Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 409

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 405←Archive 407Archive 408Archive 409Archive 410Archive 411→Archive 415

Dealing with trolls?

On the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Liberal_Party_%28UK,_1999%29 , user Emeraude has taken it upon himself to defame the party as a far-right organisation, and refuses to accept evidence to the contrary. He has demonstrated behaviour that in any other context, would be considered trolling and/or slander. What can be done about this? I have previously tried discussing this issue with him, but without success. Rhialto (talk) 14:58, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Read the dispute resolution policy. It will tell you to discuss on the article talk page. There has been no recent discussion on the article talk page. Also, assume good faith and please do not characterize differences of opinion as trolling. If discussion on the talk page does not resolve the matter, the dispute resolution policy identifies several venues. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:06, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps you should find a reliable source describing the party's politics and use an inline citation for any changes you make to the infobox. Or are inline citations recommended against when inside infoboxes? (I haven't been a serious editor in a long time, but I'm thinking of coming back, but my knowledge of style and policy is probably rusty.) (And of course, other editors are expected to always provide verifiable citations as well.) 72.204.168.159 (talk) 22:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Rhialto. When you accuse another editor of serious misconduct, as you have regarding Emeraude here, you should inform that person. I have just done so, because it is important for any editor to know when they are being attacked. The issue is how to accurately describe a tiny political party that has received only a handful of votes in a few elections. It may be that no source which is reliable for evaluating political ideologies has commented on the ideology of this party, since it is so small. It seems clear that many of the individual leaders of this party have "far right" backgrounds. The question is whether or not that is sufficient to describe the ideology of the party itself that way. In my opinion, that is not sufficient, and a reliable source stating that explicitly is needed. I am inviting Carrite, an editor with lots of experience working on political party articles, to comment. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:16, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Hi Jim and all. To find an answer to this matter I popped by the fascist website Stormfront.org and ran a little search of their message board archive, which ultimately led me to THIS piece on the NLP. It's a National Front splinter, so "Far Right" is an accurate description, but seem to favor a multi-cultural ethnic-nationalism-for-all approach that needs to be considered seriously. My advice is to accept the nominal identification but to really work to explain the group's ideology, which seems to be more complex than run-of-the-mill White Nationalism. Hope this helps, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 01:34, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

It's certainly true that, many years ago, a couple of the individuals involved in the party had far-right associations. However, that was before the party was even founded. This is comparable to, for example, describing the German Nazi party as a far-left party due to a historical association with some left-wing movements. It might be "technically correct", but it gives an entirely wrong impression of what they were about and what they did. Emeraude has chosen to disregard evidence such as the party's "shop local" campaigns and statements in the party's manifesto, as well as adding entirely unsourced statements to claim the party is elitist, monarchist, and anti-Russian. It is telling that almost half of the entire article discusses events that happened before the party even existed.

I have tried on more than one occasion to add cited references to the article, but as Emneraude has reverted them each time, it became an exercise in futility. Rhialto (talk) 07:54, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to be so late - I've been travelling and away from Wikipedia for a few days, so to come back with spurious allegations of trolling and slander is somewhat disturbing. Neither is accurate, and to accuse someone of slander is to accuse them of a criminal offence! Never mind. More worrying is the accusations of what I am supposed to have added to the article, particulaly "adding entirely unsourced statements to claim the party is elitist, monarchist, and anti-Russian". I have done no such thing. All I have done is revert my accuser's unfounded assertions that the party is not of the far right and have made no comment on any other position. If reverting this person's edits brings back these issues, so be it but that is entirely incidental. If they think these are inaccuarate descriptors they should be taken up with the editor who added them, which the history shows was 180.242.130.169 on 2 October 2015, and not me.
User:Rhialto claims to have "tried on more than one occasion to add cited references to the article". This is not true. I can only see one occasion on which a cited reference was added (Revision as of 19:37, 11 August 2015), and that was a link to the party website and its statement of principles. Not an independent reliable source, of course. More importantly, this was added to support an edit that changed Third Position to Third Way, with the rationale "They are not fascists". Seeing as the link makes no mention of Third Position, Third Way or fascism, it is of no relevance. Equally, the link makes no mention of centre or centre-left. It is, as used, completely useless.
I note that Carrite agrees with my edit rationales. User:Rhialto writes that "It's certainly true that, many years ago, a couple of the individuals involved in the party had far-right associations." This is not entirely accurate. Firstly, it was not "many years ago" and, more significantly, those involved include " former deputy chairman of the National Front (NF) and a member of the executive of the British National Party (BNP)-supported "trade union" Solidarity", "BNP leader Nick Griffin's European Parliament staff manager and a former leading figure in the NF, and general secretary of Solidarity" and its General Secretary is "himself a former NF member". (Italic quotes from the article.) That cannot be described as mere "associatons". Incidentaly, it might be useful to invite Keresaspa who originated this page and is a noted expert on far right political groupings. Emeraude (talk) 11:13, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Changing quotes

I saw something wrong in the quotes on a page "....decided that the nerves on his legs are not working as they should". I changed the "decide" word into "found" (Logically, NOBODY can decide whether someone nerves are not working) but my edit got reverted instead. If the quotes are wrongly expressed, can someone change it? Thank you Jason Sudana (talk) 12:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

The quote should accurately reflect what the person being quoted actually said or wrote, not what they should have said. The Manual of Style says " the wording of the quoted text should be faithfully reproduced". --Gronk Oz (talk) 12:57, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

User page hijinks

I have come across a user page which claims, among other things, that the user has checkuser, file mover, and template editor rights; is an administrator; and has been a registered user for longer, and made more edits, than they actually have. (The page also contains numerous instances of the same large image, though that seems a less serious issue.) Obviously this is against policy, but is there anything I should do other than warning the user? —GrammarFascist contribstalk 10:11, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, GrammarFascist. Wikipedia:User pages#On others' user pages says:

The best option if there is a concern with a user's page is to draw their attention to the matter via their talk page and let them edit it themselves, if they are agreeable. In some cases a more experienced editor may make non-trivial edits to another user's user space, in which case that editor should leave a note explaining why this was done. This should not be done for trivial reasons.

I think this comes under that guideline. I would post to the user's talk page, asking that inaccurate indications of editing rights (admin, rolllback, etc) be removed, first double checking to make sure that they were inaccurate. I wouldn't even mention edit counts as they shouldn't matter much anyway, and the various ways of counting edits can have significant differences. If the user refuses or does not respond after some time (say a week), particularly if the user has edited elsewhere during that time, you could post at WP:AN or you could simply remove the inaccuratew statements, leaving a note on the user's talk page. DES (talk) 13:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the advice, DES. I wasn't sure if this was something that required a more urgent response the way, for example, copyright violations do. The user in question is very new (it doesn't seem to be just a matter of different ways of counting edits) and all of their edits to articles so far have been reverted as unconstructive (none by me — I'm a latecomer to the situation). The overall impression I get is that they're here to goof off, though of course I assume they have good-faith reasoning behind their apparently-pranking edits. I will leave a warning on their user page, since I did double-check and they do not have any of the permissions their user page is claiming, and hope that they respond appropriately. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 14:04, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Uploading a photo

I am a first time Wiki Editor. I am trying to upload a photo to the page on the composer Eric Thiman (I am the archivist of the Eric Thiman Collection). I am logged in and have successfully edited text.

(a)the photo has uploaded as far as the Media Settings box, but it is on its side, and remains so if I put it on the Thiman page itself.

(b) I do not know how to delete it from the Media Settings box in order to have a second try.

Please advise

Guy Turner

Guyscottturner (talk) 09:02, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Main EHT pic.jpg to Commons. Like many pictures, it needs rotation. Being an old-time picture editor, I have told the bot to rotate it. It might be done before you read this. You should also add Commons:Commons:Categories so other editors can easily find it. Jim.henderson (talk) 09:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)


Hello, Guyscottturner, and welcome to the Teahouse. I rotated the image while Jim.henderson was placing the rotation template, so I uploaded the rotated version and the file is now ready to use in the Eric Thiman article. To place the image, copy and paste [[File:Main EHT pic.jpg|thumb]] into the article, near the top but below any templates (a template will be in double curly brackets {{example}} like so).
I have a question about the provenance of the photo, however. You say you are the archivist of the Eric Thiman Collection above, but you also identified yourself as the creator of the image when you uploaded it. Did you actually take this photograph yourself in 1970, or should someone else be credited for doing that? —GrammarFascist contribstalk 09:52, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks both for your help. The picture now appears the right way up in the media settings box, but still appears on its side when placed on the Wiki page itself.

The file is not actually my image but the photographer is unknown - the photograph is part of the archive - how should I proceed? I do have a photo from 1928 which would be out of copyright, but it is as an older man that Thiman is principally remembered.

Thanks

GUY Guyscottturner (talk) 10:18, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Guyscottturner. Unfortunately, Wikipedia generally can only use a photograph if the copyright holder has given permission for anyone (not just Wikipedia) to use it. Since the photo dates from circa 1970, the copyright most likely belongs to photographer (or their estate if they have died); we can't use the photo without their permission whether we know who the photographer was or not. If the photo was previously published, the publisher might know who holds the copyright, or might hold it themselves. There is a Fair Use exception for images of deceased persons (it doesn't apply to living people, because someone could go take a photo of the person and waive their copyright) but I believe that it's necessary to know the identity of the copyright holder in order to make a Fair Use claim. Perhaps you could do some research into the provenance of the photo? Or try to find another photo from Thiman's later life?
In the meantime, you could certainly upload the 1928 image even though it dates from a time before Thiman became notable. If you have similar difficulties with that image needing rotation, use the ask a question button at the top of the page again. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 14:18, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you GrammarFascist for your help. Twenties picture went on fine, as you will see.

Guy Turner Guyscottturner (talk) 14:28, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

philosophical riddle

I tried to create an article entitled "Green Movement", to differentiate the movement from "Green Politics", which is the article that appears when one searches for "Green Movement". But describing the movement is a philosophical effort and citing assertions like "the movement influences society" is impossible... Anyway, I have to make breakfast for my kids n me now (!) so I'll keep this short. The snippet I wrote seems to have been accepted as an edit in the "Green Politics" article, which is an improvement. However, if someone thinks it valid to have a separate article, despite the awkwardness of finding authoritative references for its broad claims, that would be most helpful! jme Mccullochker (talk) 14:25, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Mccullochker, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I have had to revert (undo) your edit to Green politics, because you did not cite any sources. On Wikipedia, we cannot base our writing on our own personal knowledge; every fact asserted must be cited to a reliable source. If you can find reliable sources, such as books, or articles in newspapers or magazines, to back up what you want to add to the article, then (and only then) you can make additions about the philosophy of the green movement. Feel free to return to the Teahouse if you have further questions, such as about formatting citations, or about finding reliable sources. Thank you for trying to improve Wikipedia! —GrammarFascist contribstalk 15:04, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

How may I set up a Wiki to use for classroom discussion/assessment?

I am new. I recently found out that instructors have used their own wiki page for classroom discussion etc. I would like to know how I may correctly address thisTammy.escalante01 (talk) 16:03, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Tammy.escalante01, and welcome to the teahouse. It depends a good deal on what you want to do. If you simply want to display a wiki page and perhaps how one edits it (and how easily the changes become live) then you could set up a page in your userspace, such as Tammy.escalante01/Class (or whatever name you might prefer instead of "Class"). Such a page could hold almost anything you might wish, including links to articles, and you could edit it in front of a class. If you want to have students edit Wikipedia in any significant way, then I would suggest that you read Wikipedia:School and university projects, and go through Wikipedia:Training/For educators. If you want to explain in a bit more detail what you have in mind, perhaps we could give better targeted advice. DES (talk) 16:42, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tammy.escalante01. Personal Wikipedia pages are used for things relating to editing articles on Wikipedia. Wikipedia doesn't host pages used for other things. If you want to have students interact online about their classroom assignments, as at User:Tammy.escalante01/sandbox, you will need to find another site. Many school systems have their own web pages that allow students and teachers to log in and do this. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

fixing citation problem on article

Can someone please fix this citation error on this article, Charles, Prince of Wales, I'm unable to fix it. Thanks. (Monkelese (talk) 02:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Monkelese. I fixed it by using different ref names for different references.[1] I wrote the help page linked in the error message: Help:Cite errors/Cite error references duplicate key. Did you try to read it and if so, was there a particular problem? PrimeHunter (talk) 02:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

How did a fake user on TWA hide the title from his page?

Resolved

This page has no title. I've checked the source and copied the magic word but it doesn't work. TWA also created a page, User:Imfrankliu/TWA for me, which is now deleted, but when it existed it had no title either. How is this achieved? Frank (User Page) (talk) 05:37, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

It would be the "margin: -6.5em " which enables the black background to be drawn over the top of the title. I don't believe that User:Imfrankliu/TWA has ever existed, but User talk:Imfrankliu/TWA does. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:17, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
the User:WillKomen page was created by User:Ocaasi and then protected, which seems very odd. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:56, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
There are five fictitious users at Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure/Index#Characters. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:04, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Ahhh, Thank you! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:35, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi, you've just discovered some of the 'behind the scenes' of The Wikipedia Adventure. You can read all about it here: WP:TWA/Story. Jake Ocaasi (WMF) (talk) 21:02, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
@David Biddulph:@TheRedPenOfDoom: User_talk:Imfrankliu/TWA HAS NO TITLE. There is a display: none attribute in the DISPLAYTITLE magic word. @Ocaasi (WMF): Hi, I couldn't find anything about how did WMF hide the title in your page. (I scaned through it several times but it's only like reports and reports). Frank (User Page) (talk) 05:17, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
It is not true to say that "User_talk:Imfrankliu/TWA HAS NO TITLE" (even if you SHOUT it). The "display:none" does not prevent the page title being displayed (in any of the 3 browsers which I have tried with my current preferences). You can see by changing the value of the margin parameter. If you change the margin from -7.5em to 7.5em, for example, then the page title is visible. You can experiment in your sandbox. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Right, since 2013 it is not possible to hide part or all of the title with <span style="display:none;">...</span>. The rendered html for User talk:Imfrankliu/TWA says <span style="/* attempt to bypass $wgRestrictDisplayTitle */">User talk:Imfrankliu/TWA</span>. See mw:Manual:$wgRestrictDisplayTitle. The Wikipedia Adventure is originally from 2011 where display:none; was allowed. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:02, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
@David Biddulph:@TheRedPenOfDoom: This is how I see the title of User_talk:Imfrankliu/TWA (with "Inspect Element"): <h1 id="firstHeading" class="firstHeading" lang="en"> <span style="/* attempt to bypass $wgRestrictDisplayTitle */">User talk:Imfrankliu/TWA</span> </h1>

Frank (User Page) (talk) 04:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC) I just saw PrimeHunter's notes. Okay. Thanks. Frank (User Page) (talk) 04:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

quotes in foreign languages

Hello kind tea house host. When copy editing, should I remove, from citations, quotes from the cited page which are not in English? Many thanks, Myrtle. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 03:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Myrtlegroggins and welcome to the Teahouse. No, you should not remove such quotes, at least not without a talk-page discussion. But if you can provide reliable translations to accompany them, that is a help. Ideally sourced and published translations. Failing that, your own if you are fluent in both languages and feel competent to provide a good-quality translation. Do not depend on Google translate or other automated translation. While such services are much better than they used to be, and are often good enough to get a general idea of what a text is about, they are not yet reliable enough for use in a Wikipedia article (except an article about machine translations, where examples would be relevant). DES (talk) 04:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Many sincere thanks for your answer. I understand and will comply with pleasure. Regards, Myrtle. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 05:56, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I've been using italics when referring to articles on Wikipedia. Is this correct? MOS:QUOTETITLE seems wrong on this. — CpiralCpiral 01:29, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Referring in which circumstances? Please post a link to an example. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello Cpiral, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would usually use quotes, not italics when referring to Wikipedia articles. But in other Wikipedia articles, one usually refers to another article via a wiki-link, and no additional punctuation is needed in most such cases. Actually one is mostly referring not to the article but to the article subject. The MOS doesn't cover project pages and talk pages, the places where one is most likely to actually refer to (mention, not use) another article. There I don't think it matters too much what formatting you use, but again most often a wiki-link, at least on first mention. DES (talk) 01:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
If you are referring to most articles, like Halloween, you just put the article in brackets. But if you are referring to a short art work, like a song "Bohemian Rhapsody" or a poem "Purple Cow", then you would use "quotes". If you are referring to a long-form artwork, like War and Peace or a ship SS Edmund Fitzgerald you would use italics. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

All very fine answers. Nice teahouse experience!

Unfortunately I really don't have an entirely valid question, because I don't have an example. A list of all the common situations is too much to bother with, such as when its both use and mention. At the time I wrote the question, I might easily have been failing the use-mention distinction. Now, assuming the default case of an article referencing a related article on the wiki, in a mention outside of See also section, I now think neither italics nor quotes is necessarily stylize-able in a wiki the way I've seen it in other (Encyclopedic) venues. For one, we have article stubs, and if we're to treat articles like works then stub mentions would get quotation marks, per MOS:T. So we don't treat articles like works, when it comes to italics or quotes. We treat articles like the text their link is.

The MoS now seems correct to me in not mentioning the answer to a somewhat invalid question. It's subtle because 1) wikilinks are not visible in the black and white print version, so we just ignore the fact that it is a link to an article; and 2) links are freely labeled differently than the title they link to, so if an article title equals a work, treat it like a work. — CpiralCpiral 08:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it appears you are thinking of wikilinked terms in running article text like:
"Work, Death, and Sickness" is a short story by Leo Tolstoy who also wrote War and Peace.
This is not "referring" to the articles. It is merely linking to the articles for convenience when the subject of the articles is mentioned. It should use the same styling as if there had been no wikilinks:
"Work, Death, and Sickness" is a short story by Leo Tolstoy who also wrote War and Peace.
PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

How to add Auto Confirmed badge

I am an auto confirmed user but there is no badge on my user page. How can I add one? Anjana LarkaTalk ✉ 10:28, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Anjana Larka, welcome to the Teahouse. {{User wikipedia/Autoconfirmed}} makes a userbox. {{Autoconfirmed topicon}} makes an icon in the upper right corner but I see you already have that. I don't think there is a badge for The Wikipedia Adventure like Wikipedia:TWA/Badge/1. I see you display userboxes for autopatrolled and rollbacker but your account does not have those rights. You also claim 10,000+ edits but only have 298. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Also, user pages contain personal content and should be customized personally in most cases; meaning if you want to display your achievements (related to editing Wikipedia) on your user page you have to do it on your own. -- Chamith (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
If you copy-paste source from another userpage make sure to alter the source code so that it reflects your contributions. -- Chamith (talk) 12:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out PrimeHunter. I actually added them after posting this question. Found my answer somewhere searching in TeaHouse Anjana LarkaTalk ✉ 12:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC).
Anjana Larka, Here is the code for an Autoconfirmed Userbox:
{{Template:User wikipedia/Autoconfirmed}} renders like this:
This user has autoconfirmed rights on the English Wikipedia. (verify)
Cheers{{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 13:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Anjana Larka, you might want to look at Wikipedia:Service awards if you are interested in badges for accomplishments. You might also want to look at the Article Rescue Squadron or the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors if you are looking for useful activity on the project that might earn a barnstar, as your userpage says. DES (talk) 13:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Building Infobox

Hi, I created the article Walking Horse Hotel yesterday (yes, I know it's a stub, but I'm going to do more research on it tomorrow after all the good source sites remove their stuff about it being haunted for Halloween, and just talk about it in its unhaunted form). Anyway, the hotel is on the National Register of Historic Places and I'm wanting to add the template of the building infobox to the article. When I went to copy-paste it off, though, I couldn't because it was locked. I know I was logged in, but I couldn't open the edit window to copy it. Is it OK to copy the Infobox from an unlocked article about a similar subject and just replace the particulars on it with the info about the Walking Horse Hotel? White Arabian mare (Neigh) 18:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

Welcome to teahouse White Arabian mare You can copy paste from documentation where blank template is given. You need not click on edit. Copying from another article is not recommended as fields might be differently used there. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 18:45, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
I have added the blank template for now. Keep the parameters you need and delete the rest. Happy editing :) -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 18:49, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
I usually leave the extra parameters in place so future Editors can easily fill them in. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 03:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi White Arabian mare. It's unclear to me which page you tried to copy from. You can copy a template call with blank parameters from the displayed page Template:Infobox building. Template documentation has code ready for copying without having to view the source. You can also click the "Edit" or "View source" tab on an article using the template and copy the code there for adaptation to another article. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi PrimeHunter, I didn't actually copy anything. I was going to copy the blank template from the Template:Infobox building page and paste it to the article page, but the template page was locked. I was thinking that if I couldn't copy from there I could copy the parameters from a different article, but I didn't try it. Thanks, Capankajsmilyo. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 19:28, 31 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

You're welcome White Arabian mare! Again, locked or not doesn't matter. You don't have to click edit to copy. Just copy what appears on Template:Infobox building in blank template. (Y) -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 19:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
If it's a property on the NRHP then possibly a better infobox template to use is {{Infobox NRHP}}. To copy the blank template go the section Infobox NRHP#Usage and copy and paste the contents of the box titled Blank template with most common parameters - you do not need to edit the page to do this, it has been formatted to show the code needed. Nthep (talk) 20:06, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Nthep, Your direct wikilink did not work so I refactored it for the convenience of White Arabian mare. If that's not right, please undo. As for the NRHP template I noticed it does not include parameters typical of a hotel, such as number of rooms. There used to be a Template:Hotel, but now we're stuck with Template:Building or Template:Restaurant. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:02, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
I went ahead and added the NRHP infobox. White Arabian mare, if you are stating the property is on the NRHP, it is important to cite that info. Wikiproject NRHP has a nifty set of tools, one of which will look up the NRHP registration number and take the data from the registration to make an infobox, containing the proper reference and a location map. John from Idegon (talk) 06:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks to all. I'm not really experienced with doing articles on buildings, but I decided to do this one after seeing that it was redlinked on the Bedford County list of Historic Places. Also, it figures prominently in one of the horse articles I wrote, and I thought it needed it's own article. Thanks again to everybody for helping. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 14:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

Do we want an article for cranial ultrasound?

Hello - I'm a novice editor. Cranial ultrasound (medical technique for examining babies' brains through the fontanelle) currently only has a couple of lines in a table the "Medical Ultrasound" article. (I notice "Echocardiography" and "Carotid Ultrasound" get their own.) It's definitely accurate to classify under medical ultrasound, but it's quite a specific technique. Should I add more detail to the main article, or make a new article so that the general "Medical Ultrasound" one doesn't get unbalanced? Thank you, Dora Dorasteel (talk) 15:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Dorasteel, and welcome to the Teahouse. That really depends on how much information on Cranial ultrasound you can find, and how well sourced it is. Creating a new article so that it is acceptable is often hard for a relatively new editor. Please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article to consider in general whether there is enough reliably sourced content for an article on the subject. Then read WP:MEDRS. Since this is a medical topic, that stricter sourcing guideline would apply at least in part. If you go ahead, I strongly urge you to use the Article Wizard and create a Draft under the articles for creation (AfC) project. Such a draft would be reviewed by an experienced editor before it goes live.
You could start by adding content to the main article, and then consider splitting it off into a separate article.
I hope this is helpful. Please feel free to ask any followups or other questions here. DES (talk) 16:02, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

wiki categories

Hi, when adding a category to a page is there a list of categories to select from? I'm ideally looking for - Athletics Club in Suffolk. Thank you Cavbex (talk) 08:53, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cavbex, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is a listing of major categories at Portal:Contents/Categories. From there, you need to click through to a relevant one and then you can find sub-categories, e.g. at Category:Track and field. Often, though, I find the best way to identify relevant categories is through looking at equivalent articles (and a bit of trial and error typing "Category:..." into the search bar. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Actually, that category doesn't exist but Category:Athletics clubs in England does. Liz Read! Talk! 09:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Cordless Larry, am I right in thinking you can list more than one category and sub-categories? Cavbex (talk) 09:11, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes you can, Cavbex. Take a look at Help:Category and Wikipedia:Categorization for more detailed guidance on this. Just one thing to note: you normally shouldn't add an article to a main category and one of its subcategories. For instance, an article in Category:Track and field in the United Kingdom shouldn't also be categorised in Category:Track and field. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Cavbex, Go to: Preferences: Gadgets: Editing: Enable "HotCat". You'll have a "+" sign at the bottom of each article page to click on. Click on the "+" sign and HotCat will do auto-complete and category-prediction based on what you start typing in. Type slow and wait for the pop-up; scroll down the choice list; if nothing there add another letter to your query. Down the road you can add a Javascript to your common.js page and rev up HotCat so it has up/down arrows for parent/child category picking. Good luck. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 13:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC) Thanks Checkingfax that's really helpful. My page has since been removed due to notability, not sure how to go about this, I'm reading up on it now, but any advice would be appreciated! I have looked at another athletics site and it only shows the official website, which I already had. I have some references/link that I could add, i.e: http://www.englandathletics.org/england-athletics-news/waveney-valley-ac-achieve-clubmark-accreditation?search= Cavbex (talk) 16:02, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I wrote an article in a Central Kurdish Branch language (ckb.wikipedia.org/), but till now I can not find my article in Wikipedia search. This is my first article and I registered in wiki first. So, What I do?

Hi, I wrote an article in a Central Kurdish Branch language (ckb.wikipedia.org/), but till now I can not find my article in Wikipedia search. This is my first article and I registered in wiki first. So, What I do?Delshad1974 (talk) 15:28, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Was it Draft:كتێبی ئامارزانی? if so then there it is. However, we cannot accept it here because this is the English language Wikipedia. Please submit it to https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/صفحهٔ_اصلی instead. Fiddle Faddle 17:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Wasn't the question about Delshad1974's contributions to the ckb Wikipedia, not to enwiki? --David Biddulph (talk) 17:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Decline of Draft:Gridcoin

At Articles for Creation, I declined Draft:Gridcoin. The submitter, User:Awoodwa, asked me on my talk page how to improve the article to get it accepted. I am bringing that question here (as per the banner on my talk page) for advice from other experienced editors. How can the submitter improve the article? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:20, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I will note that the encyclopedic acceptability of an article on this subject has been a matter of question in the past. A previous article Gridcoin was deleted as per WP:Articles for deletion/Gridcoin. However, since I can’t see the deleted article, I can’t compare the declined draft with the deleted article. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:20, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice of other experienced editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:20, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon I reviewed the deleted article. It was actually deleted four different times for four different reasons: A3 (empty), G11 (promotion), AfD (notability), and G12 (copyvio), but I reviewed the version just prior to the AfD deletion. There is considerable similarity to the text of the current draft. This is not surprising, as the history of the draft actually predates the deleted mainspace version, and it looks as if that started as a copy&paste move of an earlier revision of the draft. The AfD focused largely on notability, and whether the somewhat specialized sources cited at that time constituted reliable sources. The consensus was that they did not, or not sufficiently to establish notability, and there there was no substantive mainstream coverage found. I wasn't aware of this AfD, and I think that I might have disagreed with the consensus view, but I would have researched the sources more than i have yet done before I offered a view on an AfD. If you intend to work with the drafter on this, or if it will help you, I am willing to email you the wiki-text of the 5 March 2015 revision, or just the sources cited there.
As to what the drafter could do, obviously rewrite to improve the tone toward neutrality. In particular the last paragraph of the current draft's lead section, starting "This idea, to benefit humanity via crowdsourced BOINC research, ..." feels rather promotional to me. Also phrases like "much anticipated [27]Proof of Research" seem like puffery or uncited opinion.
The current draft seems (on a quick glance) better sourced than the deleted 5 March revision, but a few more mainstrream sources, if available, would help.
I hope this is helpful. DES (talk) 15:51, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
User:Awoodwa as I reviewed the draft, it appeared to be sourced almost entirely to cryptocurrency news letters/blogs/chat forums and not reliably published sources with a reputation for fact checking and editorial oversight. The one source that would generally default as a reliable source , The Guardian, didnt appear to actually discuss Gridcoin at all. The Brookings Institute as an advocacy think tank would probably be OK to include as a major opinion AFTER notability has been established, but their innerworkings and finance are sufficiently opaque as to not enjoy the benefit of "independence" required to help establish notability in the first place.
Awoodwa should look for major coverage in major newspapers or academic journals. news.google.com and scholar.google.com help search to sources that are mostly appropriate (note "mostly" - not all will be acceptable and they will miss some places that would be acceptable like major magazines The Atlantic or New Yorker.) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Translating articles

I'm fluent in Eglish and my native language is German. Obviously the English Wikipedia has a lot more articles than the German one. When I come across an article, that exists in English but doesn't in German, can I just translate the English text into German in order to 'create a new article' for the German Wikipedia? Or would that violate someone's copyright or whatever?

And why should we sign 'all of our non-article posts by ending them with four tildes'?

Thanks, Gluehbirneee

Gluehbirneee (talk) 12:19, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea! Seriously, this is encouraged. There is a good article covering how to do it, and some considerations to keep in mind, at Wikipedia:Translate us. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Gluehbirneee, and welcome to the Teahouse. I agree with Gronk Oz that you're encouraged to translate articles, and that the page linked above is the best resource for information on how to do so.
About signing with four tildes on non-article pages at English Wikipedia, this is so everyone reading can tell who said what (and when). It would be very confusing to have to keep going to the page history and looking at diffs to figure out who asked a question, and which parts of the responses were left by which other editors. (Timestamps are better to have because sometimes people add their comments out of sequence.) Does that make sense? —GrammarFascist contribstalk 13:54, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
@Gluehbirneee:: yes, translating articles from here to de:wp would be very useful. I would like to add one important point: Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA license allows copying but requires that attribution should be given to the authors of the original content. A good way to do that is to place on the talk page of the translated article the {{translated page}} template or its local equivalent. For German Wikipedia, that would be de:Vorlage:Übersetzung. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:33, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Content correction

I just created an account (username and PW) and wqnt to point out contradicting dates on the Wikipedia Snakes/Serpentes page. But I can't determine where to go/hoe to get to the place to report this. Suggestions? Ecolobg (talk) 19:23, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. If you go to Talk:Snake, you can start a new discussion with the "New section" button. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

B-side with infobox song

I have seen a lot of b-side with infobox song. It is normal ? For example, I just want to make love to you (the b-side of Tell me) had a infobox song, but I changed it. Now, I'm not sure if it was a good choice because it's the case of many other songs like Send It To Me (B-side of She's So Cold) and others.

So, do I need to change it ?

And, another question : If a song was released as a single in one country (but not all), do I need to change from Infobox song to Infobox single.

93.15.231.184 (talk) 16:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

If you have edited the above-referenced articles, it must have been while you were logged in with a username, or else under a different IP address, because this question is the only edit that has been made under 93.15.231.184. I'm not sure I entirely understand your question; for articles about songs that use an infobox, if there was a B-side included, it can be mentioned in the infobox but does not have to be. It would be easier for Teahouse volunteers to help you if, when mentioning the name of an article, you typed (or copied and pasted from the top of the article) [[Tell Me (The Rolling Stones song)]] (which displays as Tell Me (The Rolling Stones song) ) instead of just Tell Me, since there are literally more than three dozen songs by that title listed on the disambiguation page. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 21:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

asian month competion

how do i sign up for this.what do i need to sign up for this.Wasimuntakim12 (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey Wasimuntakim12, welcome to the Teahouse. You can sign up over at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month by clicking the 'Sign up now' button at the top of the page. Be sure to read the instructions on the page so that you sign up successfully. NottNott talk|contrib 21:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia deleted my file.

I have made a page for a record label https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_a_Minute_Records and I was going to put an image in the infobox but they deleted it and said fair use for EN not COM. I'm confused and upset because I want the article to have as much information as it can have.Pitaascot99 (talk) 20:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Pitaascot99 and welcome to the Teahouse. I have deleted In a Minute Records as a copyright infringement of the streetsonbeats.blogspot.com/2006/01/in-minute-records_24.html page. If you want to try again, I strongly urge you to first read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article. If, after reading those, you think this is a valid topic, I urge you to use the Article Wizard and make a draft under the Articles for Creation project. That way, an experienced editor will review your draft before it goes live. Remember that all drafts and articles should be in original words, not copied from anywhere, but should be firmly based on independent reliable sources, and only "notable" topics will have articles..
As for the image, Commons does not accept copyrighted images used under a claim of Fair Use. en.Wikipedia does, in limited circumstances, but any image should wait until the article has its basic structure written and approved. DES (talk) 22:01, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Admin Bully

Is there anything that I can do if an admin is acting biased against me? I keep getting warnings, bans and blocks. He prefer my talk page to discuss edit issues than Article's talk page. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:04, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I see no particular evidence that any one admin is acting against you. It does appear that at least two admins have acted against you, and often if two or more admins think that your editing is out of line, your editing may be out of line. It appears that you have been topic-banned from edits on Indian religion under WP:ARBPIA and that you continue to make edits in violation of your topic ban. You can either abide by the scope of the topic-ban or appeal the ban at Arbitration Clarification and Amendment requests. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Capankajsmilyo. You have received one warning, so it's a bit soon to call it bullying; and I don't think it's relevant that the person is an admin because anyone could post that warning.. Your identification of dead links seems appropriate, but some of your other edits don't seem constructive, and that may be what the editor in question is responding to:
  • this edit removes mention of his grandfather with the claim it violates WP:UNDUE (really?)
  • this edit and the next one add a POV and an Update tag, but you don't explain why. Unexplained tagging is not useful - how are people supposed to fix it if you don't explain the problem?
  • this edit, which hasn't been reverted yet, violates the Manual of Style for boldface (but I don't blame you for not knowing that).
  • several placements of citation needed tags. One or two such tags for statements that seem dubious is reasonable, but strictly speaking citations are only needed for statements that are likely to be challenged. Also, it is better practice to attempt to fix a problem yourself; only tag it if you don't succeed. RockMagnetist(talk) 17:48, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for point by point analysis and reply RockMagnetist. It's really appreciated that at least there's someone willing to listen. Otherwise I was fed up with the attitude that whatever an admin says is final, and you won't get any explaination.
Do we really need a mention of whole lineage. Mother Father GrandMother even GreatGrandfather really? Isn't it undue?
Dead link was with a tool, is the tool defective?
I have been accused of POV for CN. Is adding cn to an article POV?
Update tags and POV tags were added because lots of present tense was used for past statements and facts have changed now. Anyways, I haven't readded them.
CN were added only for those statements which were not cited. Further no discussion was conducted on talk page prior to issue of warning and threatening of block. I have been banned already in the same manner, where my talk page is misused to discuss the edits of an article so that article contributors can't step in discussion.
When I appealed the ban to admin (for religion), I was just informed straightaway that My first option of appealing to admin has been done. No discussion nothing. Just simple blatant that my appeal is rejected and I can now go to arbitary. When I approached arbitrary, its a never ending appeal. It hasn't been concluded yet. No one comments there except those who have imposed a ban on me. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 18:03, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me that there has been plenty of explanation. Your topic ban (which is now missing from your talk page - it should be restored) not only has an extensive explanation but also links to other attempts by users to warn you and provide advice. In your appeal, there was another lengthy explanation. It seems to me that the person who needs to start listening is you. Here is my advice - stay away from tools and tagging in general and try to add good content. If a citation is missing, find one. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:56, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Capankajsmilyo: For example, I repaired those dead links you tagged. Here's how. RockMagnetist(talk) 22:56, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Capankajsmilyo, as you can see, hardly anybody agrees that the mention of the great-grandfather in this instance is WP:UNDUE. The due weight needs to be decided based on a holistic understanding of the entire context and the simplistic arguments of the kind you have made are not enough. Until you get a good understanding of how this works, I suggest that you ask the experienced editors about issues of WP:WEIGHT. Let me also add that the administrators are senior editors with loads of experience, and you shouldn't dismiss their advice lightly. All the best! - Kautilya3 (talk) 14:14, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Moving large portions of original article to more specific article

I am currently working on the article Agent Orange's Effects on the Vietnamese People and need to consolidate a lot of information that is currently on the Agent Orange page regarding my article's topic. Should I go ahead and cut and paste that information over or should take those resources and rewrite those same claims on my article using those same resources? Vnguyen518 (talk) 03:27, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

If the content is good and usable you can cut and paste over. However, when you do so, you MUST provide copyright attribution in the edit summary by (at a minimum) stating what you are doing, together with a link to the source page you've copied from. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:05, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

where can i make a complienet about something

I like to report a admin whose been annoying me is there a place that I can report him?ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 18:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

The wording "his or her" is gender-neutral. Let's not stretch things any further, either with regard to templates in general or with forumshopping disruptive editors. I think that the wording is gender-neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:33, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm afraid it's a common misconception that "his or her" is sufficiently gender-neutral, Robert McClenon. Happily, the template has already been corrected by Checkingfax. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 04:31, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Tips on how to use Wikipedia (beyond regular use).

The main way to use Wikipedia for study is to read articles. Some other ways I know is to use the reference desk and talk pages. Also, editing probably makes you smarter. What are some other ways to use Wikipedia for self-learning purposes? Anyone have a tutorial? TheKing44 (talk) 01:19, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, TheKing44, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you're looking for a tutorial, Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure is probably the best one. It's interactive, and takes about an hour to complete. Have fun, and don't hesitate to return here with any further questions! —GrammarFascist contribstalk 04:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

HOVER LINK: HIDDEN ERROR: Usage of "_VALUE_" is not recognized

When hovering over the link to Michael Laucke, the image in the infobox is picked up fine, but the introductory page text one is accustomed to view, does not render, and reads "HIDDEN ERROR: Usage of "_VALUE_" is not recognized". The link works however. When one gets to the Michael Laucke article, the same problem occurs when hovering over Elton John. Many thanks in advance for your kind help; it is always much appreciated. --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 02:53, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Natalie.Desautels. I suspect that you will get more helpful answers to this over on WP:VPT. DES (talk) 03:03, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
@DESiegel:
Hello DESiegel Thank you so much for such an unexpectedly rapid response. I will take the pleasure to contact WP:VPT for some help on this issue. I like to say that when it comes to technical issues, we are never alone! meaning, that if it happened on the Michael Laucke page I initiated (and 13 editors have contribute to), then chances are this glitch exists elsewhere on Wikipedia.
I would be amiss not to congratulate you on your fantastic contributions to Wikipedia. I've read several of your articles and enjoyed them immensely, as well as having learned so much from them. The one on Process was just excellent.
I am multiligual and little difference exists for me between several languages, so I hope to be useful to Wikipedia in this regard as well.
Very best wishes and congratulations once again for such great work and dedication, Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 03:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, DESiegel: I went to check out the "WP:Process" essay which redirected me to "[[WP:Processes]]" which was totally blank. I rolled it back for you. Pinging Natalie.Desautels too. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Checkingfax, I believe the reference here is to WP:Process is important aka WP:PI, which I consider one of my more significant contributions here, although i am not the only editor, and it has not proved as persuasive as I had once hoped it would. Strictly speaking it isn't an article, of course. Natalie.Desautels, thank you very much for those kind words. DES (talk) 04:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
@DESiegel and Checkingfax:Yes, WP:Process is important was the Project page I visited, along with others. It may not have been an "article" but it sure was interesting! Although music takes precedence for me, I also have a strong interest in law and the history thereof. So this certainly grabbed my attention. The writing also was very clear, so well structured and, well, pleasing, even though English is not exactly my mother tongue (...still trying to figure out which language is : ). Thanks again for a great contribution; sorry to hear it didn't prove persuasive to some; to me it certainly was, and then some! all my very best wishes, Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 06:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
I am very pleased to hear that, Natalie.Desautels. You can follow the way this essay evolved in its history, if you are interested, and you can get at least some view of the reactions to it in the archives of its talk page. DES (talk) 12:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
@DESiegel and Checkingfax: Hello, User:DESiegel Indeed, I would be very interested in reading how the essay evolved, and to gain some understanding of other points of view on the subject. ...good to know I can access the archives of its talk page. Many thanks once again. very best wishes, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 12:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
"@DESiegel and Checkingfax: Hello, User:DESiegel, So now I've taken the pleasure of reading through most of archive 1 and 2 on the Talk page of WP:Process is important, skipping over what seemed the purely polemical parts of the discussion; it did help me to follow the way this essay evolved in its history, as you said. I have to reiterate that I steadfastly enjoyed your project page, found it extremely interesting and remain surprised that more traction could not be gained out of such a fine contribution. Many thanks for the tip of how to access its history and again for this very interesting work. very best wishes, Natalie --204.48.94.47 (talk) 06:29, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_409&oldid=1142564603"