Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 65

Archive 60

←

Archive 63

Archive 64

Archive 65

Archive 66

Archive 67

→

Archive 70

Reliable sources

Hi, I created an article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ataklan , and it has been rejected 4 times. After the last edit, I was sure I had included sufficient references by inserting newspaper article links, however it was still rejected. There are not online references for all of the information within the article, however there is 'non-digital' evidence that I cannot get a hold of to upload. I do not wish to compromise the accuracy and completeness of the article by excluding information that I do not have online sources for, can you give me any suggestions. Thanks Petalm (talk) 15:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Petalm, hi and thanks for stopping by. There is no requirement that references you want to use have to be available online. If they only exist in print then that's fine as long as you give full enough details that should someone ever want to locate the reference they have enough detail to do so. For example if it's a book then not only the title and author but the edition and page would be needed.

Looking at the article it does need a lot more referencing. Taking one sentence out of the lead paragraph "Ataklan hails from the village of Chinapoo in the heart of Morvant , Laventille- the urban community that was once the epicentre of Trinidad's Golden Age culture- and now is collapsing into zones of urban decay and gangland criminality." Potentially there are three references needed here 1) that Ataklan is from Morvant, 2) that Morvant was once part of the Golden Age of culture and 3) that it's now collapsing into decay. Frankly I'd just delete everything after "Morvant, Laventville" and just provide a reference for his upbringing there unless you are saying that where he is from is relevant to his musical style and development in which case the references about Morvant become even more important. NtheP (talk) 15:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Signing

I want to make my signature colorful which is done in my preference but when i make it colorful so it shows code not the result please give an example of colorful signature which we make in our preference, Thank You Greatuser (talk) 14:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Greatuser, welcome to the Teahouse! What's happening here is that you have the "Treat the above as Wiki markup" box, right below the field for your signature, unchecked. When this box is unchecked, it means that Wikipedia will read what you've typed into the box literally, instead of looking at it as if it were code. Try putting the code in again and checking the box; that should do it. If it doesn't, copy and paste the code here (you might need to surround it with <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags so that we can see what your code is), and we'll help you get it working. Hope this helps! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Please give an example just your signature is like this (Writ Keeper ⚇♔) How have you written it on your preference? Greatuser (talk) 14:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure, my sig is written as: [[User:Writ Keeper|Writ Keeper]] [[User talk: Writ Keeper|&#9863 ;]][[Special:Contributions/Writ_Keeper|&#9812 ;]], with the box checked. (The spaces between the numbers and the semicolons need to be removed in order to have the special characters appear.) The problem with yours is that the "font" tag has been deprecated since HTML 4, and is no longer supported in HTML5, which Wikipedia recently switched to. As an alternative, you should use span tags with a css style attribute. You would type in [[User:Greatuser|<span style="color:red;">Greatuser</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Greatuser|<span style="color:yellow;">talk</span>]]</sup>, and it will come out looking like: Greatuser ^talk. Again, make sure you have the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box checked. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:52, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Like Writ Keeper said, you can use several different colors in your signature. Try this article to get you started on picking colors. My signature is written as:

'''[[User:JHUbal27|<font color="mediumblue">JHUbal</font><font color="teal">27</font>]]''' ('''[[User talk:JHUbal27|<font color="darkviolet">talk</font>]]''') Go to "Preferences" on the top of the page and type in what you want for your signature. After that, sign your posts on talk pages like this one with ~~~~ and you should be good to go!

Your signatre is your's to customize, so have fun with it! If you have any questions contact me on my talk page. Here's my beautiful cool color signature. JHUbal27 (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

How long does it take to review and publish? (Approximately)

Hello, I have created a page on Wikipedia about 2 weeks ago, but when I type the title of the article into the search bar at the top of the screen, it says that no article exists with this title. Does this mean that my article has been deleted? Or is it not released yet? How long (approximately) does it usually take for a page to be reviewed and be made (for lack of a better word) 'searchable'?

The page is called Nice Pebbles

Thank you for any help or advice you can give regarding this!! Makahi (talk) 11:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

• There never has been a page called Nice Pebbles. All Wikipedia pages are published instantly and usually reviewed within minutes. There was however a breakdown in vigilance and user talk:Makahi managed to survive for several days. But it has now been rightly deleted as blatant advertising. Please do not attempt to republish under any title. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:05, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Take 2 - Journalist Attempting to Corroborate Event

Greetings, former AP reporter attempting to make new entry into Wikipedia about a political group responsible for upset victory of Minn. Gov. Arne Carlson 1990 but being denied for lack of citation. This group appears to have been DELIBERATELY OMITTED from record. I notice RE-TYPED, non-authentic transcripts of newspaper articles accepted by Wikipedia on same subject. Why?

Main problem: lack of Internet access to 1990 USA Today article published circa October 17, 1990 on page one with photo of Gov. Carlson in victory salute. Pls. advise.

06:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razorfish721 (talk • contribs)

Hi, razorfish! nothing says there has to be an internet source. Go to the library find the issue of the newspaper you need, and use the "cite news" template to reference it. Just keep in mind that wikipedia requires you tell both sides of the story WP:NPOV. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:28, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, razorfish, and welcome. I posted a comment to your talk page, with an offer to help. SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Reference warning needs help

Just created a new article called Lenart Sphere and the first reference bombed. I'm a real novice here but do have a PhD in math and am a good OOP coder, so can probably help from time to time with tech stuff once I get the feel for the format. Need help in fixing the first reference, and welcome any other help and suggestions. Still trying to find a copyright free image-- see my comment on the article's talk page. There are hundreds of references to this on Google but I kept it minimal for now, not knowing what was kosher for Wiki's copyright rules. THANKS tea friends! Pdecalculus (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Ref has been fixed, you can see the changes here[1]. You forgot the }} at the end. Here is a guideline for citations WP:CITE. Ajaxfiore (talk) 02:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

AJAXFIORE, YOU'RE THE BEST, THANKS! Pdecalculus (talk) 21:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

How do I remove a structure banner?

Greetings... I've revised an article that has a banner reading: This section may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines. Please help by editing the article to make improvements to the overall structure. (November 2012) How do I either remove or petition to remove the banner now? Thanks very much and Happy New Year! Misssarta (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Misssarta. If you have fixed the problem you can boldly remove the banner. If other editors disagree and put it back you should then discuss what is needed on the article talkpage.--Charles (talk) 21:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Misssarta, welcome! If you provide a link to us, I can take a look at exactly why the tag is on the article. However, unless you fix the issue described by the tag, it can't be removed. It's probably nothing that is hard to fix, just removing the tag may get some other editors to be less-than-happy with you. I'll take a look if you can give me a link. gwickwire^talk_edits 22:41, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps worth guessing at Chuck Philips (in which case the tag was added more recently than any edits by the OP)? - David Biddulph (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Zack Norman

Hello there! I wrote an article on actor Zack Norman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Zack_Norman), which has been rejected twice because my reference sources (primarily the Internet Movie Database) didn't meet Wikipedia requirements for verification. So I had a quick question: does Wikipedia consider the New York Times website to be a reliable reference source? Because, for example, if you go to http://movies.nytimes.com/person/52994/Zack-Norman/filmography many of Zack Norman's film roles are listed. So could I just cite that url as verification for his accomplishments as an American film character actor? Or would I need to cite a separate url for each role, i.e.: http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/41997/Romancing-the-Stone/cast for his performance in Romanicing the Stone? If you could let me know if this would be acceptable, that would be a huge help, because then I could just replace the reference footnotes where necessary, redo the layout according to Wiki guidelines, and ... is there something I'm forgetting? There's certainly no conflict of interest, as I am not associated with Mr. Norman in any way. I'm just a writer with an interest in submitting articles to Wikipedia, and chose Zack Norman as my first article subject simply because he's not yet represented there and seems like he should be. I look forward to your response, and Happy New Year! All the best, Matthew WeissMatzohboy (talk) 21:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Matzohboy. Welcome. Yes the New York Times is a reliable source. I recommend using the detailed references for the various roles, adding them as inline citations.--Charles (talk) 21:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Matthew, welcome to the Teahouse. The NYT is a reliable source so you can us it. If it covers all his films you can just cite it once but if there are roles it doesn't list which you have other sources for you would need to use the NYT cite against each role it lists. if you do this to keep the typing down you can use the named reference trick so it would go something like this

*Role 1<ref name="NYT">http://movies.nytimes.com/person/52994/Zack-Norman/filmography</ref>
*Role 2<ref name="Somewhere else"> made up URL </ref>
*Role 3<ref name="NYT"/>
*Role 4<ref name="NYT"/>
*etc

== References ==

{{reflist}}

gives

Hope this helps. NtheP (talk) 22:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll get right on it! Thank you both so much.Matzohboy (talk) 00:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Is a Wikipedia article a reliable source?

Is it okay for an article to use another Wikipedia article as a source? Would it be considered reliable? Or does it depend on the article? Koopatrev (talk) 11:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Koopatrev and welcome. Well, long story short, the answer is no. I would recommend you reading WP:Identifying reliable sources. Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:06, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

While Bonkers is right, one thing you can do is, if you're looking to cite something from another article, you can look at the source provided in the other article and cite that in the article you're working on. Go Phightins! 20:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Koopatrev! Although you cannot use wikipedia as a source for a fact, there is absolutely nothing wrong (and many things right!) with dropping a Wikilink to another article into the article you are working on for information. For example, if you were working on an article about CNN, you could certainly put "Ted Turner" in as a Wikilink for information. Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

posting

Hello community... thsi would be my first time to want to (a) correct and (b) post a new page. Specifically somebody has posted erroneous information on an airline company that is now out of business (flyAruba), but mixing up with this our company website, and in and effort to create a posting on our company (Aruba Airlines) i now see messages indicating this is unverified or other such comments and subject to deletion. How do i simply correct the erroneous poster information and post an intro of our company, that can be build on...

thank you for any inputs

Trevor Sadler 201.229.125.182 (talk) 01:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! One thing you need to be very careful about is editing pages in which you have a conflict of interest, such as this airline company. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so feel free to correct any errors you see, but also be sure to add a reliable source to back up what you're saying. Otherwise, it may be contested and removed. I hope this helps, and Happy New Year to you. Go Phightins! 01:55, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I hope I've done the right thing trying to help here. It's not my area of expertise, but it sounded like an unocnnected editor could assist. I have brushed-up both pages to remove dead links, removed some English errors and make the distinction between the failed airline and the still-extant one clearer. If someone with the privileges to do so can move Fly Aruba Airlines to Fly Aruba and Aruba airlines to Aruba Airlines that will also make things clearer still, I think. John Snow II (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Cosmetic changes, CSD P2 and Visual Editor

Question No 1: What are cosmetic changes? I am seeking help here because I recently got the AWB flag. The AWB policy states that we should be careful in making cosmetic changes. I don't want to lose the AWB flag so I would like to know what are cosmetic changes. "Cosmetic changes (such as many of AWB general fixes) should only be applied when there is a substantial change to make at the same time.". What is general fixes here? Please give me a detailed explanation about this.

Question No 2: What is CSD P2? "Any portal based on a topic for which there is only a stub header article or fewer than three non-stub articles detailing subject matter that would be appropriate to present under the title of that portal." I found the sentence very confusing. Please give me a detailed explanation about this.

Question No 3: What is VisualEditor and how does it work? I found this gadget in the Editing section of Preferences.

Question No 4: What are reliable sources and how to identify them? I read Project:RS but found it confusing. I also read in Project:V and Project:NOR that reliable sources must be cited for potentially controversial claims. I would appreciate a detailed explanation.

Please answer my questions. Thanks! Forgot to put name 18:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Forgot, welcome to the Teahouse! AWB has several fixes that it makes automatically, without you needing to write rules for them; these automatic fixes are what's known as "general fixes", and they're described in more detail here. Many of these general fixes fall into the broader category of cosmetic changes, which are changes that do little or nothing to change the output of a page. I think the idea is that these changes are unimportant, and the edit history of an article shouldn't be cluttered up with a bunch of revisions where each one adds or removes a line of whitespace, for example. If you have a serious edit, like fixing misspellings, those cosmetic changes can be done at the same time, but they shouldn't be made on their own.

The Visual Editor is a piece of software that is designed to enable a WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) editor for Wikipedia. The idea is that wikicode is confusing for many first time users of Wikipedia, and you can't tell what it will look like on the final page while you're typing it (you can use the "Show preview" button, but that breaks the rhythm of writing). The Visual Editor is designed to allow a more "natural", MS-Word-type interface to editing Wikipedia, which will be easier on the newbies. It's still in alpha stages of development, so it's nowhere near complete; it's listed in the Gadgets menu to enable people to start testing it.

I don't really know how to give you a detailed explanation about reliable sources if you don't understand WP:RS. Our sources generally have to be published by some organization with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This isn't always true for completely uncontroversial things; for example, we could use a person's official website as a source for their birthdate. But for anything with any degree of controversy, we need a true reliable source. The general idea is that, since we know nothing about who's pseudonymously editing Wikipedia, we have to rely on objective sources to support our information. But, especially on the Internet, posting a blog or creating a website that says anything you want to say is easy, so we have to be sure that our sources come from organizations we can trust to get things right. Now, which organizations to trust, and on which subjects, is never set in stone, so there is no surefire rule for identifying reliable sources. As RS says, it's always dependent on context; you just need to make the best judgement that you can. There's always the reliable sources noticeboard, where you can ask for another opinion, if you can't decide on your own. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the replies. However, I did not get answer to #2; can anyone answer this question please? Thank you in advance Forgot to put name 06:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Forgot, to understand CSD-P2, you need to understand what Portals are - these are pages intended to serve as "Main Pages" for specific topics or areas and there are guidelines about what they should contain. CSD-P2 basically says if the content of the portal is minimal and so far below the guidelines then speedy deletion of that portal can be considered. NtheP (talk) 11:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Writing a template

Hi. Can someone tell me where to go? I want technical help in writing a new template.
kcylsnavS{^screech_harrass} 20:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Svanslyck. You can request that templates be written and ask for assistance with one you're working on at Wikipedia:Requested templates. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates might also be a good place to get the ear of a template guru. For general help pages on how to write a template, please see Help:A quick guide to templates, Help:Template, m:Help:Advanced templates and Help:Magic words. It might not hurt if you detailed the problem you are having here though. Someone might be able to help. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:46, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Hi there!

I created a new article, (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rank Uiller), but it was rejected due the reliable sources issue. I have two questions about that. 1.- Is the external link that appear on the page, valid? 2.- Is the References section mandatory on each article?

Thanks. Happy new year! Regards, Zoe. Zoepe (talk) 17:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Zoe, hi, welcome to the Teahouse and happy new year to you to. The external link is valid as an external link but it's not a reliable source as it's not independent of the subject. So at the moment your article has no sources at all and as a biography of a living person it will not be accepted without at least one source, so to answer your second question - yes a references section is mandatory especially for biographies. What you are after is sources about him but not by him and these need to be from reputable sources like newspapers, art magazines, reviews of his exhibitions and the like. I have to say that a quick Google search isn't showing too much but I've only looked at English language sources not Spanish ones. NtheP (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Photo Editing

I uploaded a photo on wiki but it's name has changed . Why an how did it happen? The same file has been redirected.Alhosniomani20 (talk) 11:06, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The reason for the rename is given in the edit summary in the picture's history- David Biddulph (talk) 11:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

April Fool's

Is it true that on April Fool's day, one can randomly nominate any random page on Wikipedia for deletion, in the name of fun? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 08:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Bonkers. I am not sure about that, but anyone can nominate a User for deletion. I am going to nominate you. April Fools!  :) Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:01, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

HAHA, but it's not April! :) Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 09:04, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

For further context and pranks pulled in years past, please see WP:APRIL and Category:Wikipedia April Fools' Day

Traditionally, we try to avoid impacting the readers, so most jokes happen "behind the scenes" at places like WP:ANI and WP:AFD. Users have retired, disappeared, changed their names, and the like. The strangest, randomest stuff has been nominated for AfD (who needs the Earth, anyway?), and well-known editors SPIed (e.g. Jimbo Wales). But the rule is, keep it out of the reader's way.

Hope I cleared things up! Feel free to reply with any other questions. ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Make a comment!} 10:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Gee, thanks! Can't wait for next April. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 10:03, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Any tips on assessing an article?

I have read my talk page, and I received large amounts of messages saying that I should assess this article. any tips? :) Ianlopez12 (talk) 07:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Please see the criteria here. Some of the wikiprojects may have slightly different versions of this, so clicking on the link at the talk page will let you know this. Basically stub, start, C, and B are just based on your assessment. A GA rating has a formal set of criteria that needs to be met, and an FA rating can only be obtained from going through the FAC process. An A rating is the highest rating other than FA, Featured Article. Apteva (talk) 08:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Ian. I am kinda confused here. The only request for assessment I saw on your talk page was for Jehovah's Witnesses practices. If that is the article you are talking about, I would suggest you ask for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity. If that isn't it, please let us know! Gtwfan52 (talk) 08:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for the help. Yes, correction, the only one. Ian Raphael Lopez  :) (talk) 08:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, one more question. Is there any time deadline in assesing an article? Thank you Ian Raphael Lopez  :) (talk) 08:31, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

old family letter upload (no copyright)

hi, I uploaded an old family letter (there is no copyright) I'm not sure what category to place this in and have picked to the best of the options so Wikipedia can be satisfied it is a free work . how can I be sure that the picture wont be removed ? is there another option I can select? Trixx22 (talk) 23:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Trixx22, welcome to Wikipedia. Just curious, what article will you be using the image in? When was it written? Both of these things will help us make the best decision for it. Thanks! SarahStierch (talk) 00:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Trixx22, I'm the person who tagged the image asking for more information. Letters do have a copyright and it is held by the author of the letter not the recipient. So in this case the copyright is held by the Honorary Secretary of Ponsonby Rugby Football Old Boys' Association and it's their permission that is needed, as the letter is only 30 years old there is no question of the copyright having expired. NtheP (talk) 18:50, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, the letter was written in 1981 and is in reference to "George Carter - Rugby NZ Allblack"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Carter_%28rugby_union%29

the letter was written to my Great Grandmother who lived to 106. As I live in New Zealand I am not aware of what copyright is being referred to? and If there is a copyright then what is required as proof? Trixx22 (talk) 10:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Trixx22, New Zealand copyright law is fairly similar to UK law. The content of the letter belongs to the person who wrote the letter not the person to whom it was sent. Therefore without permission from the person who wrote the letter you do not have the right to publish it's content. If you really want to publish the letter you need permission from the club preferably in the form of an email confirming their agreement to it's publication.

Looking at what you are using the letter for it looks like you are using the letter as a reference for asserting that Carter was the first capped player for NZ from the Ponsonby club. I'm not sure the letter meets the needs of a reliable source as there is no indication that the person who wrote the letter isn't just reciting club folklore rather than ascertained fact. NtheP (talk) 14:45, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Nthep, The NZ Copyright Act (law) came into force in 1994 . there is no prior law concerning Copyright in 1981 when this letter was written. Further under NZ law "A publisher's copyright in the typography of a published edition lasts for 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first published" therefore this letter being written over 31 years ago is no longer under Copyright. Please do not challenge this letter being uploaded in future as it is a free work Trixx22 (talk) 02:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Of what use is the letter to Wikipedia, regardless of its copyright status? --Jayron32 03:09, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Jayron, I have researched the recorded history of the Earliest AllBlacks in New Zealand and have had discussions with a number of historians about these early records and for the most part the early records are incomplete and alot of information is missing. My Grt Grt Grandfather (George Carter) played for the Ponsonby Rugby Club, he also played for Auckland Club and travelled around NZ to other Clubs and played overseas (Australia) matches, playing for other clubs was practised by all players. This letter is the familys record that George Carter was a member for Ponsonby as some historians are trying to revise history without any proof (as they themselves state that records are incomplete), and without any proof are wanting to remove a number of players from the honours board at Ponsonby Rugby Club. the letter can be taken for what it is an acknowledgement. There are records available that show George Carter playing for Ponsonby Club. Alot of NZ's early history is no longer available, It is a Great shame that this letter is not admissable to wikipedia site as part of a Great Players story, a letter written to George Carters own daughter Trixx22 (talk) 22:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

There are two things here. Firstly, the letter is just the secretary of the OBA's view (and probably genuinely held belief) that Carter played for Ponsonby. That's not proof that he did play for the club, just evidence that someone believes he played for the club and is not a reliable source that can or should be relied upon. Secondly about its uploading here, all I have asked is that you prove that the letter isn't copyrighted or if it is copyrighted to obtain permission of the copyright holder to use it. The 1994 NZ Copyright Act is essentially an update of the 1962 Copyright Act which defines a literary work as "any work, other than a dramatic or musical work, that is written, spoken, or sung". If it falls under this definition then it is copyrighted to the author of the letter until 50 years after their death. The publisher's copyright of 25 years you refer to, relates for example, to a book publisher of Shakespeare's plays, their copyright over their edition, not the content. I'm sorry you find this frustrating but Wikipedia has fairly strict copyright policies to prevent copyright abuse and the onus of proving that something is eligible to be uploaded onto Wikipedia rests with you as the person uploading it. I have raised the question about section 2 at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions so hopefully we will get a reply reasonably quickly. NtheP (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Formatting issue while creating template documentation

Hello,

I'm trying to create documentation for a template I just created, Template:International dollars. The template is supposed to do an in-line conversion of a value in a national currency to international dollars. However, Wikipedia seems to be doing some formatting that I don't understand when I use the template. In one instance it puts the value on its own line (i.e. puts newlines before and after it); in another it keeps it on the current line but moves all text afterwards into a box with a dashed boarder on a light background. How can I change my template so that the value it returns is substituted for the template without any other formatting changes? --Greenbreen (talk) 04:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I moved the calculation to a sub-template and had the template call the sub-template, and now the template seems to be displaying correctly. --Greenbreen (talk) 05:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thats great. You worked the solution for your problem youself! Congratulations!

Is there any way we can still help you?

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:45, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Problem editing the first time

I can see how to write new paragraphs but I can't understand how you edit what is written on a Wiki page. When I click edit (logged in) I don't get the text to edit, just a list of other things. I seem to be missing something very basic in the process Heritage specialist (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Heritage specialist, welcome to the Teahouse. Click the "Edit" tab at top of the page to edit the whole page. If you click the "edit" link to the right of a section heading then you only edit that section. See more at Help:Editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I just tried again before you answered and this time the text has come up ok. Now I am struggling with how to add refs, but I will get there in the end! It does not seem very intuitive but I will learn!

Heritage specialist (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

References can be tricky. You can see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and ask here if you have problems. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I have added a ref but keep getting error messages. Can you check for me to see what I am doing wrong? It's on the Old Boma page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Boma page

98.204.26.105 (talk) 00:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

It looks like you worked it out. Your post here was oddly formatted because it contained lines with leading spaces. I have removed the leading spaces. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

why is it so hard to suggest new topic ? more user friendly ?

why not ?

suggest - PAIMI federal law: protection and advocacy for mental ill individuals act 50.79.41.93 (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! I did a bit of research and found quite a few reliable sources regarding Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (the PAIMI Act), so if you'd like to work on that article, I'd say go for it! Regarding your broader question, "why is it so hard to suggest new topic?", topics need to be notable and there need to be reliable sources to support it. There are a lot of topics still missing, and a lot which are already created but need more information. I hope you'll enjoy editing wikipedia, and, if you wish, create a user account. Hope this was helpful. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Note, you will not be able to create that article yourself unless you create an account. Otherwise, you'll have to go through Articles for Creation which is a long and grueling process with a huge backlog. One more reason to create an account :) gwickwire^talk_edits 22:13, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

editing with footnotes

Hello! This is my first and I look forward to getting more involved in projects. I played in my sandbox and have submitted AND been rejected AND corrected. However, I am so close to completion. If someone could look at the article and tell me what I am doing wrong. It would be extremely appreciated. I know that it is a simple fix, but I am doing something wrong in the referencing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Badding_Rug

L,S,A. 18:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by L-S-AZZAR (talk • contribs)

I think the article looks good enough to go now. How about submitting it and seeing if its accepted?

Cheers!! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, L-S! Your article is looking good. The only problem I see is the {{{15}}} in the last sentence and the redlinks in the article. The only children's hospital I could find in Oakland is Children's Hospital Oakland. The department store actually has an article on Wikipedia under a slightly different name. If you want to link to it and still call it a department store, you would type this:[[Breuners Home Furnishings|Breuners Department Store]]. One last thing...one of your reviewers mentioned to you about the use of titles. We don't use them. You should clean that up. We don't follow the tradition of the time. If the Museum's name is the Mrs. Dwight D. Eisenhower Museum, that would be ok (but I find no reference on the internet to such a museum in NYC). But you do need to find and use all the rest of those ladies whole names. Commenting that you are writing in the style of the time is unencyclopedic. You article is very close to ready. Good luck! Gtwfan52 (talk) 19:50, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

RE: hospital name I am citing from the news sources and the same applies to the department store. 62 years ago it (like many hospitals) used a different name. I understand about the "Mrs." rule, but it is exactly how it is printed on Program for the Eighth National Exhibition of Amateur Needlework Of Today Inc. --- under the Honorary Chairmanship of Mrs. Dwight D. Eisenhower. Does this rule mean that I must omit that portion of the history of the rug? L,S,A. 00:45, 31 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by L-S-AZZAR (talk • contribs)

No it doesn't mean that at all. We all know Mrs. Eisenhower was Mamie...if the other ladies were notable, their first names should be somewhere. The Eisenhower's had considerable involvement with the MOMA; could that be the "Mrs. Eisenhower" museum? If you simply cannot find the ladies names, it would be better to be out of style than to leave the content out. Someone else can come along later and change it. That is the great thing about Wikipedia; many people collaborate to make the best possible content. Gtwfan52 (talk) 02:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

How to create a template on Wikipedia

I want to make a template on Wikipedia, i shall be grateful very much to anyone who will guide me. Sanpatrick81 (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Sanpatrick, You can request that templates be created at Wikipedia:Requested templates. ANother place to make a request would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates. For general help pages on how to write a template, please see Help:A quick guide to templates, Help:Template and Help:Magic words. What is it you are trying to create as in many cases there is already an existing template that will do the trick. NtheP (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help.

Template:Overlay does not seem to work properly anymore

This template is used quite a bit on Wikipedia, and editing the article Temple of the Tooth which did not display properly, I realized that the template itself has an issue.

Have a look at Template:Overlay and the examples, they do not display legends properly.

The author of the template Overlay article does not seem to be active anymore.

I have added two entries on the talk page Template_talk:Overlay.

Vincent Lextrait (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, interesting one, I've raised it at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). NtheP (talk) 15:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Ok, the people who hang out at VPT have fixed it. Thanks for pointing it out, Vincent. NtheP (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

What references are reliable?

Hi, I'm starting to write this article and I found most of my information on their official website. Is an official website a reliable source or just an external link? Would this website be a better source? Also, about how many reliable sources do I need? I'm sorry for all the questions. Thanks. JHUbal27 (talk) 07:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• Hello JHUbal27, good to see you again. You should really read the guidelines to reliable sources, but let me try to sum up the basic idea for you in a few words. We're basically looking for information where at least one person has done some level of fact checking. Broadly speaking (and there are exceptions) we consider newspapers, magazines and books to be reliable because there are disinterested writers and editors involved. Blogs, home pages and press releases don't have disinterested editors and so we don't consider them to be reliable. Thus, to answer your question, the first website isn't reliable because it is put up by the company, and the second website isn't reliable because they've just reprinted a press release.

There are many nuances here—I'd consider the company website to be reliable for uncontroversial facts like the company's mailing address—and the documentation covers most of those kinds of cases that you'll run into.

As to how many reliable sources are needed: it depends, but if you can't scare up at least three independent reliable sources then you're going to have a hard time arguing that your subject is notable. You may be able to make that argument, but it's not going to be an easy one.

Hope that helps! GaramondLethe 08:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. JHUbal27 (talk) 16:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

starting an article

Hello Teahouse, I have editing experience but am an article originator rookie, and am wondering if the Article Wizard is a safe haven to build an article over time. I will be writing one with appropriate references and don't want anyone making rash decisions about the article's worth for Wikipedia until it is ready to go live. My impression of the Sandbox from the descriptions is that there is always someone looking over your shoulder poised to hit delete, so I think the Article Wizard is best, yet am seeking advice. Is crafting the article in Word a better route, so as to submit in complete form? Please advise.

Thanks Wordcraft (talk) 07:38, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wordcraft and welcome to the Teahouse! The Article Wizard is a great place to start a new article, and as long as you don't submit it for review, it won't be thoroughly checked. However, some users, such as myself, frequently check the recent contributions across Wikipedia (for vandalism, among other things), so someone may happen to find your submission. But rest assured it won't be deleted, unless it is a major issue, such as vandalism or a copyright violation. I can assure you that your draft will be safe there, but keep in mind that it can still be edited by other users (which are almost always helpful ). If you need any help with your draft, feel free to ask here. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 08:01, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• (ec) Hello Wordcraft, and thanks for dropping in. I don't have any experience with the Article Wizard, but I can tell you that your sandbox will probably be left alone. That doesn't mean you can upload anything at all there, of course, but I have several future articles incubating in my own sandbox that are nowhere close to being complete and I haven't heard any complaints. Taking a look at the wizard I think it would be more appropriate for relatively simple articles and will prevent you from making several basic mistakes. If you want to make something a little more complicated, then using the sandbox will give you some more time to get it into shape as well as let you have other people take a look before it goes "live". Either way should work well, but given your concerns I'd recommend the sandbox. GaramondLethe 08:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Please, tell me !

Please,tell me how to add a photo to the article. If you can give me the tutorial video,please! I really really thanks to you :) DaFaJi (talk) 06:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

question moved to top of page. NtheP (talk) 13:12, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I tend to be a rather boring curmudgeon, so I am unaware of any videos, but that's not to say there aren't any, perhaps another host could help us out if there are...though adding a picture isn't that difficult. First you need to make sure the image in question has been uploaded either directly to Wikipedia, or to the [commons.wikimedia.org Wikimedia Commons]. Once you find the image there, you'll want to copy (or memorize) everything after "File:". In the article you want to add the image to, click on the icon in the editing interface that looks like a little picture of, I don't know, a sunset or something of the like. Once you do so, there will be a popup to put the name of the image, and the caption you'd like to include. If you add a caption, remember not to use ending punctuation. I hope this helps, perhaps a non-curmudgeon host is aware of a video, I am not. Happy editing! Go Phightins! 14:10, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey thanks:) i wanna try this. it really really helped. And thanks again. DaFaJi (talk) 08:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Great! Happy editing! Go Phightins! 14:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Just in case you are still interested, there is a Video here. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:22, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

How to prevent your article from deletion?And what is orphan?

On the top of my article, there are warning box there that says "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the Guide to deletion."

And another box with a yellow line on he left that says "This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; suggestions may be available. (December 2012)"

And also, what is the meaning of the colors on the left side of the box.

Thanks!

franz josef caballes (talk) 03:06, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

First, welcome to the Teahouse! The issue with the article is someone thinks it should be deleted as it might not be in line with all Wikipedia policies. See the linked page (near the words Articles for Deletion) for the reasoning, and you can reply there to see what you can do. In regards to the orphan message, it means that it has no links to other articles, nor do any articles link to it. You can accomplish this by adding [[ and ]] around some of the words you'd like to link to articles in Wikipedia. The colors basically mean the severity of the notice, for example deletion is a very major notice, whereas orphan is less important than a deletion discussion. Any other questions? gwickwire^talk_edits 03:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, just a minor point, an "orphan" is when nothing (or almost nothing, apart from lists) links to the article. An article with no links out is sometimes called a "dead end". Neither of these are significant problems on their own, but "orphan" articles are often about "non-notable" subjects. Rich Farmbrough, 05:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC).

Photos from Ukranian WP

How does one (or does one) use photos from another WP (i.e.: Ukraine)? Beate Sirota Gordon died yesterday, and I thought it might be nice to spruce-up her article with a picture or two, and noticed there are some on her corresponding uk.wikipedia page:[2] ~Thanks, ~E : 74.60.29.141 (talk) 23:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

First, welcome to the teahouse! Second, let me start by saying I do not speak Ukranian, so this is speculation. If you click on the images in her Ukranian article, there's a big red (C) on the page. That means copyright usually. If you know what that says, and you can summarize it, then I may be able to help more, but if they're copyrighted, it'd be more work to get them into an article here. gwickwire^talk_edits 23:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Neither of those images are public domain. They were uploaded to the Ukrainian wiki under that wiki's equivalent of non-free use. Potentially they could be uploaded here under a non-free rationale but you would have to compile such a rationale. The biggest obstacel to overcome is establishing that there aren't any free images of here to be found (disclaimer I don't speak Ukrainian either). NtheP (talk) 23:22, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Btw, I don't speak Ukrainian either. -And the only "source" I have is an IP claiming to be her granddaughter (over at that "other" help desk). I didn't want to make changes without conformation, but I figured that photos would be nice regardless. ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 23:29, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

New Year Templates

Hello everyone! First of all a very Happy New Year 2013 to all! I wanted to know if there are any more new year templates for wishing editors other than {{New Year 1}} and {{Happy New Year 2013}} I believe there could be more than 2 templates on a big community project like ours. TheGeneralUser (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

A quick look and I can only find the two, although there are some like {{Yuletide}}, {{Xmas2}} and {{Xmas3}} that have Happy New Year in them. NtheP (talk) 20:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

How long does it take for your page to be created

How long does it take for your page to show up on Wikipedia once you requested its creation? Alisamusso (talk) 16:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Alisamusso, welcome to the Teahouse. If you're talking about the draft article you have in your sandbox about MainStream Media Ent then you haven't submitted it for review yet. On the page in the box at the top you'll see the last line says "If you are writing an article, and are ready to request its creation, click here." You need to click to submit the article for review. The time taken for the review will vary depending on how many other articles there are awaiting review. I would say that at the moment your draft would not pass a review; it doesn't indicate why the company is notable and all the references you have are from the company itself. You should concentrate on finding sources about the company from independent, reliable sources to support the company's notability otherwise it can be seen as mostly a promotional article. NtheP (talk) 17:00, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Image problems

I am not able to link File:Junoon Aisi Nafrat Toh Kaisa Ishq logo.jpg to Junoon - Aisi Nafrat Toh Kaisa Ishq in the infobox. Please help me. Thank you. Forgot to put name 14:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, fixed it for you - infoboxes are often different about how they need image file names formatting. In this case it needs the full file name including the brackets [[File:Junoon Aisi Nafrat Toh Kaisa Ishq logo.jpg]] Other templates might only need [[Junoon Aisi Nafrat Toh Kaisa Ishq logo.jpg]] or even just Junoon Aisi Nafrat Toh Kaisa Ishq logo.jpg NtheP (talk) 14:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Can someone help me fix the talk page of Wonder Woman

Hi, I reviewed the article, which was a Good article nominee. I passed it and I thought that I should edit the talk page and show it, but somehow I messed up and it look weird. I just did as the GAN page said for successful articles and did the rplacement stuff. Now it looks awry. Plus, can someone update the article's talk page accordingly as the article is now GA class and not B class?

Details: The article was previously B class. The article had previously failed a GAN. WeirdWoman123 (talk) 10:25, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey. Let me see what I can do to help edit the article. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:05, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

hey. It seems that you are a new editor. Have you gone through the GA category conditions completely? We usually do not have editors doing GAR unless they are through and through with how GA works. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes ,yes, I had read and understood the ga criteria and the review guidelines prior to reviewing the article.

WeirdWoman123 (talk) 12:31, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

thats good.But if I were you, I would have another reviewer check it again, just to be on the safe side. You do not know how many new reviewers underestimate GA standards (That includes me). TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:15, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

We had Wizardman monitor the review. No relevant problems were singled out.WonderBoy1998 (talk) 13:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Did he approve it anywhere? If yes, then I have no problems. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Alternative account

I have an alternative account for my test editing like Using twinkle and warn user or welcome user. I mean I use the warning templates of twinkle on that alternative account. Do I have problems with that? --Pratyya ^{(Happy New Year)} 10:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Pratyya. As long as the alternate account is clearly linked to your main account (e.g. a note on its userpage to the effect that "This is an alternate account of User:Pratyya Ghosh") and as long as you aren't using it in an inappropriate manner (e.g. to support your main account in deletion discussions or to give the appearance that you are actually more than one person) you should be fine - I have an alternate account myself (User:Yunshui-tester) which I use for similar purposes. The policy on multiple accounts has more information, but if you're just using it to test out Twinkle warnings and the like, you aren't breaking any rules. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:02, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

change username

Hello, sorry if this is the wrong place to ask. I would like to change my username to my signature. Thankyou :) Andrea Christiansen 08:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andrea. This is easily done, but unfortunately, not by regular editors like you and me. To get someone with the appropriate permissions to change it for you, please file a request at Wikipedia:Changing username, and someone should sort it out for you shortly. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:56, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

(PS. Per the guidelines on signatures, your signature should contain a link to your username and/or talkpage - I've added one for you above, but you should change your sig's appearance under your Preferences ASAP) Yunshui 雲‍水 10:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

thank you so much for your quick & helpful reply :) Andrea Christiansen 19:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrea Bubendorfer (talk • contribs)

rejected revisions

I just got a notice that my changes regarding male tennis players were considered unhelpful and removed. I have absolutely no idea what this is talking about. I have, to my knowledge, never been a wikipedia editor. Can I assume this is an error? 24.178.6.142 (talk) 20:47, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! IP addresses often are shared, so if you've never edited Wikipedia, it likely applies to someone else who has your same IP address who did something unhelpful. If you'd like to contribute to the project, I'd strongly recommend creating an account, so you avoid irrelevant notices such as the one you just received. Thanks for dropping by! Go Phightins! 20:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Note also that the message on the IP talk page was dated August 2011, so is not a current warning. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Created new Article, but it isnt shown in Wikipedia

Hi, I recently created a new article Poverty in Japan, it has just been initiated and i am looking forward to adding more input, though i am unable to find my article when i search for it. Do i need to anythning else to make my article visible to everyone ?Anandtr2006 (talk) 02:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey, and welcome! Is this the article Poverty in Japan? If so, it's just because the software sometimes has a little wait period before articles are added to the search indexing it uses. Don't worry, the new article exists, and you can still get to it through either the link I put above or by using the http:// link you'll find at the top of your browser while on that page. gwickwire^talk_edits 02:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Merging accounts

Hi,

I'd like to merge my current account (anothersignalman) with my former one (steamtostay). How do I go about transferring the contents of both the main and talk pages, and setting up the "steamtostay" page to automatically redirect?

Thanks, Dave

Anothersignalman (talk) 02:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey Anothersignalman, welcome to the Teahouse. As far as transferring the data goes, it's just a simple case of copying and pasting the data from the old page into the new one. Just be sure to read WP:MULTIPLE and WP:SOCK#LEGIT. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 02:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Framing images in galleries

Is there a way to get rid of the white border that surrounds images in standard galleries? What I'm talking about is this: When you look at a standard gallery of images, it looks like a set of old Kodakchrome slides from the 1970s. If there is any text, the text floats under the Kodakchrome slide. I'd like to (1) have the image take up a bigger portion of the "slide" OR (2) have the caption appear on the bottom of that frame instead of free-floating under it. Is that possible?ProfReader (talk) 23:33, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi ProfReader, welcome (back) to the Teahouse. Almost anything is possible... but. I am pretty sure it's not possible to affect the gallery function if you are using <gallery>. You could, however, create your own templates to present images any way you like, or just use a number of images in a row and include "thumb" in the parameters. If you intend to use that in an article it is likely to be frowned upon because people prefer things to be rather standardized (even if the standard is not great). What is your intent and preference? heather walls (talk) 00:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

That is what I was afraid of. Given the community's preference against unintentional white space, I am surprised that the galleries are rendered that way. To my eye, it just makes the images too small to be useful at first blush. Is there at least a way to change the standard size of gallery images, even if it means jumbo Kodakchrome frames? I definitely don't want to tackle creating a template for my project, but I'm still fishing around for a nice, clean, crisp looking way to package lots of pictures without having to reroute people to Wikimedia Commons (my least favorite option of all).ProfReader (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

It looks like there might be a way to change the image size in a gallery. Wikipedia is based on MediaWiki. In MediaWiki-help I found, mw:Gallery#Optional_gallery_attributes which implies that you can affect the image size. I haven't tried it yet and there are things in MediaWiki that do not apply to Wikipedia (usually extensions that haven't been turned on) but it seems like this should be applicable.

AND someone already made a template: Template:Gallery heather walls (talk) 00:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm going to keep playing around with those helpful sources and see what I can come up with.ProfReader (talk) 00:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Asking for a review of a questionable article

I've contributed a little but I'm no expert on the Wiki society so I'd like to ask someone more experienced to have a look at this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGC_7603

It seems to be a copy of this:

http://quasars.org/ngc7603.htm

My understanding is that this is a pseudo-science site based on Halton Arp's controversial and/or discredited views.

George Dishman (talk) 23:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

George, welcome to the Teahouse. Pseudo-science or not, it looks very much to me like a copyright violation of the quasars.org page you listed and I have therefore tagged it for deletion as such. NtheP (talk) 23:07, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you. George Dishman (talk) 06:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Asking for peer review

I have requested peer review on the following article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singani How can I support the process of getting impartial experienced reviewers to look at this article? DGFritz (talk) 21:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey DGFritz. Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you explain what you mean when you say "supporting the process"? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 21:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, DGFritz! Peer review, like all other aspects of Wikipedia, is done by volunteers like me and you. So, the short answer to your question is almost nothing. However, if what you are looking for is a possible elevation in quality status, your best bet, rather than peer review, is to request review at Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Assessment. It is certainly not a stub and I am guessing it is at least "C". There is a formal process for "Good" and "Featured" ratings and "A" is actually between those.Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:30, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I read somewhere in WP that peer review was a process of exchanging reviews, reciprocal favors as it were. The Wikiproject sounds promising. Thanks. 108.18.122.94 (talk) 01:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)