Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 317

Archive 310

←

Archive 315

Archive 316

Archive 317

Archive 318

Archive 319

Archive 320

goodreads

Can I consider http://www.goodreads.com/ as a reliable source for creating a page for a novel/ short story CosmicEmperor (talk) 07:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, CosmicEmperor. Goodreads is a website based on a social networking, or user submitted content model. Accordingly, I do not see it as a reliable source, either for establishing notability, or for factual assertions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Then which sites can be used as reference for creating page for fiction stories if written in Indian languages . I think goodreads has user submitted reviews , but the details of the name of book and author along with date of publication may not be user submitted .--CosmicEmperor (talk) 07:38, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

CosmicEmperor, those basic details of a book's publication history can be found on many databases, or on the publisher's website, where they are almost certainly accompanied by promotional content. Not a single one of those sources helps in any way in establishing the notability of a book here on Wikipedia. Indepedent reviews are what we are looking for, along with major awards, film adaptations, teaching in university literature courses, and the like. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

CosmicEmperor, if you want a reliable source for publication information, let me suggest WorldCat.org. As their home page says, "WorldCat connects you to the collections and services of more than 10,000 libraries worldwide". --Thnidu (talk) 04:19, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thnidu ,Cullen328 Actually I wanted to create pages for Indian FolkTales or Indian Fairy Tales or FolkTales of India , So I was asking this question . CosmicEmperor (talk) 05:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Article rating/improvement suggestions?

I'm still somewhat new at this - and I don't quite know what I should be looking for when it comes to editing and improving articles. What's the best way to have more experienced Wikipedians look at the articles I want to edit and suggest improvements? Peeteygirl (talk) 02:06, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Peeteygirl! I'm going list a few ways here:

1. Ask in real time chat at #wikipedia-en-help ^connect
2. List an article for peer review. They seem to have a backlog, so it may be a while before someone gets back to you.
3. Ask at the corresponding Wikiproject
4. You could even ask here, if you'd like!

Good luck! Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 05:25, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Unsure of notabilty and action to take

I have come across the article Evelyn Gertrude Brooke, which I believe to be non-notable. I am thinking that it should either have the {{Notability}} template applied, or be put through Articles for Deletion, but I am unsure as to which action to take. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, GregNGM (talk) 02:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Greeetings and welcome to the Teahouse, GregNGM. I took a look at the article and the same questions came to my mind. Applying the {{Notability}} template might be the easiest solution and may get the attention of the article creator but then the article would still be questionably notable. Nominating the article for deletion will just cause a drawn-out search for references on the topic. Another option is to simply find a few references to add to the article yourself if you feel like helping.

  Bfpage |leave a message  03:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

My greetings as well, GregNGM. You can find some good information from Bfpage above. I would like to describe my own priorities in a case like this. We are here primarily to build a high-quality encyclopedia. Secondarily, that sometimes means we need to delete articles about non-notable topics. So, the first step is to engage in a good faith effort to determine whether or not the topic is notable. That requires two or three minutes of application of your online search tools and skills. Call it "Google foo", though feel free to use more specialized search sites. Think of plausible alternative phrasings and spellings, and search them too. If you find good sources and have the time, add the best of them to the article. Saving and improving poor quality articles about notable topics always comes first.

If you come to the well-informed conclusion that the topic is not notable, then either tag it or nominate it for deletion, as you see fit. Let our community processes play out. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:29, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I have taken a closer look at Evelyn Gertrude Brooke, and see that there is a much better article about her in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, which explains the basis of her notability more convincingly. This is a highly respected biographical encyclopedia. Almost by definition, any topic which has an article in a reliable paper and ink encyclopedia is eligible for an article on this online encyclopedia with 4.7 million articles. We don't have to buy rail cars full of paper or barrels of ink, after all. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

citing papers in the National Archives at Kew

What is the best way of citing this public record in the National Archive at Kew

http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C506723

is there a template for this sort of reference? KreyszigB (talk) 12:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, KreyszigB, I believe {{NRA}} is what you need. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 19:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

@Anon126: The template needs an identifier, i.e. "Archival material relating to Teahouse/Questions/Archive 317". UK National Archives., But I cant find the relevant identifier in the URL for the page I want to link to. My URL contains the number C506723, but this doesnt work as an id, neither does 506723. I went back to the example about westminster abbey on the NRA page, and tried to reverse engineer it by looking at the page it linked to, but without success. The id stated in the westminster abbey example is id=063532, but this doesn't appear on the URL when you click on and follow the link. Any ideas? KreyszigB (talk) 08:41, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

@KreyszigB: This won't help with the 'problem' with the 'NRA' template, but you could still use a 'standard' {{cite web}} template as a workaround. 220 of ^Borg 06:51, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Citations & Fiction

Is there any reason a list of fictional characters from a TV show needs citations? Peeteygirl (talk) 01:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Peeteygirl. Verifiability is a core content policy here. If I have never seen the TV show, and the list is unreferenced, how do I know that you (or another editor) aren't just making up those characters? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:46, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

You make a good point, Cullen. The show at hand is Falling Skies, and I've never seen it. The page List of Falling Skies characters is part of the Copy editor's Guild backlog. I noticed that it also had a citations needed tag, but I'm not quite sure what to cite. Peeteygirl (talk) 01:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

MOS:PLOT says: "The plot summary for a work, on a page about that work, does not need to be sourced with in-line citations, as it is generally assumed that the work itself is the primary source for the plot summary." I think it's common that articles about TV series characters make limited mention about which episodes contain the information. I watch the show, skimmed the list, and it sounds right. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

There is a big difference between a plot summary and a character list, in my judgment. According to the Manual of style for lists, "Lists, whether they are stand-alone lists (also called list articles) or embedded lists, are encyclopedic content just as paragraph-only articles or sections are. Therefore, all individual items on the list must follow Wikipedia's content policies: the core content policies of Verifiability (through good sources in the item's one or more references), No original research, and Neutral point of view, plus the other content policies as well. Although the format of a list might require less detail per topic, Wikipedia policies and procedures apply equally to both a list of similar things as well as to any related article to which an individual thing on the list might be linked."

The bottom line is that any blue-linked item in a list needs references in that linked article showing that it belongs on that list, and any unlinked or redlinked item on a list needs at least one solid reference showing the same thing. That's verifiability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Glad I read that PrimeHunter! I have been wondering, having filled in the plot of at least one movie, but never looked the MOS up on that issue. I tend to 'follow the herd' (Baa! Baa!) i.e. do what everyone else seem to be doing, or follow common practice. 220 of ^Borg 05:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

RE Cullen328 and PrimeHunter So, in cases like this, what should one cite? There is a "characters" page on the official Falling Skies website, but it doesn't contain listings for the side characters - the wiki list does. Also, what would be the best way to go about adding said citations? After each character's name, or? I don't oppose adding citations to this list in principle, but I'm concerned reliable sources will be difficult to find, and seeing as adding sources to fictional character pages doesn't seem to be commonly done, I'm not sure it's necessary. Peeteygirl (talk) 16:54, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Majestic_Search_Engine Page Content/Approach

Hello, I was advised by Samwalton9 in the live chat help to post here in the teahouse in hope to find a solution to getting a page published:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Majestic_Search_Engine

Samwalton9 suggest one of the reasons for the page to have been rejected may be due to the sources:

- http://searchengineland.com/link-building-tool-review-majestic-seo-103646 - http://searchengineland.com/majestic-seo-announces-new-link-metrics-trust-flow-citation-flow-121230

They are both very well known and popular sources in the search engine arena, both reputable and reliable sources.

I have also understood from our conversation that Editors may be inclined to view Trust Flow, Citation Flow, and Topical Trust Flow as commercial products when in actual fact they are technical features which are at the very heart of the Search Engine functionality. There is no reference to the commercial features available to the user.

I would be grateful for feedback and help on improving our approach to understand what it is that reads like an advertisement and in your view which external sources (if any) we should remove, or frowned upon because of their poor quality.

I wish to thank you for your time, dedication and attention,

Santejachille (talk) 13:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Santejachille. That draft is better than some, but there are still enough things in it to justify "reads like an advertisement". To take the ones that leap out at me: "has successfully migrated" - no Wikipedia article should ever describe anything with an evaluative term such as "successful" unless it is quoting (or nearly quoting) an independent reliable published source that says so. Including the word unsourced is advertising puff. "Unlike traditional search engines" is more advertising puff. Unless you can find an independent reliable source which explains what a "traditional search engine", that phrase shouldn't appear in an article (though I suppose if an independent reliable source said that it was "unlike traditional search engines" you could quote that, making it clear that it was the source that was using the undefined and probably meaningless phrase). Your Trust Flow etc are in far too much detail - most of the content of these sections is not referenced to an independent source, and so should not appear in a Wikipedia article - certain uncontroversial factual data may be cited to a non-independent source, but if the bulk of the text is in that category, there's something wrong. Searchengineland looks OK as far as reliability goes, but the problem is that when they are talking about technical details of the product, they are not independent, but are almost certainly regurgitating information from Majestic. Only when they are expressing opinions or evaluations would I count them as an independent source. --ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Very Much for this input - it is what I required to see the forest, not only the tree :)

Santejachille (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Where do I go to nominate an article for featured.

I found a few articles that I think are well written and sourced. and I believe they should be featured. Where can I go to nominate articles for being featured? Weegeerunner (talk) 17:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Weegeerunner. Go to WP:FAC (featured article candidates) for all the details. Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 17:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

@Weegeerunner: Please note that after nominating an article for featured status article reviewer will seek your assistance to fix issues he/she finds in the article.--Chamith (talk) 17:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Weegeerunner. Not that this isn't a link that can be found within the page DocTree referred you to, but please focus on whether the page meets the requirements set forth at Wikipedia:Featured article criteria before nominating. We also have a project that's geared toward preparing articles for the high bar of a featured article nomination that it might be a good idea to visit first: Wikipedia:Peer review. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, which might be characterized as one step before a peer review. Many articles go through that type of step-by-step process, being improved at each rung, before finally arriving at a FAC. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

How come my article said it is proposed to be deleted?

I read through the rules and my article seems to comply with everything. I cited the facts and did not input any opinions. How come I am still getting a notification that my article is proposed to be deleted? Thanks!

Markerzzzz (talk) 19:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Markerzzzz, welcome to the Teahouse. If you don't mind, I've removed the {{help me}} box from your post because the Teahouse is already for getting help.

Anyway, your article is being proposed for deletion because the citations are not to independent sources. Press releases, even when published elsewhere, are not independent, because they are still written by the company. If you can find independent news sources, please cite those. Otherwise, we cannot keep the article. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 19:54, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Anon126, thanks for your response! I noticed that other Wikipedia articles also have press releases as their source. How come it is ok for them?

Thanks for deleting the {{help me}} box. Very new to posting on Wikipedia and am trying to get the hang of it!

Markerzzzz (talk) 20:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

In thanking Anon126 for removing the {{help me}} box, you were adding it in again. I have put <nowiki> tags around it to avoid the problem. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Markerzzzz. There are hundreds of articles added to Wikipedia every day, and it takes a while for the regular editors to check on them. Also, the millions of existing articles are all constantly changing. At any one time there are always some that are not complying with policies. However, those articles that you found with only press releases as references will eventually be noticed, and either better sources will be added or they will be tagged for possible deletion. It's a volunteer project, so everything doesn't always happen in a timely way.—Anne Delong (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) ::Hello, Markerzzzz. The answer to your question is that it is probably not OK for them. Wikipedia has over four million articles, and not all of them are up to standard. New articles tend to get checked, but sometimes something is missed, particularly if it is in an older article. (It is also the case that non-independent sources such as press releases are acceptable as sources for some kinds of information: uncontroversial factual information such as dates and places; but most of the sources for an article should be independent of the subject). If you find an article that is not up to scratch, you are welcome to improve it if you can (eg by finding better sources), or to mark it as unsatisfactory, either by adding a template such as {{refimprove}} to the top, or by describing the problem on the article's talk page, or both. If after looking for sources, you become convinced that satisfactory sources do not exist, you can nominate the article for deletion (see deletion process) but it's probably best to wait until you are more familiar with policies before doing that. --ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

How to create right justified bounded box with image and text

Aloha,

I'd like o create a box on the right side of a page i.e. Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences and add our college logo too but I can't find direction to do so in the tutorials. Kaiwikimom (talk) 18:59, 9 March 2015 (UTC)HelenKaiwikimom (talk) 18:59, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Kaiwikimom. That box is called an infobox, and you can find information about the particular one you want at {{infobox university}}. But you almost certainly won't be able to use the logo at present, because most logos are copyright, and may be used in Wikipedia only in accordance with the non-free content criteria, which say (among other things) that they may be used only in published articles, not in drafts. That is a good thing for somebody writing a new article, because the important part of a Wikipedia article is not the logo or pictures, or really even the infobox, but the neutrally-written and informative text in the body of the article, which should be based entirely on reliable published sources independent of the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

thinking about starting an article on a living person but unsure how to verify basic facts about the person's life

Hello Teahouse hosts, I am trying to see if there is enough verifiable info on a living person to justify writing an article. I have the person's resume, and I am wondering how much it can be relied upon. Do you have to fact check things a person states about themselves such as where they were born or where they went to college? Do these things all need to be mentioned, say, in a newspaper article, to qualify as reliable? Is a pertinent but unpublished PhD thesis from a recognized university back in 1977 available enough to be used as a source? How do you find an independent source to verify that someone was a VP at a university in the 1970s? How do you substantiate the person having had a long-term friendship with someone well known if you have seen for yourself first-hand? Do photographs of the two people together provide good evidence? Or maybe that is original research and therefore no go?

I have read some of the pages on sources and verifiability, but I have not found answers to these particular questions. I am sorry to have so many questions at once! I will gladly read pertinent info if somebody can point me to it. Thank you kindly! Alfhild-anthro (talk) 03:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Alfhild-anthro. One of our core content policies is verifiability, which means that a motivated reader must be able to verify the claims in our articles by reading the cited published reliable sources. If a resume is published, then it can be used to verify uncontroversial, basic biographical details. If it is unpublished, it can't be used as a source. An unpublished PhD thesis may be of value to you in tracking down other sources, but can't be cited as a reliable source itself. An unpublished photograph of two people is of no value in establishing a friendship between two specific people. We have no way of verifying the identity of those people, and two people standing next to each other may not be friends. They could be enemies, for all we know.

Wikipedia has articles about notable topics which have received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. We write articles primarily by summarizing what those sources say about the topic. If those sources do not exist, then there should be no Wikipedia article about that topic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Alfhild-anthro How did you get access to the thesis? If someone else could access it the same way It can be used as a source. An unpublished thesis is usually at least available at the library of the university concerned, if that is the case then for WP purposes it is "published". If even a single copy of a source is known to exist at an accessible venue then it is usable. If that were not the case monumental inscriptions would be uncitable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen and Roger for your help. I have the dissertation because I know the person; it is his copy. But I can find out whether his seminary has a copy. I might go ahead and put something together in my Sandbox to see how this is shaping up. I have been given a whole bunch of stuff including many newspaper clippings but it is taking time to track down the newspapers to see whether I can use them in an article. Some seem very local and some are no longer in business. Is it correct that If I have a draft in the Sandbox, I can ask about the worth of a particular source at that reference desk I found a few days ago? Thanks for sharing your expertise!100.1.205.107 (talk) 21:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

That was me just now! I wan't logged in.Alfhild-anthro (talk) 21:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen and Roger for your help. I have the dissertation because I know the person; it is his copy. But I can find out whether his seminary has a copy. I might go ahead and put something together in my Sandbox to see how this is shaping up. I have been given a whole bunch of stuff including many newspaper clippings but it is taking time to track down the newspapers to see whether I can use them in an article. Some seem very local and some are no longer in business. Is it correct that If I have a draft in the Sandbox, I can ask about the worth of a particular source at that reference desk I found a few days ago? Thanks for sharing your expertise!Alfhild-anthro (talk) 21:51, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Having trouble in requesting an article.

Hello,

So, I wanted to suggest a topic on WP:SUGGEST for some help but I wanted to ask that in which category, 'Business, Finance and Economic Awards' come in?

Thank you Komchi (talk) 15:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi and welcome! To help you with this I would obviously have to know what the article would be about. However very few articles that are suggested actually get created, so I would suggest you be bold and create it yourself, maybe with the help of WP:AfC. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Article title question

Hi - I'm working on an article about the Schmuckmuseum Pforzheim (Pforzheim Jewellry Museum), and am not sure what to title the English Wikipedia article. Do I use the German name and include an English translation, or the other way around? I looked at this list of museums in Germany, and it seems like it's about half and half. Thanks in advance! extabulis (talk) 20:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I should note that my sources use the German title and English title equally (so not sure which to used based on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). extabulis (talk) 20:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi extabulis, "Pforzheim Jewellery Museum" (note the last 'e' in Jewellery) is a common name in English sources and used by the English version of the official website so use that. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi PrimeHunter, thanks very much! (And good catch re:Jewellery.) extabulis (talk) 20:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you redirect the other translations title to it and tag the redirect with {{R from alternative language}}. Good luck and happy editing! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

To editor Extabulis: I'd like to note that {{R from alternative language}} takes a paramater for the language it is redirected from. So you would use {{R from alternative language|de}}. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 00:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks EoRdE6 and Anon126, I will do so! extabulis (talk) 01:08, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

How to cite an introductory chapter in a book not by the books author

Hi there

I'm attempting to cite an introduction chapter of a book that gives an overview of botanical art in New Zealand. This introduction is not written by the main author of the book but instead is by a prestigious academic. I'm having difficulty with the "{{cite book}}" template as I'm not sure which fields to fill in to make it clear that I'm citing a chapter by a person who is not the main author of the book.

Thanks in advance for any assistance you can give Ambrosia10 (talk) 00:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I think that the salient part of the documentation for the template is under the heading Template:Cite book#Authors, specifically the listing for "others". Hope this helps. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Ambrosia10. I don't know whether there is a practice but you could use others at Template:Cite book#Authors, for example:

Bloggs, Joe (1974). Book of Bloggs. Introduction by John Doe.

It could be combined with at at Template:Cite book#In-source locations if you really want to clarify who wrote the cited part:

Bloggs, Joe (1974). Book of Bloggs. Introduction by John Doe. Introduction page 5.

PrimeHunter (talk) 01:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for this. This is exactly what I wanted and was unsure of how to go about doing! I very much appreciate the speedy reply. Ambrosia10 (talk) 01:15, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The Premier Basketball League Wikipedia has been hijacked. How can we get this fixed?

A rival league has managed to lock the page and publish rumors rather than facts. How can we have the proper information posted and have the user possibly suspended?

Maximus2929 (talk) 01:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Maximus2929. The article was semi-protected by an administrator, Ronhjones, due to persistent vandalism. Any registered editor who has made more than ten edits and has an account at least four days old can edit the article. Most recent edits have been made by Things Said Over Coffee, who is a relatively new editor. I see Facebook posts used as references for recent news about problems with the league, which is not appropriate. I suggest that you express your concerns in detail at Talk:Premier Basketball League, which is the proper place to reach consensus on the content of this article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

There was a large concerted attack by different IPs to take out large chunks of referenced data (mainly negative in tone). One IP can be blocked, but once they start switching IP addresses (and it was the same data being removed, so we can assume the same person), then the only option is semi-protection. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 15:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

The recent information posted is all documented and verifiable, and, in fact, sourced by teams in their own league. The recent additions are factual updates based on what has gone on in recent days. Office staff of the subject of the page, as you can tell from the edit history, has repeatedly blanked the information they don't want on there because they perceive it as negative. They clearly don't understand this is a public wiki, and as long as the information is truthful and documented, they have to take the whole truth, just not what they want on there.Things Said Over Coffee (talk) 01:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

My article keeps getting rejected for not being in the style of an encyclopedic article.

I have referenced. I have read the 'peacock terms' and have made sure I have not used them... I am not sure where to go from here. Can anyone give me some practical advice? Tegalex (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Tegalex. I presume that you are writing about Draft:23 Things. It seems to me that the problem is lack of independent sources to show that 23 Things is program that's well known outside of its circle of developers and testers. Several extensive writeups in publications under the control of an editor, such as news reports, magazine or journal articles, books, etc., written by journalists or other professional writers not connected with this program are needed. Unfortunately, blogs don't fit in this category. If no one has yet written independently about 23 Things, it may be too new for an encyclopedia article.—Anne Delong (talk) 03:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

My page was not accepted due to copyright. How do i find out what the copyrighted material is?

My page was not accepted due to copyright. How do i find out what the copyrighted material is? The page was about Jerry the Marble Faun. I am unsure if the copyrighted material is because "The Marble Faun" is also the title of a Nathaniel Hawthorn novel. However, the novel was published in 1860 and according to google: "In the UK, copyright lasts for the lifetime of the artist plus 70 years after their death. Other territories may give shorter periods of protection, but usually not less than the life of the artist plus 50 years. There are some special provisions which apply to older unpublished works." Hawthorn died in 1864. What's the problem? Is it something else that was somehow copyrighted? How do I resolve this issue?Klempayj (talk) 02:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Klempayj. THIS LINK should show you the section that was copied from a web site. Just rewrite that part in your own words, and you will have fixed the copyright problem. Names don't count - just whole sentences or long phrases. While you're at it, please remove the references to other Wikipedia articles - Wikipedia can't reference itself!—Anne Delong (talk) 04:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Article on Big Bang Theory

I have made a study on the above-captioned in conjunction with my intended publication of a productivity handbook for everyone "Change you can" to provide background information on the mind and matter connectivity to help us achieve breakthrough change.

I cannot help coming to the conclusion by a process of simulation of pre-existing laws of the universe and scientific evidences that any theorising on the Big Bang Theory would be incomplete without considering the possibility of a power of nothingness ruling the universe with force-field interactions and binary alternation of energy in smaller energy elements.

I forward my views and opinions on the Big Bang Theory based on there being a power of nothingness inherent in the primordial void of empty and formless space and its ability to manifest its immense power as universal instantaneous laws of energy as explained in the attached Appendix A to my book entitled "A Layman's view of the universe".

I hope you will consider posting my view on the subject of "Big Bang Theory" in Wikimedia for further deliberations by all concerned.42.60.72.185 (talk) 03:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid Wikipedia is neither the place to publish your own personal hypotheses (see Wikipedia:No original research), nor should you be promoting books you yourself have written (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.) I'm afraid you've misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. --Jayron32 04:25, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I am in complete agreement with Jayron32. Take your discoveries to a respected peer-reviewed physics journal. They publish the very best new research in physics. Wikipedia doesn't. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Difficulty assessing Author notability...

Hi folks - 1st time editor here. My subject is an author with a popular book from the 1940s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Patric) that sold millions of copies, was favorably reviewed by the New York Times, and distributed internationally, but other contemporary reviews are still stuck in the pre-digital dark ages. His work is represented in the Library of Congress, as well as the three neighboring Public Library Systems I've checked. In addition to his writing, his life was an interesting form of performance art :-) Why would this local writer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Cosgrove_%28writer%29) meet the notability bar, while John Patric would not? Brycemilton (talk) 02:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Brycemilton. Your article certainly is about a colourful character. I have some suggestions: To see how many libraries have his books, try http://www.worldcat.org. If you pick out a book and give it your general location, it will tell you how many libraries have the book and how far away each is. Also, references don't have to be on line; if you have old newspaper clippings or access to issues in your library, references to print material is perfectly fine as long as it's specific (title, issue, page number, etc.) You have a lot of quotes, but Mr. Patric has not been dead long enough for his writings to be in public domain. Each one will need to be properly attributed as to where it was written or spoken. These don't add to his notability anyway unless they were quoted in an independent source; it may be simpler to remove them all until after the page is accepted, and then add back just the ones you can properly verify and reference.—Anne Delong (talk) 04:29, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Anne - that was a very helpful link! Resubmitted with a more detailed lead and the unsourced quotations removed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Patric — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brycemilton (talk • contribs) 06:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Is Sam Sailor "in the House"

An editor declined my submission and wanted better/more secondary sources. I have them but cant find how to enter them. the editor's instructions aren't working. Emmetbrady (talk) 06:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Emmetbrady and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want get hold of a specific editor, you click on the "talk" in their signature. This takes you to that editors talk page where you can post your question. You can also 'ping' an editor the way I did with you here. (look in the code) I will leave a small guide on how to communicate with others on the Wikipedia on your talk page. Best, w.carter-Talk 06:58, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Latitude,longitude coordinates

I was on Wiki looking at locations of ghost towns in Yuba co. ca. The coordinates given are different that the google map coordinates.Is there more than one way to interpret gps?2601:C:9D00:267:D846:88D2:8719:A07C (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to the Teahouse. I find many ghost towns in Yuba County, California. Which ones have the wrong coordinates? Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 21:56, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

True, true bfpage but none of those seemed to make the cut. I'll keep plugging along till I get it. Thanks for the pointers! Jetcitypd (talk) 02:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, 2601:C:9D00:267:D846:88D2:8719:A07C. To answer your original question: Yes there is more than one way to write GPS coordinates. These are basically longitude and latitude, which can be either shown as degrees, minutes and seconds or in decimal form. There's an explanation at Longitude#Noting and calculating longitude. Handheld GPS devices usually have an option to set which type of calculation to display, and many a geocacher has been led astray by having his or her equipment set in one mode while the instructions are given in another. I believe that Google uses decimal coordinates.—Anne Delong (talk) 08:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

What pronouns should be used for a person who refers to themselves differently than secondary sources do?

Vaginal Davis is a self-identified intersex drag performer and visual artist. She refers to herself with standard feminine pronouns (she/her), but a prominent NYT interview refers to her as he/him. Additionally, some editors of the page prefer to assign her their intuitive pronouns (she looks masculine, and traditionally drag performers who are not transsexual are referred to as he/him). When paraphrasing and referencing the NYT article, or just in general, what is the appropriate way to refer to her?

Colinarobinson (talk) 21:56, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Use the self-identified pronoun. Use the self-identified pronoun. This is a very specific aspect of the policy on biographies of living persons to give the individual living person the dignity of being referred to in the way that she prefers. If you are new to Wikipedia, you may not be familiar with the Chelsea Manning naming dispute case, but ignoring this policy on self-identified gender is a sanctionable offense. Use the self-identified pronoun. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:02, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I'll add a secondary question: if directly quoting a source that uses the wrong gender pronoun, should one "sic" the incorrect pronoun? Peeteygirl (talk) 02:58, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Good question. You should definitely quote the source accurately and you are allowed (but not required) to include "[sic]". I think good editorial judgement is required (and I don't know what that should be!). Wikipedia:Quotations#Formatting says that "trivial spelling or typographical errors" may be corrected silently but clearly that does not apply here. I think "sic" should be used if it helps the reader understand matters more clearly but not if the purpose is to point out the discrepancy. Thincat (talk) 09:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Ah! I've just discovered MOS:IDENTITY which says the same thing. Thincat (talk) 09:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

"Wikimedia Meta-Wiki" banner

Is it necessary? For example here.

If it is, where can I find more info on the use of it?

Thanks.

-Capikiw (talk) 06:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

@Capikiw: If you mean info about the general banner feature then see meta:CentralNotice. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:10, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

how to cite newspaper articles that are too old to be online

Hi Teahouse folks, I am interested in writing an article about someone I know who is at the end of his career. Some of the newspaper clippings about him date to around 1979-1982 and the online archives for those newspapers don't go back far enough to allow me to find them online. But I have the paper articles sitting in front of me - is there some way I can use these articles as sources? Thanks for your advice!Alfhild-anthro (talk) 02:29, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Alfhild-anthro. The answer is YES if you have accurate information about the clippings, such as the name and issue date of the newspaper from which the clipping was cut, and ideally the page. Also, be sure to place the information as an inline citation, next to the facts the clipping supports, since other editors won't be able to read the clipping to find out what it says exactly.—Anne Delong (talk) 04:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

@Alfhild-anthro: To get all the relevant info from the old newspapers, you can use the {{cite journal}}. It is available in the short form in the editing window under the "Cite" button and if you need more parameters, they are at Template:Cite journal. Happy editing! w.carter-Talk 06:17, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

@User:Alfhild-anthro & User:W.carter, please do not use {{cite journal}} for newspaper articles, the journal template is designed specifically for academic journals. The correct one for newspapers is {{cite news}}. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Roger (Dodger67) for clarifying, I did not know that it was so specific. My bad. Best, w.carter-Talk 07:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks all. I will try! 100.1.205.107 (talk) 15:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks all. I will try! Alfhild-anthro (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Language problem

On articles related to India what form of English spellings should be used-US or UK? Rubbish computer (talk) 17:01, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Strictly speaking Indian English; but with a few minor exceptions, that is almost the same as UK English - Britain having been the former colonial power, who established schools, the civil service, the legal system etc. - Arjayay (talk) 17:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Rubbish computer (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer. I think you'll find the information in MOS:TIES to be helpful. Wikipedia generally does not prefer one form of English over another. The main concern is that the spelling and grammar used throughout the article be consistent. Having said that, you should take care just not to go and change all the American spellings in an article to British spellings or vice versa, especially if one form has been the established form for quite some time. It might be a good idea to check the article's talk page, including its archives if there are any, just to see if such a thing has been discussed before. It's possible that a consensus may have been reached to use one form over the other. Just some suggestions. Happy editing. - Marchjuly (talk) 00:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll read the links you provided in order to help with this. Rubbish computer (talk) 16:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

What has happened

Can anyone tell me what has happened on List of birds of the world in both mobile and desk view it appears as a sort of a double page repeating itself after the reference section. Can anyone solve or tell me how to solve this problem

Thank you regards Owlsofeurope Owlsofeurope (talk) 16:58, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Owlsofeurope
It looks like it was your edit at 08:54, 7 March 2015 as seen here. That added the duplicate version - It is not in the version before, but is in that version - you added 90kB to a 47kB article trebling the length and appear to have added a duplicate copy as well as what you presumably were trying to add. - Arjayay (talk) 17:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Arjayay but if I delete the duplicate version will it also delete the other one?Owlsofeurope (talk) 17:19, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

No, it is all separate text, rather than one version being transcluded 3 times. You'll need to get rid of 2 out of the 3. You will need to check, of course, which versions are correct, because it doesn't look as if the 3 are identical. If in doubt, go back to your last good version and do the edits again. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

St. Porphyrios wiki page

Dear Teahouse,

I recently got in touch with Wikipedia about the iconic image of St.Porphyrios as the image on the page is that of St. Paisios. There is a problem getting the image to you.

Thank You70.209.142.139 (talk) 18:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, 70.209.142.139. I'm afraid I'm not clear what you're asking. I'm not even certain which article you're talking about, but I guess it's Porphyrios (Bairaktaris) of Kafsokalivia. That seems to have a picture of both Porphyrios and Paisios. Is it that you have a picture of Porphyrios, which you want to put on the page in place of the current picture? In that case, you will need to sort out the copyright (since Porphyrios died only 25 years ago, any picture of him is almost certainly copyright). If your picture is to be used, the copyright owner will need to release it explicitly under a suitable licence such as CC-BY-SA, and then it can be uploaded to Wikimedia commons. Please see User:Yunshui/Images for beginners. --ColinFine (talk) 19:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi and welcome! I am having a hard time understanding your question. If you wish to upload and image you need an account but they can be uploaded c:Special:UploadWizard <- there. If you wish to use and image from an article you can most likely do so, just click the image and read the licensing details. Also, if you weren't aware, Wikipedia if available in many languages, and one of those may be easier for you. If you need anything, reply here or on my talk page. Thanks! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 19:19, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

On Leclanché cell

Hi teahouse members, I have edited the Article on Leclanche cell(added content),but when I log out my added contents are missing....I have added a reference too..What should I do to make it permanent?I want anyone to patrol it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anik editor (talk • contribs) 02:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Anik editor I have had a look at the three edits you did to Leclanche cell and I can see all of them. this here however is not the right way to add a cited wp:Reference. You have added it after the {{reflist}} template which displays references, and in any case the reference must be between <ref></ref> 'tags' to work. I think what you want to see on the edit window is:

'''Reaction occurring at electrodes in the cell:'''

At cathode: 2NH₄+(aq)+2MnO₂(s)+2e- → 2MnO(OH)+2NH₃

At anode: Zn → Zn2+ + 2e-<ref>Modern's ABC of CHEMISTRY by S.P Jauhar(2014-15 edition), ISBN 9789383907236</ref>

The underlined text shows a very basic reference. which will appear on the page as:

Reaction occurring at electrodes in the cell:

At cathode: 2NH₄+(aq)+2MnO₂(s)+2e- → 2MnO(OH)+2NH₃

At anode: Zn → Zn2+ + 2e-

And at the bottom of the page it would appear as:

References

Ideally more information such as, page number being used as a source is helpful, If the source is on-line, then a URL, and access date is also good to have. See also {{cite book}}. N.b that ISBN doesn't appear to be correct as it does not lead to any book. Amazon has the book, but no ISBN. --220 of ^Borg 04:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

creating a personal page

how can i add image and personal details in the right top corner?Vaideesbe (talk) 16:52, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vaideesbe welcome to the Teahouse. If you are talking about your own userpage you can add information by using Template:Infobox user. But to add a picture you must upload it to either Wikipedia or Wikimedia under own work license. Assuming that you want to upload your own picture I believe you own the copyrights for that picture.--Chamith (talk) 16:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted your sandbox through the AFC process as a draft article for the encyclopedia. It will be reviewed in due course, but I can promise you that it will be declined. To have a Wikipedia article, the subject must be notable in Wikipedia's terms, which means having received significant coverage in multiple published reliable sources independent of the subject, and these sources would be used as references to ensure verifiability. There are specific requirements for notability of people, and for specific categories of people, such as academics, athletes, and actors. Even if you were to satisfy the notability requirements, it shouldn't be you who writes the article, for reasons given at WP:Autobiography. Have fun writing about other subjects in Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Vaideesbe I haver edited that page to put the image (only), in the top right corner using this code [[image:vaidees.JPG|thumb|Vaidees]] before any other text. I think {{infobox person}} may be what you really want (as ChamithN has already said). However, this page is only really suitable as your wp:User page not a Wikipedia article via wp:AFC. - 220 of ^Borg 05:15, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

references

I have made several edits, but many of them have been rejected because I did not add references. I am fairly new to Wikipedia and have no clue how to do that. Can anyone out there give me some help? Fabcats1 (talk) 19:03, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Fabcats1. Every single fact or claim in an article should be individually cited to a reliable published source. The mechanism for doing so is to insert <ref> ... </ref> immediately after the sentence or paragraph, with a citation to the source where I have put ... The page Referencing for beginners explains all. --ColinFine (talk) 19:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

You can also just add the refs in the text without using any coding, and somebody will come along and set it aright for you. I was taught this many years ago, and it by far the easiest way to do it. Of course, you will want to learn anyway, so by all means follow ColinFines' fine advice for long-lasting results. GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Article proposal and COI

Hello, I am interested in proposing articles for creation for various Cornell Law Faculty. However I have a conflict of interest because I work at Cornell Law School and want to be as unambiguous as possible about that conflict. I'm hoping to only submit articles for potential creation and let the editorial process run its natural course rather than just creating articles outright. I have created an initial draft article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mjwill46/sandbox/Sherry_F._Colb

I was hoping someone could review whether the format of the draft would be workable, but also more importantly to make sure that I'm going through the right channels by putting together a drafting and then proposing it for creation, rather than creating it outright. Is this proper procedure for accomplishing something like this? I just want to be as transparent about this as possible. Mjwill46 (talk) 15:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey, @Mjwill46: Thanks for stopping by, and thanks for being up front about this. Things are likely to go much better when you are clear about potential COI issues, and ask for help as you have. I've looked over the draft article, and as it stands right now it would not "make it" as a Wikipedia article because the article does not establish independent coverage of the subject. Independent coverage of a subject is something that at Wikipedia is called by the term d'art known as "notability". You can read more about it at Wikipedia:Notability which has all the gory policy details, or you can read a "Cliff's note's version" at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Don't worry about the terminology, for now, just focus on this concept: We at Wikipedia all want our articles to be based on reliable, independent source material, that is based on source material which is unconnected to (and thus takes a neutral, dispassionate point-of-view of) the subjects of the articles here. That means that to qualify for an article, the subject of an article should have reliable, independent material about it. For the person in question, we'd need some reliable text which describes her, her life, and her work in something more than cursory detail; and that material should have been written and published by someone other than her, her employers, her clients, etc. That is, someone who is truly independent of the subject. As I read the draft you have created, I don't see any evidence of sources you used which meet that criteria for reliability and independence. Without that source material, we don't know if we can trust the articles at Wikipedia, and that's the entire basis for Wikipedia's reputation: we're only as good as our source material. If you know of any independent text which discusses this professor in detail, that would help a lot! I hope that helps. --Jayron32 15:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Mjwill46. Whilst your draft still needs work (in particular, it needs citations to demonstrate that the subject passes either the general notability guidelines or the specific guidelines for academics) the process you're following is absolutely correct - I wish more editors with a conflict of interest were so open and upfront! Both the process of submitting through AFC and the note on your userpage are exactly how you should be going about this. Thank you for taking the trouble to learn a bit about how Wikipedia operates before getting stuck in. Yunshui ^雲_水 15:44, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both for this very helpful feedback. I have added a few more independent sources (mostly news articles)to hopefully help establish reliability and independence. If the article doesn't meet notability standards in the end, then that would be perfectly fine,I want someone else to make that determination anyway since I do have the COI. Mjwill46 (talk) 17:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I have done some courtesy clean up of the draft per the Manual of Style.--ukexpat (talk) 12:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Interwikis

I am trying to find articles to translate from French to English, but when using the suggested article search tool (https://tools.wmflabs.org/joanjoc/sugart.php?l1=fr&pr=wiki&l2=en&cat=france&dpt=3&tpl=&uselang=en&go=Proceed), I do not understand what value should be placed for "Inside category" or "Including template" boxes. I've tried a variety of French and English words that should have had interwiki links, but an error keeps coming up (Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2)ERROR: No result returned). Colinboisvert (talk) 13:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey Colinboisvert. I don't have any direct answer to your question, but I hope the following is helpful anyway. I have translated a number of French articles and what I do is trawl the French Wikipedia's recently featured articles (fr:Wikipédia:Articles de qualité/Justification de leur promotion), past featured articles (fr:Wikipédia:Articles de qualité/Justification de leur promotion#Promotions plus anciennes) and proposed featured articles (fr:Wikipédia:Articles de qualité/Propositions), looking for those either having no English entry, or those un- or less well developed here. See also fr:Wikipédia:Bons contenus and fr:Wikipédia:Bons contenus/Propositions (their equivalents of [the lower-threshold-than-'featured'] "good articles" and its candidates for promotion). There's also a category here for articles needing translation from French Wikipedia; see also Wikipedia:Featured articles in other languages#French. By the way, I would certainly welcome help with this featured French article translation in progress which I've just started (it's a huge project though; each French section is followed by an English machine translation, which of course means each needs complete rewriting). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Copyright problem

Last year I went on Bangladesh Institute of Marine Technology and found that the entire of the article's text had been copied and pasted from the only link provided. It clearly stated on the link that the material was copyrighted. I used the subst:copyvio template (incorrectly as I didn't know how to use it at the time) and deleted the text. The page was rewritten, a lot shorter. I went back to the page to see if I could thank a user for editing it and found that an IP editor has done the same thing with the same link. I tried to revert their edits but they are now making more edits- some of their edits have been constructive. Should I say something to them? I'm not sure what to say but this is illegal. Also what should I do about the copied text?Rubbish computer (talk) 18:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

The article has been reverted back to a stub. It seems harsh, but we have to deal with copyvios swiftly and completely, even if there are potentially useful edits buried within.--ukexpat (talk) 19:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

And also if IP editors keep adding copyrighted content even after you revert them you can request an admin to protect the page for a while. Keep an eye on the page and if you need any help against copyright violators, feel free to contact an admin. Wikipedia takes copyright violation as a serious issue.--Chamith (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both. I'm putting this page on my watchlist. Rubbish computer (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

need to remove a section from wikipedia, having copywrite issue

need to remove a section from wikipedia, having copywrite issueEdwinr78 (talk) 07:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Edwinr78. Any copyright violations need to be removed from Wikipedia immediately. If you mention the name of the article here, I expect that an experienced editor will offer help as needed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:31, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Diaspark, need to remove csr sectionEdwinr78 (talk) 07:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Edwinr78, I've removed the material in that section and replaced it with a note. Because the previous versions (with copyrighted text) are still in the history, I've also requested that those versions be removed. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)