Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 597

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 590

←

Archive 595

Questions regarding policy, editing while on talk, and community interaction norms

Hi, I'd really appreciate some advice regarding a discussion on the John Fleming (American politician) talk page I'm involved in. I have three questions:

1. Am I understanding policy, particularly notability and undue weight? 2. At what point is it appropriate to add the two scholarly references I mention to the article itself, given that there's a discussion ongoing on the talk page? 3. Is this interaction in line with community norms?

Thanks! Shelfpea (talk) 12:18, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey Shelfpea. So that's a pretty involved conversation, but we'll give it a go.

undue weight is primarily a concern where there are minority and majority perspectives on a subject So, the answer here is not necessarily. This is the way I like to think about DUE: Imagine that you had the perfect search engine and you could pick a topic, like coverage of this guy's gaffe, and get 1) every article, book, literally everything that has ever been published on this person in the history of the world, and 2) be able to sort those by every piece that mentions this Onion gaffe and every piece that doesn't. If 4% of these mention it, and 96% don't, then in a perfect world you would commit about 4% of the article to the information.

Having said that, in my hypothetical there is also some theoretical threshold of "outright insignificance" and at some point you wouldn't try to commit 0.08% of an article to a subject; you would simply ignore the information as not being important at all.

Of course in the real world we don't have this, but what we try to do is approximate what it would be like if we did. So this is both important when deciding how much weight to give "support and oppose" viewpoints (e.g., the vast and overwhelming majority of research supports the fact of human contribution to climate change), but it is also useful in trying to judge whether content should be included at all, or simply ignored.

That's a bit of a convoluted answer I know, but hopefully it helps illustrate the point. TimothyJosephWood 13:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. But we need to integrate the differences among sources into your hypothetical, no? So reliable sources would be valued more highly over unreliable, regardless of numerical spread. And reliable tertiary sources, which suggest the material in question is likely to pass the ten-year test, should similarly have different weight. Right?

Could you (or someone else) also weigh in on my second and third questions here? I should add that with regard to the third question, this interaction on the talk page follows an all caps shouting at me in edit comment boxes for the article (which led to a warning from an admin) and a request for mediation (which was denied), both from the same user. Is this considered normal community behavior here? It is...not welcoming. Thanks. Shelfpea (talk) 17:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey Timothyjosephwood (or others) I'd really appreciate it if you could advise me further, particularly on the last two questions. Thanks Shelfpea (talk) 11:30, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey Shelfpea. Thanks for the ping. I'm afraid I spent most of the afternoon over at commons and didn't follow up here. Hmm...so here we go. (Sorry for the wall of text response.)

As to my hypothetical, basically yes. If we were building our "ultimate due weight calculator" we would "weight" (in the statistical sense of Weighting) sources according to their type, primary > secondary > tertiary. Not only that, but we would judge their importance not only by the raw number of publications, but also by the actual word count dealing with the topic specifically and what proportion of the whole that represented.

So in your book (I don't remember which one I looked at yesterday) it would get a "bump" for being...lets say 75% secondary, but 25% tertiary (overall more like a tertiary source than a news article although still arguably very secondary). But it would also get a "downgrade" because such a very small portion of the book actually deals with our topic. In comparison, a news story would get a downgrade for being 100% secondary, but it may get a bump for being 100% about the main topic.

When to add the sources? Well we have to deal with WP:OVERCITE, which an essay but a useful one. Basically, we don't want to cram in 9,000 citations just because we can. The Onion article itself can probably be removed, since it is totally primary here and not actually about Fleming at all, and I would probably drop at least one news story, since they pretty much just duplicate each other. So you start and end up with four sources, but probably get an overall upgrade in quality. Of course this still falls under WP:BRD, and you would need to get consensus if the change was controversial.
Finally, about norms. Yes and no. WP:5P4 is the standard. However, there's also a little bit of WP:COMMONSENSE that has to go along with it. You can't realistically expect to edit in...say...articles about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and think that everything is going to be tea and sunshine. Emotions are predictably going to run high in politically charged topic areas, and there's really only two ways to deal with that: either you become the kind of person that runs to WP:ANI and WP:AE with every little complaint and wastes a lot of time doing little of any value, or you can be the kind of person that doesn't sweat the small stuff, and tries to redirect the conversation to a place where it's civil and productive. I recommend the latter in all but the most extreme circumstances. TimothyJosephWood 12:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

main page

who created the main page? The garmine ^(talk) 00:30, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

or does anybody even know? The garmine ^(talk) 00:38, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi The garmine. Wikipedia:Wikipedia's oldest articles has some information about "HomePage". PrimeHunter (talk) 01:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

It was found there by the first Wikipedians. There is footage of the event. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:50, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

thanks, Primehunter The garmine ^(talk) 13:21, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

sandbox access

Is there a way to invite another wiki user to my sandbox so that they can make edits to it as well?Kcling3 (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you can send them a message on their user talk page, with a wikilink to User:Kcling3/sandbox. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:02, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kcling3 if you wish to invite "interested editors" rather than a specific individual, you could post an invitation to WT:WikiProject Microbiology, which is where editors interested in bacteria (and other microscopic life) can be found. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:18, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

@Kcling3: In case it isn't clear, all users can see and edit your sandbox. There are no private pages in Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:51, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kcling3. PrimeHunter's answer is 100% true but can be slightly misleading; the relevant guideline is found here. Everyone else can see and edit your sandbox; however, it would usually be impolite to do so without an invitation (explicit or implicit), so it is a good idea to place one. Also, few people (if any) go around looking at sandboxes for article drafts they can improve, so if you want some help it is better to ask. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:00, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Sulaiman

what is machine translation? (Abasule (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC)) what is the importance of machine translation?(Abasule (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC)) what is the objectives of machine traslation?(Abasule (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC)) what is the advantages and disadvantages of machine translation?Abasule (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You will find useful information in Wikipedia's article at Machine translation, and (in the context of Wikipedia) at WP:MACHINETRANSLATION. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Editing an article about a politician

Hi, I'm a newcomer, I did create an article yesterday and it was removed without suggestion of modification or invitation to change or modify incomplete content before deleting the article. I couldn't have choice or time to protect it, it was removed by an administrator than I doubt about his competence to judge the subject and appreciate the opportunity of it in the iranian actuality. At the point I am now I don't know how to change things. This politician is official candidate of Presidential elections in Iran for this year, and even he is not already referred in information medias, he has an official website and references are all verified. Now many medias looks about wikipedia articles when they search about a personality especially a politician, so how can I fix the problem and publish the article. Many thanks.

TheSimorgh (talk) 17:33, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello @TheSimorgh:, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please provide a link to the now-deleted article so editors are better able to help you. In general, you could ask the deleting administrator for clarification about their reasoning - and the deletion reason usually contains blue Wiki-links to the relevant guidelines. Politicians' articles must meet any of the criteria outlined in WP:ANYBIO or WP:POLITICIAN (as well as general content guidelines like neutrality and verifiability). Our personal opinion about a topic's importance doesn't matter in that regard, independent published reliable sources (either in English or any foreign language is OK) are required. Hope that helps a bit, I'll also post some basic links for new editors on your user talkpage. GermanJoe (talk) 17:43, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello @GermanJoe:

Thanks for all informations you've sent. At the instant sadly the administrator that deleted the article gave confusing informations. Here is the link of the deleted article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hossein_Homayoun_Fard

Now I wrote from you and other users to understand the situation.

I respected all terms of use especially the question about neutrality. You can see the biography I wrote on the official website of the candidate www.homayounfard.com . The picture I've uploaded is under Antoine Homayounfard Copyright, the son of Mr Hossein Homayounfard who I'm creating article, so I did have authorization to use the picture. I hope this article can be restored. Thanks as advance.

--TheSimorgh (talk) 17:55, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello @TheSimorgh:, in case you are employed to write for this politician, you should also read WP:COI and WP:PAID. Another quick point: verbal consent to re-use copyrighted material on Wikipedia is generally not sufficient - in an anonymous online project we cannot verify such claims. Information about a possible written verification via mail, and other copyright-related aspects, can be found at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. When you have read the notability guidelines and believe an article could meet them, your best approach would be to follow WP:Your first article. But please make sure to collect enough reliable sources and to disclose an eventual "conflict of interest", before you continue to create a new draft version. GermanJoe (talk) 18:16, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi TheSimorgh. Further on to what GermanJoe said above, this page was required to be deleted as it was a blatant copyright violation of this site – even if that was not the reason Materialscientist deleted it, and even if you were unaware you could not do this. Although the text was not written in a manner that Wikipedia could use anyway, that might have been able to be fixed, but the fact it was copied and pasted could not be, unless the owner of the copyright released it into the public domain or under a suitable, free copyright license. That is, but for short, transparently marked and cited quotations, we would need an irrevocable release of the copyright to the world in order to use the content – not the owner's permission for us to use his/her-its non-free content. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello @Fuhghettaboutit:. I have read your answer. Thank you for your informations but in reply of your explanation, I do have all authorizations from Ayyaran group and Dr Homayoun Fard, (who's website is propriety and copyright propriety) to use every elements useful of the website in the process of creating an article about this politician. Preventively, you could ask and demand me to modify the page and explain me how to modify text to be in the best form before deleting it without any explanation. I mean we're an open source system of information, and users are seemed to be consider as equal by each others like our five main rules are written. So where your right to delete my article is larger than my right to write it and have the right to see your prevention about copyright and form of the content and time to modify my article in consideration of your indications before my work being erased ? I'm absolutely ready to rewrite it according to the indications you will have given to me, even from the form than from the way to use rights and copyrights for uploading a picture. Explain me how to prove that I have those authorizations. Thanks as advance and also best regards. Sincerely. --TheSimorgh (talk) 00:49, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi TheSimorgh The website that you link says: " AYYARAN GROUP - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 1976-2017". Wikipedia takes copyright laws very seriously, so text from that website cannot be reproduced here without procedures that you have been given advice above about (suitable, free copyright license). It's not worth considering that procedure because the text will have to be rewritten to comply with neutral point of view. The rules on WP:Biographies of living persons are particularly strict, so you need to read up on these first, and collect some references where the subject has been discussed (not just mentioned) in WP:Reliable sources to establish WP:Notability. All editors here are volunteers, and all editors are equal, but rules have been agreed by editors over the years, and those do not include a right to publish except under the usual rules of an encyclopaedia. It is normally advisable for new editors to create articles in WP:Draft space or in a sandbox page so that there is time for advice and improvements. Dbfirs 11:51, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi again. TheSimorgh. As indicated in my post, and clarified above by Dbfirs, even if you went through the exercise of providing a proper release of the copyright, it would need to be substantially rewritten and much of it not included, so I don't think that is worth your time. What would be needed, if a neutrally-written article is possible is for it to be supported by citations to reliable, secondary and entirely independent sources—and not ones merely mentioning the topic but ones that treat him in substantive detail. That would demonstrate the notability of the topic to warrant an encyclopedia article, and at the same time, verify the information content.

To be clear, only those types of sources are useful to demonstrate notability, which show the world taking note of the topic. Non-independent, primary sources like the one you copied from, can also be used for limited purposes to verify straightforward facts, but do nothing to demonstrate notability.

So, the way to write an article is to gather those sources first, then determine if an article is warranted by their existence, and if so, write the article only including information they verify (writing in your own words; source are used to verify the information, not the sentences; as you do so, pretend you know nothing about the subject, and write in a just-the-facts style.

Nevertheless, if you still want to try to use some portion of the previously written content from the website (even though much of it cannot be used as written anyway, as promotional, evaluative, self-serving prose), then ways to provide a verifiable release of the copyright are set out at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials – such as changing the posted copyright notice at the website to properly release the content under a suitably-free copyright license or into the public domain. (You can archive such a release at the talk page using {{Text release}}.)

Meanwhile please note that if you work for the subject, or are receiving any compensation for trying to write this article here, you must disclose your paid contributor status. You can do so by posting to your user page the filled out template {{Paid}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:49, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Why does this link not work?

Hello again. I've tried to add a reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RimWorld#Plot_Update, but I appear to be unable to. The link in question is the following: https://ludeon.com/rimworld/RimWorldGitLogA13toA14.txt AWearerOfScarves (talk) 16:30, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. I think I have provided insufficient information. Here it is:

I want to add a reference with the aforementioned link. When I try to add it via the visual editor, it creates an error message. I would like to know how I can circumvent this issue so that the reference can work. Thank you for your patience.AWearerOfScarves (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello AWearerOfScarves. I am not sure what problem you encountered; I was able to insert that reference, though not by Visual Editor. Can you give us the exact content of the error message?

I am not sure what you want to use that link for (and to me it just looks like a giant dump of bugs/features/fixes), so I reverted my inclusion, but you can copy-paste the syntax for non-VE edition if you want to. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:06, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Tried it again using the Automatic reference generator, didn't work. But, I don't think I need to add it, since another reference leads almost directly to the log (yes, it is a dump; it is an update change-log for the game on that (Wikipedia) page. Sorry for wasting your time.AWearerOfScarves (talk) 18:55, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Can I replace an older photo?

Hello, I've searched everywhere and cannot find an answer to this question. Am I able or allowed to replace an old photo of, say the River Len in Maidstone, with a newer photo, showcased on my userpage that I've taken myself? The quality is greater in my photo as it is newer, but I don't want to infringe on the author of the first photo. Any advice? JoshTilley (talk) 15:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Josh. The short answer is, yes. Go right ahead.

The slightly longer answer is yes, but in the event that your change is reverted, be prepared to discuss the merits of your image on the talkpage rather than simply putting it back in. But do feel free to update the article with your image if it's of better quality. Yunshui ^雲 _水 15:27, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@JoshTilley:: I just did it, since I agree the image is better in all respects (maybe contrast is a bit too high, but the previous one was much too gray). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:46, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you to both of you, that helps a lot! JoshTilley (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Just my 2c but that image is beautiful so thank you JoshTilley for taking it and uploading it here :), Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 16:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I really appreciate that Davey, thank you! JoshTilley (talk) 17:02, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

The picture looks beautiful! Hbran21 (talk) 21:03, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I note that the previous image, File:MaidstoneLen0169.JPG, is being used in the articles Medway watermills (lower tributaries) and River Len. It might be appropriate to change those too, JoshTilley. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:12, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry, that's done, thank you for bringing it to my attention. JoshTilley (talk) 21:24, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@Hbran21, thank you, I really do appreciate that :) JoshTilley (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Create article

I want to create a new article. How can i do that ? Thanks ! ShefaliTomar (talk) 08:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello ShefaliTomar and welcome to the Teahouse.

Creating a whole new article is quite difficult. The recommendation from Teahouse responders is that you spend some time, even months, working on improving other articles and learning the ropes before you try to create a new article from scratch. You should, at a minimum, read WP:Your first article and Help:referencing for beginners. These should help you avoid the pitfalls that many new editors fall into. Having your first contribution declined can be pretty frustrating and having some experience under your belt can help you avoid the rejection. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:43, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

In addition to the good advice above, if my guess is correct, you might also need to read WP:conflict of interest, WP:autobiography or WP:biographies of living persons. Apologies if my guess is wrong. Dbfirs 08:57, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Create and Article

Hi, I wanted to know if you can only create an article only on your talk page, or can I do it somewhere else too? Need help on this question ASAP!! (Thanks) Typicalfrances (talk) 17:01, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

My Wikipedia experience is long but narrow: What I usually do is search for the desired article; if it is not found,you are prompted: 'You may create the page "Foobarque".' If you get this prompt, Foobarque is a link, you have the privilege to create the article just by clicking it. First make sure if you can the article doesn't exist under another name; if so, see Help:redirect, or sometimes Help:disambiguation if there is more than one instance of the term. If it is long, create it in your sandbox first to avoid a bunch of initial edits. There may be other ways to create an article. - D Anthony Patriarche (talk)

Also check out several references to Notability below, or your article may be rejected. - D Anthony Patriarche (talk)

Another alternative, if you want to spend time working on an article to get it ready to be published, and want other people to help you, is to use WP:Draft space. Dbfirs 09:02, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

See also Create article above. - D Anthony Patriarche (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:08, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Not Able to Use my Signature using four tildes (Wikibaji 12:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC))

Hello Wikipedia experts,

Please help me to fix my signature hyperlink. If i use four tildes with any message that doesn't reflect in to a hyperlink. Wikibaji 12:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikibaji (talk • contribs)

Look at Special:Preferences. In the signature section is the "Treat the above as wiki markup." checked? If it is does the box right above have a link wikilink to your usertalk or user page? If you check that box you have to put the code exactly how you want your signature to appear including any wikilinks. If you uncheck that box then the software creates the wikilinks. ~ GB fan 12:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Seems resolved – see the user's sandbox page Special:Diff/771242628. --CiaPan (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much User:GB fan, my issue is fixed now.Wikibaji (talk) 05:28, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Marked as resolved, based on the OP's statement above. --CiaPan (talk) 06:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Resolved

I was having a similar problem, signed comments (4 tildes) were being re-signed by sinebot. After sandbox experimenting, I found a likely cause: If there is an accidental CR/LF (i.e. <Enter>), or probably space or any other invisible charcter after the tildes, SineBot adds another signature. Makes sense, actually, although I suppose SineBot could be refined to ignore white space after the tildes. D Anthony Patriarche 18:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by D A Patriarche (talk • contribs)

I've never found that to be a problem myself, D A Patriarche. Note that your signature needs to include at least one link to your user page or user talk page, per WP:SIGLINK. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:51, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, and as mentioned above you can do that by removing the "Treat the above as wiki markup" checkmark at Special:Preferences. Then your signature will say "D Anthony Patriarche (talk)" and Sinebot will be happy. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:03, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I'll try that, thanks. D Anthony Patriarche (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Changed UserPage signature as suggested by PrimeHunter above; now there is no date/time and sinebot adds those! See 30 Mar 2017: mb 03:09 Wikipedia:Teahouse‎ (diff | hist) . . (+174)‎ . . SineBot (talk | contribs) (Dating comment by D A Patriarche - "→‎Create and Article: See also")

Which is "best" practice, User Page "Treat the above as wiki markup" checkmark at Special:Preferences or unchecked??  I just want to cut down on the minor changes by sinebot! BTW, is there any difference between 3 tildes and 4? D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 10:23, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Leave it unchecked, D A Patriarche. Signing with three tildes will add your name but not the time and date. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:38, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Please sign with four ~~~~ to include time stamp. Three ~~~ will omit it. If you only want to change the displayed name from the username to something else then leave "Treat the above as wiki markup" unchecked. It's a setting for more personalized signatures like changing color, font and "(talk)". See more at Wikipedia:Signatures. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:42, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I think I've got it now, thanks especially for the clarification of 3 vs. 4 tildes. D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 10:56, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Resolved

What to do with a permanent dead link?

I am new to wikipedia. I just today listened to a great video about "wiring up the brain", and so looked at the "axon guidance" article to see if I could add a link to the video, which I did. At that time, I saw that the "Further reading" section of "Axon guidance" has a link that has a superscripted "permanent dead link" after it. What should be done about that? JeanOhm (talk) 19:34, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey JeanOhm. Unless you can find a way to fix it, just remove it. There's no requirement to have a further reading section. TimothyJosephWood 00:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, that was interesting. I found collections from the Royal Society, but none seems to be the one that was in the original "further reading", so I will delete it. Thank you. JeanOhm (talk) 01:13, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

JeanOhm, probably best. Ideally, the editor looked themselves before putting the dead link tag there, and if both you and I also looked to no avail, I'd say we're pretty well done with it. TimothyJosephWood 12:13, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

indian actor stub

I am looking for any Indian actor-related article rated as stub-class.The garmine ^(talk) 00:02, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey The garmine. See Category:Indian actor stubs. There are about 800 to choose from. TimothyJosephWood 00:23, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

thanks. The garmine ^(talk) 13:04, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Venant Nkurunziza

This isn't the place for a draft article

Venant Nkurunziza

https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrinknp_200_200/p/4/005/090/179/0560493.jpg

[1]

Venant Nkurunziza was born on the 02 January 1983 in the village of Gasumba, Nyamagabe/Gikongoro Province today's Huye District in Southern Province of Rwanda. He is a young Rwandan politician who serves as Minister of Justice of the Rwandan people’s Government in Exile. He is one of the leaders of Ishema Party, described as a new generation political organization in which he holds the position of Deputy Secretary General in charge of Legal Affairs and Conflict Management.

Background and education

Venant Nkurunziza come from a middle family. His father was a businessman and mother a housewife. He is the 5th among his ten siblings.

At the age of six (1989) he was sent to School (Mugano Primary School) and completed in 1997 to attend his secondary school (Tronc commun) at ES Mbogo Commune Kinyamakara today's Huye District, Southern Province.

He then did “Humanities science” at GS Mutura/Gisenyi today's Northern Province. At the age of 20 he was awarded his Advanced General Certificate of Secondary Education in 2003.

Venant Nkurunziza pursued his legal studies in Faculty of Law at the National University of Rwanda (University of Rwanda) from 2004 after which he was conferred his Bachelor Degree of Law (LLB) at the congregation held in Butare on the 27 March 2009.

Currently Venant Nkurunziza holds a Master’s degree (LLM) in International Law and Protection of Human Rights from the University of the Western Cape (UWC), South Africa in 2013.

Professional Jobs

Venant Nkurunziza is a Lawyer by Professional. Since 2008 he was employed by Supreme Court of Rwanda as a court Clerk at Nyarugenge Court before and after his university studies. Court clerk

He worked as a Researcher Assistant at the African Institute for Migrants Workers (AIMW), then at University of the Western Cape in South Africa.

He is currently an Expert Consultant in different domains of Law. Such as International Law, Protection of Human Rights Law, International Family Law, Child protection and International Humanitarian Law. Etc.

Exile and political career

Having witnessed boundless injustice, vast of human rights violation, and seeing how political space has been closed under Paul Kagame’s regime, Venant Nkurunziza obviously decided to flee his homegrown and mother country on 29 September 2009 to South Africa.

Ishema Party

On 28 January 2013, while he was still a student at the University of the Western Cape (UWC) Venant Nkurunziza intrepidly managed to overcome the refuge situation in Africa and founded Ishema Party together with other young Rwandan activists and scholars. Particularly these are: Rev Father Thomas Nahimana, Mme Claire Nadine Kasinge, Dr Basesayabo Déogratias, Mr Chaste Gahunde, Kabanda Jean Baptiste and Mr Ernest Tanvir Senga as they were met in Paris, France to launch it.

Up today Venant Nkurunziza holds the position of Deputy Secretary General in charge of Legal Affairs and Conflict Management in Ishema Party.

The vision set by the founders is “promoting Democracy through the truth, intrepid and social justice”. From the beginning they proposed the non-violence and peaceful way based on the dialogue and consensus upon the constructive initiatives to be implemented in a manner evenly beneficial to all the citizens.

After one year the Party convened its first Congress on 08 February 2014 and decided that the time had come to go back home and realize their political program as it is well summarised in their main socierty project named “Together to Modernise Rwanda”.^[1] That is why the congress nominated Rev Father Thomas Nahimana as the presidential candidate for the party in the upcoming presidential elections of 2017. For the next extraordinary congress of 2015 held in Le Havre France, Venant Nkurunziza was nominated among others as Candidate Campaign Manager to accompany the presidential candidate for the party registration and campaign procedures. It was in that congress they decided that they should be in Rwanda on 28 January 2016.

However the following congress held in Brussels on 17 November 2016 determined the steps to be taken before going back in Rwanda. The major step was to finalize their main society project named “Together to Modernise Rwanda”. Therefore, they decided to land in Rwanda on Wednesday, November 23, 2016 instead of 28 January the same year.

Back Home for politics

While Venant Nkurunziza and his colleagues Father Thomas Nahimana, Claire Nadine Kasinge with her baby Kejo Skyler were prepared to board Kenya Airways on Wednesday 23rd November 2016, the Government of Rwanda through a letter written to Kenya Airways and other connecting airline operating to Rwanda, warning them against allowing those Ishema Party’s leaders from boarding any flight en route to Kigali.

Seeing Rwanda Government categorically denied their rights to return home and found themselves blocked in transit at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport. They decided to go on hunger strike, sleeping in transit for four days, saying that the government should recognise their rights and let them go back home. But it was in vain. After unsuccessful effort to return to Rwanda Ishema Party leaders were obliged to return where they were coming from.

On Monday 23 January 2017 Ishema Party leaders attempted again to realise their project and due to the convivial speech of the President Paul Kagame, the high and mighty of Rwanda, they believed to reach Rwanda on the stipulated date. But Paul Kagame was not a man of his words as these compatriots leaders have been blocked at Brussels for second time at the order of Kigali Government. By this time they decided to hold quick discussions with all other representatives of opposition political parties striving for Democracy in Rwanda, other members of civil society and individual activists by founding Government of Rwanda in Exile.

Government of Rwanda in Exile

After three days of an extraordinary retreat from 17-19 February 2017, the day after, they declared a separate official “GOUVERNMENT OF RWANDA IN EXILE”. And Venant Nkurunziza became Minister of Justice in this Government. The members of the cabinet are the following:

President of the Republic: Rev Father Thomas Nahimana 2. Prime Minister: Mr Abdallah Akishuri

3. Deputy Prime Minister: Mrs Nadine Claire Kansinge

4. Minister of Culture, Family and women’s welfare: Mrs Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza represented by Mrs Claire Nadine Kansinge

5. Minister of Foreign Affairs: Mrs Immaculée Kansime Uwizeye

6. Minister of Justice: Mr Déogratias Mushayidi represented by Mr Venant Nkurunziza

7. Minister of Information: Mr Chaste Gahunde

8. Minister of Interior and Local Development: Mr Daniel Nduwimana

9. Minister of Finance and Commerce: Mrs Marine Uwimana

10. Minister of Education: Mrs Chantal Mukamana Mutega

11. Minister in Charge of Refugee Protection and Suppression of the Causes of Aslym: Mrs Virginie Nakure

12. Minister of Infrastructure and Housing: Rev. Father Gaspard Ntakirutimana

13. Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Land: Mr Jean Léonard Seburanga

14. Minister of Health and Social Walfare: Mrs Speciose Mujawayezu

Based on their declaration, they considered the Government of Kagame as illegitimate and undesirable by the people. It is “a Government that lost its legitimacy and legality in the eyes of Rwandan citizens because it does not work for their interests.” They declared.

As they set up the Rwandan People Government in Exile, the main duty for the Government was “to stand ready to replace the illegitimate Government led by Paul Kagame”.

Getting an article accepted

Hello, I have tried twice to get my article accepted and it keeps getting declined! And I was told I could come here for help with my article! Any advice can help! I really want to get this page out there and started! Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nostalgic 8907 (talk • contribs) 06:01, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Nostalgic 8907 and welcome to the Teahouse.

I assume we're talking about the article you've been working on at Draft:Milton Crosby III. The review comment says that you must use "inline citations" and points to the instructions at WP:ILC. The purpose of this citation style is to make it easy for the reader to identify what the source is for each fact or claim made in your article. In practice, this means sentence-by-sentence referencing, it's not sufficient to do it by paragraph or by section.

The other problem that you're going to run into is that the references you've provided will likely be deemed insufficient to establish the subject's notability. What Wikipedia would like to see is that the subject has been covered by multiple, independent, reliable sources. Newspaper or magazine movie reviews might help establish notability, but you really need more in-depth coverage to meet this standard.

One thing you might do is spend some time improving other articles on Wikipedia and thereby "learn the ropes". Creating an article on WP is pretty hard, since there are increasingly stringent requirements on what you have to do to establish notability and the kinds of sources that are acceptable. Have you looked at WP:Your first article? That might help you understand why it may feel like you are swimming upstream. Having your first article rejected can be discouraging, but the Teahouse is here to help. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Nostalgic 8907. I endorse jmcgnh's comments above, but can I also add that you shouldn't deleted previous review comments, as you did with this edit? Cordless Larry (talk) 07:15, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the information, and I don't recall deleting any edits at all, but I may have I am a little confused with everything I'm doing on here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nostalgic 8907 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Trying to improve a band page

Hi there,

I'm trying to improve a band page. What information should be included in the most top section of the page. I think it might be called the summary part of the page.

Also, I'm trying to figure out which categories would be most appropriate to include under this section, e.g., history, influences, etc.

Thanks!Radditor (talk) 16:44, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

What type of band page are you talking about? The music type of band or the gangster band? Typicalfrances (talk) 17:02, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

The "lead" (topmost section) should be a general introduction that presents basic facts that are a summary of the detail given in later sections. Are you asking about an infobox? Have a look at some articles about similar bands for ideas on layout. Dbfirs 09:07, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, band as in music. Radditor (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

No need to apologise, Radditor - it seemed pretty clear to me what you were referring to. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:04, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both Radditor (talk) 13:26, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Radditor, BOLD editing is always encouraged, but a word to the wise. ..changing the "genre" field in a music article infobox is always contentious, so go to the article talk page first and start a discussion if that is one of the changes you want to make. John from Idegon (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I wish to be included in famous people of Belper

Dear Wikipedia my sporting activities regarding 0.303 rifle shooting may be considered enough to be included in the title above, how do I proceed?. Thank you. 86.137.193.213 (talk) 13:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

If your achievments are actually big and are covered in reliable sources widespread enough, they certainly will find their way to Wikipedia!
Meanwhile I suggest to see Wikipedia:Notability (esp. Wikipedia:Notability (sports)) & Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. --CiaPan (talk) 14:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, 86 etc. It's never a good idea to write about yourself. If you are notable, someone else will write about you. It is very hard to be neutral about yourself. John from Idegon (talk) 15:34, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

And as for inclusion in the Notable Residents section of our Belper article, that should come after someone has created an article about you. Rojomoke (talk) 17:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Article Notability Check

Good morning Teahouse -

I have an article in my Sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CelluloidJam/sandbox and would much appreciate some feedback on it. The new article is for Djanet Sears' 1997 play Harlem Duet - Sears herself has a page and there are several (unlinked) references to the play around the site, so I hope it has grounds for notability.

This is my first article - I've used a template and sourced external references, but I would love advice on other ways I can improve the odds of the draft being acceptable so I'm not submitting in vain. The article is current incomplete, I need to finish the plot summary and a brief 'themes and references' section, but I would love to know if I am headed in the correct direction.

Thank you in advance, Julia

CelluloidJam (talk) 15:17, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, CelluloidJam. It looks to be notable to me. It's obviously not finished, but I'm sure you know that. When you finish, click the blue button at the bottom of the sandbox header template. That submits it to Articles for Creation for review prior to publication. Note that it is reviewed there. If it were to fail, you will be able to work on it more and resubmit. You've done a good job so far. John from Idegon (talk) 15:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, CelluloidJam. I agree that the play is notable. The review in the New York Times and the Stage Door reviews for the performance at the Stratford Festival are solid. I suggest you try to find reviews in Toronto publications going back to the time the play was first performed. You also need references for the awards that the play won. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:49, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help. I have a question about citing old Toronto article reviews - there are some that I can access but might be behind a paywall for people without a college database subscription (specifically JSTOR or Proquest archives). Are these acceptable references, or am I hooped?

An example: ^[1] CelluloidJam (talk) 18:07, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Sources behind paywalls are perfectly acceptable, CelluloidJam. See WP:SOURCEACCESS on this. Many of the best sources, such as scholarly journal articles, are not freely available, but that doesn't stop us using or even favouring them. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:14, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Although you should try to avoid linking to a specific institution's access page for the source, as you've done with UBC there, and instead try to provide a direct link. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:16, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

References

^ "Toronto Star article from 1997". ProQuest. Retrieved 03/30/2017. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

Removing notability

Hello, I've been editing a page that's been flagged for notability and want to check that it's now considered notable enough to have the flag removed. The page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_McGinnis_(author). The addition I just added was that he's credited by a magazine as coining a popular phrase. I want to check if that combined with the existing sources is enough to establish notability. I would flag the account that originally added the flag, but it's a bot!19:20, 30 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naspirta (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Naspirta. For your info, it was Mike Rosoft who added the notability tag, with this edit. The bot just added a date to the tag. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cordless Larry! I'll reach out to Mike Rosoft to see if I can get it removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naspirta (talk • contribs) 19:39, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Any other editor can remove the template if they believe that the issue has been resolved, but I will leave this one for others to judge. My point about Mike was really just a clarification. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:25, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Doing stuff

How do I create articles? Last Dinosaurs (talk) 17:59, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Last Dinosaurs. Writing a new article is one of the most difficult things to do properly on Wikipedia. I see that you are a new editor so I suggest that you spend some time improving existing articles and studying our policies and guidelines for a while. Please read Your first article and study the links to better understand the challenges of writing a new article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:06, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

how to improve my page

I would like to ask for some help to help improve my draft as it was rejected Batozsu89 (talk) 20:48, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I assume that you mean the article Draft:Protestant church in Sajóvelezd. As explained there, you need to find some WP:Reliable sources that discuss the church in detail. Dbfirs 21:01, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Batozsu89. As well as finding more references, you need to cite the sources you already list in the text of the article, following the material that they support. Help:Referencing for beginners tells you how to do this. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Is it possible to remove a redirect word from a page?

Hello. I wish to create a serious article but once I type the word I get redirected to a page that clearly has no links to said word.

Thanks in advance.

TheContribution3837 (talk) 13:44, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

@TheContribution3837: When you are on the redirected page, you can see a green link describes with "Redirected from ..." below the title.
Click on it – and you'll get to the redirecting page.
Then click "Edit" and voilà! --CiaPan (talk) 14:25, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

That is one approach, TheContribution3837, but my advice would be to treat this as creating a new article; so unless you are very sure that you can make it into an acceptable article at the first attempt, create it in draft space - see your first article. When you submit your draft for review and a reviewer accepts it, they will sort out the redirection issue. --ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Creating a page for someone who has no online reference for his date of birth

I am currently creating an article for someone, with limited references. For instance, the person does not have an official launch of his date of birth online. However, he has that information on his company website and other related platforms. He is highly involved in international works and close partnership with USAID and won the Quality Era Awards, Geneva Switzerland. I want to sure if at least 4 references can make the article breakthrough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Excellence360 (talk • contribs)

Hello @Excellence360:, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no fix number of required references for an article, but most of the newly created content should be based on published independent reliable sources. Limited usage of self-published sources (including the topic's own website) for non-controversial claims is acceptable (see WP:SPS for more information), but will do nothing to establish the topic's "notability" itself (see WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO). The absolute amount of necessary published coverage can vary from topic to topic, so it's difficult to give specific advice without knowing the specific case and the currently available sources. I'll also post some additional links on your user talkpage. Hope that helps. GermanJoe (talk) 11:10, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, I know that sometimes people (including myself) write articles on scientists, majority of which don't have date of birth. As user GermanJoe said: As long as they meet WP:GNG you should be fine. If you write an article on a scientist, my advice would be to look for an h-index number, the higher the citation rate the better.--Biografer (talk) 22:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey,

I am just introducing myself. I have written some work that is currently being drafted and would welcome anyone's input into what I have so far. Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:August_Joseph_Faber/sandbox August Joseph Faber (talk) 02:06, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi August. Forgive me but I think you have mistaken the purpose of Wikipedia. The content in your sandbox has no place here. I am not criticizing it from the perspective of its worth in general, but as it would fit into an encyclopedia, and under that lens, it bears no relation to an encyclopedia article. Please save it offline and post it elsewhere. It will never become an article here (unless you publish it elsewhere; it gains recognition; and then we could have an article about the work, rather than hosting the work itself), and even though we give some leeway while articles are being developed in sandboxes, because this is so far from content we could use here, it is not unlikely to be deleted as "blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:26, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi August Joseph Faber. I looked at User:August Joseph Faber/sandbox, but I'm not sure what you're tyring to do. If you're working on a draft for a possible article, then you should be advised that writing about yourself is something that is not really encouraged as explained in Wikipedia:Autobiography. Only subjects which satisfy Wikipedia's definition of notability are considered to suitable for stand-alone articles, and article content is required to be written in a neutral manner and be information that can be verified through the examination of reliable sources cited in support. In other words, Wikipedia is not particularly interested in what the subject has to say about itself, but only rather what independent reliable sources have to say about it. If you're just trying to create a user page profile for Wikipedia, then you should carefully read through Wikipedia:User pages (particularly Wikipedia:User pages#What may I not have in my user pages?). We as editors do not own our user pages and although we are allowed to include a little bit about ourselves on our userpages, the content on our user pages should primarily be limited to stuff related to Wikipedia. You should be careful not to mistake a user page as a free web host for posting stuff about yourself unrelated to Wikipedia or trying to use like some kind of social media account. User pages which do not comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines may be blanked by another editor or even deleted by an administrator. So, you might want to reassess yours and make sure its appropariate for Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Help w/Harvard references

I am not understanding why my short citations are not linking to my full citations at: User:RM2KX/sandbox#References, if someone can explain, please? RM2KX (talk) 13:41, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

(1-15 only) RM2KX (talk) 13:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, RM2KX, and welcome to the Teahouse. Long story short:

For Blackmar 2012, it's because you are using |author=Last, First instead of |last=Last|first=First.

For all others, (i.e. those that use a citation template other than {{Citation}}, like {{Cite book}}): you need to add an extra parameter ref=harv.

Granted, those Harvard references are difficult to understand. I wholeheartedly recommend this tool: User:Ucucha/HarvErrors. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:46, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Oh my gosh, thank you!! I was almost there, but I didn't create the Blackmar reference so I didn't notice it was a different format. RM2KX (talk) 13:56, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi RM2KX. If what you're working involves changing from one citation style to another, then you probably should take a look at WP:CITEVAR. It's generally considered OK to make minor improvements or tweaks to existing citations as explained in WP:CS#Generally considered helpful, but Wikipedia does not have one particular citation style that it prefers over all others. Before making any major changes (e.g., switching from no citation templates to templates), using short citations, etc.) it might be a good idea to see if there's a consensus to do so by posting something on the relevant article's talk page. Changing citation styles is one of those things than can quickly lead to edit warring if you're not careful, so it's best to sometimes be a little cautious. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:54, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the great advice, Marchjuly. Fortunately, I've taken on a small article with infrequent edit activity and very few valid sources to begin with. I've now expanded the article and improved references, and changing styles turned out to be pretty easy. RM2KX (talk) 03:37, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

How do I upload an image?

How do I upload an image. Yeshua Ha'MashiachYeshua Ha'Mashiach (talk) 23:57, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Yeshua Ha'Mashiach, welcome to the Teahouse. Before I get into the specifics of how to upload an image to Wikipedia, I would first like to explain what kinds of images that Wikipedia can accept—it can get complicated. One important thing you should be aware of is that Wikipedia takes copyrights very seriously. In order to upload an image on Wikipedia, you need to ensure that you either

are the copyright holder for the image (usually, the person who created an image is that image's copyright holder), or
have permission from copyright holder not only to use the image on Wikipedia, but also to release the image under a copyright license that is compatible with Wikipedia, or
are sure that the image is not protected by copyright, or
are sure that the image meets all ten requirements of Wikipedia's non-free content criteria, which allow the use of fully copyrighted works in specific situations.

In summary, you can't simply upload any image you find on the Internet. If you are confused or unsure whether your image is okay to upload, feel free to describe it here and we would be happy to help clarify. The image use policy describes in greater detail our policies regarding images. Once you are sure that you have the rights to upload a particular image, head over to the Wikimedia Commons, which is where we host most of our free images; you can log in with your Wikipedia account and click the blue "Upload" button on the Main Page to get started—you should be prompted with on-screen instructions. If you need help, feel free to ask here again. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 03:17, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Yeshua Ha'Mashiach. I took a look at your user page. I see that this account is shared among three people. This is contrary to our policy, which in brief, is "one account for one person". Please read WP:NOSHARING. Please comply with this policy by setting up three separate accounts for the three people who wish to edit Wikipedia. Each account should have a password unknown to the others. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:32, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

article review

Hi. Can someone please check my article? I have edited many times but still not accepted. Thank you. -Anis- Anis2520 (talk) 02:26, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Anis2520. The draft article in question is Draft:Azim Afif bin Ishak. I have written several new articles and expanded others about notable mountaineers. This person recently made it to the summit of Mount Everest after two previous attempts, and the references in your draft article verify that. However, nearly 5000 people have successfully climbed Everest, and that in itself is not enough to establish notability. In some recent years, several hundred people have been successful. What we need are references to reliable independent sources which devote significant coverage to this person. That coverage must be enough to allow an informative biographical article to be written. Sources which just mention that he reached the summit along with several other people are not sufficient. We call those "passing mentions". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:05, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

re-submit

My articel got deleted because of copyright infringement on one of my links. I thought that if it was linked it was alright. How do I go back to revise and re-submit?Freda120 (talk) 00:58, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Freda120. Wikipedia is very strict about copyright infringement, and it simply is not allowed. You cannot add copyrighted written content except for brief quotations which are properly attributed and referenced. You cannot link to any website which itself violates copyright. You must write original content in your own words, and freely license that work to Wikipedia. This is not negotiable. Read the links on your talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:24, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

[1] Ishema. "Party". Retrieved 2017–03–29. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

[2] "Toronto Star article from 1997". ProQuest. Retrieved 03/30/2017. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

[1]

[1]