Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 121

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 115

←

Archive 119

→

DYK Topicon

Hi, it's me again! I submitted an article for DYK, it was accepted, and was on the main page, "that the Little Chapel is believed to be the world's smallest consecrated church?". However, it was put up at 16:00, and is now off. How do I put a DYK topicon on my userpage?

Thanks, Mat ty.007 16:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Matty-- congrats! Getting a DYK is a big achievement (I remember when I got my first one!) A DYK topicon can be put in using this wiki markup:

{{DYK user topicon | article_name=ARTICLE NAME | date=DATE RECEIVED}}

There are some offsetting options in the syntax you can check out at Template:DYK user topicon if you need to. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:59, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I added that, here, but I cannot see the topicon. Am I doing it right? Thanks, Mat ty.007 17:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

It's there, it's just hiding behind your Stiki icon. You'll need to offset the icon-- check the template parameters in the link above. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the help. Mat ty.007 18:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Nice little article, Matty.007. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

How Can I stop deletion of my page ?

A while ago I'd create a page on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farshid_Haidari which had been deleted, and I created this again but unfortunately I got a notification which says It's gonna be delete again which I ask you to help me how to figure it out and stop it .

Thanks in advance . Don't Wish . . .Try . . . (talk) 13:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi IMTheAdrenaline the last time the article was deleted it was because there was no evidence that Farshid Haidari met the criteria for biographies of a living person, particularly a lack of independent sources that show Haidari is notable. I have looked at the article and I have tried searching for reliable sources on Haidari but I can't find any. If you can't produce any sources the article will be deleted again, I'm afraid. Flat Out let's discuss it 14:23, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Don't Wish . . .Try . . .. If Farshid_Haidari is well known, there should be news reports or sports magazine articles about him that you can cite in the article. The sources don't have to be in English, but if there aren't any, Wikipedia can't have an article about him. Also, the article has a lot of promotional comments like "most famous" that would need to be removed, since encyclopedia articles contain just facts, not opinions. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Don't Wish...Try... and welcome to the Teahouse. What you should do is create the page using the Article Wizard at the Articles for creation page. Develop your article there, writing it, adding sources, etc. and then submit it when you think it's ready. You will get feedback from experienced Wikipedians who will tell you how to improve your article. TL;DR: Submit it via WP:AFC. Thanks, the one sean 00:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Commercial links on wikipedia

In the page entitled "Moroccan riad" there is a link to a commercial site offering moorish design services "Worldwide Moroccan Architecture and Decoration Services". Is this appropriate?M.F. W-Venables (talk) 13:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

No, it is not appropriate, and I have removed it. Thanks for pointing it out. --ColinFine (talk) 13:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The same IP address spammed half a dozen other articles as well. Removed them (they were all last year, so no point in following it up on the IP's talk page). --ColinFine (talk) 13:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Any editor, new or experienced, who sees clearcut spam links such as this should remove them immediately, mentioning "spam" in the edit summary. If you have time, see if the person who added the spam in one article is also spamming other articles, and ask an experienced editor for help if that is going on. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Source not found

Sir, I read in a newspaper that Dan Brown has sold an estimate of around 250 million books. I tried to find out and found that his total sales should be around 200-250 million. But I cannot find a source on the internet that specifically says this and so I cannot edit the pages. Please Help. Rishabh Agarwal (talk) 11:29, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Rishabh Agarwal: Do you still have the newspaper in which you read the information? If so, you can use that article in the newspaper as a source, even if it's not on line. Just add the name of the newspaper, where it's published, the title of the article, the date of publication, and if there is a reporter's name on the article, add that too. —Anne Delong (talk) 11:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

There is a citation for "more than 200 million" worldwide sales here: Legge, James (14 May 2013). "Dan Brown's Inferno: Publishers poised for biggest-sales since Harry Potter as Da Vinci Code author's latest Robert Langdon story hits shelves." The Independent (London). Keri (talk) 12:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Live Chat in Wiki

If FB can use FB chat. why not Wiki can make live wiki chat for the vision of making Wiki a better place.Nirbhaygupta (talk) 06:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Nirbhaygupta and welcome. Facebook is social media, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. There is IRC chat for help and questions for admin and that's OK but what other purpose do you think chat would be good for? Flat Out let's discuss it 06:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit reverted because of vandalism

A while ago I edited a page, and a while later I got the message "(Reverted edit(s) by KingSupernova identified as test/vandalism using STiki)". How do I contact the person who did that, to tell them that it wasn't vandalism?KingSupernova (talk) 03:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello KingSupernova, and welcome to the Teahouse. My guess is that you are referring to the edit you made on May 29 to List of Alphas episodes. Your edit was reverted shortly thereafter by User:ankit Maity who fights vandalism here, and was using a anti-vandalism tool called STiki. This tool flags edits as possible vandalism using various algorithms, and then a human editor takes a look and decides whether or not to revert. Your edit was unreferenced and called a five year old character a "math genius". In addition, you did not leave an edit summary. I am unfamiliar with the Alphas show, so have no way of knowing myself whether your edit was accurate or not. The other editor may have been too quick to call your edit vandalism, and you can discuss the matter on their talk page. But they may not remember it after five weeks, and were probably acting in good faith. Anti-vandalism work is not 100% accurate.

Here are some friendly optional tips from me to reduce the chance that your edits may be reverted: Create a user page saying a bit about you and the work you do on Wikipedia. Some editors may subconsciously assume a "red linked" editor without a user page is more likely to be a vandal. Always leave an edit summary explaining the purpose of your edit. Add references to any claim you add that might be challenged, such as calling someone a "genius". And, if someone disagrees with one of your edits, discuss the matter on the article's tak page. I hope my observations are helpful to you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, I am sorry I did not leave an edit summery, I must have forgotten. The character really is a math genius, the show is about people with superhuman abilities. Since you are probably correct in that they won't remember it, should I just re-change it and if it is reverted again, I bring it up then? Thanks for the help.KingSupernova (talk) 04:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Before you change it again, be sure to find a reliable source, such as a news report or magazine article about the show that specifically says that the character is a math genius. Add that at the same time, and then your edit will "stick"! —Anne Delong (talk) 12:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Uploading a photo to an article

As the page on Indian Astronomical Observatory, at Hanle [1] doesn't have a picture of the HAGAR Telescope. (It is a gamma ray telescope). I was trying to upload a picture I have taken. After failing to figure out how to do that in Visual Editor, when i read the docs, i found one has to have done 10 edits to be eligible to upload a photo. So what is that i should do now to contribute a photo of HAGAR telescope to wikipedia article? NB: I have read and happily agreed all the public domain conditions. Indiajoe (talk) 09:26, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Indiajoe, hi and welcome. The easiest solution is for you to make a few more edits, even small ones will do, until you hit the 10 edit mark. At that point your account will be confirmed, then you can upload the image. NtheP (talk) 19:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Indiajoe. I would think that since you want to release rights for it to be used on Wikipedia, you may wish to upload it to Wikimedia Commons for use on many Wikipedia language sites. They also do not have the 10 edit and 4 day requirement there. Happy editing!!! Technical 13 (talk) 01:45, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to Nthep and Technical 13 for suggestions. Offhand, i can't think of making any 10 edits. So i think the best thing i can do now is to upload to Wikimedia Commons.

Thanks again for all the suggestions. Indiajoe (talk) 09:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Should I create a table for a filmography?

I'm working on an article about a child star in silent films. My first attempt was rejected, because I didn't understand that primary sources are a no-no on WP. So after a day of internet research, I've found good verifiable sources for most of the material in the original article, plus (as a nice reward for doing the research) some great new material from the same solid sources. One of those sources provided a verifiable filmography for my subject, consisting of 13 entries. I'm wondering if I should simply list those in the text, or whether I should put them in a filmography table. I found a template for such a table in WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, but I don't see how to use that template in my article.

So, two questions: - Should I use a filmography table? - If so, how do I format it?

Many thanks! Ailemadrah (talk) 05:36, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

ye121.74.91.156 (talk) 10:28, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Ailemadrah and welcome to The Teahouse.

Below is a sample of how such a table might be formatted. First you can see the code that is necessary to create the table. You can see the date goes in the first row in each case, followed by the name of the film on the second row, and then the role on the third row. If you want to add notes that can go in the fourth row.

{| class="wikitable sortable plainrowheaders"
|-
! scope="col" | Year
! scope="col" | Title
! scope="col" | Role
! scope="col" class="unsortable" | Notes
|-
| align="center"| 1984
! scope="row" | ''[[No Small Affair]]''
| Mona
|
|-
| align="center"| 1985
! scope="row" | ''[[Moving Violations]]''
| Amy Hopkins
|
|-
| align="center"| 1987
! scope="row" | ''Inside Out''
| Amy
|
|-
|}

This code produces:

Year	Title	Role
1984	No Small Affair	Mona
1985	Moving Violations	Amy Hopkins
1987	Inside Out	Amy

— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 16:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Log in problem on Opera Mobile

i am using a tablet for wikipedia editing, i used to be able go to wikipedia via Opera Mobile,but now it shows this message: "Connection refused: en.wikipedia.org:80". But i can go to wikipedia via Opera Mini, why is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MachKushay (talk • contribs)

Something appears to be stopping the connection to Wikipedia's servers. Have you tried logging in to https://en.wikipedia.org instead? -- ^(T)Numbermaniac_(C) 04:00, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Images of an 1898 building

Hi folks, I'm having trouble figuring out what images are fair use, public domain, etc. Please check my upload at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:First_Unitarian_Church_of_Berkeley,_exterior.jpg and let me know how you would have handled it. I also have a color photo of the building taken recently by a friend, who would like credit but not copyright. How do I handle that? Also, please see the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Unitarian_Church_%28Berkeley,_California%29 and tell me what went wrong with the link to the image. HarZim (talk) 04:16, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Heya HarZim and welcome! Your question is a very good question since images and their copyright status can be tricky. There is a noticeboard at Wikipedia designed to handle these exact sorts of questions. See Wikipedia:Media copyright questions and ask the exact same question you asked there, as you asked here, and you're likely to get some good help. --Jayron32 04:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello HarZim, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your question is both complicated and simple at the same time. The simple part is this: If you, or me, or any other Wikimedia editor photographs the building, and uploads to Wikimedia Commons with the proper license, then all is well. But if someone, acting in good faith, makes even a passing mention of something incompatible with an acceptable free license, then the deal is dead. A common problem is someone saying they will release noncommercial but not commercial licensing. That sounds idealistic, but is a deal killer here. We allow all uses on Wikipedia, even commercial uses. Licensing MUST meet our standards, which are somewhat complex but also inflexible. I hope this helps. 04:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

Did they have e-mail in 1913....or should that read 2013? Yes...this is a non free image for our purposes at this point with the source used. There is no documentation to demonstrate when the photo was taken. If it can be shown to be more than 75 years and no known photographer or sourced to one, dead 75 years or more, then it should pass under public domain I believe.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, HarZim. The 1898 image is public domain under US law. So if you are uploading from the US to Wikipedia, whose servers are in the US, there is no problem at all with that image. I think the anonymous response above, combined with Jayron's answer, covers the color photo. There is a way he can release it, but unless he establishes a Wikipedia account of his own and uploads it, he will receive no credit. Even if he uploads it himself, the only credit will be on the image's page, not on the pages it is used on and that will be only be credited to his username. He will have no control whatsoever on how or where it is used, on or off Wikipedia. Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, I thought I was helping, but maybe not. I reviewed the history of First Unitarian Church (Berkeley, California) and put in the image the bot removed the malformed link for on July 1. This is a photo that has been here for some time and is the one used to illustrate the county NRHP list. If you want to use the old photo you uploaded, just open the edit window and copy the file name (not the URL), without the "File:" in front of it to the image line in the infobox. If you want it somewhere else in the article, just put the following line in whatever section you want it in:

[[File:First Unitarian Church of Berkeley, exterior.jpg|thumb|right or left|your caption]] Choose either right or left, that will be the side of the page it goes on, and write out a caption of your liking. As it is an old picture, it would most logically go in the history section. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Created a category

Hi, I created a Category:People educated at the University of London Institute in Paris, first time creating one, i'm not sure what i did was the correct formula, so can anyone check to see before it is deleted. thanks. (Monkelese (talk) 20:53, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Monkelese, thanks for swinging by The Teahouse. The category looks like it's in good shape-- 10/10! Now all you need to do is add some articles to it! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 21:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Monkelese, congrats but do you want to check that it doesn't duplicate anything in Category:Alumni of the University of London and also should it be titled Category:Alumni of the University of London Institute in Paris to be consistent with other alumni categories? NtheP (talk) 21:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

References

Hi--I know there is a function where you can enter a URL in a reference template, click a button, and the template is filled in automatically, but I can't find anything in my Preferences that makes that happen. Help please? Mindy Dirt (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mindy, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is a "Cite" toolbar at the top of the edit window which allows you to automatically generate the required wiki code.

You click one of the templates, e.g. "book", and fill in the details.

More information can be found in Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or the citations tutorial (the below video will play best in Firefox or Chrome):

Hope this helps, I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Although now that I am rereading your question...you might be looking for the reflinks feature. This works sometimes, I find, but not always for automagically filling in refs. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The method you're pointing at only has autofill for the ISBN (which doesn't appear to be working at all for me, by the way)--I was looking for the one where it autofills for the URL also. I saw it on a different computer, a while ago--it's a slightly different looking setup, with buttons made out of arrows (?) for the ISBN and the URL. Thanks anyway, Mindy Dirt (talk) 17:12, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Maybe that's it, but what I saw wasn't something done afterwards. Mindy Dirt (talk) 17:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Specifically for GoogleBooks citations, you can paste the URL into http://reftag.appspot.com and it'll auto-format. It won't auto-do the page# if it's a "Snippet View" one, so those you have to type in, but generally I find it pretty useful. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Also not what I was looking for, but it delivered a pretty decent citation, so thanks Matthew. Mindy Dirt (talk) 00:55, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

What should I Do for Undelete My Page.. Madhukar Muni

Please Help Me.. I am Sanjeev Nahata.. I create a Page about Jain Saint Madhukar Muni from India.. It is completly True and Correct.. but wikipedia.. listed it in delete.. pls help me to save my page.. thanks.. Sanjeev Nahta (talk) 12:40, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Sknahta007 and welcome to the Teahouse. I see the article was deleted as a copyright infringement. Due to the licensing of Wikipedia content, that's not allowed. Luckily this problem is fairly simple to fix - just use your own words instead of copying someone else's (note: If you wrote the website that you copied off, there is a separate procedure to follow). ^King Jakob _C2 13:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You will not only have to write in your own words. You will also have to write in a neutral way, rather than in a way that seems aimed at telling us all how wonderful the person yo are writing about is, and you will have to provide reliable sources to show that he is notable enough to be the subject of an encyclopaedia article. Those sources must be independent of that person, and of any organisation he is connected to. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Editing references

The article "Illusion" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion) contains an incomplete reference (#4). I found the complete reference and would like to contribute it. How do I do that? Thanks! Arts4always (talk) 08:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Arts4always. You are welcome to edit the article. Pick 'Edit' at the top, and then find where the reference is used in the text (not where it appears. Pick that, and it will let you edit the content of the citation.

If you are not confident doing that, explain your addition at the article's Talk page Talk:Illusion, and another editor can insert it for you. But I encourage you to give it a go: even if you make a mistake, it's not the end of the world, because previous versions of the article are there in its history, and can always be retrieved. --ColinFine (talk) 09:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

What is "housekeeping"?

Title basically explains it. I saw it off WP:SD, thanks. Koopatrev (talk) 06:23, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Can you please give the sentence where the word "housekeeping" was used, so we can see the context? In general on Wikipedia, the word "housekeeping" is used to decribe routine, non-controversial maintenance tasks. It could be correcting a typographical arror, or it could be removing gibberish like "b)l;6%3+0&76gvs#&%" from an article or a talk page. I hope this helps. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Maybe

When applicable, the following criteria may be used to delete pages that have survived deletion discussions:
G6, housekeeping

In the Introduction to criteria section. The Anonymouse (talk) 06:41, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that one, thanks. I saw many pages being deleted with the reason "housekeeping", which links me to the page above Koopatrev (talk) 07:17, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

It's basically at the deleting administrator's discretion; these are generally just (at least perceived to be) uncontroversial deletions (so, for example, deleting an old, unused, misleading template-space redirect). They aren't "binding" in any sense, though, and if you see one that you'd like to contest -- or maybe you even agree, but just want to get a few more eyes -- feel free to bring it up at the admin's talk page. Happy editing! Theopolisme (talk) 07:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Non-controversial maintenance: Who would object to someone mopping their floors, vacuuming their carpets, emptying their trash cans and washing their dishes? Literally or figuratively? That's "housekeeping". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:15, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

An example for you. I was doing archiving of my talk page today and discovered I had mis-titled the last one I did. (left out the space between archive and 15) After I had fixed it, there were two pages with the same content and almost the same title. I asked for one to be speedy deleted as "housekeeping". Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Line 21

Nesi Bern 06:18, 5 July 2013 (UTC)WikaNesi Bern 06:18, 5 July 2013 (UTC)What is wrong with line 21 in my first article? What is line 21? From where I have to start to count the lines? Nesi Bern 06:18, 5 July 2013 (UTC)WikaNesi Bern 06:18, 5 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nesi Bern (talk • contribs)

Hi and welcome to Teahouse. I cannot tell who you are, and without knowing who you are, I can't find your contribution list to look at your first article so I can answer your question. Are you signing your name by typing four tildes (~~~~)? Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Nesi. I've edited your sandbox User:Nesi Bern/Sandbox to move the Reference section and the {{reflist}} template to the bottom: that gets rid of the error message. The way references work in Wikipedia is that at the end of the statement you want to support you insert the <ref> ... </ref> information, and then at the end of the article you use the {{reflist}} template for the software to render the actual references (it just puts a footnote number where you defined the reference.) Please see WP:Referencing for beginners for more information.

Another point: I'm not sure if you intend all the links to Wikipedia as references, or are just putting them there for your reference while you work; but if you were intending to use them as references, please be aware that Wikipedia may not be used as a reference, since it is not reliable (anybody may edit it). However, you are strongly encouraged to link to other articles within the text. You don't need to give a full URL for links to Wikipedia articles, just enclose the page name in double square brackets. So for example you can write [[pelvic floor]] in your text, and it will appear as pelvic floor, so the reader can pick it to go to that article.

Please come back and ask if you need any more help. --ColinFine (talk) 08:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Good Article

For the Good Article process, do I have review a GA nomination each time I nominate a Good Article, like in DYK? And if I lack GA experience, could I request someone to review a GA nomination with me?--Taiping Tulip (talk) 05:01, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi User:Taiping Tulip! Do, you do not have to review a different nomination in order to nominate an article of your own. See the relevant instructions at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions. Of course, the good article process is extremely backlogged, so they will appreciate it if you could review some GAs now or down the line. If you have questions about the process of GA reviewing, I'd recommend asking someone who's active in the reviewing process. If you look at Wikipedia:Good article nominations and see whose names are listed there a lot of times, they would be good people to talk to. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

moving major edits to Sandbox

When an article is in need of major edits and the references need verification, is it permissible to move the article to 'sandbox' until it can be cleaned up? Stmullin (talk) 16:04, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Stmullin. No, I don't think that's a good idea, but you don't have to make major changes with just one edit. For instance, when creating articles, I usually do the job over the course of 10-20 edits (example). ^King Jakob _C2 16:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree with King Jakob c 2. The article should be continuously available to readers while being improved. This is a collaborative project and other editors may pitch in to help improve it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

What you can do is to use the Template:inuse: if you use 'Edit source' and add {{inuse}} to the top of the article, it will put up a message telling people that the article is being worked on in a major way. --ColinFine (talk) 21:53, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Liberty
		Thanks for working on a Holiday! Happy 4thStmullin (talk) 19:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Stmullen, welcome to the teahouse, you probably know this already but I just wanted to point out you can still copy (as opposed to move) the article in question to your sandbox, work on it there and upload it back. I do that often. I make small changes to an article directly but if I'm doing any writing of more than one or two sentences I like to have it in the sandbox. A few things to keep in mind if you do this 1) remember to remove any categories from the version in your sandbox, I'm not 100% sure the reason for this but someone told me who knew what he was talking about, my guess is you don't want people searching for topics to see content in your sandbox 2) remember to delete (or just put a ":" in front of) any images from the article. For copyright reasons images that are OK for an article often aren't OK in your sandbox. Also, if you are worried about edit conflicts, what happens if someone changes the article while you are working in your sandbox on it, in my experience those are few and far between and easily managed. Just make sure you are watching the article so you will be notified of any changes. Mdebellis (talk) 14:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

How to disable Visual Editor?

Hi. I'm on a mobile device. Therefore, visual editor is not compatible with my device. Is there a way in your preferences to disable the visual editor? If not, I'll just type it manually into the address bar with the {{URL|example.com|optional display text}}. Thank you. ~~JHUbal27 23:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JHUbal27. I too edit with a mobile device, a Droid RAZR. I log into the desktop version of Wikipedia, not the mobile version. You will have two menu options for editing an article. Clicking "edit" brings up the visual editor. Clicking "edit source" brings up Ye Olde Wikicode. I hope this helps. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the edit source button. I edit on a Samsung Galaxy Reverb. Thanks. ~~JHUbal27 00:21, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I figured it out. To all future editors, go to Special:Preferences→ Gadgets ↓ Editing and put a big 'ol Y in the box that says "Remove VisualEditor from user interface." That is all. ~~JHUbal27 03:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

An FA

Does anyone think that Fishing Creek (North Branch Susquehanna River) would be ready for FAC? Thanks, ^King Jakob _C2 12:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi King jakob! Some thoughts. "Fishing Creek starts south of State Game Lands Number 13..." - what is a State Game Lands Number 13? "..where East Branch and West Branch Fishing Creeks..." - why are these capitalised? Is "East Branch Fishing Creek" really a proper noun? Is Google Maps really a good enough source for large sections of this large paragraph? Fishing Creek's end point is defined by the Susquehanna river, but there's no article on that - so should this article say more about it? "This is close to the limit of tolerability for trout... the pH levels near the limit that brook trout can tolerate" - why the repetition when both facts are apparently from the same source? Long listings of different levels of different chemicals does not make for exciting prose, unfortunately. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:09, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Tulsi Tanti page

We wanted to edit the content on Tulsi Tanti's page, the content is quite old and this might need a refresh. How should i provide / edit the content.

Please help. 08:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The normal way you'd edit any other page? --Hawkmist (talk) 09:06, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I did that, but this changed again to old format121.242.42.35 (talk) 09:23, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

and when i asked why did this changed to old format, they told me that go to Teahouse and find out. Shimansh (talk) 09:27, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The information you are adding is a copy of the information at http://www.green-global.net/pdf/Profile.pdf . You can't copy and paste information from other sources as this is a violation of copyright. Flat Out let's discuss it 12:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, is the page you copied of the web your own work? If so, see WP:Donating copyrighted materials. ^King Jakob _C2 12:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

User uploaded copyrighted image under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license

Hello

Recently I came across a poster of a film which was uploaded to wikipedia under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license by an user but being a film poster it is copyrighted and cannot be used under sharealike license! I don't think that the user himself is the graphic artist even if he is the production label won't allow him to. What to do now?

The poster - File:Issaq_2013.jpg

Regards

---$oH4M ❊ আড্ডা 08:58, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Sohambanerjee, good spot. If you can identify where it is a copyright violation of then go to the image page on Commons andd add {{copyvio|source=URL}} to that page and a Commons admin will take care of it. If you're not sure where it is a copyvio of, again go to the image page at Commons and in the toolbox on the left hand side you'll find an option called "Nominate for deletion" - click on this and follow the process listed there. NtheP (talk) 09:48, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply but looks like a template has been placed on it by none other than you. Thanks for doing it as I think copyright violation is a serious matter that too one such incident in Wikipedia.

---$oH4M ❊ আড্ডা 08:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Dimitri Papadimos

...I have created a page in Greek about my father Dimitri Papadimos (http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%94%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%AE%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%A0%CE%B1%CF%80%CE%B1%CE%B4%CE%AE%CE%BC%CE%BF%CF%82) and now have tried 4 times to great page in English (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Dimitri_Papadimos). The submissions have been declined on the basis "not adequately supported by reliable sources" and the last reviewer has added that "...MUST_ FIX THE FOOTNOTE FORMATTING". Having submitted the project several times it is obvious that I am doing something wrong...Will someone please instead of stating the problem explain to me how to sort it out...Yani papadimos (talk) 08:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Yani. If you look at the Career section, you'll see that footnote 1 is a small number. This is because it's done properly. You need to change the rest of your footnotes to use <ref> </ref> tags like footnote 1. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 10:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I've fixed footnote 2 for you as an example. Note we don't put the footnote number - the Wikipedia software takes care of that. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 11:04, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

NeilN

I would like to thank you publicly for being the only reviewer that actually helped me in sorting out the problem with the footnotes...you are the only person who by actually editing yourself the submission explained to a "beginner" how to go about editing the article...I have re-submitted the article and I hope the problem is solved and it will be published...again if there is something that I committed I hope you or the next reviewer will not only point it out but supply me with "hints" of how to go about sorting the matter...again many tks Yani papadimos (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Yani, and welcome to The Teahouse. Your problems still are not solved. The few sources you have do not cover much of the material, and in order to get a biography accepted, you have to have a source for everything. ~~Furthermore, the final paragraph has only one source which is not independent of its subject. To have that much of the article relying on a source that is not independent is not acceptable.~~ I misread something. That footnote is incorrectly formatted. It may actually be true that the source for the final paragraph is independent, but it is in Greek and I can't be sure what it is. Still, peacock language is a problem. There's a promotional tone that sounds like advertising. "Multifaceted" is one word which shouldn't be there unless it is a direct quote from someone independent. And the entire second sentence just reads like an advertisement. It's hard to explain.

And, of course, you are not independent of your subject. See WP:COI. Ideally, you should not be creating an article about your own father because it is hard to write with a neutral point of view. It's not your fault. Most people feel they can be neutral when writing about subjects they are close to, but they rarely succeed.

One more problem is what people in the UK call the lede. You may spell it that way too. The lede, or first paragraph, should clearly state why the subject of the article is notable. Yours does not.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I have personal photos of Dimitri Papadimos (my father) that I would like to add to the article. These are when he was a military photographer during WWII, but dont know how exactly to add them within the article. I know how to upload files and insert image at the top of the article.Yani papadimos (talk) 12:04, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

August 30th Hello, would you be able to help me? I have submitted an article for creation/project page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Dimitri_Papadimos what happens next? Thank you for your help. Yani papadimos

Username change

How do I change my username? I would prefer something less flowery. Can any admin perform the task?--Taiping Tulip (talk) 04:20, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Taiping Tulip and welcome. The process to follow is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username/Simple but you first need to read these points to understand what is and isn't allowed. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:27, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Taiping (or maybe not for long), and welcome to the Teahouse. You can see a username change at WP:CHU. Thanks, the one sean 04:28, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The quickest and easiest solution is to keep your username but change your signature to something similar, like "Taipeng T" for example. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

No backlog at the Articles for Creation desk.

For those editors, particularly those who are new to Wikipedia, who have been working on an article for the encyclopedia, this is a really good time to submit your article at the Wikipedia:Articles for creation project for review. There is usually a backlog which means that you could wait at least a week for a review of your article, but right now there is no waiting list at all. You can submit your article and within a few hours you can find out if there's something that needs to be done to improve it before it becomes part of the the encyclopedia. Good luck! —Anne Delong (talk) 03:28, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, Anne. I know that you do careful reviews but have my concerns about some of the other reviewers. Is there some sort of peer review of the work done by Articles for Creation reviewers, so that skills are steadily improving? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, feedback such "article is too short" doesn't do much to help the newcomer. Flat Out let's discuss it 03:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Maybe an update of the Wikipedia:Twinkle scripts to notify the editor who moves an article into article space, as well as the article creator, when an article is nominated for WP:PROD or WP:AfD? That would at least give some feedback. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

This is one good thing about the backlog drive which is going on during July. Each review that is done is reviewed again by a second reviewer, and if the two don't agree, then a third reviewer is called in. This means that reviewers and submitters get the benefit of more than one opinion. One piece of advice that I can give is that if your article is turned down, it's not final, just make some suggested improvements and submit it again - there's no limit, really, except for copyright material and libelous articles, which are removed right away. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:58, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Reading some of the comments, I would like to point out that Twinkle and Afd are used mainly on articles that are in mainspace, not in the Article for Creation unless something is really nasty. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:04, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I've used Twinkle and PROD / Afd on a number of AfC articles once they're in mainspace. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to weigh in here. For the backlog drive, at least, there is a review process for random reviewing of reviews. (There's a better way to say that, but I don't have time to find it.) For the other times, peer review is entirely informal, but it does exist. Thanks, the one sean 04:27, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Removal of citation request

Hello.

I have added citations to a number of pages that were asking for this to be done. How do you bring it to someones attention so as to have the please add citations request reconsidered? Is this something that happens automatically over time? I am not the original creator of the pages I am just trying to assist.

This is a link to one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Cowell

Best, Dean.Take-too (talk) 02:47, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Dean, and welcome to the Teahouse. The various maintenance templates that you see on articles can be removed by any editor, including you, when the issue has been resolved. So, if you have added citations, simply edit the article and remove the template. Use an edit summary explaining what you are doing. So the edit history for the article might show four recent edits, summarized as "add ref", "add ref", "add ref" and "remove tag". I hope this helps. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I've now looked at the article you mentioned. The biggest problem with the majority of the citations is that they are Bare URLs. They should be fleshed out to full citations, including author, title, publication or website name, city, page number, date of publication and so on. Be sure that you choose reliable sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen. Bare URLs. Didn't even know that existed. There is a lot to know.

In the case of these (very reputable) Australian Government and IMDb links, if they change the paths at anytime, I seriously doubt that having a text body that is more descriptive will help to relocate if/once they become dead links. But I get the point and will attempt to include in my future page entries.

Best, DeanTake-too (talk) 05:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Adding content

how do you add an article to wikipedia?

Andes87 (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Andes87 and welcome. WP:Article wizard is a good place to start. You could also do some work on existing articles to get used to our systems and style.--Charles (talk) 21:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Corbis Images OK to use on Wikipedia and if so, are there special considerations that must be applied?

Corbis Bettmann images OK to use and if so, are there special considerations that must be applied?

Corbis Images

http://www.corbisimages.com

From the talk page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Corbis)

"Their images which are from the US Govt are in the public domain, as are all photos from pre-1923. They have also granted free use to non-profit organizations for some historic photos (so Wikipedia)"

http://www.corbis.com/BettMann100/ImageDonation/PDF/Corbis_Guidelines.pdf

Accordingly, the Bettmann arcve has been "opened:"

"Only images from the Bettmann Archive will be donated. Images must be available through the Corbis website (http://pro.corbis.com)"

I gather if I wish to use Corbis Images from the Bettmann archive (particularly pre 1945 images) to illustrate a Wikipedia article, I can do so, or is there some other consideration I must look into. For example, it looks to me I can simply use the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Non-free_historic_image template. SteamWiki (talk) 19:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there are always special considerations with images and copyright. That is, there are rarely situations where you can say use a broad brush of a class of images but need to look at each individually. Let's start easy. If an image is published prior to 1923 it is in the public domain in the U.S. (where our servers are located). The rub here is published, not just an image from prior to 1923 but an image published prior to 1923. Anyway, if that is the case, you should upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up).

U.S. federal Government works are not eligible for copyright and are public domain in the U.S. (meaning many state works are not) and a consideration in this area is that U.S. works may include copyrighted images not owned by the U.S. but used by permission of a copyright holder, transferred to the U.S. with the copyright retained by the assignee or commissioned by the government to a private contractor who retains copyright.

Here's the bad news. It appears only images that meet public domain standards from the Corbis archive can be used (outside of the restrictive fair use standards which I'll get to). The images in the archive that are not public domain are being given a free license that is wholly incompatible with the free license our content requires (essentially free reuse even for commercial purposes by our end readers, only with the requirement of attribution to the copyright holder). The images there are under permission to use only, and the "images may not be reproduced, displayed, distributed, or incorporated into other works" etc. As such, the use of the non-public domain images for Wikimedia purposes are no different than any other fully-copyrighted non-freely copyrighted image.

Okay, so what then? We allow use of non-free copyrighted images under fair use doctrine, but only if the material meets the strict criteria set forth at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. You must meet all f the criteria and very much here, you cannot generalize but must look at each to see if it meets the doctrine. For example, is it possibly replaceable by a free equivalent? If so, it won't meet the no free equivalent criterion. Generally, images of living persons cannot meet fair use because they fail this criterion. Unfortunately, fair use is thorny; copyright in general is thorny. You can always ask for an opinion as to a specific image at WP:MCQ. Best regards.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:30, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. In view of what you stated, I should be ok since the images I plan using are of deceased persons in a specific historical situation, the image(s) used to illustrate that particular event are discussed in the article and are derived from the Bettmann archive, where the Corbis donation encompasses.

SteamWiki (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Three fair use questions to consider when placing: Have you checked whether there other images out there of the same event that while maybe not as good, are freely-licensed or public domain? Have you reduced the image size to meet minimal usage? (rescaled the image as small as possible to still be useful.) Does the image's presence significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding? Also, be aware that you must not only provide a license, as the one you suggest above, but also a fair use rationale. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Harvnb reference when year is unknown

Can anyone suggest me how to cite a reference in Harvnb format when year is unknown? Ref: footnote 3 here. --Tito☸Dutta 02:50, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Tio, if you're talking about the references to the web page "Sketch of the life of Pavhari Baba" then {{cite web}} has been correctly used in this case and use of {{harvnb}} would be inappropriate and won't work as it doesn't work without a parameter of |year=. NtheP (talk) 20:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Verifying references for a departed person

Im writing an article on a religious leader born in 1897, and lived up to 1951. There are limited written records which are referenced online. The person is notable, whose memory continues to be revered. Even recently he was conferred a title. I have seen articles which are less referenced being published... Mentabolism (talk) 10:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Mentabolism! This is a really good question. If the person was active in a time period before the Internet, there would still have been written reports of his doings at the time, perhaps in newspapers or books. The reports don't have to be on line and they don't have to be in English, One problem when writing and article about a religious figure is that his followers often admire him so much that it is difficult to find articles that are factual information, rather than praise and expressions of support. However, a notable leader must have held gatherings which may have been reported, or written documents himself which may have been written about, or perhaps been present at dedications, or founded organizations, etc., which should have attracted media comment. The difficult is in finding the sources when they are not on line. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Mentabolism, can you tell us the name of this person so we can see if we can help? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi MatthewVanitasI am writing an article on the His Grace, The Late Lamented Geevarghese Mar Philoxenos. Mentabolism (talk) 06:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Mentabolism. I want to echo what Anne said about detachment. If you write an article like you wrote this question, I can promise you it won't get far. No disrespect, but the person isn't departed, he's dead. And just because he is revered by his followers or you feel he is notable, doesn't make him notable. What makes a subject (be it person, place or thing) notable is reliable secondary sources, independent of the subject, writing about the subject in detail. You see, notability for the purposes of Wikipedia doesn't mean exactly what notability may mean to you. It has a objective definition that can be found at WP:N. Notability is a requirement for any Wikipedia article. Gtwfan52 (talk) 17:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

HiAnne Delong. The person lived and worked through a time when the internet was not even thought about. The print media had just started growing roots in India, and there probably were no news reports about his work. Even if there were, I am sure these are not digitized and published on the net. There are some excerpts from his diaries, on a website which is far from being considered a reliable source. I have written the article with whatever I could find. He has started institutions which I have referenced to, institutions which are still running and refer to the person as their patron. Mentabolism (talk) 06:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

The Times of India was founded in 1838, sixty years before this person was born.

I do not understand why you say "I am sure these are not digitized and published on the net". Anne already explained to you, "the reports don't have to be on line". Did you read what Anne said? What did you understand it to mean? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 06:11, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

hi Demiurge1000,If it is not available online, can I just site a source and then say it exists? Mentabolism (talk) 06:25, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Well yes, if it actually exists, of course you can. Cheers! Crazynas^t 06:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

How can I claim coverage under WP:CCWMOS and have this article approved?

WP:CCWMOS is only a guideline and doesn't provide any exemption from the general notability guidelines of coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. So, for example, you can't he played an important role in a significant event within the Catholic Church (WP:CCMOS#4) without supporting references. NtheP (talk) 19:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Researching topics that are not covered on the Internet can be more difficult, but not impossible. For example, when writing my article about the Toronto Light Opera Association, in order to find reviews of the association's productions I had to take an hour's train ride to another city and read though unindexed microfilm copies of issues of a defunct newspaper. For most topics I wouldn't have bothered, but since this topic was of particular interest to my family I took the time. You may need to do the same, or to enlist the help of someone who lives in the area where your subject lived. —Anne Delong (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Anne Delong Demiurge1000 Crazynas MatthewVanitas Gtwfan52 yes I m beginning to get a lot more information on what I ve been doing wrong. Thank you for your input. I also tried the live chat, and got some feedback from there to. What added to the confusion was that there were some articles which were approved for much less. guess there were too many articles and too few editors.