Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 471

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 465

←

Archive 469

→

Wikipedia MeetUp: Women in Science and Engineering

Hi I'm holding a Wikipedia Edit-a-thon for Women in Science and Engineering on April 8, 2016. I have the project page in my Sandbox, but I'm not sure how to get it published to share during the event. I need some guidance on how to get it published in the right place on Wikipedia. This is the link to my Sandbox if you are able to see it there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mesquitetree/sandbox

Thank you, Mesquitetree (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mesquitetree. Does the first bullet point of Wikipedia:How to run an edit-a-thon#What you should have beforehand help? If you followed that advice, then you would move your sandbox to a subpage of Wikipedia:Meetup, such as Wikipedia:Meetup/ASU Tempe edit-a-thon, 2016–Women in Science and Engineering, then post to the future meetups section of Wikipedia:Meetup, and maybe advertise at the Wikipedia:Community portal, per Wikipedia:How to run an edit-a-thon#Ways to advertise an edit-a-thon (though this does seem a bit last minute given how soon the event is scheduled for). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

By the way, Mesquitetree, and I'm sorry to feel the need to raise it, but I think you may be too new a user to effectively run an edit-a-thon (if indeed you are running it). I say this because, for example, your post uses a URL to link your sandbox, instead of a wikilink, which to me indicates you are likely inexperienced in Wikipedia basics (as that is a very basic formatting issue that it would be highly unlikely for an experienced user to have done). If you are running it and are as new as I think you are, then are you planning to advise people that every edit they make should be accompanied by citation to a reliable source that verifies the edit they are making (and how to do so)? That they must not copy and paste copyrighted material? Give advice on writing in an encyclopedic register and pitfalls to avoid to do so – and so forth as to matters that I think should be very high on any list of things to inform people of, who are new to editing?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:31, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help and advice. I have added it to the Wikipedia:Meetup page and now I will see about moving it from my sandbox. You are correct, I am new to editing Wikipedia. Luckily there will be more experienced editors at the event.Mesquitetree (talk) 23:22, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your patience with me. I am wondering, when I move my sandbox what namespace is best for a Meetup? Thank you, Mesquitetree (talk) 23:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Other than the article mainspace, all namespaces are defined by the prefix at the front before the colon. So if you move it to "Wikipedia:Meetup/NAME", the prefix at the front defines that it is in the Wikipedia namespace (a/k/a the project or administrative namespace). What can be tricky is that the move dialogue allows you to define the namespace and only provides "(article)" rather than "none" or "blank" – it assumes no defined prefix equals an intent to move to the article mainspace. But it actually just means blank, as in, no namespace defined. If that sounded confusing, well... it is. Here's what to avoid. If as I assume you're moving it to "Wikipedia:Meeting/NAME" then you have two choices: 1) choose "Wikipedia:" as the namespace, but then don't enter into the field below Wikipedia:Meeting/NAME but just Meeting/NAME (or you will end up with a doubled name like "Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Meeting/NAME") or alternatively 2) enter the full name in the field below, but then choose "(article)" which really means "no defined namespace prefix will be added". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:47, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit thank you so much! That worked. I so appreciate your help. All the best, Mesquitetree (talk) 04:35, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Great, glad to help.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

My edit of the bite inhibition was reverted for "non-optimal sentence structure"

The Bite Inhibition article has some inaccuracies and confuses bite inhibition and soft mouth. It also has a lot of material about aggression that is probably extraneous. I did what I thought was a minor edit clarifying the difference between bite inhibition and soft mouth but it was reverted. It looks to me like there is one 'owner' of that article. Do I just give up and leave it wrong or is there a way to ask for input from others on Wikipedia who are knowledgeable? Prettyriver (talk) 23:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Discuss on the article talk page, Talk: Bite Inhibition. You didn't do anything wrong. Read Bold, Revert, Discuss, which, while not a policy, is often applicable. You were bold. You were reverted. Now discuss on the talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

There is no such page as Talk: Bite Inhibition, as shown by the redlink; it is Talk:Bite inhibition. Case is significant. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:40, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

My apology, Bite inhibition. Case sensitivity is a difficult feature for experienced editors and very confusing for inexperienced editors, and your correction of me was harsh, although I should have known better given that case sensitivity is a long-standing misfeature. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Number of edits

Is there any way for me to see what number of edits I have performed during my time on wikipedia? Also is there any way that I can see all the articles on my watchlist at one time so that I can see if there are some that I want to remove?*Treker (talk) 23:03, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey *Treker. If you go to your preferences under the first section ("basic information") you will find the number of edits recorded for you by the software. It does not include a variety of matters I consider edits, that may be captured by other edit counters, such as X's tool, which is provided as a link entitled "Edit count" appearing at the bottom of your contributions. See also Wikipedia:Tools#Edit counters. To the second question, go to your watchlist and see the links at the very top for "View and edit watchlist | Edit raw watchlist". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:13, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thak you so much. That X! Tool is great.*Treker (talk) 23:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Anytime.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

How to ask about and to encourage somebody to write an article

Hi,

I thought Wikipedia should have an article about the term "Putinversteher", how do I find out that this seen as being relevant?

Thanks. 195.16.52.82 (talk) 11:10, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello 195.16. In general, Wikipedia does not have articles about "terms", because Wikipedia is not a dictionary. (Our sister project, Wiktionary, is a dictionary.) Wikipedia does have articles about the concepts that terms represent. There first thing is to be sure that a topic is notable. Only notable subjects should have Wikipedia articles. See Wikipedia's Golden Rule and pages linked from there. Then you could ask someone else to write an article at requested articles, but there is a very large backlog there. Or you could read Your First Article and use the Articles for creation process to create a draft and submit it for review by an experienced editor. I hope that this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 13:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

The term is somewhat in the news but is not even used in Wikipedia EN, DE, or RU. To me it seems worth, at most, only a brief mention, perhaps in the Putin biography or more likely in the Germany-Russia relations article. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Templates

What are the editing templates I need to know? I feel like I might have done a little bit less than I could've in my recent contributions to wiki and I would like a list of the templates often used with editing. I already know a few, such as {{sports-stub}} OR {{copyedit}} Please help. Man epik (Epikman) 18:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Epikman (talk • contribs) 18:15, 7 April 2016‎ (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I have slightly modified your question so that the templates you gave as examples are linked rather than transcluded. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

It is difficult to answer your question without knowing what type of tasks you are interested in performing because there are so many templates, Epikman, but there is a directory of template messages similar to {{copyedit}} at Wikipedia:Template messages. That might be one place to start. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Bay Area American Indian Two Spirits

I reviewed Draft: Bay Area American Indian Two Spirits and declined it, requesting more independent reliable sources.

User:Stayhomegal then asked: Hi Robert, you recently commented on my BAAITS article that I need to add more reliable sources. I have two on there, so I understand that's a low number. I'm wondering what your opinion on the two that I already have is thought? What I mean is: do you think that the ones I do have are reliable? I think they are good, but I just want to make sure that going out and getting similar sources is a good way to proceed from here? Thank you!

In general, two is the minimum. I would suggest that you try to Google on it and then check whether the sources that you get are independent. It would also help if you could find at least one source that isn’t local to the Bay Area. What do other editors think? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

As to the first source, it's not very clear how the radio station is related, if at all to the event, but it is mostly a regurgitation of this press release (See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources). The second source it much better for our purposes. I did a quick Google Books and then Google News search (which tend to concentrate reliable sources, as opposed to a web search) and did not find much that was more than passing mention (i.e., not "significant coverage" in reliable, secondary, independent sources, tending to show notability): [1]; [2] (just a snippet but verifies date of founding as 1990). I only searched the full name – a search of the acronym might turn up more.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both for responding. I think I understand what the issue is. The articles I am choosing to write are on topics that just aren't notable yet.

I have another question, and you may not be able to answer it. I am working on a Wiki project for a class on cutural representations of sexuality. The topic I am working on is contemporary two-spirit activism and advocacy. Do you think this is a viable topic? Because it seems to be the case that while I have a few sources, some of those aren't up to par, and that when other editors look, they can't really find much more than the little that I have. I am considering changing my topic or something because it seems like something further back in history would be more feasible. Stayhomegal (talk) 18:34, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

From what you say, Stayhomegal, it does sound as if that is not going to work for your topic at present. Congratulations: you have learnt something that many, many, people never learn about Wikipedia! --ColinFine (talk) 19:23, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Status of scanned newspaper pictures

I have some very old newspapers - pre 1940. I would like to add picture scans from them into an article I am preparing. The scans are of pictures of sporting events. Is it permissible to add these and if so, how should I proceed? George . . . GDMorgan (talk) 20:56, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi @GDMorgan: and welcome to the Teahouse. The copyright status of such images depends on the country, and the exact year of the newspapers. If it's in relation to Old Belvedere Cricket Club, then Copyright law of Ireland suggests that "Protection expires 70 years after the death of the author/creator." Which means the images are possibly still under copyright law. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for that. This is a new article I am planning - not yet published. In the case of a now defunct newspaper, how might I establish the copyright? If the photographer was an employee of the newspaper, then can I assume the copyright is owned by the newspaper? If the paper folds, then after 70 years (in Ireland) the image is free. But if the photographer owned the copyright, then it is only free 70 years after his death? Am I correct? Is there any sense in which using the photo could be deemed 'fair use'? George . . . GDMorgan (talk) 21:29, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

George, Irish copyright law, as mentioned above, is normally 70 years after either the death of the author or, if the author is unknown or pseudonymous, the date of publication but for uploads to the commons they must also be in the public domain in the US. If you don't know the author and you don't know if an image was "made available to the public, i.e, published, as it appears for most of your Belvedere images, your are out of luck because the copyright status remains uncertain. Defunct newspapers may have been absorbed by another newspaper who may still own the copyright, so some investigation needs to be done but in general the 70 year rule applies. It appear that many of the images for Old Belvedere Cricket Club that were uploaded to the commons were deleted and I noticed that some of the older images have the author as "Sean Murphy ( -1945)" which seemed like a highly convenient 70 year old death date and wonder what research has been done to verify that date. Many of the other images are from 1950 or newer and just don't make the 70 year mark. In fact the whole article appears to have only been expanded to include mostly names of offices, including minor ones, of the club and a gallery of random club photos which is not encyclopaedic but that's another issue. In my opinion this article needs to be reevaluated completely because all the existing images plus a load of others you want to add are just decoration and don't really contribute to the reader's understanding of the club. I suggest you read WP:NOT especially WP:NOTGALLERY. To answer your other question, our non-free policy is far stricter than the usual understanding of fair-use and any such use MUST comply with all 10 non-free policy criteria but from what I saw of the article they fail #8 and probably 1 or 2 other criteria. ww2censor (talk) 23:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Just to be clear, my question here about old newspaper photos has nothing whatever to do with my article on the Old Belvedere Cricket Club. It relates to another article which I am planning about another sport.

I take on board all you say about my article on the cricket club. It is a work in progress and I am already being guided by another administrator on what is not appropriate for the article. I have taken down several of the images which he says are inadmissible. I am new to this and learning on the job. Thank you for your advice and interest.

George . . . GDMorgan (talk) 08:33, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

My comments about the Old Belvedere Cricket Club article were by way of guidance if you are doing something similar and maybe using various images as you gave no indication exactly what you are working on other than referring to old newspaper images. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 19:23, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

adding pictures to players

Hello.I edit pages of Iraqi player but whenever I add their pictures they get removed, there is no such option in the copyright section, how can i add their photo?

Alitheboss55 (talk) 19:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Alitheboss55. You can only add a photo of a living person if the photo is freely licensed in an acceptable way, or copyright free. Almost all random photos you find online are restricted by copyright and cannot be used. If you take a photo of a player yourself, then you are the copyright holder and you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons under an appropriate free license. If you find a photo already on Wikimedia Commons, then it is OK to use. Some photos on Flikr are licensed properly but most aren't. It is your obligation to verify that any photo you want to add is licensed properly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

For complete details, please read Wikipedia:Image use policy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:21, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Need help

Hi! Im new at Wikipedia, want to create an article about Gadri, but Admins deletes many times, i want to reverse my article Gadri, so Please, if anyone, please reopen my blocked and deleted article Gadri Fazul12345 (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

The latest recreation of the article has been moved to Draft:Gadri, but I can't see any evidence that you created it or have even edited it, Fazul12345. Could you clarify? Cordless Larry (talk) 15:07, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

I moved it to Draft:Gadri, Fazul12345. It seems to have been crated by User:Gadri. Is that an alternate account of yours? In any case, the draft will need sources before it can be approved, please read Your First Article and Wikipedia's Golden Rule. DES ^(talk) 15:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Fazul12345 is the latest of many socks of Gadri. Doug Weller talk 20:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

How do you find a good picture that of free use to use on a Wikipedia Page?

I am trying to find some pictures of Kaia Kanepi from her 2015 year, but all the pictures I find don't have Creative Commons on them. What do I do? Bryson483 22:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryson483 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse. There are photos from other years at commons:Category:Kaia Kanepi, any of which you can use. If you can't find a photo free from copyright for the year you're looking for, you can't add it to a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria doesn't allow use of non-free images for living subjects, as you can take a photo yourself. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:51, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Bryson483. Where a suitably-free picture cannot be located in searches – and there are already free photos for this subject – there's only two options I can think of: i) take the photo yourself; ii) write to the subject and ask them to provide a picture. I actually started drafting a model page for the second purpose here, which might give you some ideas, but I never completed it and it also has out of date material in it. I know there's a page here with sample requests that I had intended that draft to be added to, but I haven't found it. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah – Wikipedia:Example requests for permission.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Do revisions to a resubmitted article meet stated specifications

Dear Wikipedia Editors,

I am an American hired by a Korean law firm to help them adjust to the opening of the Korean legal market after FTA-mandated liberalization. It never occurred to me to use Wikipedia as advertising. After reviewing your policy on conflict of interest disclosure and subject notability, I set out to show the firm deserved a page because of the numerous high-profile cases it has been involved with. Three subjects or people involved in cases covered by the firm already have English-language Wikipedia pages. Two of the firm's consultants also have Wikipedia pages already. A current case involving a worldwide sporting organization will also generate considerable publicity when settled.

I understand why Wikipedia needs to block out advertising and bias. The point of this page is to provide a neutral source of information so non-Korean students or reporters covering cases the firm has been involved with, can get the same type of quick reference links they can find among the Wikipedia pages of the Western law firms that this firm has worked with or opposed or will be working with or opposing. After making revisions based upon suggestions made by the editor who rejected the first draft, I would like to ask more feedback about what could be done to make this article comply fully with your expectations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LegalKorea/sandbox/DR_%26_AJU Thank you for your consideration. LegalKorea (talk) 09:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Note that the draft is now at Draft:DR & AJU (as you were notified more than a month ago). You have still not made the declaration of paid editing in the form required by WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

David Biddulph Thank you for your comments. I'm sorry for not using the proper Draft:DR & AJU designation. While I have been aware for more than a month that the page was moved to the draft section, I simply pasted the old URL link that I have always used to access the page. I also declared my connection to the firm at the top of the Talk page as required even before I started work on the page. I did not, however, use the official template because at the time I researched the policies, they stated that one (of about four options) for complying with disclosure requirements was to state any connection at the top of the Talk page. Now that it specifies to use the template provided, I have complied accordingly. My aim has been and always will be to comply with Wikipedia guidelines. I appreciate all the assistance and advice received from you and everyone along the way. LegalKorea (talk) 02:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I see that you have tried to use {{Connected contributor}} on your user talk page, but if you look at the page for that template it says: "This template should be placed on article talk pages." Similarly {{Connected contributor (paid)}} (which is the relevant one for paid editors) says "This template should be placed on article talk pages and on drafts."

Note that WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY also says: "In addition, make the disclosure on your main user page in a clearly visible list of your paid contributions." You haven't yet created your main user page, but you can do so at User:LegalKorea.

The page for each of the templates explains what to put in which of the parameters. For example for U1-otherlinks= it says that this is the place to supply relevant links. By "links" it means WP:wikilinks. David Biddulph (talk) 04:07, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for getting me closer to (if not completely at)full compliance. I put the template on my User page, User page Talk, Draft page, Draft page Talk. Please let me know if there is anything else that needs to be done. I sincerely appreciate your help.LegalKorea (talk) 08:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Over reliance on primary sources: Tag Issue

Hi there - I'm currently editing and reviewing the Charities Aid Foundation page, which has a note on the top that it is over-reliant on primary sources. I'm re-referencing many parts of the page with third-party links, but I wondered how often that note is reviewed? It is date stamped back to 2013 - is there a way I can request that is reviewed, or would it happen automatically when there are enough third-party sources added in? Thanks Martinloves (talk) 09:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

There is no rule as to when tags are reviewed. Some editors think that a bot reviews them and sometimes pulls them, but that isn't feasible. (The tagging logic isn't such as can be coded, so that the untagging logic can't be coded either.) A human can apply the tags, and a human can remove the tags. If you think that the tag should be removed, you may remove it via bold revert discuss, or you may request on the talk page that it be removed, and be prepared to discuss the tag. Robert McClenon (talk) 11:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

communicating with the page creator

How can I communicate directly with a page creator who has responded to my tagging of a page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Oh) to speedy deletion? Thanks. WFtrax (talk) 15:29, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

That page was originally created by Fixing Things 42824282, WFtrax. You could leave a message on User talk:Fixing Things 42824282, or ping that user to some other appropriate page, particularly if a discussion of the issue is already in progress. Where and how did the user respond to you? DES ^(talk) 18:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

references

Hi, can someone please check my Andy J. McNamara wiki page and see if the references provided meet the criteria now? I do not want his page deleted.

Thanks,

MaxShipMaxShep81 (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, MaxShep81, and welcome to the Teahouse. The Andy J. McNamara article does not have any references. I can see that you added a couple of external links to the references section, but another editor moved them to the external links section. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners on how references should work here, and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources on what is considered reliable. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Having issues placing a free picture

I have a picture of a person as a young child and I'm trying to place it in the "Early life" section but no matter how hard I try it always ends up being placed underneath it or creating a big white space next to it.*Treker (talk) 14:10, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

In this edit I left-aligned the image. Not the most elegant solution, I know, but does it look satisfactory to you? Deor (talk) 18:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh, god. thank you so much. I was going insane trying to figure out how to do it. Thanks a lot. You're great.*Treker (talk) 19:20, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Problematic editor

I have come across an editor who I feel genuinely is trying to do good work but they just keep adding in fancruft and unsourced material in DC comics articles. I als have a strong susspection that a lot of the text is coppied from somewhere.

This is the ip adress 37.46.47.138

I have left a message on their talkpage but what should I do if they keep doing what they are doing?*Treker (talk) 12:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

I think you should take this to ANI Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 13:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Try to interact with them more on their talk page before you take it to ANI or anywhere, and give them the anon welcome. If they ask questions, answer them. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

what would this be considered

i wrote some info about Zentangles. Could I put Zentangle on the doodle article? Clairem05 (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Clairem05. If you complete your sandbox draft, and it is accepted as an encyclopedia article, then you could add a link to it in the "See also" section of Doodle. Please wait until then. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I wonder whether Clairem05 intended it to be a standalone article, though, or rather a section of the article on doodles? Cordless Larry (talk) 07:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328 and Cordless Larry - I have been working with Clairem05 on her zentangle text. We originally intended to submit it as a separate article, but later wondered if it would be more appropriate as a section on the doodles article. I wasn't sure whether it merited its own article. Thoughts? extabulis (talk) 15:58, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, it's a very short article, which perhaps suggests that it should instead be a section of Doodle, but then again, no other type of doodle has such a section, so it might appear a bit strange there. I'm not sure what would be best, extabulis and Clairem05. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:35, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

improving content

Hello today I tried adding content to a stub-level article about Tara Hunt. Later the editor, Redune, reverted the article to the original with the message that the content I added was about the Whuffie Factor, not the living person described in the particle. Here is the link to the edit. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tara_Hunt&oldid=prev&diff=713703537

Redune was right of course and I thanked him/her, but am now unclear about how to improve an article about a person if I cannot refer to their work. e.g. could I add a section like 'Social Media Advisor' and then describe her application of the Whuffie concept to online reputation building?

As an aside I don't have any connection to Tara - although I did refer to her social credit-buidling ideas in one of my own books. She thanked me and I then looked at her Wikipedia article. Caboc333 (talk) 18:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

You can of course refer to her work Caboc333 (provided you summarise what independent reliable sources say about it, and don't add unsourced material or original research). The issue is about how much of the article should be about her work. I suggest you discuss it with Redune and maybe others on the article's talk page, and see if you can agree how much about the work is appropriate. Alternatively, if the book meets the criteria for notability in its own right, you could write an article about it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

how to link up two articles?

Dear Teahouse Team Many thanks for your assistance in my wiki experince. I have recently created and article called CS Pacific which is qualified as orphan. Following your suggestions I have linked the article with another one called "List of ship launches in 1903". Unfortunately the article is still a orphan after this change... can you help? Thank you M0KLB (talk) 09:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

No, M0KLB, it is no longer an orphan, and you may remove the {{orphan}} tag from the top of it. (Finding more articles than one to link to it would be good). People often assume that maintenance tags like that are automatic, but there is no way to do that. Any editor may add and remove them when they think it appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 10:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Subject of notability

I am writing an article on Ron Fenton, an actor, writer and directer, documented as a Theatre Personality in South Africa, which has been rejected on the grounds of notability

He has been in a large number of professional plays, which I have referenced to online archived material. And have referenced the famous people he has worked with in those productions, such as directors etc.

I think whats against me is the place and timings. In South Africa in the 1970's not alot is documented about theatre generally, due to its political situation at the time. I do have reviews about the plays from the national newspapers of the day (In paper clippings), but i cant use those obviously. But Ron Fenton was definitely a pretty impressive person in the day, and definitely a notable person. Other than the productions he was in, he has written many plays, 2 of which were put on professionally in South Africa.

Any advice will be much appreciated.

Frazer

FrazeFento (talk) 08:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

You can use your paper clippings if they contain the name of the newspaper and the date (and preferably the page and column numbers). There is no need for sources to be available online, but they should be cited in a way that allows them to be checked by anyone with access to a good library. Maproom (talk) 08:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Maproom . Will i need to photo and upload the newspaper clipping? And will this improve the notability requirement?

FrazeFento (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

To upload a copy of the newspaper clipping would probably be a WP:copyright violation. Just give the details to which Maproom referred. {{Cite news}} is a useful way of listing the relevant parameters in your reference. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Chronology Between Different Artist Names

I'm trying to make a neater chronology for Buddy Holly's singles, but I'm not sure how to approach on the topic of different band names. Certain singles will credit 'Buddy Holly and the Three Tunes' as opposed to just 'Buddy Holly'. Should these be part of the main chronology, or a part of their own? -Disco dude rock (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

info box picture

Hello Wikipedians. How do i add a picture on info box please? Dantunkuran (talk) 13:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

It depends on the infobox, if you are working on this draft all the info you need shoud be here. It should look something like this: |image=example.jpg|image_size= --Nfreaker91 (talk) 13:44, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

What you added in this edit was not in accordance with what Nfreaker suggested, nor in accordance with what Template:Infobox person says. I have corrected it in this further edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

sexist and nationalist chinese text

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuan_dynasty is problematic for its use of sexist and nationalistic claims about the "intermarriage" of various types of women with Han Chinese men. First, this is mischaracterization of history since Han Chinese men and women were the majority of slaves and servants of the Mongol dynasty which is absent and frequently edited out of this text and mischaracterizes other Asian ethnicities as slaves, especially women of other Asian ethnicities. Just because the "authors" cite a few texts out of context does not make these passages legitimate.

For instance, this is a typical text that shows Han chauvinistic tendencies.. "Shi Tianze was a Han Chinese who lived in the Jin dynasty. Interethnic marriage between Han and Jurchen became common at this time. His father was Shi Bingzhi (史秉直, Shih Ping-chih). Shi Bingzhi was married to a Jurchen woman (surname Na-ho) and a Han Chinese woman (surname Chang); it is unknown which of them was Shi Tianze's mother.[39] Shi Tianze was married to two Jurchen women..."

If the editors of this page are Han Chinese-Americans or Chinese, they will be likely politically biased that lead to this abuse of privilege. Can we make sure there is neutrality on this historical and political issue and revamp this problematic page?65.78.18.158 (talk) 19:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Note to Teahouse hosts: please see Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 469#Chinese nationalistic, sexist trolling on Yuan Dynasty page. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:07, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

IP editor, as I told you in the previous discussion linked above, the best place to discuss this is on the article's talk page, but you don't appear to have taken that advice. The Teahouse is a place to learn about editing Wikipedia, not to discuss article content. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Also, regardless of whether you are here or on an article talk page, making comments that imply ethnic or sexual bias on the part of other editors is not a good way to get started editing collaboratively or to improve the encyclopedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

need help re: speedy deletion of things I submitted

Please can you help! I worked SUPER hard to create a couple of entries and they were speedy deleted :(

I have edited entries until now, and these are my first two pages created.

People will turn to Wikipedia to understand more about the two organisations in question, and they are in all ways similar to hundreds of thousands of entries on Wikipedia (one is a professional network and one is a company). What can I do? I don't understand!!!! Alexandragreenhill (talk) 16:25, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

You say that "People will turn to Wikipedia to understand more about the two organisations in question". They will if the organisations are already notable, that is, having been covered by more than one independent reliable source. If so, you need to provide evidence in the article of that notability, or it may be deleted, possibly speedily. If the organization is not already notable, then Wikipedia is not the place to advertise it. I don't know which is the case, since the articles were already deleted. If the organization is notable, provide evidence. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Also, if you are not familiar with Wikipedia policies, and want feedback on draft articles, create the articles in draft space and use the Articles for Creation process. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

If you want to get the articles that you worked on back to continue to improve them, you can make a request to have them restored to user space or draft space via Requests for Undeletion. Your mistake was putting them immediately in article space, also known as mainspace. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, Alexandragreenhill. Welcome to the Teahouse.

You submitted the article Mybesthelper and it was deleted for being promotional. it started with the text:

Mybesthelper is an award-winning innovative company that uses tech to revolutionize how families connect to child, elder and home care options...

and continued in much the same vein. I am afraid that this is pretty clearly promotional by Wikipedia standards. It is full of opinions and evaluations ("innovative") in Wikipedia's voice, not attributed to any particular person. Wikipedia articles must neutrally describe what reliable sources have said about a topic, not themselves praise or attack it.

you also created an article Founders network which was deleted for being a copyright infringement, as well as for being promotional. Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, unless it is released under a free license so that anyone in the world can reuse or modify it, even for commercial purposes. Moreover, text copied from the website of a person, an organization, or a company is almost always too promotional to be of use, even if it is released under a free license.
You could use the article wizard to start over, creating a draft that would be reviewed by an experienced editor as part of the articles for creation project. But first be sure that the topic is notable in the special sense used here on Wikipedia, and read Your First Article, Referencing for Beginners, and Wikipedia's Golden Rule. DES ^(talk) 16:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

PS, while you could use the Requests for Undeletion process as suggested by Robert McClenon above, in this case I advise against doing so. On the Mybesthelper topic you would do better to start over, to avoid the promotional tone from creeping back into any new draft. The other one would not be restored due to the copyright issues. However Robert McClenon is very correct to advise you to pay close attention to notability issues, Alexandragreenhill. Those are most often the main problem with new draft articles. DES ^(talk) 16:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

DES Robert McClenon thanks for the rapid replies! I did look for how I could submit them into the draft space but couldn't find it. I would love to undelete Founder's network as I can easily re-write their content - I thought I had to be as similar to what their actual mission was saying in the first part. The rest of it was my own language. Alexandragreenhill (talk) 17:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

DES Robert McClenon Where is the draft space? The one for myBestHelper I hadn't even edited or added any references for. Thanks for the help!!!Alexandragreenhill (talk) 17:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Please do not recreate Mybesthelper if your business is notable someone else will do it eventually. Theroadislong (talk) 17:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Read the copyright policy. New editors often have difficulty understanding the Wikipedia Copyright policy. However, the Wikipedia policy is simply that we take copyright very seriously, and copyrighted material will be mercilessly deleted from Wikipedia. Our policy reflects the law. (Just because other web sites don’t enforce the law doesn’t mean that they are right and we are wrong. It means that we are right.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Any material that is copyrighted, including a mission statement, must be rewritten in the author’s own words. It should not be very similar in wording to what they posted, only similar in meaning to what they posted. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

While this is largely true, Alexandragreenhill, it is possible to include quotes in articles, providing that they are put inside quote marks and properly sourced. A mission statement is the sort of thing that could acceptably be quoted, rather than paraphrased. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:47, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

However, since you are in a hurry to resubmit the deleted material, I have a question. Are you affiliated (e.g., as an employee, consultant, agent, etc.) with either of the two organizations? If so, have you completed the conflict of interest disclosure, and, if necessary, the Paid editing disclosure? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

You ask where the draft space is. You can create a page in draft space just by preceding its title with 'Draft:', otherwise in the same way as you created pages in article space. However, please read the policies, guidelines, and advice before being in a hurry to re-create your deleted contributions, and please review whether you have a conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Alexandragreenhill. You can create a draft article in Draft space by just typing (eg) "Draft:Mybesthelper" into the search box. It will tell you that doesn't exist, and ask if you mean to create it. However, I would recommend not doing that, but using the Article wizard to create it, as that will put some useful templates in.

On the content, I think a principle to bear in mind is that Wikipedia has almost no interest in what a company (or any other subject) has said about itself, or wants to say about itself, unless its statements are themselves the subject of independent writing. A Wikipedia article should be based close to 100% on what people unconnected with the subject have published about it. --ColinFine (talk) 17:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

How do I transform my article from "like a journal article" to "an encyclopaedia entry"?

I have written an article on the problems faced by patients with severe anorexia nervosa when they get admitted to medical wards. They sometimes do badly because the staff aren't familiar with the condition. My article has been rejected because it read "more like a journal article than an encyclopaedia entry" I need help to make the transition from journal article to encyclopedia article.

Paul2322 Paul2322 (talk) 16:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

When asking here about a draft or article, it would help to provide the title. In your case, it is Draft:MARSIPAN: MAnagement of Really SIck Patients with Anorexia Nervosa. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

It is not clear to me, as a scientifically educated non-physician, whether the subject is an appropriate article for Wikipedia for two reasons. First, has your paper already been published? If not, it isn't a verifiable source for Wikipedia. Go ahead and submit it to a medical journal for peer review and publication. After it is published, you can cite it as a reference. Second, it isn't clear that this detailed precise topic needs an article in an encyclopedia, as opposed to being in an article such as Anorexia Nervosa or some sub-topic. Not every topic that deserves to be discussed in the Journal of the American Medical Association deserves to be in Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Paul2322, A Wikipedia article should be substantially based on independent published sources. Have there been articles published by people not in the MARSIPAN group which discuss it in some depth? (Not just citing it, but discussing or reviewing it). If so, there can be an article on it, which should be mostly based on those articles. If not, then Wikipedia will not accept an article on it. --ColinFine (talk) 17:58, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Correct way to format reference

Hello, I'm curious as to the proper way to format a reference, as whenever I add one, I usually end up leaving another wikipedian to properly format it.

Here is an example of a reference which I use:

{{sfn|*name of book*|*author of book*|*year published*|*page number*}}

Any help would be appreciated.

St.HocusPocus (talk) 18:02, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@St.HocusPocus: I'm a real fan of sfn and sfnp as a way of referencing but there's two things here:

{{sfn}} only takes three parameters; last name(s) of author(s), year, page number(s) or location so you need to stick to those.
it only works properly when the full reference of the book is given using {{cite book}} and the special parameter |ref=harv is used.

So you have to have something like

Markup	Renders as
here is my text.{{sfn\|Author\|2015\|p=200}} ;Source {{cite book\|last=Author \|title= Name of book \|year=2015 \|publisher=Wiki Press \|ref=harv}} ;Notes {{reflist}}	here is my text.^[1] Source Author (2015). Name of book. Wiki Press. `{{cite book}}`: `\|last=` has generic name (help); Invalid `\|ref=harv` (help) Notes ^ author 2015, p. 200.

Nthep (talk) 19:20, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

How to use Wikipedia

Hi, my name is Shakiah and I use Wikipedia for study and sometimes social purposes and I was wondering how to use it. I am 12 years old and am Homeschooled. I am doing a research project on the Emancipation Proclamation and I saw something that I needed to edit. I didn't know how to so I had to make a profile to have this question answered. Can you help me? Kiah6060 (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Kiah6060, and welcome to the Teahouse. We have some younger editors who are very helpful, so you can be if you want to. I suggest you start by reading advice for younger editors for your own safety; then try The Wikipedia Adventure which will introduce you to editing.

If you see something that needs improvement on an article, usually you can just go in and edit it. Make sure you leave a sensible "edit summary" describing what you've done, so that nobody will think that your change was an accident or vandalism. To correct mis-spellings or something like that, just do it. If you want to change the information, you need to be more careful: generally we require that all information in a Wikipedia article is from a reliable published source: don't just add things that you know, unless you can find a book or a newspaper or a reliable website (not just social media, or somebody's blog) that says the information. If you think you have an improvement to an article, but you're not confident, the best thing is to make a suggestion on the article's Talk page.

Happy editing! --ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Misunderstanding Wiki's Citation Form

I got Too Excited to Contribute my First Edit to Wikipedia, having just watched an Interview broadcast on ABC Television with a Sports Legend, and discovering that much of what I had just taken notes, was Missing from the Wikipedia article. However, I discovered my attempt to properly cite my first entry, was woefully inadequate, due to obviously misunderstanding Wiki's Citation Form... Although I included on the form the name of the Interviewer and his Weekly Sports Interview Program, and the date it was broadcast (today)... The Published Citation contained No Name of interviewer or his TV Sports Show on which the interview was conducted, hence, No Actual Source shown ... And I've been Unable to figure out how to again open the citation to try again. The interview Subject was Troy Brown (not the basketball player), Football Wide-Receiver for 15 years (and 3 Super Bowl Rings) with Only one team, the New England Patriots. Although the aforementioned Uncommon Sports Status was already mentioned in your article, much fascinating info which I had taken notes upon, was missing. Since I just heard such come from Troy Brown's Own Mouth, and can re-check the interview online, I thought I Really Had Something to Contribute. But I Realize Now that I Should have Studied all your Editing Ins-&-Outs BEFORE ever attempting to do so. Meanwhile, the One entry I attempted, #3 citation in his Early Years, is Mortifyingly-Inadequately-Cited. . . Laughably So. So Such is My Question: How do I Complete said citation. So Sorry that I got myself (and the article) in this mess. . . Thank You for wading thru this -- (I'm suddenly being urgently summoned, and will just have to let this Fly. . . Daniel Clay Kirby74.51.82.78 (talk) 19:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You can see previous edits to this page by using the "View history" tab at the top of this page. You can see your own contributions by using the "Contributions" link at the top of any page. One further piece of advice is that other editors will be more likely to read your question if it isn't littered with randomly-scattered capital letters. The convention in English is that the first word of a sentence starts with a capital, as do proper nouns, but other words in general don't. Properly capitalised text is easier to read, and diificult-to-read text may well be ignored by busy editors. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Daniel. You didn't do badly on your edit to Troy Brown. You got the format of the "access-date" parameter wrong, but Keith D fixed it up after you. However, the citation does not really have enough information that a reader could go and check it. In fact, I'm not sure where we stand with citing broadcast interviews: if the broadcaster then archives the segment on YouTube or their own website, that would be fine, but I'm not sure if all sport interviews, for example, get archived. But if it can be used, you need more information than you have given. In particular the title of the show. (You've given it as the name of the reference, but that is only used internally, for referring to the same source more than once: it needs to go into the citation template, probably as the title= parameter, and the broadcast date. I've fixed it up a bit - copied the show title to the title= parameter, and changed accessdate to date (accessdate is for URL's, to show when the URL was checked: it wasn't displaying because there's no URL in your citation. Citing sources which are not online is fine, as long as the reader can in principle get hold of them). --ColinFine (talk) 20:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Not notable candidate for local office, does not meet WP:POLITICIAN.

MA Razak Master, this is my page. But i can see that "Not notable candidate for local office, does not meet WP:POLITICIAN." How i can fix this issue?

I have to remove any content?Abdunnasir kdy (talk) 09:28, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. No, removing content won't solve the problem. Unless you can demonstrate that the subject meets Wikipedia's definition of notability, or specifically that at POLITICIAN, then the article will be deleted. If you can demonstrate notability, please do so at WP:Articles for deletion/MA Razak Master. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

By the way, it is not a good idea in Wikipedia to write "this is my page". Even though you probably only mean that you wrote it, some editors will think that you mean that you own it and that it belongs to you. No editor owns a Wikipedia page. So please avoid using that phrase. It annoys other editors, who may think that you mean it. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Ward as a given name

Hi, I hope I'm in the right place to ask! You have the page Ward (surname), but Ward (given name) is a redirect to Howard. Some people seem to genuinely have Ward as their first name though, such as:

Ward Bond - Wardell, went by Ward
Ward Churchill - Ward
Ward Costello - Edward, went by Ward
Ward Cunningham - Howard, Ward is a nickname
Ward Lernout - Ward
Ward Swingle - Ward

I'm unsure how to proceed: Should there be a page Ward (name) similar to Paul (name) for first and given names or maybe a disambiguation page for the given names instead of a redirect? Or did i overlook something and there should be no action at all?

A german wikipedia user looking for help, thanks in advance --Nfreaker91 (talk) 13:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

You're right, Nfreaker91, the redirect is not helpful. I would expand it to a DAB page, with a cross-ref to Howard (name) and perhaps to Edward. --ColinFine (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Why not a normal article similar to Stephen? Something like this:

Ward is a masculine first name....

==Notable people known by the name Ward:==

How to reverse an offical article name and the redirect to it?

Hi, I just did a cleanup and expansion of a little article by the name of USA Living formerly known as USA Discounters. While doing research I discovered the company's "name change" was in fact only a branding change and the company's official legal name is still "USA Discounters, LTD". In addition the company also runs another store brand Fletcher's Jewelers. I think the article should officially be named with the legal name of the company and the USA Living name should be the redirect, along with a new redirect for Fletcher's Jewelers to make the package complete. I know how to do a simple move/redirect but I am not sure how to safely do a switch between the existing two pages. Help? Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 21:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

In most cases, moving a page over a redirect requires administrator attention. But before you consider that, please look at WP:MOSNAME. Wikipedia does not necessarily use legal names of entities: it uses the name that is found in the majority of independent reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 22:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine. It seems that the vast majority of the sources for the article also use the "Discounters" name as well so per MOSNAME that makes another reason the article should be renamed. Where on WP should I contact an admin for this? Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 21:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't need an admin if (as in this case) the target name is merely a redirect to the current name and there have been no further edits, see WP:MOR. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Yes that guideline seems to cover exactly this situation. Thank you. I will move the page soon. Currently dealing with someone who considers the article non-notable and I would like to get that dealt with before I confuse the issue with a move. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 02:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

[FOOTNOTEauthor2015200-1] uthor 2015, p. 200.

[1]