Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 51

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 45

←

Archive 49

→

SONIC PLOTS

Hi, I've been creating more specific plots for the Sonic games, and some people are telling me to stop. WHAT SHOULD I DO?Mecha Tails Puppet (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, MTP. Um...have you considered listening to them? Sergecross's recommendations on your talk page look pretty good. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Although it's great to be enthusiastic about contributing, watch out for spelling and grammatical errors. Article content should also be cited with reliable sources. Remember to use the "show preview" function before saving the page.--xanchester (t) 21:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mecha, and welcome to the teahouse! I took a look at this diff, and I think you're pretty close to having a solid contribution. Amplifying was has already been said: First, you might want to look and see how plot summaries are usually handled. Perhaps start with Super Mario (series). Then definitely get rid of the exclamation points and see if you can track down a citation for that information. After that, you might want to leave a note on the article's talk page (here) with your proposed revision and ask for comments. If you don't get a response after a couple of days, go ahead and make the change. Feel free to drop by here again with more questions. Garamond Lethe 21:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi MTP, if you haven't read it yet, I would strongly suggest you read WP:WikiProject_Video_games/Article_guidelines. Those are the basic agreed-on customs for writing videogame articles, so a good way to see if your additions follow the standard style of writing. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:05, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Kindly Guide! What link to be considered and what not?

Hello,

Kindly assist me this one article for its publishing asap with the link as: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kapil_Srivastava

Following are some of his links for your consideration: Some are from famous print-media in India and some online media

Following are 2 links from one of the worlds best newspapers in India but unfortunately i endeavored hard to retrive its e-paper edition but could't till yet viz.:

My request is to select and reject as per the wiki guidelines what can be considered for wiki and what not & if possible then put the links on your own (May be as a separate section as Press Coverage or Citation in the article by putting some lines about him) in that same article of him.Mrnit (talk) 18:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mrnit, just to make sure we're following your question right, you're asking "which of the following sources meet WP:Reliable sources for my draft article about the guitarist Kapil_Srivastava?" Is that your question? Also I hope you won't mind, I'm formatting your links for clearer display. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:41, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello MatthweVanitas, Thanks & yes, you have stated better the question I have asked. My objective is to get it published first, even with less of his content but that's ok (as I'm also looking forward to add his audios and videos). But 1st work is to get this article published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrnit (talk • contribs) 19:03, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

inre Files/Images

How do you put files or images from other language wikis into the English Wikipedia? Bonkers The Clown (talk) 07:19, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back Bonkers. ideally the images you want to use are hosted at Wikimedia Commons (or just Commons as it is normally known). If they are then just adding the code [[File:filename]] will automatically link the image in Commons to your article here. If the files are locally hosted at another language wiki then you would need to arrange for the file to be moved Commons, assuming the licence is acceptable. Ordinary interwiki links, for example de:Datei:Thiemsig.jpg - a link to an image hosted on the German wikipedia, creates a link to the image but doesn't display the image. NtheP (talk) 11:54, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I have similar question. Could I just copy image to my computer and put it into English wiki if the original file have such e symbol (PD) ?

I just did not find text with license type "CC BY SA" or "CC BY A" Kinedw (talk) 15:47, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes you can as long as you are sure that symbol is being used correctly, but it would be better uploaded to Commons as other wikis can then use it. The licence cc-by-sa is this one - {{Cc-by-sa}} and cc-by-a is {{Cc-by}}. NtheP (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Review Box

I published an Article on Wikipedia. Whilst working in my sandbox, i pressed the button review accidentally. As the page has already been created will this affect anything? Is there anyway to cancel the review? and can you just give me a brief description of what this process means. Hope this makes sense... Samantha2chipmunk (talk) 19:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Samantha, no damage done. I've declined the review on the basis that the article already exists. When you accidentally submitted your sandbox for review, another editor moved it to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Avatar Repertory Theater where it was sat in the queue awaiting review. Had the article not already existed then a volunteer editor would have reviewed the submission for suitability to move to mainspace. Now Avatar Repertory Theater exists you should always work on the live article not on a sandbox draft - this avoids any problems later on if you decide to make major changes later as you will have to take other editors edits into account - not something that will happen on a sandbox draft. NtheP (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Samantha. It appears that instead of letting WP:AFC run its course with a reviewer taking a look. This is OK, it's been reviewed, but nothing really happened since you'd already moved it. Next time, I'd let the review run its course. Go Phightins! 19:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

How do I change my profile picture within the teahouse?

Can somebody please advise me of how I can personalise my profile picture? I guess I will be spending a fair amount of time in the tea room so i believe I should personalise my pic. Cheers Matty. MattyMaltby (talk) 17:13, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Matty go to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Guests/Left column, find your entry and change the picture you want to use against the parameter |image=. You can upload a photo of yourself at Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, feel free to ask if you have problems with the upload wizard. NtheP (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

How come my edits wont stay?

I'm editing and putting true facts on and it wont stay there.... Dtpolice131313 (talk) 15:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Because you aren't putting in true facts. here you changed an article to deliberately make it wrong, indicating that a Massachusetts high school was located in Palm Springs, California and Canada, changing the name of the Principal to a nonsense name, and adding classes like 'Battletech' to the course offerings. If you want us to genuinely help you, you need to start with being honest with yourself about what you are doing here at Wikipedia. --Jayron32 15:56, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Dtpolice131313. We don't usually get vandals dropping by asking why their vandalism keeps getting removed. You might have better luck if you tried improving the article. Garamond Lethe 16:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Wake-Carolina rivalry

I recently submitted an article or amendment to the "North Carolina football history" wikipedia webpage on the history of the football rivalry between Wake Forest University & the University of North Carolina.

It was denied approval and quite frankly I don't understand "why"??? how can or do you ask for "proof" of a college rivalry between two teams and universities which exist and have a long traditional rivalry? also the information was valid list of games played between the 2 schools. It's really frustrating and annoying when you put hours into doing research and work only to have you efforts wasted! And as someone who lives in North Carolina and is a graduate of the universities, I think the information is factual.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OldWell (talk • contribs) 13:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

OldWell, thanks for stopping by the Teahouse. All that is being asked for is reliable sources that support what you have written. If, and I'm not doubting it, this is the oldest rivalry in North Carolina then presumably it has been written about in publications over the years that can be referenced. If it hasn't then the question has to be asked, is this a notable rivalry? Please remember this is a global encyclopedia not just a US one so what might appear to be obvious to you isn't necessarily obvious to non-US readers or even US readers outside the Carolinas. I could refer you to Potteries derby which is the rivalry between my home town football (soccer) clubs but without references you'd be thinking "so what?" References make all the difference between something being considered trivial to something concrete even if of not much more than local interest. You said you spent hours researching the article, so you must have been looking at sources, quote those sources and your job is almost done. NtheP (talk) 16:03, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Can someone please check this article?

Can someone please check my article again please? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Waterbeach_F.C. I believe I have done everything expected of me adding extras and deleting possible biased literature so just wanted someone to check it if that's OK as it still don't seem to be live yet? I really do appreciate the help so thank you. P.S. Can you also let me know how to delete my previous post on here as don't want to put loads of simular posts on here? Thanks again. Matty Maltby. MattyMaltby (talk) 13:01, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse. If you're ready to submit the article for AfC, place {{subst:submit}} on the top of the page. An editor will review the page to see if it meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.--xanchester (t) 13:42, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thought i'd already done that? will do it again, thank you. Much appreciated.MattyMaltby (talk) 13:46, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Have you addressed the problems that User:Nthep and User: MatthewVanitas brought up below? If so, then go ahead and submit it for review.--xanchester (t) 13:53, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi xanchester yes I have addressed the issues that User:Nthep and User: MatthewVanitas pointed out below and have resubmitted but no reply as of yet. Thanks for your help though.

reference section / online article

Hi, had two questions please about a page that i am trying to create. 1-The reference section seems to publish entries twice, and i cannot figure out why 2-How do I know if the page has been published? I cannot see it out there, yet

Here is page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assaad_W._Razzouk Thank you in advance for your help Wikialma 09:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikialma (talk • contribs)

Wikalma, welcome to the Teahouse. The reason the references are showing twice is because you've entered them twice. In the text you have done exactly the right thing and used <ref>Your reference</ref> at the place you want the reference to refer to. That would have been enough as your later used of the {{reflist}} tells the software to display your references where you have added the reflist template, but you've then re-entered all your references again in the references section, that's why they show twice. You can delete all of this second set. Looking at the article youe have four references, currently numbered 12-15 that need to be placed somewhere in the article so you can just cut and paste those to where they need to be. At the moment they sit alone just above the reflist template

Your article was published the moment, you made the first edit and saved it. If you mean it's not showing in a Google search at the moment that is a matter for Google and when it next updates it's database. NtheP (talk) 09:32, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much, this is much appreciated, all the bestWikialma 10:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikialma (talk • contribs)

User being disruptive

Hello, a user named FactStraight has been disruptive on the article of Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall by adding a dubious tag to an info which has been given two reliable sources. Can administrators stop this editor, this conflict has been going on since the beginning of this month. (Libby995 (talk) 04:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Libby and welcome to the Teahouse! I've taken a look at Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall and it looks like you an FactStraight have gotten off on the wrong foot. First off, though, just because you disagree with the tag doesn't mean it's vandalism. That word has a technical meaning here and is mostly limited to what bored eight-year-old boys might find amusing to add to Wikipedia (see WP:Vandalism if you want the official defintion). FactStraight is making a good-faith effort to improve the article, as are you, and characterizing his edits as anything else is going to reflect poorly on you.

You're doing the right thing by engaging on the talk page. I don't know if the two of you have had conflicts in the past, but your tone does leave something to be desired. I understand that you're frustrated, but you'll be much more effective if you can remain polite, and that in turn is much easier to do if you assume FactStraight is acting for the best as he understands it.

I'll take a look at your sources and leave a note on the article's talk page. So for the moment, enjoy your cup of tea. Garamond Lethe 05:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello! You seem to be involved in a content dispute. Consider taking a look at Wikipedia:Dispute Resolution.--xanchester (t) 07:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

User: GSK

Hi, I am sick of GSK's multiple replies on my talk page. I think he might be harassing me but I don't know. I want to stop this but I want to avoid being blocked. What should I do?--BeasttoBeastUser talk:BeasttoBeast talk 01:01, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Let me take a look. I'll get back to you in a few minutes. Go Phightins! 01:05, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

All right, it appears to me that you've made a few unconstructive edits. What you posted on his talk page was totally out of line, and he was well within his right to revert it. Please see the fourth pillar of Wikipedia. If you disagree, however, you are welcome to take it to the Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents. I'm not sure I would recommend that because you would likely be implicated. Go Phightins! 01:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually you have made a great number of unconstructive edits. The responses by GSK have been mild, as you have wasted a considerable amount of other people's time. As I look at the excited language and typography of the message that you left on GSK's talk page, I ask myself whether you (A) were merely blowing off steam or (B) meant part of what you said. If the former, you'd better cool off before editing here. If the latter, then despite numerous attempts by others to set you right, you've got a totally mistaken idea about Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 01:34, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes I was just blowing of steam. Sorry if I made any mistakes. I will try to not leave harassing comments on peoples talk pages. Once again, I am very sorry for this incident.--BeasttoBeast 20:24, 26 October 2012 (UTC)User:BeasttoBeast|User talk:BeasttoBeast talk — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeasttoBeast (talk • contribs)

No date of Birth for Helen Varley Jamieson

I am doing an article for a university assignment on Helen Varley Jamieson. However, I cannot find her date of birth anywhere. Is the date of birth essential? Franbundey (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Fran and welcome to the Teahouse! No, a date of birth is not essential. Some subjects do not wish it publicised, while for some it is not even recorded (generally historical figures). G. Kruger, for example, does not have his first name either as it does not seem to have been recorded. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:42, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you Crisco 1492 Franbundey (talk) 11:32, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Waterbeach F.C need help on Wikipedia

Hi I am trying to get this active but am struggling can anyone please help me as I can not see what else needs doint to get it listed? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MattyMaltby/sandbox There are 4 other teams active in the same league as Waterbeach so just trying to get the same oppertunity however struggling a little. My main interest is sports and this is to be my 1st listing. MattyMaltby (talk) 11:55, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Matty, welcome to the Teahouse. First off, I see from the article that you are the team manager so apart from anything else, that puts you into potential Conflict of interest territory although looking at the article, I don't see any problems on that score. Next, you've got the wrong league they don't play in the ECL as the lead pargraph says but the Kershaw league which is another tier down - this needs amending. The only other issue I can see is that some of the language isn't exactly neutral. Phrases like "sadly lost, this in turm fired up the heart of a lion attitude which is to this day installed in each and every one of there players giving them the fight and determination that they need to compete" are not what is called for here, not unless you can reference it. This lack of neutrality is more apparent when it gets onto the section about you - who says you and Jamie are a renowned duo? if you can't find a citation to support it, don't write it. While I waa writing this reply I see some similar comments have been made by an AFC reviewer. The club does meet the notability threshold but needs filling out. NtheP (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Matty, I've seen this article a couple times so far at AFC (incidentally, please don't start new drafts of the same article, just re-submit the same page after making improvements, or it clogs the system). It's pretty close to ready to publish, but needs a few improvements in WP:Tone, and a bit more sourcing. Mainly, WP doesn't use phrases like but sadly lost, this in turm fired up the heart of a lion attitude which is to this day installed in each and every one of there players because those aren't WP:Neutral. The article has to be written factually so that fans and enemies alike have to agree "yes, this article is correct, they were indeed founded in X year, and they undeniably did win the Acme Cup in Y year, and their coach is indisputably Bob Smith as of Z year." Makes sense? Otherwise sports pages would be constant fights between fans and detractors, and wouldn't be credible. That aside, I suggest adding a few more citations to papers like the Cambridge News, since you have some facts (marked with the "citation needed" tag) that don't yet have a clear source, and then just run a basic spelling/grammar check to clean that up. After those things are fixed, you should be golden. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:25, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello again I have taken into consideration everything that was said and have now come up with this:Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Waterbeach F.C. Hopefully this will now be ready can somebody please advise? I really do appreciate all of the help so Thank you. I am sorry that there was 2 simular articles submited, I do not actually know how this was done? so now i will only be editing this one. If someone could just let me know if this one is ready then i would apprciate it very much. Thank you. MattyMaltby (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Matty, I've declined it for the time being. There is a bit more clarity about a couple of points needed, please see my comments on the article page. But it is very nearly there. NtheP (talk) 17:12, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Categories.

I am in the process of making a new article currently in my sandbox, however I think my article may be more suited to the category Academics I was wondering how do categories work? and how do I know if an article is suitable to be added to this area?

Thank you

LydiaRDoyle1992 (talk) 10:48, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Lydia, welcome back to the Teahouse! You can add categories by creating a wikilink to the category at the bottom of an article. So, if you go to the category page here, you see how it says "Category:Academics" in the title? All you need to do is put that, within double brackets, at the very bottom of your article, and it'll be added to the category. On the edit page, it'll look like this: [[Category:Academics]]. As for whether it fits or not, just use your best judgement. You can take a look at the other pages in a category, and if they seem to mesh with yours, then it's probably fine. If it doesn't, you or someone else can always come back and change it, so it's not that big a deal. :) Does that help? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Lynn, do bear in mind that categories should be as specific as possible, so please don't use just the main Category:Academics, but delve deeper into the "by nationality" and "by subject" categories. So if "Susan Smith" is a British feminist historian, she should have the categories Category:British historians and Category:Feminist historians. All good? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:03, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help.

Lydia Doyle. LydiaRDoyle1992 (talk) 11:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

New sources

Hi, I was able to add 2 new sources, that look reliable to me :) Could somebody look at it, if the article can be published now? Thank you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Collateral_Management_Conference Peterkortvel (talk) 08:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Peter, and welcome! This lists the sponsors of Collateral 2011, and that includes your FinRoad, SLT, and the second SLT cites. That leaves the Rule cite as the only independent one, and that's probably not going to be enough to get the article through review.

I did a quick check of the NY Times, Financial Times and The Economist and didn't see the conference mentioned. I don't know that you're going to find much more. Establishing notability for conferences is hard. I'm off to Supercomputing at the end of the month; that conference draws 10,000+ people but I don't think the current article would pass a notability check (hmmm.... I should really try fixing that up today). Anyway, I'm not sure what you're going to be able to do with a conference that draws in the hundreds if you're not the World Economic Forum. Garamond Lethe 14:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help Garamond. Anyway the FinRoad and SLT are not the sponsors, they are only media partners so I think that they could be relevant... Peterkortvel (talk) 10:37, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

About the guild page I was making...

The reason why I tried to make a guild page here about Edge of destiny is that the Spiral Knight wiki doesn't allow anymore pages to be made, including the guilds and such. I don't know why they did that though. Can you explain please? YaRoCheSsa (talk) 05:02, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, yes it is simple enough. Wikipedia limits itself to notable subjects appropriate to an encyclopaedia. Edge of Destiny and many other MMORPGs may be notable enough to have an article, but it is rare if ever that a clan or guild is notable enough. It would have to have significant independent coverage from a reliable source, such as articles in magazines (not fan blogs and the like). Rich Farmbrough, 05:10, 28 October 2012 (UTC).

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse! Unfortunately, the Wikimedia Foundation, the organisation that operates Wikipedia, does not own the Spiral Knight wiki and has no control over the site's operations. Based on the site's Terms of Service, it appears that the developers of the game, Three Rings Design, own the wiki. You may have to contact them on their forums. There's not much that can be done on Wikipedia, a completely separate site, and as Rich has said, all subjects on Wikipedia must meet the site's notability requirements. Cheers, and good luck!--xanchester (t) 05:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Editing the index of related topics/categories

Hi. the article on reading education, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_education, has a sidebar of articles on reading that doesn't list the article in which it is appearing. That's weird. I tried to edit it, but it doesn't actually appear in the editing field for the article itself. I also couldn't get to it by following the any of the Categories links at the bottom of the page. Tips?

Wikipedia is a good way to spend a night not spent going out...... Strangesad (talk) 02:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! I guess what you are saying is the template at the side of the article. You can't edit it on the editing field of the article itself,instead, you can edit the template or sidebar on the template's editing page, here's a quick link to the editing field. Visit or see Help:Template for more info. Have a nice day! Mediran ^{talk|contribs} 03:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, you will often see "V T E" or "v t e" on these sidebars. They stand for "view, edit talk" and clicking on the "E" or "e" will (all being well) allow you to edit the template. Rich Farmbrough, 05:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host start - is it just me?

Looks like the whole preload deal is somehow having problems (and not picking up a parameter?)—it's attempting to save its edits to the Main Page, rather than to the host list... which renders that form rather useless (at least as far as I can tell). Theo polisme _Boo! 00:04, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

It's functioning as intended. The host landing page doesn't 'do' anything with the input (hard to use form input without Javascript). So the act of signing is a symbolic agreement. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 01:53, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not talking about signing—rather, I'm talking about what happens once you click the button... I get a "protected page"/you can't edit the main page error. Theo polisme _Boo! 01:58, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

huh. I can't duplicate that. It works fine for me, logged in or not. Maybe move this discussion to the lounge to solicit more QA from other hosts? - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 02:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I see the problem; there's another button underneath the fancy one that takes you to the main page. Lemme look into it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 05:05, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Writ Keeper to the rescue! :) Theo polisme _Boo! 05:10, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, it's fixed, at least in part. Now, the second button will take you to the correct page with the correct preloaded text, but it'll use whatever the person put into the box as their username (not too big a deal) and the editnotice with the helpful instructions doesn't appear to show up. So...yeah. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 05:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Notifications saying I have answers from the tea house not showing.

Hey,

I have noticed that the last few times I have wrote a question to the teahouse or talked to another wikipedia editor on their talk page, that the notification is not showing on my talk page is there a reason for this?

LydiaRDoyle1992 (talk) 23:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Lydia—welcome again to the Teahouse! These message are actually added manually (using the {{talkback}} template) by whoever answers your question — it's the responder's responsibility to leave them for you (not a system error or anything like that). Theo polisme _Boo! 23:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Quality of Articles

I have listed the article I am editing as a stub; however, on my talk page it has been rated as Start class by two projects. Does this mean I need to remove the stub template? Franbundey (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Fran, quality of articles is not a rigidly defined structure, there are critieria (see Wikipedia:Quality) but how those are interpreted is very subjective. If the article you are talking about is Helen Varley Jamieson then I agree with the other assessors, this article is most definitely not a stub and the stub template ~~can go~~has gone. NtheP (talk) 17:51, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes the article I am referring to is Helen Varley Jamieson. I understand that rating the quality of the articles (even with the criteria), is a very subjective thing. Thank you, Nthep :) Franbundey (talk) 18:42, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Philosophies stated as definitions

When reading Wikipedia, I've often noticed philosophies stated as definitions. Once I tried to take one of these out, and was reverted with a comment like "restore referenced, relevant material". It is true, it was relevant and referenced material, but it was being used incorrectly.

For example, the opening paragraph of "pedagogy" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedagogy) does this. "Holistic" is really not part of any consensus definition of pedagogy. Maybe it is the correct pedagogy, but not the only one. A teacher who thinks her only job is to teach math, and the "whole child" should be left to the parents, still has a pedagogy.

What's the best way to go about fixing this? When I was editing as an IP, I kept running into articles I couldn't edit or being presumed a vandal. I'd like to learn a little more about process now.Strangesad (talk) 15:01, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse. My advice: Always use edit summaries. Editors are less likely to revert if you explain your changes. But if your edit is reverted, you should discuss the issue on the talk page. This is known on Wikipedia as WP:BRD, or bold, revert, discuss. An editor makes a bold edit, and if it is reverted by a second editor, both editors must engage in a discussion on the talk page to establish a consensus. Cheers,--xanchester (t) 15:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

How do I create a Re-Direct?

Hey

I had some brilliant advice from a experienced wikipedia on my article talk page they advised me to create a re-direct see below:

You also need to add a "Redirect" from "Stephen Schrum" - that form is used in his faculty web page and probably elsewhere, and it's always good to make redirects from any likely alternative version (a) to help the reader and (b) to reduce the chance of someone creating a duplicate article!

How do I go about doing that?

LydiaRDoyle1992 (talk) 12:50, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse! Create the page with "#REDIRECT [[article title of the page you wish to redirect to]]". Cheers,--xanchester (t) 12:54, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, where about do I add this if the page has already been created does it go next to the article name?

LydiaRDoyle1992 (talk) 13:02, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Create it here: Stephen Schrum. You have to create the redirect on the page that you wish to redirect from, not on the page you wish to redirect to. Hope that helps.--xanchester (t) 13:12, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes thank you I managed to do it : )

LydiaRDoyle1992 (talk) 13:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks great, Lydia! Let us know if you ever have any other questions about editing Wikipedia — we're more than happy to help. Theo polisme 14:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

User boxes on user page

Hi, I am editing my user page and I was wondering how to put user boxes on the right hand side of the page? Franbundey (talk) 10:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse. Place {{Userboxtop}} above your userboxes, and {{Userboxbottom}} below. It automatically aligns right. You can also further customise the template by using the optional parameters detailed in the template's documentation.--xanchester (t) 11:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Why is my article still not accepted?

Why is my article for Novocastrians Rugby Football Club still not accepted?

I have changed what was needed and have added more references in.

Thanks, ZeeGuv

176.255.10.112 (talk) 09:13, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse! Your article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Novocastrians RFC, was declined by an editor because the citations do not adequately demonstrate the subject's notability. On Wikipedia, an article must meet the site's general notability guideline, which requires significant coverage by reliable, published secondary sources. Examples of secondary sources include newspaper articles, magazines, books, scholarly journals, etc. The citations currently in the article are either self-published, and not considered reliable, or don't mention the subject directly, like the Guardian article. Once the article has been adequately sourced, go ahead and resubmit it for review. I hope that helps. Cheers,--xanchester (t) 09:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Let me add to that, I see that you have changed the article since it was declined. But the references you added are not suitable to show the club's notability for the reasons xanchester gives. Beside that it has been less than two days since you resubmitted it, and as the review waiting message says, review can take several days. —teb728 t c 10:10, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Requested password, Wikipedia says it sent, it is not in my e-mail.

I haven't edited much since creating my account a month or so ago, but I just found a really biased article I'm excited about fixing.

I tried to log in, but the word I was sure was my password was wrong. So I requested an e-mail of a new password. It didn't show up right away, but I figured it might just take a while, so I started in on the research.

More than an hour later, I decided to rate the page. I included my e-mail address in the rating, and got an e-mail within minutes, thanking me for my interest.

I searched through all of my folders, including spam, but that was the only e-mail from anything which could have been Wikimedia resetting my password. So I tried to reset it again.

This time, it told me it had already sent my password once in 24hrs, and wouldn't do it again.

I rechecked all of my folders at least 3 times, and the likely ones every few minutes for the past 3 hours. Please, I want to edit this page! Help! would be user: FutureImperfect 74.60.156.103 (talk) 08:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi FutureImperfect, welcome to the Teahouse. I see at Special:Contributions/FutureImperfect that your account has edited since your post. I don't know whether you remembered the password or received a password mail. You can see and change the stored email address at Special:Preferences. Some users have problems with mails being stopped by spam filters, sometimes outside their own control. Maybe another email address will work in that case. Comparison of webmail providers shows many free services. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

If you have indeed got back into your account, it is important to check the email address as described above. If you truly loose the password and the email is not working, there is effectively no way for the average editor to regain control of their account, and a new account would have to be created. Rich Farmbrough, 05:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC).

WikiWomen.

Hey,

I received a invite from WikiWomen an online collaboration to help women on wikipedia work with each other and share edits or new articles they are making on wikipedia.

I was wondering are there any more collaborative groups like this, which any more experience wikipedians could recommend to me as a new wikipedia user.

Thank you

LydiaRDoyle1992 (talk) 22:08, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can more of these WikiProjects at this master list - there're a ton of them, so I'm sure you'll be able to find something to fit your fancy. Thanks! Theo polisme 22:35, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

meta:WikiWomen's Collaborative is a recent initiative and different from WikiProjects. As Theopolisme says, there are lots of WikiProjects and probably some which deal with the type of articles or work you would like to do. Another way to look for WikiProjects is to view the talk page of articles of interest. There will often be links to relevant WikiProjects. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

New article

After the deletion of my first article (nothing doing...) decided try the new one here:User:Kinedw/Mykola Budnyk. Could anybody of hosts look at and tell something about? Thanks! Kinedw (talk) 21:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Kinedw, and welcome to the Teahouse! Since the article appears to be written about a living person, it definitely needs a lot more reliable sources. Otherwise, it's looking pretty good, but it may need a little bit of cleanup/copyediting. –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for quick responce! This is not an article about living person. Text "† January 16, 2001" could not be clearly visible because of photo (I'm only studying wiki-formatting options). Now I'm trying to fix it. Thanks again! Kinedw (talk) 21:34, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, that text is not usually the way on Wikipedia to indicate someone's death. I just added an infobox to the right of the page for that information to go in. And more references are still needed regardless of living or not. –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me! Working with references. Kinedw (talk) 21:49, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, we have our way of doing it. The German Wikipedia does it using the * for birth and † for death - but we prefer to keep things as simple as possible. Rich Farmbrough, 05:54, 28 October 2012 (UTC).

Article deletion

I put an article up and it got deleted because it was thought to be an advetising article. i was still working on it, I have finished with all the necessary references needed for the article. Can I just repost the article or is there a process I have to go through again. Thanks Jeffasiedu (talk) 02:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I would recommend sending the article through the Articles for creation process, where a reviewer will double check the article's readiness prior to posting it, but you may repost it yourself if you've addressed the prior concerns. Go Phightins! 02:57, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Deleting pre-published edits

Hello, I'm new here. I was wondering if there is a way to delete pre-published edits for articles I submitted through Articles for Creation (ie article for Mason Mathews), so I dont look like an idiot for having fumbled around for hours with formatting and sentence construction, etc :)

Thank you!Newtack101 (talk) 21:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome! What do yo mean by pre-published edits exactly? Go Phightins! 21:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I just mean edits that I made before I submitted the article for review through AfC. It is purely a superficial question.

Newtack, if you mean can it be published with a single edit in the history then no. The edit history is an integral part of how the article and wikipedia were built. You won't look like an idiot, we've all been there and created articles where the edit history is tortuously long and if anyone were bothered to investigate, would find all sorts of mistakes. Don't worry about it and instead celebrate the success of the published article. NtheP (talk) 21:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello there! Edits cannot be deleted except through Wikipedia:Revision deletion, which is only used for the most serious of cases, as listed on the page's Criteria for Redaction. Article draft pages in your user space can be deleted (although it is technically not deleted, only hidden from non-administrators), through the process known as Speedy Deletion. Just place "{{db-self}}" on top of the draft page that you want deleted. Don't worry about past edits! All of us were newcomers once.--xanchester (t) 21:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks you all. Newtack101 (talk) 21:28, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Ectomorph/Endomorph/Mesomorph articles consist pretty much entirely of pseudoscience.

Ectomorphic, Endomorphic and Mesomorphic are pretty much completely pseudoscientific, with sources made up of online weight-losing guides, body-building magazines and similar. I am not familiar with wikipedia policies, but this seems like an extremly bad take on medicinal/anatomic subjects; the problem being that they are presented as being genuine, while they are probably of more interest described as cultural phenomena. We already have Somatotype for this, so I personally think an outright deletion with the pages being replaced with redirects to Somatotype would be a proper solution.

What would the appropriate measures be to notify more experienced users of the problem? Autharitus (talk) 18:33, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse! There is an entire noticeboard on Wikipedia devoted to pseudoscience and fringe theory articles: Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. Hope that helps,--xanchester (t) 18:40, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Haha, I forgot the hello, so hello to you! Thanks, I'll look there. Autharitus (talk) 18:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Can someone create an image locating the map map of Cyprus China relations article ?

There is an article of the new article Cyprus China relations which needs a locating map and I do not know the application to create it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 17:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! A good place for this request might be the Geography Wiki-Project. On the talk page there, if you post this request, someone may be able to help you. Thanks--Go Phightins! 17:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

IsrArmen, I think the file you want already exists, it's File:China Cyprus Locator.png NtheP (talk) 18:06, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Dear NtheP you are right but I do not know how to add the picture on the article! Please if you have the knowledge to do it, it would make my life easier!IsrArmen (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I can help with this. In the editing window, in the blue interface, there's an icon of a picture. If you click it, it should give you a pop up where you'll simply copy-paste the title of the picture, and then whatever caption you want (make sure not to include ending punctuation in the caption) and then click insert, and then save the page. Go Phightins! 20:02, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

It's not an area I'm familiar with but looking at other article on X-Y relations, the map gets used in conjunction with the template {{Infobox Bilateral relations}} so I think you need to add something like {{Infobox Bilateral relations|China–Cyprus|China|Cyprus}} to get the outcome you want. NtheP (talk) 20:14, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

true- if you want it in the infobox, follow those directions; what I said is for when you want to put it in the article somewhere. Go Phightins! 20:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

how do I add a reference??

I am working on the article for GCIU - and I want to add the following reference for the sentence that says that George Tedeschi is the President of the GCC. - how do I do that??

This is the reference: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/santa-barbara-news-press-charged-with-illegally-firing-journalists-51623987.html

Thank youDwhitewdc (talk) 14:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Dwhitedc, welcome to the Teahouse. To add references, insert, at the point you want the reference to refer to, the code <ref>Your reference text </ref> then at the bottom of the page make sure there is a section called References which is followed by {{Reflist}}. The software will then list all the references you have inserted in the References section with links so that you can move between the reference and the text and vice versa. So in the case your would enter

Markup

Renders as

Text after which I enter my reference<ref>[http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/santa-barbara-news-press-charged-with-illegally-firing-journalists-51623987.html Santa Barbara News Press Charged With Illegally Firing Journalists]</ref>

More text and the rest of the article

== References ==

{{Reflist}}

Text after which I enter my reference^[1]

More text and the rest of the article

References

^ Santa Barbara News Press Charged With Illegally Firing Journalists

There is a whole load more you can do but this is the most basic, you can find more out at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. Hope this helps. NtheP (talk) 14:53, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Why no number of times page viewed? Esp. when deleting pages.

This software has the ability to show how many times a page has been viewed/accessed. Why isn't this used when debating the notability of a subject?

If someone nominates a page for deletion that has been accessed like three times, it's probably fine. But if said page has been accessed thousands of times, maybe it is actually notable and shouldn't be deleted.

Why isn't this information taken into account? 41.204.74.36 (talk) 12:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

41.204, welcome to the Teahouse. I suspect the answer is because popularity is not a measure of notability, a topic could be very popular, for example a World of Warcraft guild, but not notable in Wikipedia terms. Wikipedia articles cover notable topics—those that have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of Wikipedia. Wikipedia considers evidence from reliable Wikipedia:independent sources to gauge this attention. If you start counting the number of page views then these criteria go out the window and notability becomes a beauty contest. In addition it would be very easy to rig page views by the use of bots and other tools to increase the view number. NtheP (talk) 14:14, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I understand that reasoning. But if something is popular, and has references, and is NPOV, etc. Then I fail to see why it should be deleted. Wikipedia has space. And if a guild is relevant and gets lots of stuff written about it, then it should be kept. I often come to this place to look for info, only to find that the page was deleted. Gone. Anyway, thanks. 41.204.74.36 (talk) 15:01, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

If there is a specific page you're interesting in, you can ask for a WP:REFUND, which will get you a copy of the page back again (so long as there was no copyright infringement). Once you have a copy you can put it on another website, if you wish, or re-cast it to meet WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:31, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

User

Is it possible to change the user name? --RB-AXP talk 12:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes it is, you need to follow the procedure set out at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple which also allows you check that the username you want isn't already in use. NtheP (talk) 13:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Nominate articles

How do you nominate articles?Ferrari Enzo 2 (talk) 09:04, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! I don't know what kind of nomination you want but I guess that is for deletion. To nominate an article for deletion, (1) Put the deletion tag on the article, to do that, insert {{subst:afd1}} on the article, (2) create the article's deletion discussion page, (3) notify the author of the article you are nominating for deletion, insert {{subst:afd3 | pg=NominationName}} (replace NominationName with the title of the article) to the author's talk page. To view the more detailed and complete steps, see WP:AFDHOW. Thank you and have a nice day! Mediran ^{talk|contribs} 09:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

about making new wikipedia article

hello, i just want to ask how can i go through on making new articles in wikipedia. all i know is just some sort of editing. i wanted to make new article regarding our cities progress like putting a list of new and upcoming projects but i just don't know how to start. i tried it once but it never existed and lately, i just received an email regarding my post and was tagged as "vandalism" for not having it complete instead. Degie17 (talk) 08:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! If you want to create an article, I may suggest you to use the Article Wizard. The Article Wizard is a step-by-step process in making an article. I'm sure you're a little confused at this time but I think this will help you out. If you are going to create an article without the use if the Article Wizard, please double check and be sure that your article is ready because it may be deleted if it is incomplete or if it met some criterion for deletion. If you want, please also use the Help:Userspace draft. Mediran ^{talk|contribs} 08:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

notability

Hi, i'v recently created a new article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sana_Gallery), and received this message: "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline." I read the guidelines, and was wondering: 1-If the problem is that i needed to add more references? Think i have two newspaper articles about the gallery itself, and a few web-based listings about it 2-If i needed to add more references, until when do i have time to do so. I mean is there usually a deadline before the page gets deleted or something? If so, how can i save the page for a later time, so that i don't have to rework it from scratch? Thanks for your help, all the best, wikialmaWikialma 06:53, 28 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikialma (talk • contribs)

Hi Wikialma, and thanks for stopping by the teahouse! This is a really good question: I'm not aware of any specific notability guidelines for art galleries. You've made a good start with the couple of newspaper articles, but ideally you'd have enough citations so that the article is obviously notable. I would normally suggest looking at other gallery articles, but most of the ones I'm finding have demonstrated even less notability than yours. The Terrain Gallery is the best of the bunch I've seen so far. That's not a bad model to use. I think you'll be well into "notable" territory before your article is at that level, but that's what I'd recommend you aim for.

I have a few other suggestions I'll leave at the article talk page, as my BART train is pulling into the station now.... Garamond Lethe 18:29, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I just edited an article about bitless bridles. it got reset to the old version. why?

I have been riding horses with different bitless bridles for years, do natural horsemanship and know a lot about the topic. the article on wikipedia is incomplete, so I edited it (that was my first time working on wikipedia). I think my edit was good, it was factual and correct. why did it get set back? what would I have to do to actually make all my changes (or at least some of them) stick? Karenguruh (talk) 05:02, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I suggest you go to the page of the person who edited out your material and civilly ask. He or he claims to be a horse person as well. I think the changes were made because of your tone (e.g., the use of an exclamation mark) and what the other editor sees as a bias adn unnecessary or unsupported though commonsense comments (e.g., soft hands being needed). Try to work with that ed to jointly improve the page.Kdammers (talk) 05:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Karenguruh, and welcome to the teahouse! I took a look at your edits to Bitless bridle. That's a good contribution that's lacking one thing to make it "stick": you can't rely on your personal expertise. Instead, you have to be able to cite a reliable source (a book, newspaper, magazine article, etc.; generally not a blog or a press release). This rule can be frustrating if you're an expert and you want to share your expertise. Unfortunately, having us verify your expertise is a hard problem, and so we take a step back and assume (for the most part) that authors of books and editors of magazine and newspapers have done some minimal amount of verification for us. (As an aside, Montanabw's comment of "unsourced POV" is a shorthand way of saying that you were contributing your own point-of-view, not that of a "reliable" source.)

If you have a few books that discuss bitless riding (is that the right term?), then leave a note on the talk page of Bitless bridle mentioning that you've now sourced your edits and will be reinstating them with citations. Google books works well for this if you know the area well but don't have many sources in your library. They may be reverted again; in that case, start a conversation with the editor on the talk page and see if you can resolve the issue. (There are several options available if you can't reach a resolution — dropping by here is one of the easiest.) If you want to take a look at the actual policy on reliable sources, then head over here. And don't be shy about asking questions here. It's a pretty steep learning curve, but I think you'll find it's worth the effort. Garamond Lethe 06:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Putting an article on top of a Redirect

Hi, I'm trying to write a new article for songwriter Denny Randell; at the moment, Wiki has any searches for his name redirecting to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denny_Randell, which is a Wiki dedicated to the songwriting efforts of Denny Randell and Sandy Linzer. Can I just write a new article only about Denny Randell here? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denny_Randell&redirect=no Thanks!

76.166.175.157 (talk) 20:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi 157. Just below the page title of the page you are redirected to you will find a blue "redirected from" link which will take you back to the redirect page. You can then edit that page into an article assuming that you have well sourced notable material. The page you are redirected to is all part of Wikipedia so it may be as well to start a discussion on the talk page of that article about splitting into the individual writers.--Charles (talk) 00:06, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Alternatively, you can also work on a new draft in your sandbox, and then submit it to WP:AfC — a reviewer could then help take care of it. (Just another method!)

Theo polisme _Boo! 00:25, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

[1] Santa Barbara News Press Charged With Illegally Firing Journalists

[1]