Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 290

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 285

←

Archive 288

→

I would like a page to be deleted on Wikipedia, entitled roy acuff discography

Please delete this page. Ernesttubb8756 (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Done Philg88 ^♦talk 19:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Question about total edit numbers

Hi. Could anyone show me how to see the exact number of edits that I have made, rather than the list on my contribs page? DasPig _talk 20:35, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Try Luxo's tool. There are other edit counters but they seem to be off-line or not responding.--ukexpat (talk) 20:40, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Guten Tag CaptainPiggles willkommen im Teehaus. Click on your "Contributions" page, the link in the upper right corner when you are logged in. Go to the very bottom of that page and look at the links on the bottom: " CaptainPiggles: Subpages User rights Edit count..." click on "Edit Count" Note: that feature has been kind of slow for me lately so it may take a couple of seconds. Hmmm... actually it's not working for me right now. I think the program that provides that info may be down but normally that works. I tried it for my contributions as well and it didn't work for me either so it's not something specific for you. Hopefully by the time I finish typing this and post it, it will be back up but that should work. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 20:46, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Didn't work for me either but I have slow Internet. Thanks, Ukexpat.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject edit counters has a list but I don't know how up to date it is. A current count of your own edits can be seen very quickly at "Number of edits" at Special:Preferences. Note that edit counters can give different counts. Possible reasons may include lag, whether page moves count as one or two edits, and whether deleted edits are included. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Thankfully no one has criticized the tool. We should all be grateful that it ever works at all, as I believe it is done by voluntary work as most of wiki stuff. Thank you to those who work to resolve problems. Meanwhile try again every so often. SovalValtos (talk) 23:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Working fine now. SovalValtos (talk) 19:30, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Review and Approval process

I'm working on my first article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Jordan_Bachner and it was submitted for review and rejected as it contained a copyright violation as it contained text from a source. I made revisions to make the text my own and refer to the source and have resubmitted it.

My question is would this be the only issue that was holding the article back or could there be more? For example, I'd hate to find out that I've spent time resolving the copyright violation only to find that the article will be rejected as not being significant enough to be added. Is that possible or does the reviewer take that into consideration as part of the review and his response to me the author? Thanks TimHitchings (talk) 14:10, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Welcome! There is a reasonable chance that it will be declined again due to a lack of notability since Wikipedia is not the correct place for memorial pages, this at points seems to be one. Also, the references need to be put into their own section. I'm busy at the moment, but I will certainly have a second longer look at the article in a few hours time and see if there is anything which could be done to better emphasise the subject's notability. Arfæst Ealdwrítere – talk! 14:19, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I've polished the references and added additional significant sports accomplishments to the article. I was hoping the references in fox news and sports illustrated would carry enough weight to boost notability over a memorial page. Thank you for your response and your advise and attention. TimHitchings TimHitchings (talk) 17:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I had a brief look at it, TimHitchings. I think the article is about something a bit more than a straight memorial, and that it's been covered by a lot of media outlets is something in its favour. Let me take a more thorough look now I've got some time to work on it, and I'll see whether I can determine whether the sources are reliable enough to prove notability. LouiseS1979 (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Lstanley1979 for your feedback. I'm hopeful that your assessment is correct as I would love to be able to surprise the parents with this article about their son. TimHitchings (talk) 19:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I'll post more specific advice to your talk page to avoid cluttering up the Teahouse. But I'd also like some other input into this, because I'm also a bit of a rookie with this too. LouiseS1979 (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Removing 'Original research' tag

After completing the adventure, I took on cleaning up a page as suggested- the page for the album Confield, by Autechre.

I think I've done it justice, so am I responsible for removing this?

"This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (March 2009)"

Thanks for the help Planetofpants (talk) 21:37, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Planetofpants. You are not required to remove it but you are free to do so if it is no longer justified. I notice however that there are still whole paragraphs without a citation. There should be at least one per paragraph even if it is a repeat citation.Charles (talk) 21:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Stuart Styron

Can someone help out and rewrite some points? Thank you very much. -- Flashfox7 (talk) 21:15, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Flashfox7. Your challenge is to show that this person meets our notability guideline for musicians. I Googled his album release, and didn't find any independent reviews in reliable sources. Though I could be wrong, he doesn't appear notable to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:00, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Hey Cullen328, he is an artist in an popular independent label calls "Timezone". They sell worldwide and have lots of good german artists. They already are on german wikipedia. Styron is in all online stores and he will publish cd`s elsewell all is upcoming. In social networks he is popular and has a verified facebook page already. He is not over the top or something, but he is also an actor. What do you think is the best way to describe him. I mean he is not only a musician, we can write more neutral things that would be good elsewell. There are some links I found, did you checked it? Thank you. -- Flashfox7 (talk) 22:47, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, FlashFox7. It doesn't make any difference how widely he sells, what he publishes, how popular he is, or whether he has a Facebook page: what matters is (only) whether reliable published sources, independent of him, have written at length about him. If they haven't, then there is essentially nothing which can be put in an article, because almost every single piece of information in an article must be backed up by a reliable published source. The links you have given may be enough, but some of them are not useful because they are no more than mentions of him. Please see NMUSIC for more about the criteria for having an article. As for what to say about him, the answer is the same: you may say about him what the independent reliable sources say about him, nothing more. You should not use any description which is not found in them. --ColinFine (talk) 00:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

okay, but what can we do now? He is popular, can someone support the article? I haven`t enough experience. -- Flashfox7 (talk) 22:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I've created a new project

Surprisingly, there still was no project about cosmology in all these years of Wikipedia. Here is is now: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cosmology. It still needs some work on it. I didn't want to make this public, but maybe you guys can give me a hand to improve it a little. I've done the basics already. Thanks! Tetra quark (talk) 20:00, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Tetra quark, and thanks for starting the project! However, don't you think it might be a duplicate of the astronomy WikiProject? --Biblioworm 20:51, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Haha, nope. They are two different things. Tetra quark (talk) 22:32, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I think I see what you mean. (I've never been the scientific sort.) --Biblioworm 22:51, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Cosmology is more about the universe as a whole. It's the study of its beginning, current situation and its end. Astronomy is more about the study of celestial bodies like planets, galaxies etc. You're not much into science but it's ok. I wish I were more into books :) Tetra quark (talk) 23:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Grabbing a logo, but not from the org's website

Hi! I plan to add a logo image to The Land Institute, but I'm unable to get the logo from landinstitute.org, the official website. Is it okay to grab the logo from www.cooper.edu/events-and-exhibitions/events/nature-measure? Thank you for your time! Happy New Year! Bananasoldier (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bananasoldier. Because the Land Institute appears to be an official sponsor of the event described on that web page, in my opinion, it is fine to copy the logo from that page. However, you should reduce the resolution of the image before uploading to Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you once again, Cullen328 (talk · contribs)! Bananasoldier (talk) 03:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

How do I deal with a user who could be impersonating?

I recently found a user who claimed that he/she was the same person that the article was about, with no proof whatsoever on their user page (empty). Should I report this somewhere, or is there a specific way to deal with this? Thanks a bunch! ~HackedBotato ^{Chat with me ♽ Contribs} 03:40, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Could you provide a link to the article and/or user? Arfæst Ealdwrítere – talk! 03:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

The article is Brooke White, user is User:Realbrookewhite, claims that she is the real "Brooke White" on the edit history of the page. ~HackedBotato ^{Chat with me ♽ Contribs} 03:52, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I have reported the user to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. If it's genuinely Brooke White, she can prove it to the staff over at Wikimedia. Arfæst Ealdwrítere – talk! 03:59, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a ton! ~HackedBotato ^{Chat with me ♽ Contribs} 05:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

It seems that the user is trying to update the image of the performer. It would be useful to explain our policies regarding images, on both the article's talk page and the user page, as the image has been nominated for deletion. All signs indicate that this person is operating in good faith, so an overly bureaucratic response should be avoided, and every effort should be made to welcome and assist them. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Disapearing image file (but not image page)?

Hi, I noticed on Windows 7 that it showed the file File:Action-centre-warning.PNG as red-linked. When I went to check the deletion reason I was surprised to find the file page File:Action-centre-warning.PNG still exists and nothing in the history mentions the physical file being removed. Anyone know what could have happened, how to fix? Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:54, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

@KylieTastic: You have to click "View logs for this page" on the history page to see entries in the deletion log: [1]. Four versions have been uploaded, the first three were deleted 21 October 2011, and it's the 12 October 2011 version by Pacificgilly1992 which is missing. I don't know what happened to it. The same user uploaded File:Action centre warning.png five minutes earlier.[2] It was deleted but as an administrator I can view it. I could restore it but will wait in case somebody else wants to try to figure out what happened. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks PrimeHunter - It's very odd as this appears to be something that happened in the last 48 hours, but as you say the logs show no change for years! The reason I noticed the change was it popped up on Category:Articles with missing files that I monitor. Also the file was still showing ok in its other use on Features new to Windows 7 (unless you click on the thumb you then got an error) - but I just checked and its now been red-linked there as well. It's a very odd glitch, and the first time I've seen it in the 10's of thousands of issues I've dealt with flagged up on Category:Articles with missing files. Your plan of waiting for a while for further input and if none restoring sounds good to me - I just hope its not part of a larger issue and more files are just going to disappear! Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Google's cache:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Action-centre-warning.PNG currently shows it was on the file page 19 December. The file itself is still at http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d6/Action-centre-warning.PNG. It's apparently lost in some kind of Limbo. Purging or null editing the file page doesn't help. cache:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7 shows it was missing from that article December 29. file:Action-centre-warning.PNG is supposed to produce a direct link to the file at upload.wikimedia.org, but it also thinks the file is missing and makes a red link. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:52, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

I have posted it at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 133#Image in Limbo. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:26, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Could you anyone please guide us to submit our articles as the information about the articles are real, reliable and notable.

Dear mate, my friend has submitted 2 articles yesterday but it was patrolled in next 3 to 6 hours. I hope the format we followed was right but the reasons they shared as promotional & tag type problems. Yesterday full day we wrote that 2 articles alone. Could you anyone please guide us to submit our articles as the information about the articles are real, reliable and notable.Keerthiee (talk) 03:55, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Welcome! Could you link the article draft here to here so that we may see it? Arfæst Ealdwrítere – talk! 05:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your valuable advice. Here is the draft page link "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keerthiee/Ignite_Foundation" for your review as you mentioned previously.Keerthiee (talk) 08:30, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Keerthiee. I see that the draft article has been deleted for copyright infringement. There is a comment on your talk page about how the foundation could license the text to be used on Wikipedia; but in my opinion that will not be helpful. It is important to remember that nearly everything in any Wikipedia article should be based on published information by people unconnected with the subject: probably at least 90%. Ifn an article about the Ignite Foundation, hardly any of the article should be based on anything that the Foundation says about itself: simple factual data like places, dates and names of people, and nothing else. --ColinFine (talk) 09:59, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine, Can you please clarify me the sentence little clear ? "everything in any Wikipedia article should be based on published information by people unconnected with the subject: probably at least 90%. Ifn an article about the Ignite Foundation, hardly any of the article should be based on anything that the Foundation says about itself: simple factual data like places, dates and names of people, and nothing else." As this problem is persisting for a longer time for me too. KarthikeyanKKenKnack (talk) 10:17, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Dear ColinFine,

As per your advice, I edited the draft fully based on the previous feedback too. Kindly review it and share your feedback again. ThanksKeerthiee (talk) 10:59, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your valuable tips ColinFine. Here is the draft link "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keerthiee/Ignite_Foundation" for your reviews as you mentioned below.Keerthiee (talk) 11:10, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Keerthiee. Not one single piece of information in the draft is referenced to a reliable source, therefore the article cannot be accepted in its current form. For example, the first sentence after the lead paragaph is "Ignite Foundation, a KEN KNACK’s CSR initiative was founded on February 2012 by Dr. K. Karthikeyan, when he was pursuing his post graduation in Anna University Guindy Campus with a team of his like-minded friends". That is at least two separate pieces of information which are unreferenced. It needs an inline reference to a published source that says that it was founded in February 2012 by Karthikeyan, while he was a postgrad at that university - since that much is uncontroversial factual data, that much could be referenced to information published by Ignite, for example its website. Talking about his "like-minded friends" is editorializing - telling the readers what to think - and should never appear in an article unless it is directly quoting a reliable source unconnected with the subject. So if a newspaper published an article (not just from an Ignite press release, but one which an independent writer had created) that referred to Karthikeyan's like-minded friends, that would be acceptable: not otherwise. Similarly "they were feeling ideal pleasure in making everyone happy" does not belong in an encyclopaedia.Throughout the draft article, there is some information which in my opinion does not belong in an encyclopaedia article at all (for example, who created the logo and website); and more information which may occur but is not written in the neutral tone required in Wikipedia articles; but in any case every single piece of information in the article (after the lead paragraph) should be individually attributed to a published reliable source, and most of it to sources independent of the subject. Please see referencing for beginners for how to go about this.

In addition, I see that KarthikeyanKKenKnack has contributed much to this draft: he needs to read Wikipedia's guidelines on editing with a conflict of interest.

One further point: "a KEN KNACK’s CSR initiative" is meaningless to me. "Ken Knack" is I guess an Indian corporation, but the article should say so the first time it is mentioned (ideally it should have a Wikilink to it, but we don't appear to have an article about it). Similarly, looking at the article CSR I guess that you mean "Corporate social responsibility", but that is one of thirty nine different meanings of "CSR" in our disambiguation page. You should either spell it out and link to the article ([[corporate social responsibility]]) or at least link to the article with a pipe ([[corporate social responsibility|CSR]], which will appear as CSR). --ColinFine (talk) 13:17, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Adding an image to published article

I've successfully published my first article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Jordan_Bachner with the help of a couple of very generous users Arfæst Ealdwrítere – LouiseS1979

The subject of the article's mother wants to have a picture of her son added to the article. I've read through the articles on images and am still fuzzy. If the mother can supply me with a photo she took of her son pitching, example: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152601937172147&set=o.113660979655&type=3&theater what is the best method to get the photo in to Wikipedia so it can be attached to an article? Thanks TimHitchings (talk) 17:20, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, TimHitchings. There are three stages:

Make sure the copyright holder in the photo has released it for free use. If the subject's mother took the photo, then she probably holds the copyright; but she must be willing to release it under a copyleft licence that lets anybody use it for any purpose, including commercially. If she is willing to, she (not you) needs to follow the procedure in WP:donating copyright materials.
Once that has happened, you or she can upload the photo to Wikimedia commons.
Finally, you can add it to the article.

User:Yunshui/Images for beginners is a good introduction to all this. --ColinFine (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Jordan_Bachner Hopefully all is correct. Thanks for your help. TimHitchings (talk) 21:26, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Moving article

Please move WWE Payback (2015) to Payback 2015. I cannot move because Payback (2015) already exists! It happens with all WWE pay-per-view events I had seen before, but after all how do they fix it. One example is WrestleMania 31, whenever I clicked it, it took me to WrestleMania, but now it is fixed! Ikhtiar H (talk) 08:01, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi there Ikhtiar H and welcome to the Teahouse. Only administrators can move an article when the target page already exists. In this case, looking at similar articles, the correct location is Payback (2015). I will move the article accordingly. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 08:07, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Philg88! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikhtiar H (talk • contribs) 08:23, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

how to become best page creator

i want to know how to be a best writer 08:13, 1 January 2015 (UTC)Randhawaharnir (talk)

to be abest writter a creativity is needed08:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)08:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randhawaharnir (talk • contribs)

Hi Randhawaharnir it will be good if you consider reading Wikipedia:Your first article. You can also see this wikiHow article. Ikhtiar H (talk) 08:18, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

thank you 08:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)08:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)~~

i want to ask to make my intro better what should i include08:27, 1 January 2015 (UTC)08:27, 1 January 2015 (UTC)Randhawaharnir (talk) 08:27, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, your user page should have some information about you and what you want to do here on the Wikipedia. Since you are young you should be careful and not write personal information such as you real name, age or info about your family. See my other answer to you. There are some rules and tips here Wikipedia:User pages and here Wikipedia:User page design center. And to add to the answer above, there was another user who asked about becoming a good editor some days ago, you can read all the answers to that here. w.carter-Talk 08:52, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

trouble with displaying uploaded photo

Hello,

I am having difficulty locating and embedding a photograph file on a wikipedia page. The photograph shows it is uploaded (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eric_A._Johnson.jpg) but for the life of me I cannot get it to embed on the Professor Johnson wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_A._Johnson). I would sincerely appreciate any help I could get with getting it uploaded and helping me to understand how to correctly upload images in the future.

Thank you, Jlsin2013 Jlsin2013 (talk) 15:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

The photo loads without a problem, but I haven't left it up on Eric A. Johnson's page, as it is clearly a copyright violation taken straight from Central Michigan University's website, and will be deleted shortly. - Arjayay (talk) 16:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Jlsin2013, and welcome to the Teahouse. I added the picture in this edit, and you can see how it is done. However, the image is a copyright violation of this webpage, and will almost certainly be deleted. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 16:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you both Arjayay and G. S. Palmer for your advice and help with this problem. I will ask for publication permission on the photo from our marketing department when the new semester begins on January 5th. Also, thank you for helping me learn the ropes on adding photos, your advice and assistance is greatly appreciated. All the best, Jamie. (talk) 16:17, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Jlsin2013; please note that releasing copyright may not be as easy as it first appears. You need to be clear who actually owns the copyright (usually whoever took the photo) and that you cannot release copyright just for use in Wikipedia, as (almost) all Wikipedia's content can be re-used by anyone, for almost any purpose, including altering it and selling it. You may wish to suggest your marketing department starts by reading Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials - Arjayay (talk) 16:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

i too cant upload my photo08:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)08:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)08:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randhawaharnir (talk • contribs)

i want to know my for what is tea house

what ia tea house Randhawaharnir (talk) 08:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello Randhawaharnir and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a friendly place where you can ask question about how to edit on the Wikipedia. I saw your other question here and I think it might be a good idea for you to read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. I have also left you some notes on your talk page. Best, w.carter-Talk 08:46, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

my question is how can i add picture to my profile08:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)08:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)08:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)Randhawaharnir (talk) 08:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

You can find millions of pictures at something called the Commons and this is a guide on how to add them. You should also think about becoming adopted by a senior Wikipedian. Look at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. w.carter-Talk 09:07, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

New Question

(Moved here by w.carter-Talk 09:18, 1 January 2015 (UTC))

please help me to apply the photo on my profile09:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)09:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)09:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randhawaharnir (talk • contribs)

Please try to keep all your questions in the same thread. I think we should move this conversation to your talk page. I'll see you there and answer your questions. w.carter-Talk 09:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I am writing an article and I am not sure if the references are good enough

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vanmodhe/Moz5a#Our_Culture_Records.282014-.29

This is the article Vanmodhe (talk) 11:29, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Vanmodhe. Start off by reading WP:Reliable sources. At the moment, you only have 'primary sources' - records of his work, links to his albums on music purchase sites and so on. That's fine (in limited amounts), but you need a bit more to demonstrate his notability.

Basically, what you need to add to the article is press discussion of Moz5a's work and career. Search in reliable newspapers or music magazines for articles about him. There will probably be references there in articles about his two nomination for the Shorty awards, for instance, which may also go into detail about his career from an independent point of view. LouiseS1979 (talk) 13:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I need to upload a word document; It contains tables and pictures.

I tried copying and pasting in article section, table didn't show up 99.246.154.212 (talk) 19:41, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi person editing from 99.246.154.212. It's not possible to do so directly. Formatting here is done through Wiki markup (see also the Cheatsheet for a summary of common forms). Tables are also made through wiki markup that would require you to do some study to emulate the form of your Word document. See Help:Table, Help:Table/Introduction to tables and for style issues, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Tables.

However, there are some tools available that purport to help with conversion. See those listed at Wikipedia:Tools#Importing (converting) content to Wikipedia (MediaWiki) format.

One thing to be careful of: is the material in this word document your own unpublished work? If not, there might be copyright issues with using it here at all.

Please also keep in mind our requirements for neutral content, prohibitions on promotional content and using original research, and our requirements of demonstrating notability and verifiability through cited, independent and reliable secondary sources. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:58, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Probably i will drop the idea then 99.246.154.212 (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Location information in image captions

I edit articles on animals. In many of these articles, where there are images of animals, editors have included the location of the image in the caption, e.g. A XXXXX(animal) in XYZ park in abc (country). It seems to me this is unnecessary information and potentially implies that animals from that location might be different or noteable in some way. Is there a WP policy on this? An example of this is Common raven but there are many, many others.__DrChrissy (talk) 12:39, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Greetings DrChrissy Welcome to the teahouse. I'm not sure if there is an explicit wikipedia:policy on this but I think there are some good common sense reasons to leave those captions, as long as they are always factually correct. For one thing, I think it's a mistake to hold back true information just because someone might misinterpret it. The way an encyclopedia should work is we try and present as much relevant information that is verified in good wikipedia:references as we can. It's not our job to worry that some user might misinterpret some of it. Second, while I'm no biologist one of my best friends is a birder and I've picked up a few things from listening to her and for some birds at least there actually is an amazing amount of small local variation so it often would be useful to know the specific location of the animal being pictured. For example, where I live there are white crowned sparrows. Their call is quite distinct and I've done some research on it, the song they sing in my area is essentially unique to the small remote part of San Francisco where I live. Of course that is about the song but there are also similar kinds of minor variations in the appearance as well. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 13:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

The documentation at Template:Taxobox#Images says: "A caption can be provided using image_caption. A caption need not be provided if it would just repeat the title of the article. It should be provided if it can convey any additional information about the image, such as the sex or life stage of the individual, the location where the picture was taken, the artist (if an engraving or other illustration), or (for higher taxa) the particular species depicted."

You could suggest removal of the location at Template talk:Taxobox but I guess many readers like to know the location even if it doesn't appear relevant. Some of the users uploading their own photos probably also like to tell the location. It may even encourage them to take and upload good photos. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:20, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks both. It seems this is a pet dislike of mine. I have deleted locations from captions sometimes in the past but I think from now, I shall have to grin and bear it. Thanks again and Happy New Year! __DrChrissy (talk) 18:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

No, to grin and bear it. I think there is more to be said, but I do not have time until next year to say it. Hang in there.SovalValtos (talk) 18:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I get rid of that stuff all the time, I think it's cruft. Usually the location in a caption adds little to the article unless the location is relevant in the context of the article itself. Montanabw ^(talk) 05:59, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I am not a Teahouse host, just an ordinary editor for less than a year. Template:Taxobox#Images is a small sub area concerning the use of images within animal articles. I think the original question was about images in general. I can see that specifically for animals there may be an argument for giving a location if it adds to the article, but I would much prefer to see the judgement as what to be included in the caption left to the consensus of the editors involved. The same image used in different articles might have radically different captions depending on what point was being illustrated. Generally less is best, leaving new material in the body of the text where requests for Cits are more comfortably placed. An important broader point is that captions as created on upload to Commons cannot be considered as being reliably sourced at all. I have seen locations being given well out of position, wrong species etc. SovalValtos (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

SovalValtos Regarding images in general: making arguments like "less is more", which essentially just states an editor's personal bias and preference are not compelling. First of all it is a very well established best practice of web designers that images should have captions. There are good reasons related to web accessibility for disabled people that make captions a good idea. For example, there is software for blind people that can take a web page and convert it to an audio stream. When those programs get to the pictures they obviously can't analyze all the pixels and tell the blind user what the picture is so image captions are essential. And there is an MOS entry on this: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Captions that says: "Photographs and other graphics should always have captions, unless they are self-captioning images" I agree of course that the consensus of the editors and having verified info takes precedence but the default if you want to follow Wikipedia MOS and web design best practices is that you have a caption unless there is a good reason not to. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 13:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes a picture without a caption is rare, and ought to be. Some captions are too small, and more are too large. When they are too large, it's a judgment call whether just to trim or to put most of it into a sentence or two or a paragraph in the text. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

User:MadScientistX11 I do not think that anyone has suggested that images should in general have no captions. Certainly not me. If instead of using the phrase "less is more" I had used (the shorter) "succinct" my meaning might have been clearer. Sorry. Thank you for the link to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Captions and the mention of how blind users may use Wikipedia. I moved on to Wikipedia:Alternative text for images which made me realise I have never included alternative text when adding images, and I am not sure that I have come across its use at all. This is rather getting away from User:DrChrissy's question. On the page Common Raven the original caption for the first image was "English: Corvus corax (Common Raven) at Camp 4 in Yosemite Valley, Yosemite National Park, California, United States". Would adding 'Camp 4 in Yosemite Valley' to the caption on the page improve things? I think not. SovalValtos (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

"Corvus corax (Common Raven) at Camp 4 in Yosemite Valley, Yosemite National Park, California, United States" is not a caption but the file description at commons:File:Corvus corax (Common Raven), Yosemite NP, CA, US - Diliff.jpg#Summary. The former caption in the article was "Common raven in Yosemite National Park, United States".[3] "Camp 4" would be too much. I think that for an animal as common and widespread as the common raven, the location means less than for more rare aninmals. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:44, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, a file description usually says much that a caption does not, and sometimes vice versa. That's because the file description is about the picture. Captions serve a different purpose. Jim.henderson (talk) 21:53, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Once I've done my edit-'next & save' option doesn't appear

As stated above, once I finish my edit, usually it gave me the option to next & save it...it's no longer doing this... A little guidance please. 👍 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uk updates (talk • contribs) 20:42, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

@Uk updates: Hey there, welcome to the Teahouse. Usually, when I make edits to a page, I'm used to seeing the "save page" button at the bottom, below the editing window. But not a "next & save" option. Are you referring to something else? Are you using the Visual Editor by any chance? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 05:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Title edits and mis-info deletes?

I'm really new and have 2 basic questions: How does one go about editing the title of an article. Also how does one go about deleting mis-information in an article? Lancelka01 (talk) 18:51, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Lancelka01. We use a procedure called moving to change the name of an article. An account needs to be active for four days and have ten edits to complete a move. Your account is too new. If you mention the specific article here, and the reasons for changing the title, someone can help you. To delete uncited mis-information, just erase it, explaining why in your edit summary. If the information is cited to a poor quality source, then cite a better source, being prepared to explain why your source is more reliable than the other one. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:58, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. The article is entitled "Donald MacDonald (craftsman)." I have edited it based on my 2004 published article. I would suggest that the article be re-titled "Donald MacDonald (stained glass)." This would be much more informative. Could someone assist me with this change or "move." Lancelka01 (talk) 05:53, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Artical has been decline

Hi

My article has decline. I am getting " This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified"< Not sure what exactly do I need to do. This is genuine article about the company.

Thanks Fslpso (talk) 23:53, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

@Fslpso:, you may want to read WP:RS for explanations. As you haven't linked your article here, we cannot give you specific advice. But basically, you can't copy and paste information from a company's web page (because that's a copyright problem, see WP:COPYVIO) and you need to use reliable, third party sources to verify that the company is notable in general. To use references, see WP:CITE for how to do it. Good luck! Montanabw ^(talk) 00:05, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Flspso. Your draft article Draft:GEMS Learning Institute is entirely lacking in references and includes non-encyclopedic promotional language such as "It is an incubator of logic and creativity with a broad range of services and programs for children of all ages." Your draft article needs a complete re-write, and should summarize what Reliable, independent sources say about the school. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:57, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

wikipedia has not accepted my article hindi shayari please check topic and tell me mistakes and idea to make it more attractive 06:59, 2 January 2015 (UTC)06:59, 2 January 2015 (UTC)06:59, 2 January 2015 (UTC)~

What to do in a civilised dispute?

Hello once again, sorry to keep asking questions. If someone sees an article that is not NPOV and decides to discuss it in the talk page to have it changed but everyone (2 editors) goes against him, what options are available for him. I understand that consensus is important but blatant bias also needs to be dealt with. If I am at a block and there are only 2 other editors who are against improvement, is their any way to get an uninvolved editors to come and arbitrate the discussion. How do I find an uninvolved editor who is unbiased and holds no previous opinion on the issue that I require input and arbitration for? Alternatively what other options are available for me? This is important for me because I think wikipedia needs to maintain a certain standard to justify the readers confidence in our articles. This particular article has a very obvious bias starting from the very first line. Any help on what I should do would be appreciated. Thank you and sorry for the constant questions. Mbcap (talk) 14:25, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Mbcap. First, some general points: Wikipedia is not a democracy. The resolution on talk pages should be driven by rational arguments that appeal to wikipedia:policies so just because a situation may be two against one is not definitive. There is a simple way to request another editor take a look at the issues. This article tells you how to do that: Wikipedia:Third_opinion However, if you are talking about the discussions related to this article: Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant my advise in that case would be to just accept that the consensus went against you and move on. Those articles are incredibly hard to edit. I for one would never have the patience for it. I took a quick look at the discussion on the talk page and from that quick look if I were the third party I would side with the other editors. Sorry. It seems to me you kind of jumped into a discussion that had a long history and you were essentially raising again issues that had long been debated and settled. Please don't be offended if I'm misunderstanding the issues. Those talk pages are long and I only took a quick look but my advise is to get more experience editing less controversial pages first and then try going back to articles such as the ISIL one. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your input MadScientistX11, I am not offended at all. You have been very kind and civil with your input. I think I will go for the third opinion options if I find it is going nowhere. Mbcap (talk) 16:54, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Mbcap OK, good luck. One more thing: there are requirements that have to be met before you seek out a third party opinion. I suggest you read that article carefully and make sure you have done all the things required before requesting a third party or the request may be denied. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 18:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

If the original poster (OP) said that two editors went against them, then third opinion is not applicable. Read dispute resolution as to how to handle content disputes in general. If third opinion is not applicable, because there are already three or more editors involved, then the remaining options may be either a Request for Comments to obtain the opinions of additional editors, or the dispute resolution noticeboard to request that a volunteer moderator facilitate discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Robert McClenon My mistake. Thanks for correcting. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 07:05, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi

I am writing an article.

Draft:Don't Talk (Should be "Don't Shoot")

Can you tell me if it is a good article or not? Thanks. 92.16.4.92 (talk) 21:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

It's a nicely written and properly formatted stub, well done! If you can find and add some critics' opinions about the song it would help consolidate its notability. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:08, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. It would be really fuckin' awesome if it got accepted. 92.16.4.92 (talk) 12:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

very nice but need bit change 06:53, 2 January 2015 (UTC)06:53, 2 January 2015 (UTC)Randhawaharnir (talk) 06:53, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I like the title of your draft :) Since it has been made ready, I think the stale redirect can be now deleted. (don't talk secrets) (talk) 07:32, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Programming Language ??

Please answer my following questions....

Is Wiki Markup the only language used to edit wikipedia ??
When I go to Edit source of any wikipedia page, what's the programming language used there ?
What's the difference between C, C++ and Java ??

DtwipzB Talk 14:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Dibyendutwipzbiswas, welcome to the teahouse. Just to be clear Wiki markup isn't really a programmming language the way C or Java are, it's like HTML just a markup language. It is possible to escape to HTML and once you do that you can pretty much do anything you can do in HTML including scripting. At least I assume that is the case, I've never done it and the few times I've come across an editor who wanted to escape to HTML I've discouraged it. The problem is that most Wikipedia editors don't know or want to know the details of HTML so once someone added it to an article that article would be very hard to maintain. Also, the goal of using Wiki markup is to establish a consistent look and feel across one of the largest sites on the Internet. Escaping to HTML circumvents that. Regarding C, C++, and Java, this isn't the place for those kinds of questions. In the future please ask those types of questions here: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Computing The Wikipedia:Reference_desk is like a reference desk at a library, you can ask pretty much any question there. This forum is meant to be only used for people with questions about editing the encyclopedia. But the simple answer is that C is a very old procedural language. It was designed to be lean and fast and of the three if you had to get absolute bat out of hell performance or a minimal code foot print (which is rare these days given that my phone has more CPU power than the mainframe I used to program decades ago) you would use C. C++ is a superset of C, everything in C is in C++ plus C++ adds object oriented capabilities. And Java is a language designed from the beginning to be truly object-oriented. It's performance isn't as good as C or C++ but the code is more maintainable because a lot of the sources of error in C and C++ stem from things like memory allocation and Java unlike the other languages does that for you automatically. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

One last point, if you want to contribute to helping on the technical side of the Wikipedia infrastructure, volunteers are always welcome. I would start with this article: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Wow, a great answer to a rather boring question. Although this ins't my first time in the Teahouse. Thank you MadScientistX11 (talk) for your kind attention towards my question. DtwipzB Talk 15:15, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

@Dibyendutwipzbiswas: You asked "Is Wiki Markup the only language used to edit wikipedia ??". It depends what you mean by Wikipedia. Most editors only have to know wiki markup. All mainspace encyclopedia pages use it. But they can invoke modules written in Lua (programming language), either directly with an #invoke command or indirectly via templates which invoke modules. See Wikipedia:Lua. And in Userspace you can have JavaScript pages (not the same as Java) ending in .js, and CSS pages ending in .css. They affect the interface and layout. See more at Wikipedia:Customisation. The userspace pages only affect your own account but there are also js and css pages in the MediaWiki namespace which affect all users with JavaScript-enabled browsers (not sure about CSS). The gadgets at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets are all coded in js and/or css pages in the MediaWiki namespace. Special:Gadgets shows which pages. Templates use wiki markup but some of the central features in templates are rarely used in other pages like articles, so template coding is sometimes considered separate from normal editing. Finally, the MediaWiki software which powers Wikipedia is written in PHP. Normal editors don't have direct access to change the code but they can submit suggested changes. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:19, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

cool. DtwipzB Talk 08:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

"C++ is a superset of C, everything in C is in C++" This is not exactly true, but maybe sufficient, if simplified, answer for a complete beginner. It is possible to construct valid programs that silently do a different thing when compiled as C than when compiled with a C++ compiler (although these don't come up in practice that often). (don't talk secrets) (talk) 07:36, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Is it possible to use ToR?

Policy page Wikipedia:IP_block_exemption says that "In highly exceptional circumstances, an editor may be permitted to edit anonymously, via Tor or another anonymizing proxy." What might these highly expectional circumstances be? Isn't it sufficient that I don't want ECHELON to discover my IP address? (don't talk secrets) (talk) 07:00, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I happen to be an editor who has an IP block exemption, although for a mundane reason. All registered users edit anonymously, except that a very small group of highly trusted editors called checkusers can access their IP addresses for the purposes of investigating sockpuppetry and other forms of deceptive editing. Highly exceptional circumstances justifying proxy editing might include severe and demonstrable security concerns involving a highly trusted, long term editor. Any such requests should be directed in confidence to a member of the Arbitration Committee, or a Wikimedia ombudsman. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:19, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

So the additional privacy offered by ToR is only allowed for a privileged few? I'm not worried about checkusers themselves but more concerned that Tailored Access Operations and other advanced persistent threats can likely circumvent the normal account security of Wikipedia checkusers and server administrative stuff. (don't talk secrets) (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by ""privileged few" although I am sure that you do. If you are concerned that there are unacceptable personal security concerns involved with posting on any given website, whether Wikipedia or Twitter or Facebook or the comments section of your local newspaper, then the solution is obvious: do not participate in that website. Editing Wikipedia is a volunteer activity, after all. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:34, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

AFAIK the Tor/proxy exemption is normally only allowed where an editor is based in a country where the Internet is blocked/censored (China, Iran etc.). Philg88 ^♦talk 07:50, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

how do you provide factual information if your editors delete a page that will improve the accuracy of another page

There is a page out of date. In order to improve its accuracy another page must be made. Your editors delete it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.200.214 (talk) 01:59, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. Can you provide some information about what the deleted article was and what article it was seeking to make more accurate? I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 05:15, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

It seems to me that it is not possible for a Wikipedia page to contribute to the accuracy of another page, because the accuracy and reliability of Wikipedia pages depends entirely on the reliable sources they cite, and Wikipedia is not a reliable source (because anybody may edit it). --ColinFine (talk) 10:23, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Please help me get my article accepted...

Can you offer any specific advice? My article was just rejected but it seems to fit the guidelines to me?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Property_(Malibu_artists_colony)

Thanks!Pcaabplroa (talk) 01:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I think you should just go ahead and merge your material into the article Coffee House Positano. The AfC reviewers aren't going to take it as is, but the info is interesting and fits in the scope of the other article.Montanabw ^(talk) 05:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Pcaabplroa while I agree with Montanabw that the best approach is for you to merge the new info you have with the existing article I also think you have a more fundamental problem that needs to be addressed. As far as I can tell none of the references you have actually support the information you want to add. All the references you provide seem to talk about the cafe where as you are talking about a colony where artistic people lived. For example you open with: "The Property was a 130-acre Malibu artists colony that flourished from 1962 to 1993. It was located at the site of the old Coffee House Positano." You need to have a reference that actually says this is true. When I looked at the references you provided they all talked about "the old Coffee House Positano" rather than the artist colony. There is also an issue of the strength of your references. Even if they DID support what you say things like local small town papers by themselves are usually not enough to establish wp:notability. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 12:45, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Montanabw, MadScientistX11, the Coffee House and artists colony were very different. The Coffee House was only open for 5 years. The artists colony came after and lasted 30 years. The newspaper I referenced does give the facts about the artists colony: “The wonderful surprise that sprang up after the coffeehouse closed was that it was turned into an artists' colony.... For three decades plus, the 'Budwood' colony flourished." I also referenced an Anthropology magazine and a history book. Why isn't that good enough? Pcaabplroa (talk) 05:16, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Pcaabplroa To begin with a small local paper like The Malibu Times is not a great wp:reference Secondly, perhaps I'm missing something but that article didn't really confirm what you said. It was consistent with what you said but it didn't confirm it. You said there was a "a 130-acre Malibu artists colony that flourished from 1962 to 1993". That article was about the cafe not the colony. It doesn't say anything about specific dates that the colony existed or how many acres it had or that it thrived. It says the cafe was cool (which btw it definitely was, makes me wish I had known about it when it was still there) that they had lectures, informal talks, etc. It talks about people like Ray Bradbury, Mort Sahl, and others dropping in but they are dropping in to the cafe not the colony. All I saw was one line that said there was a fire and that the cafe was (partly or completely its not clear) destroyed in the first fire and that people kept coming after. And your other references are problematic as well. The article in the anthropology times isn't actually available. At least I couldn't find it. All that I saw was the name of the article and the author. Is there an online version of that article somewhere? That would help. But even that article was problematic. It's essentially (or at least I'm deducing from the context since I can't find the article) a personal ethnography from someone who lived at the colony. Sorry if this sounds harsh but you have several rejections already and the other reviewers have said similar things and I want to try and help you understand what the issues are. BTW, I think this sounds like a very interesting topic. I tried looking for better references myself and couldn't find anything (again at least one other reviewer said the same thing). I think part of the problem though is that when searching for things like "the colony malibu" we get a lot of false positive hits for other topics. If you want to discuss this further feel free to drop a message on my talk page. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:20, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank You

As a 72 year old Wikipedia novice, I would like to take this opportunity of thanking this Teahouse community for all their help and cooperation in enabling me to create an acceptable Wiki-submission concerning King Alfred School, Plön (KAS) on behalf of the school's alumni aka The Wyvern Club - the youngest member of which is about 65 years old. Without your tolerance and advice I would have got nowhere. The KAS Wiki-entry has already given a great deal of pleasure to not only all the surviving members of the Wyvern Club but their extended families and friends but especially the younger generation of grand children and even some great grand children. Once again thank you all so much for all your help and cooperation.Wyvern4859 (talk) 12:25, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

@Wyvern4859: You're welcome! The article looks like it's off to a good start! Thanks for your hard work! I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 14:30, 2 January 2015 (UTC)