are welcome to contribute and to help them along there is a wonderful service called the new article creation wizard to help you build your first articles! (Bitey remark) Right! Which is exactly where all of my articles have started from, thank you very much. And exactly where it was when I submitted it for review, after spending many days tweaking and working on it (and getting contributions from someone else!). And exactly where it was deleted after submitting for review. I did find one sentence that was pretty close to copied from one source, that was referenced right afterwards. I managed to use my contributions tab to recreate the article (in the Wizard, again!) and clean that up. See Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/James Hill. When I first looked for him on Wikipedia, I found that someone had deleted the original page a long time ago as not being a notable person and worthy of inclusion. While notability may not be apparent from the first drafts, and even inadvertent identical sentences may exist, to delete things so quickly and off highhandedly, indicates a mentality not willing to work with new comers. And to have this appear on their talk page If you want to ask me why I marked something for deletion, tagged your article as having an issue, or other basic editing related questions, go to the Wikipedia Teahouse. is clearly a slap in the face with more than a wet trout. i.e., I'm too important to talk to you about such unimportant things. Aggie80 18:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aggie80 (talk • contribs)
Were all of the drafts for the James Hill article on this same AfC draft page? I don't see any previous declines for the article there. (I'm not an administrator, so I can't dig in any deeper than you can.) Based on the research I can do as to what has happened with these articles, I can see that the administrators involved were RHaworth and INeverCry of which have both been reasonable individuals in every previous interaction I have had with them. As it looks right now, there is already an article for this person located at James Hill (Canadian musician), although, it may have been just moved there based on the redirect I am now seeing on AfC... Let me do some more digging and see what the story is as to why this article has been declined and deleted and so-forth... I'll get back to you shortly (one of those two admins might pop in and give some more information while I'm researching, wouldn't that be wonderful!?) Technical 13 (talk) 18:35, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Interesting. That is what I re-created after retrieving the article from the delete pile. I'm very happy with Canadian Musician as opposed to ukulele player, much better! And it has been moved to Main Space! With just a few small changes it went from delete to Main. As the deleting individual no longer seems to appear in any of the records, it means that the email to me about the deletion is the only indication that it ever happened. And I'm not sure why my posts show as not being signed when I'm putting in the tildes! Aggie80 18:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aggie80 (talk • contribs)
I would be happy to help you with that as well... Click this link → Special:Preferences and go about halfway down the page there will be an input box that allows you to enter a Signature: Click the box and delete everything in it. Just under that long input box there is a checkbox that has a long blurb of information and starts with "Treat the above as wiki markup." Make sure that box is not checked. Then scroll to the bottom of the page and click save. That should fix it for you. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
The page he is referring to is Wikipedia:Articles for creation/James Hill (ukulele player). I noticed that it seemed pretty simialr to a page he referenced, so I ran a tool to detect copyright violations and it came back positive, which the deleting admin agreed with. Re the editnotice: please don't take me wrong, but I have that edit notice because in the past I got many, MANY basic editing questions from newcomers and that distracted me from doing things like working on the AfC tool. I also know that people at the Teahouse or the AfC help desk can help with these issues much better and faster than I can. --Nathan2055talk - contribs 20:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Article waiting for review

Hi,

I have created an article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mafh01/sandbox, and I've been fussing over it for the past few days. It's awaiting review from the Articles for Creation project, but I haven't heard anything yet. But, I'm reluctant to put more work into it until I get some indication of whether its going to be suitable for Wikipedia or if it's just going to be rejected on the basis of notability, not news, etc. I actually only created the article because the topic has been of substantial interest in my part of the world for several months. Its been annoying me to no end that there is no Wikipedia article on it, since I always search Wikipedia first whenever I want to find out about something.

Is there anyone who would be willing to briefly glance at it and let me know whether or not it has a good chance of being accepted? If it needs edits or improvements, that would be good to know too.

Thanks! Marla the Mop (talk) 16:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

hello!! it's good, but still needs work -in my opinion (e.g. at the introduction) Let me know if you want some helping hand. Cheers! Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks very much! Could you point me to any documentation on how to write the introduction? Many Thanks, Marla the Mop (talk) 17:30, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
See WP:LEAD.--ukexpat (talk) 17:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello Marla, I did some format tweaking, then Reviewed and Accepted your article. It's now at Murder of Skylar Neese. At first I was a bit skeptical since a lot of the sources were local news, and one of the Wiki rules is WP:NOTNEWS; that is, we can't have articles on every house fire and every murder in America, though they may be individually tragic. However, you did a good job putting right up in the Lead that the case matters because it effected changes in the Amber Alert laws for the state, so the article helps us understand not just one murder, but the development of laws regarding missing minors. Nice work overall! MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Wow, for a 'new' article, that is really good. :) I especially like who you cited everything correctly. :) One comment that I would make, though (and it will help with getting a higher 'assessment') would be to look into using the {{Cite news}} template for the newspaper articles. It'll do things like hide the 'naked' urls and make the article titles clickable links. :) Revent (talk) 21:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip about the Cite news template! I'll update the article using that template the next time I get a chance to work on it. Marla the Mop (talk) 21:46, 31 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.181.114.4 (talk)

Badges

Can you give badges freely, to anyone who fulfills the criteria or is it just hosts that can give badges. So, for example, if I fulfilled the criteria of the badge which you get for using the teahouse in the first year, could I give it to myself or does someone have to give it to me?

All answers greatly appreciated, Matty.007 09:07, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Matty! There is a host script I believe allows the easy giving of badges and the like, so, I think this is a host privilege. AppleJack7Dear Princess Celestia... 13:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Matty.007! The answer to your question is that anyone can give out Teahouse badges! I've received a few of them from guests myself for Great Answers (you can find them mixed in with other awards and feedback I have gotten here). I've seen your repeat asking of this question on Heather's talk page, and that is generally frowned upon. If you feel that your question isn't being answered quick enough (it sometimes takes a day for someone knowledgeable in the answer to your question to read it), the first step is usually to use the link at the top of this page to ask your question in the live chat area. You both may want to redo your signature as <font color="color">...</font> tag has been deprecated and replaced with <span style="color: color;">...</span>. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 14:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Matty! You can get automattically or hosts can reward it to you. Carlcrazysodaman (talk)Carlcrazysodaman —Preceding undated comment added 15:06, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Mobile editing

The way mobile devices access wikipedia has changed recently. Unlike other websites, wikipedia now always forces a redirect to the mobile site, even if you enter the full address as non-mobile. Wikipedia seems to be moving backwards in its understanding of modern devices. It also appears that the developers do not understand current mobile technology. If I remove the m at the address bar, why the heck would wikipedia think I did this by mistake?

Is mobe access developed without community input? -198.228.216.144 (talk) 11:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, if you are accessing from a device such as a mobile phone or a tablet, you will be automatically redirected to mobile Wikipedia site. But if your device supports desktop view, there will be a Desktop link at the bottom. If you click on that link, you will be directed to the desktop site. If you want to dicuss about it Help talk:Mobile access will be the best place to do it. --Glaisher (talk) 11:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse 198.228.216.144 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)! I've been fairly frustrated with the moves the mobile frontend has been making recently as well and you should be aware that you are not the only one. I've been trying to work with the dev on bugzilla and hopefully some of the atrociousness of the mobile site will start getting cleaned up in the upcoming months. This is a work in progress, please be patient and there will hopefully be many rewards up the road. That being said, I encourage you to visit Bugzilla and check out the List of known bugs. If there is anything not there that you think should be, feel free to create a user account there and report it (or let me know on my talk page and I'll report it for you if you do not want to make an account) or even feel free to create an account and offer input on existing bugs (or again let me know on my talk page and make sure to include the bug number like {{Bug|46241}} which will render like T48241 or {{Bugzilla|46247}} which will render like T48247) and I would be happy to include your comments as well. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 11:51, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
The desktop switch on the bottom of the page stopped appearing about two weeks ago, and it never appeared on all pages. I work in bots and had missed it on a lot of pages, and with really long pages, like controversial article talk pages, the pages take forever to load, so I used to he able to go to the browser address bar and delete the m, but now developers have eliminated that option and agressively force redirect even when the user has explicity edited the mobile address.
You cannot select the optiin at the bottom of the page if it does not load. On my friend's iphone, you can never switch to desktop with this method because the pages take so much longer to load than my Android devices.
Only registered users can report bugs? So what if there are IP specific bugs, and with the new tags, that is possible? -198.228.216.165 (talk) 13:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
The "desktop" link is on the bottom of the screen (it did go away for a couple days but has returned, you may need to clear your cache and clear your push data (not sure of the link for that). One of the things I am struggling with is the desktop link is only for that page for one load, which is annoying and frustrating. I'm fairly sure you have to register to submit bugs on bugzilla, that does not mean you have to register on wikipedia to report on bugzilla, they are separate if that was your concern. Technical 13 (talk) 13:28, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I know where the link is, that is the problem, even when it is there, that it is at the bottom of the page, and if a page is long and slow to load, you never gain access to that link. This is not typical because of the way the mobile collapses everything, but it does happen. It works for me on all windows on Android. -68.107.136.227 (talk) 14:47, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I understand and feel your frustration. Hopefully things will shape up soon! Technical 13 (talk) 23:02, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Page not appearing in search box

I have created a couple of pages which are now published. I am just wondering why when I type the characters of the 'name of the page in the search box', the page 'does not' appear as one of the search suggestions?Isurusappreciation (talk) 11:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Isurusappreciation and welcome. I see you created Things Don't Seem and Black-banded rainbowfish. They do appear in the search box when I have checked, perhaps you are typing the names differently (eg you might miss an apostrophe}. You can always check the articles you have created here. Best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 11:36, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Isurusappreciation. It doesn't appear for me too. I assume the search box suggestions only start to appear after the article have reached a certain age or viewed a certain number of times. You can view article traffic statistics from here. I just checked whether other new pages also appear on the search suggestions and guess what? They also don't appear. And if you type in some random article title also, you will find that the most popular pages appear at the top of the suggestions. This was only an assumption but I think this is what happened. Hope this helped. --Glaisher (talk) 12:02, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Glaisher. Thanks for the reply. I guess your assumption may be correct. It makes sense. I guess there is a mechanism that is designed to stop any new page which hasn't been checked and quality checked from automatically appearing as search suggestions in the search box. Thanks for the information, much appreciated.Isurusappreciation (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
It can take time for the internal search indexes to update, but it is not related to page review or article quality, merely a matter of time.--ukexpat (talk) 15:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Main heading position

Silly question I know but very new to all this! I've set up a sandbox page and I'm close to going live BUT I'm not sure about the main heading. Instructions say not to use = name = as it is used for the main heading. If I use it just for editing purposes, his name appears in the wrong position below the contents box. Is this something that is adjusted when it goes live? Should I leave it in place or remove it ?

Ned1966 (talk) 11:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ned1966, the name is whatever you name the file, you don't add it as a heading. I've created another subpage for you here and I will follow up on your talk page. Best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 11:20, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks - I now understand. Ned1966 (talk) 11:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

The layout of User:Ned1966/sandbox/Hugh Murphy is still not correct. It needs a lead section per WP:LEAD.--ukexpat (talk) 15:57, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Actually, DISPLAYTITLE can only hide or format characters in the real page name. It cannot make another page name. For example, User:Ned1966/sandbox cannot display "Hugh Murphy". User:Ned1966/sandbox/Hugh Murphy could hide "User:Ned1966/sandbox/" so it only displays "Hugh Murphy", but there is no good reason for this. It would just create confusion. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Honestly, I agree, but it seems to be a 'common' question places like #wikipedia-en-help (shrugs). If someone is doing it inside their own userspace, it's allowable, so.... (btw, I was referring to something like your second example, not 'completely changing the name') Revent (talk) 00:11, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hybrid Artwork

Suppose I construct an annotated map beginning with http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/USA-satellite.jpg. The annotations are my own, but the underlying graphic is not. How do I enter release information at upload time? Camdenmaine (talk) 10:18, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! You would have to get the copyright holder for the underlying work to release it into the public domain or in some way grant wikipedia copyright permissions for it to be used. Is there any way that you can take or create your own underlying picture? Then you could use the CC-BY-30 license and use it at will. I hope this helps! Technical 13 (talk) 23:10, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Justifying inclusion in the Commons

I'm a bit overwhelmed by the options for including a graphic in Wikipedia Commons. I understand that I may contribute an artwork or photo that is wholly my own. But how about organizational logos, such as that of the Nature Conservancy. Suppose I were making the Conservancy's first submitted page and it were up to me to upload the logo. It is clearly not my own work. Which option(s) would I select from there? I can't tell from the logo's Licensing Information just how it was entered. Consider also the logo of Conservation International: its Licensing section says, "It does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain." So how was it entered in order to attain that status? Camdenmaine (talk) 10:10, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello, and Welcome!
If a work is not released under any Creative commons license, then you upload it to Wikipedia and not Wikimedia Commons. Just go to our Upload Wizard, and upload the file under fair use. But please note that files under fair use can only be used on articles. So if your article is still pending review, you would upload the file after it is accepted.
Hope this helps,
TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I had wondered about that alternate path to get images in. Thanks for clearing it up

As you've written it, I worry that "upload the file under fair use" feels like a blank check. How am I to know that one organization's logo is usable in this way while another's is not? Could you refer me to a practical discussion of fair use? I think I understand the legal notion, but the practical application in a world where suddenly everything is posted on the web without copyright notice is beyond me.

The crux of the question is something like this: If I place my own original artwork on my own web site and I offer no indication that it is protected from re-use, have I given sufficient justification so that someone else could argue fair use and upload it to his wikipedia article? Camdenmaine (talk) 13:25, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

You may wish to read Wikipedia:Fair use and Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello Camdenmaine, while you'll probably find it very useful to read the Fair Use tutorials above, here's the short answer version: generally speaking, a copyright work can be used under Fair Use if there is no way to get a non-copyright version to illustrate a given concept. So a copyright picture of Brad Pitt is not FU since someone in Los Angeles could just snap their own photo of him tomorrow. However, a photo of a deceased person, the cover of a book, the logo of a company, those things may credibly only exist in copyrighted form and there is no way to acquire a public domain equivalent. In such limited cases, you can use a copyright image only for the exact subject covered, it can only be used on that exact article, and it should be small and not of high resolution. For example, the logo for Starbucks has always been copyright, but if you upload it not to Commons but to Wikipedia itself, the image isn't a big high-res one, and this is the only Fair Use photo on the page Starbucks and not used on any other page, then you're kosher. Hope this helps for you or any others reading. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
My compliments of the best 'explanation' of that I have yet to see. :) Revent (talk) 21:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

References-positioning of ref tags-next to author or end of sentence.

Your guidance would be appreciated with a question regarding where to position a ref tag when an author's /s' name is used within a sentence. It is placed immediately after the name is used; at the end of the sentence only; or in both places? For example: Klein[24] hypothesised that inhibition of return is a mechanism that allows a person not to re-search in previously searched visual fields as a result of “inhibitory tags”.[24]:1 Thanks, PilgrimB (talk) 05:47, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, PilgrimB. The exact position of the ref tag is an editorial decision, but as a general rule, it should be positioned at the end of a complete thought, or factual statement. So the second position would probably be best in your example. One specific requirement is that every quotation should be referenced to the source of the quote, right at the end of the quote, 100% of the time. If you are using a reference several times, the <ref name=ABC> alternative is useful, changing "ABC" to some useful mnemonic that calls that reference to your mind. To use the same reference a second or multiple times, just add <ref name=ABC/> in each appropriate location. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:03, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, AppleJack! I will take a look at it.Ellgee24 (talk) 16:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • A more 'complicated' but 'prettier' method of doing the same thing is to use a 'group="footnotes"' reference at the end of the sentence, and then give the sources for the individual quotations in the new "Reflist" for the group. Revent (talk) 21:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Help:Footnotes shows 'how' to do this, but not an example of using it for this 'exact' purpose....there are examples buried around various places, though. The complexity of making the 'footnotes' actually linked to the 'references' is totally optional. Just just <br /> to break the 'explanations' onto various lines. It can also help with 'phrasing', as you can cite a 'complete' quote in the footnotes without having to include it in the actual body copy (this can avoid 'issues' such as having to 'add' implied subject to the quote for clarity. Revent (talk)
  • FYI (talking to myself again, lol) Wikipedia:CITE#Footnotes is the 'guidance' about this...as it makes clear, actually /doing/ it that way isn't required...but it makes things 'easier to understand' when articles start to get 'complex' references. Revent (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Finally, the correct place to point (lol)...the examples are at WP:INTEGRITY (and the following section about 'bundling'.) Revent (talk) 21:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Black Beauty Supply

I have rewritten the article and provided wikipedia with numerous qualified links such as cosmoprof and the fact that he is a speaker at the # 1 manufacturer's shows. Why can I not get the page back? Is there someone that can help me and WILL help me? I went to the mentor page and posted but have not heard back.

It just doesn't get any bigger than cosmoprof and it is right there in the link. Sam is an industry spokesman. We have Bronner Brothers and they are the largest and yet you still will not give it merit?

I am asking for help because this is still a part of American sub-culture and Wikipedia really hasn't covered it. You may not like Sam but he is relevant and has changed the face of the beauty industry and the way it was held together. His people started the natural curl "Fierce hair" craze and 1/2 of the other crazes since he has been around. I have included it again and I am STILL asking for a mentor because I am frustrated.

we don't need the entire draft quoted here

Black Beauty Supply

History:

Annie Malone developed and popularized the pressing comb in the early 1920’s. She owned a Beauty School Chain called Poro College (Poro: a West African word meaning organization dedication and discipline) in Chicago, Indianapolis and St. Louis. She was the mentor and the inspiration for Madam C.J. Walker primarily known for her early 20th century hair treatments. The pair started the first Black Owned Beauty Supply Business. Black beauty supply stores started in black beauty and barber shops that were located in black communities across America in the early 20th century. Affluent blacks traveled to those community beauty salons and barber shops to have their hair done and bought products that were specifically made for their hair type by Black hair care manufacturers.

Garret Morgan invented the first chemical hair relaxer in 1909 and named it the GA Morgan Hair Refining Crème. The crème allowed black hair to have a more European look and became an instant success. In 1929, Samuel B. Fuller started a line of hair care products which were sold door to door on the south side of Chicago. He quickly became one of the most prominent Black businessmen in the city. George E. Johnson was a production chemist for the S.B. Fuller Company and decided to strike on his own in the 1950’s creating a men’s product called Ultra Wave. In 1957, he started a professional salon line called for women called Ultra Sheen. Johnson products research laboratory became the largest laboratory devoted exclusively to black hair care products.

Black Hair care and cosmetics sales growth has proven to be stable and recession-resistant. A group of Korean immigrants in America discovered the market and began to start black beauty supply stores in areas that were predominantly African American. The near monopoly of Korean owned black beauty supplies began to frustrate African American in the hair care and cosmetics trade merchants in the early 1990’s.

A 1993 study conducted by ViewPoint, Inc., a Chicago-based market research firm, revealed that many African-Americans were unaware and surprised that some of the hair care products they have been buying were not manufactured by African-American companies. Seventy-nine percent of the African-American consumers said it is important that they purchase hair care products which are made by African-American manufacturers and 77 percent of these consumers said that if they knew which brand were African-American, they would show a preference for these brands in their future purchases. The subject of Black Owned Beauty Supply Stores became a hot-button in the Black hair care industry as documented in the 2006 film entitled “Black Hair,” by filmmaker Aron Ranen.

Sam Ennon created Black Owned Beauty Supply Association otherwise known as B.O.B.S.A. in 2004 as a non-profit in San Mateo, California. B.O.B.S.A is the leading trade association exclusively representing black-owned beauty supply stores and retail consumers in acquiring and owning black-owned beauty supply stores, beauty salons, nail salons and barbershops. The association was formed to address the frustration that many black community members expressed worldwide over not being able to buy and sell products in local black beauty supply stores in the 1990’s to mid 2000.

B.O.B.S.A’s membership base includes over 5000 Black beauty professionals throughout the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Bermuda, Trinidad, West Indies and Switzerland 1500 beauty retail store operations in the USA, salons, barbershops, and training institutions. B.O.B.S.A members have promoted economic growth by pooling resources and recycling millions of dollars back into the Black community through contributions to organizations such as the United Negro College Fund (UNCF), the NAACP, the URBAN League, PUSH and the development of the Fred Luster, Sr. Scholarship Fund which provides thousands of dollars in scholarships to college-bound youths and cosmetology students across the country noting economic All of the association’s programs are dedicated to promoting economic and educational growth. In addition, B.O.B.S.A companies employ thousands nationwide and B.O.B.S.A employers offer on the job training, educational workshop and business skill development. B.O.B.S.A companies spend $60 million annually in promotion on Black radio, magazines and newspapers, plus millions more from minority suppliers and related businesses. B.O.B.S.A produces Dots-Online Emagazine which is short for the term “Connecting the Black Dots.” Dots-Online Emagazine covers beauty industry news and events. B.O.B.S.A is a part of the Oakland Black Wall Street Districts comprised of churches, organizations, and businesses from 50th Avenue to 109th Avenue bound by International Boulevard in Oakland, California.

Links and references.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Malone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madam_C._J._Walker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrett_Morgan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_B._Fuller http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_E._Johnson,_Sr. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CosmoProf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronner_Bros. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_for_the_Advancement_of_Colored_People http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Urban_League http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow/PUSH http://www.beautystorebusiness.com/search/node/sam%20ennon

Aron Ranen http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2578905/ Documentary : http://blackhairdvd.com/

http://www.jazma.com/black-hair-history ViewPoint: http://www.chipublib.org/cplbooksmovies/cplarchive/archivalcoll/viewpoint.php#org http://www.ahbai.org/scholar/luster_cosmetology.html

http://www.cosmoprofnorthamerica.com

http://www.cosmoprofnorthamerica.com/images/speakers/aab-2.pdf http://www.sfltimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1157&Itemid=185 www.blackwallstreet.org

www.dots-online.com ___________________________________________________________________________ http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sam%2BEnnon.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bobsa%2BOrg%2BLogo%2Blg.png

File:Bobsa+Org+Logo+lg.png
BOBSA LOGO

BIO:

Sam Ennon is the president of the B.O.B.S.A, the nation’s largest black-owned beauty supply trade association which was founded in 2004. Sam entered the beauty and cosmetics industry in 1979 as a hair care manufacturer’s representative for Clairol in Chicago, Illinois. In addition to running B.O.B.S.A, he speaks on the subject of starting and managing a black owned beauty supply store at cosmetics and hair care industry professional trade shows.

Sambobsa (talk) 16:07, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Suggest a formal title of "History of Black beauty supply industry" with your shorter title as a re-direct to this, as part of the article deals with the invention of the products, part deals with non-African American suppliers & manufacturers, and the last part with BOBSA. All in all, I definitely see potential here. Boogerpatrol (talk) 18:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Sambobsa and welcome to The Teahouse. I agree the article has potential. However, your username may be a problem. See WP:CORPNAME. You are not allowed to have a username that represents a company, and this name could be against the rules. I'm not certain. To see how to change it go to WP:CHU.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:46, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

How to add feedback box

How do I add a feedback box to an article? --XndrK (talk · contribs) 17:54, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello an welcome to the Teahouse XndrK! If I understand your question, the proper way to leave feedback for an article is by clicking on the "Talk" (or in some cases "Discussion" depending on skin/namespace) tab near the top of the page. this will take you to the page were you can leave feedback or ask questions about that topic. As a sidenote, you may want to read WP:SIG#NT and remove the template from your signature as it puts you at high risk of having your signature compromised and causing you major headaches in the future. I have added SUBST: to your signature here so that there will be no issues on this page. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 18:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, XndrK. Wikipedia:Article Feedback may have what you are looking for. Technical's idea is a good one, too, but there was a plan to provide feedback in the article page itself rather than the talk page. I'm not sure what happened to that.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, Vchimpanzee, that's what I was looking for. Is there a way to manually add the box? --XndrK (talk · contribs) 19:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
This is a pretty technical question. I recommend that you ask User:Okeyes (WMF). I believe that he is the paid staffer most knowledgeable about this matter. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Italian speaker

How can I find in this wikipedia (en) a user twho speaks both languages... or spanish, english and italian ??? Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Miss Bono, welcome back, as always! We have the Babel templates for this; they're templates that people put onto their user pages in order to show what languages they speak and at what level of proficiency. There's a list of them all here; if you want to find out, say, who speaks at a near-native level of Italian, you could find that template on the list (in this case, it's {{User_it-4}}), click on it, and then click on the link on the left side of the page that says "What links here", and it'll give you a list of all the people that claim a near-native level of Italian. I don't think there's an easy way to cross-index it among different levels of proficiency or different languages, but that should be a start, at least. Hope this helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:14, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks you, Writ Keeper!! you are so nice to me, as alwyas. I give you a ♣ for the good luck! Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello again Miss Bono! To get the most accurate list of people that speak all three languages you wish to use CATSCAN to cross reference the people in all of the categories and find your best matches based upon who can meet all of the needs. The only thing left to do will be to check the contributions of the results to see who is actually still active. Good luck! Technical 13 (talk) 19:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for another good question! I'l just add in my two cents to what is above. Wikipedia isn't particularly well-suited in finding users who speak specific multiple languages, but here are a few options:
  • I happen to find one user who has fluency in both Spanish and Italian and has edited somewhat recently: Stephanos1ko (talk · contribs). Try sending the user a message right away.
  • If you need translation of a foreign-language page on Wikipedia, consider making a translation request here.
  • You can consider using category listing to check out users who can translate between english and another language.
If you need to contact a specific user, be sure to check out their editing history to see if they have been active lately. That way, you'll be more likely to get a response back soon. I hope one of these options helps! I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 19:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you all! :D... Techincal 13 I cannot use CATSCAN, don't have access. Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

New page for non-main stream topics

I'm interested in creating and editing pages for non-main stream topics: small companies, unique locations that few know about, etc. What should I do if there are few articles or if those articles are from blogs or local news sources? Krowe1981 (talk) 00:38, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Krowe1981, and thank you for visiting the Teahouse. There is strong consensus that inhabited places are notable. Always look for the best reliable sources and use those as references. As for small companies, I think it is safe to say that most are considered "run of the mill" and may occasionally get routine, predictable news coverage in local media. But there are many small businesses that have a long and interesting history, or have pioneered a unique product, and may have attracted significant coverage in several independent, reliable sources well beyond a two paragraph write up about the new pizza parlor in town. So, notability is all about coverage in reliable sources. Lack of coverage means that Wikipedia shouldn't have an article about that business. I hope this helps. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:57, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Krowe, welcome to teahouse. Blogs can not be used for creating an article. Echoing the comment above, See your recent creation SOMA Fabrications, you have cited 2 sources, first is blog, so that is outrightly rejected. The second is a review of company in a cycle magazine, which is again not sufficient since it does not make it notable. First route should is that you create article about something highly notable. That will give you some experience about creating article, citing properly and notability criteria.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 01:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
An independent review is not notable? If that same publication wrote an article that wasn't a review then that would be notable?

Krowe Let's discuss 01:18, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I had mentioned that it is not sufficient. To establish notability few more of such articles maybe required. And while replying to a thread use one more of ":" in addition to the one earlier used. For example like my last post had three :::, you could have used 4 :::: , that will place your message with one more indent.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 01:35, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. So if I were to use multiple articles and one was an independent review, then that would be more likely to be considered notable? Krowe Let's discuss 01:41, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, more the independent citations, better it is. However there is no definite limit as to how many are required. If an article is nominated for speedy deletion when you create it, decision depends on admin guys whether the citations are sufficient or not. Or if some other editor finds the article you started workable, s/he can remove nomination and work on the article--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 01:59, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
That is a misconception Vigyani. Every user, including IPs, may participate in deletion discussions to reach consensus. Such discussions are usually but not always closed by admins who determines what the consensus was, taking into account the weight of good arguments, grounded in policy and guideline. As to the thread issue, I think, Krowe, that you are setting yourself up for frustration. If there aren't sufficient sources to sustain an article on a topic, Wikipedia should not cover it. If there is only one review of a subject in local coverage it is not going to be found notable and the article's content will not be able to be verified unless it remains a sub-stub with the only verified content coming from the one article. I second the idea of finding a notable topic and cutting your teeth there, while you learn the ropes.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:25, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant speedy deletion during NewPagePatrol. I have edited my comment accordingly. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 02:32, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

is it possible to have one user for more than one language?

is it possible or is it inevitable to open an independent account for each language in which one wants to contribute?

Kimur (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Unified login. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
First of all, thank you.

Second, having tried that, I haven't been able to merge my english account with my spanish language account. I logged in to that second account just to check, but there's no way I can get through the password request (which comes in a double pack with a korean account with which I have nothing to do). So, with this account I can do anything in the wikiverse except the spanish wikipedia (or the korean one, for that matter). Any idea? Kimur (talk) 22:57, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Kimur. Here's what's going on. Someone already created a user account with the name Kimur at the Spanish Wikipedia, on November 30, 2006. See here. Because of this, your unified login attempt did not work because it won't overwrite an existing account. However, that user never made a single edit which means "usurpation" of the account name should be straightforward. You can make your request at es:Wikipedia:Cambiar el nombre de usuario. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:35, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I had not noticed that other user.

Kimur (talk) 00:57, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

User page navigation

Hi,

I was just wondering how you put up a navigation bar on a userpage, such as seen here?

Thanks, Matty.007 10:06, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

First you create a page User:your username/Navigation similar to User:WereSpielChequers/Navigation (If you copy then use an edit summary of copied from User:WereSpielChequers/Navigation) then you transclude it at the top of the pages in your user space by adding the code {{User:your username/Navigation}}. ϢereSpielChequers 10:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Matty.007 10:36, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

login problem

I've just created an account, - user name MusingPlaying - but can't log in, password not correct? and I didn't give an email address when I did this, so cannot reset my password. Any way round this? 86.163.53.209 (talk) 09:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, not - if you can't remember the password and you didn't set an e-mail for recovery, you'll have to consider that account lost and start a new one. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 09:52, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, the simplest solution is to create a new account. If you didn't do any edits under "MusingPlaying" then abandoning it and starting over is the least complicated option. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:54, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I did do some edits though... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.53.209 (talk) 10:53, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid that if you can't remember the password and you didn't set an email address then you can't recover user:MusingPlaying, but you are welcome to start a new account. If you edit the same pages as MusingPlaying then you really need to write something on your userpage such as "I used to be user:MusingPlaying but I forgot the password". If you remember the old password then please pick one account and stick to it, there are a few reasons why some users legitimately have more than one account, but for most people one account should suffice and will prevent you accidentally voting twice in the same discussion. ϢereSpielChequers 12:57, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello 86.163.53.209 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), if you "really" want to get that username back, the only way to do so at this point is to request usurpation of it. This isn't a surefire way to do it, but it may be possible. Good luck! Technical 13 (talk) 13:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

A Problem

Hi! I've added an infobox to this article, but there is an unwanted character at the top of the article. Will someone quickly fix that. Zince34' 09:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

When you edited the infobox, it looks like you inadvertently removed a bit of wikicode and it broke the box. No big deal, easily fixed and I took care of it. Consider it a fun way to learn that, jeez, wiki-markup can be totally a pain because even one character out of place somewhere can make a page look like a bomb went off in an ASCII factory. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 09:44, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

could use feedback before major edit

I've been editing pages to do with rock music lately and as I keep linking to the article on the rock Power_trio it keeps bugging me in its current form. To begin with seeing The Police as the first picture on power trios doesn't seem right. And the whole article as is right now is pretty much original research. Lots of bands I've never heard of are mentioned and some of the things said are debatable at best (and all with essentially no references). I've been trying to find a good reference for the topic but so far have really been coming up empty both with books and online resources (if someone has suggestions please let me know). I've looked at Allmusic which is a good source for basic info on Rock but they don't seem to have an article on Power Trios, just on specific bands that are such trios. I have a revised version where I've cut out about 70% of the text and left only what I thought was incontrovertable, that no one familiar with blues rock would disagree with and keeping the one good reference the article had. The revised version is in my sandbox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mdebellis/sandbox (I think everyone can see that if not and you do want to take a look let me know) I'm nervous though that if I do the edit I'm going to remove someone's favorite band and might generate some controversy. Looking for some feedback, thanks in advance. Mdebellis (talk) 19:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know much about the subject. However I don't see any problems with doing so. Pug6666 20:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm still pretty new myself, and mostly make minor article tweaks & revert vandals, but to me this is the problem with poorly sourced articles, so much of it is arbitrary based on opinion. Ironically, your porposal got rid of the overview which attempted to narrow the scope of the term, but you also trimmed back the examples big time. The current article, though it tries to pin down a tighter definition, then includes '90 bands which don't really fit, like two of my faves, Sublime & Everclear. So, despite your interest & solid effort, I could be inclined to like the current rev. based on WP:ILIKEIT, which is by defnintion a poor rationale. Boogerpatrol (talk) 21:13, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. You convinced me I need to do a bit more research and have at least one more reference before I go live. If you are interested in the topic please watch the Power_trio page. Mdebellis (talk) 22:02, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • This is a WP:BRD issue....i.e. the 'bold' edit to try to fix outstanding issues, then discussion on the article talk page, and so on. I'm not going to get involved in it (I'm busy lol) but I remember having looked at this exact article in the past and having the same 'general' impression as the OP about the article as a whole (lack of 'sources' for the somehat randomly included bands, as if people had just added their favorites over the years.) Revent (talk) 21:19, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that link. I'm a new editor and hadn't seen that, I think that pretty much is the guideline I was looking for. I almost felt dumb even asking the question but its the first time I've made an edit that I think anyone might object to and I'm glad I did. Mdebellis (talk) 21:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome...honestly, I've found this is a good page to watch just for the seeming 'random' list of wiki policy links and such that scroll by. :) Revent (talk) 22:36, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Tough search. I tried Time magazine, Credo, Papers Past and Trove with little results. I found this through Old Fulton Postcards which looks like a pretty useful source. I'm not sure if this will help but see these searches. [1] [2]. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I've just looked at the first link but that will be useful for sure, better then anything else I had to this point. Thanks much! Mdebellis (talk) 23:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Just in case anyone is still following I wanted to document where I'm going to end up on this. Fughgettaboutit's links were amazingly helpful. I'm a new editor and didn't even know about an alltext search. After looking at what he sent me I did some more searching on my own. As just an aside this is what I love about Wikipedia, the way you learn by doing. The one issue I was still debating was whether to include something about The Police. IMO it makes no sense to call them a Power Trio (this is me as a person not an editor). But as I searched The Police came up more than once in articles with the keywords including one by Dick Clark who I think is pretty lame but I have to admit he has credibility as someone people listen to on Rock. So I'm going to include a sentence and a reference that documents the fact that the term is used for a lot of different bands and mention The Police. I plan to publish the revised article in a day or two, thanks again to everyone for all the help Mdebellis (talk) 01:00, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_110&oldid=1138264963"