Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 660

Archive 655

←

Archive 658

Archive 659

Archive 660

Archive 661

Archive 662

→

Archive 665

Speedy deletion nomination of NestAway

I recently created a page for an Indian brand named NestAway. I acknowledge the fact that the page was deleted in the past, however, after taking inputs from the issues listed in the past, improvements have been made to the version before re-submission. Moreover, the brand has really grown and coverage in significant, independent reliable sources is also available now.

I have contested the deletion nomination and would request other editors to please guide me on the same. RajkGuj (talk) 08:39, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@RajkGuj: Hello. The deletion log states that the article was deleted due to a deletion discussion. I've asked the person who nominated the page to locate the discussion for me because I can't seem to find it(at least by using What links here). If it was deleted due to a deletion discussion, it cannot be recreated unless the reasons for the deletion are addressed. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Different capitalisation: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nestaway. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: 331dot Thank you for sharing a link to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nestaway. I had read the comments left by the editors in this discussion. The challenge is that they see the news coverage as press releases but The Economic Times or TechCrunch does not cover a brand several times through a press release. Most of the times these are independent bylined news articles. They are not reposted content from a press release shared across media houses.

Moreover, the brand has over 2000 news results and they all can't be press releases or blogs. Kindly guide on how a page can be created. RajkGuj (talk) 10:38, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

If you wish to dispute the results of that AFD discussion, the page to which I linked gives you a link to Wikipedia:Deletion review. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:44, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@RajkGuj:(edit conflict) Given the internet, it is indeed possible for that many hits on a search to be reprinted press releases or derived from press releases. Even articles which state they are written by someone may still be based entirely on press releases, or an interview with a company representative, neither of which is independent. If you haven't already, you may wish to examine the organization notability guidelines, located at WP:ORG. More specifically, you may wish to review WP:ORGDEPTH (a subsection of that page) which goes into what types of sources are not acceptable. Even if you had 10,000 press releases, name drops, or routine announcements(such as the sale of the business or raising of capital) that would not establish notability. The coverage of the business must be more than a basic announcement of a business transaction; it must be in depth coverage of how the business is notable, at least as Wikipedia defines it in the guidelines. Does it have a large market share? Does it have a unique style or influence on its field? Has it been involved in notable litigation? That sort of thing. I would suggest looking at other articles on businesses to get an idea of what is being looked for(Microsoft, PepsiCo, Tata Motors) I would also suggest that, if you think you can find the in depth coverage being looked for, that you visit Articles for Creation to create the article and submit it for review before it is posted, which will allow you to get feedback on the article instead of it being deleted.

As David states above, you can contest the original deletion if you feel that it was in error. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@331dot: Thank you for that detailed explanation. Really helps and appreciate your effort. RajkGuj (talk) 16:07, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Thank you to you too. I will ask for a deletion review because the organization now has in-depth coverage links. RajkGuj (talk) 16:07, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

How to edit the ref list?

I would like to put brackets around the links as described in the external links section. I don't know how to do so. I go into edit that section and it doesn't look like and can edit the content at all. I appreciate your help. GrammerCracker96 (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey GrammerCracker96. The references aren't actually "in" the reference section, the just look like they are, because they're kindof "transported" there using {{reflist}}. The actual reference text is in the body of the article where the numbered citation is. So for example, when you type this:

Johnny told the devil "you son of a gun, I'm the best there's ever been."<ref>The Devil went down to Georgia. (1979) Charlie Daniels. ''Epic Records''.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

What you get is something like this:

Johnny told the devil "you son of a gun, I'm the best there's ever been."

References

So in order to edit the reference, you have to find where it's at in the body and click edit there. Hope this helps. TimothyJosephWood 16:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Improving my draft for submission: neutral tone and sources

Hello,

I am currently working on a page that was previously denied due to a lack of neutrality - Draft:Javier Martin. I am currently editing it to make the tone more neutral, I also have removed all external links, and am working on adding reliable sources. I wanted to know if I could get some second opinions to make sure that I am going in the right direction. Also, in terms of sources, the subject has several articles, interviews that are in other languages. If I use google translate to cite that article in English, is that something that's acceptable? Thealiengirl (talk) 15:17, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Thealiengirl and welcome to the TeaHouse. Removing the links is good, but it does not address the question of the promotional tone of the article. Statements such as "He bases his creative exploration on the careful observations of his surroundings, through this approach he constructs situations that invite reflection on impending matters in today's world" or "literally shattering society's barriers to convey the struggle against conformity, the fight for truth and freedom" or "This raw and rebellious performance finds Martin completely vulnerable in an intense spiritual journey to overcome his past to progress" (and many others) strike me as promotional rather than straightforward statements of fact.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:13, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

To answer your specific question, Thealiengirl: sources in languages other than English are acceptable if there are not English sources of comparable quality. It is not necessary to translate them. However, interviews with the subject are of very little value for a Wikipedia article: Wikipedia has almost not interest in what the subject says, but only in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about them. Paying attention to that will also help with the points Gronk Oz has made: the phrases he quotes would be acceptable only if they were quoted (with citation) to independent reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 20:42, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

where did my addition go?

Hi I just added executive bios to our RingCentral page (they match what's on our web site, RingCentral.com) They were accepted / up this morning but now they are gone. Are they coming back? Please? Thank you! Melinda Stoker (talk) 18:47, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. No, they are not coming back. Your edits were entirely unsourced, so not acceptable for Wikipedia. You will see in the article history that the editor who reverted your edits gave the reason "WP is not a company directory". Perhaps you didn't understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and that it is based on what is written about a subject in published reliable sources independent of the subject. As you refer to "our RingCentral page" you need to read WP:OWN, and as you refer to "our web site" you need to read about conflict of interest and about paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Please understand, Melinda Stoker, that Wikipedia has little interest in anything your company says about itself, and no interest at all on how the company wishes to be portrayed. It is Wikipedia's article about the company, and your role in shaping it should be limited to suggesting improvements on the article's talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 20:55, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

GLAM Wiki Town looking for Wikipedians!

Hi All! We are working on an GLAM project called TarfayaPedia; its the first initiative in the Arab world to create a whole Wiki Town, its Tarfaya; a small town in South of Morocco. the project aims to enrich and to improve coverage of the local content in its various forms on the Wikipedia platform in as many languages as possible. We are looking for Wikipedians to join us; lets start a long journey of collaboration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/TarfayaPedia

ElWaliElAlaoui (talk) 22:02, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

editing information about workplace

Hi, I just started editing on wikipedia and had a question about what the policy was on editing information about a place where you are currently working? Are you allowed to do that or is it a conflict of interest?Mrissabrad718 (talk) 00:24, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Mrissabrad718, and welcome to the Teahouse. Creating or editing such an article is indeed editing with a conflict of interest. If done as part of one's job, or on th4e instructions of a supervisor, it is considered paid editing. Neither of these are forbidden, provided that the relationship is fully disclosed. But such edits must be made with particular care to avoid bias and retain neutrality. It is often better practice to make suggestions on the article talk page, along with the use of {{request edit}}. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:30, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Mrissabrad718, I have a slightly different take on this. If you work for a large company (for example, Ford Motors) and you are not in a position where your pay is directly enhanced by publicizing the company, as long as the material you add to their article is neutral and properly sourced, it's doubtful you have a COI. COI is as much about editor behavior as it is position. I see no reason why a guy who bolts spare tires in the trunks of Lincolns cannot add to the history of the Rouge Works in s perfectly acceptable manner. Unless he doesn't edit in an acceptable manner! John from Idegon (talk) 02:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The place where I work is a library. Does that make a difference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrissabrad718 (talk • contribs) 12:20, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

That it is a library makes no real difference, Mrissabrad718. If your pay, evaluation at work, or reputation with your co-workers or bosses is at all likely to be influenced by what you write about your employer on Wikipedia, then you have a clear COI. If you have been assigned as part of your job responsibility, or given an extra paid assignment, to create or edit Wikipedia articles, then you fall under WP:PAID. If you are a volunteer shelf-reader, or a low-level front-desk worker, doing this on your own, then you have a degree of COI, as you are likely biased (or let us say opinionated) about your place of employment, for good or bad. But that is a much weaker COI, and as long as you declare it, it should not prevent you from editing. I admit that I had the first category in mind when i responded before -- we see so much of that. One still needs to take extra care in such a case, not only to be sure that content is well-sourced, but to avoid cherry-picking especially favorable or unfavorable sources to accord with one's personal view. Would you agree with that way of putting it, John from Idegon? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:06, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Pretty much, but size does matter. The potential for conflict is there no matter, but I see no need to declare it if he is a shelter in the New York Public Library System; however if he were one of two or three employees in a small library that is notable primarily because the structure that houses it is, the potential is much higher. If I'm reading Mrissabrad718s initial post correctly, he proposes editing an existing article. The confusion could be cleared up quickly if he'd let us know what article that might be. John from Idegon (talk) 00:16, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

While size does matter, i would say not as much as you suggest. Attitude matters also. I work at a Fortune 100 company. I am not at all among the movers and shakers, nor am i assigned to publicize the company. My editing an article about the company or one of its products or projects would be very unlikely to affect my pay or job status, unless i did something quite outrageous in the edit, or revealed confidential data. However, I do have strong feelings about the company (not always the same ones). If I were to make such an edit, those feelings might influence my tone and selection of content, perhaps even without my knowing it. Thus in the interests of t4ransparancy, disclosure is better, although probably not strictly required in such a case. That is my view, at least. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:42, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Change spelling in page title

Hello Teahouse friends,

I just created a page for an Australian artist but I added an extra "i" accidentally in the page title. Am I able to fix this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maizie_Turner

With many thanks SunnyBoi (talk) 09:48, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi SunnyBoi. Page titles are changed by moving the page. Your account is able to do this. See Help:How to move a page. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, @PrimeHunter! SunnyBoi :) SunnyBoi (talk) 04:17, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page

Please share me the ways to create a new page in wikipedia.Aayush Deep Rijal (talk) 08:56, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@Aayush Deep Rijal: Hello and welcome. I would first tell you that successfully creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. It takes time, practice, and effort. Those who most succeed at creating articles usually started smaller by making edits to existing articles to better learn how Wikipedia works, before attempting to start an article from scratch. However, if you wish to create a page, you may want to read Your First Article(click those words to access) which gives a good introduction. Please feel free to return here to ask any questions you might have about it. Good luck 331dot (talk) 09:50, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Thankyou so much for your kind words.Aayush Deep Rijal (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

page it seems not satisfying Wikipedia's guidelines

Hi, I have created a page for an IPS officer named Manoj Abraham https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoj_Abraham, but later I have received a message from Wiki stating "Hello, Trishna2017, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Manoj Abraham, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained" , I need someone could help me making this edits perfect

Trishna2017 (talk) 08:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Trishna2017: in the case of Manoj Abraham, I don't think the problem is with the article itself, it's with the choice of subject. It seems that Mr. Abraham simply isn't notable, in the way that word is used here. Even a "perfect" article about him would be rejected. No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Maproom (talk) 10:47, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Trishna2017. The short answer is that Wikipedia articles, especially articles on living people, must be 100% based on reliable published sources, and mostly based on sources unconnected with the subject. In an article on a living person, every single factual claim should be cited to a published source. If you can find such sources, you can start writing the article - forget everything you know about the subject, and write from what the sources say. If it happens that there is not enough independent published material about the subject, then it will be impossible to create an acceptable article, however it is written: the Wikipedia jargon for this case is that the subject is not then notable. Please read Your first article and biographies of living persons. --ColinFine (talk) 10:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Trishna2017, Hello and welcome to Teahouse. I looked your article, it is a biography article but does not cite reliable sources that prove your content right, we say a topic is not notable if it has no reliable sources. Articles topics must be notable, please read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Biography of a living person to get idea about notable objects and instructions to create an article about a person. You should cite at least three sources from different reliable sources to prove notability of your article. Please ask any other question! Sinner (talk) 11:08, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I have done some cleanup on the article. There were a lot of external references in the body which should have been references, and so I have turned those into references. I also Googled and found additional sources. It seems this person may be notable. The article needs further work, though. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I am a new comer here, and I am trying to follow Wiki guidelines, but its all news to me, I have seen photographs of people in their Wiki profile. Any chance if Wiki editors could do the same!? If we search in web we will get photos of the person

Trishna2017 (talk) 09:14, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

No Trishna2017, please don't do that, as almost every image you will find on the internet will be copyright, and so cannot be used in our articles. - Arjayay (talk) 09:33, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok Arjayay, I will not do, but in which way how we could select a photo, should we request photo directly from the person ? Trishna2017 (talk) 09:45, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Trishna2017, you could do that, but they would have to upload it themselves, or complete the copyright release, which is slightly complicated. However, I wouldn't worry about the picture, until you are sure the article will not be deleted. - Arjayay (talk) 09:55, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

in this section "In the area of cyber security, he is the man behind “c0c0n" - an international cyber security conference[5][not in citation given]" "not in citation given" its an annual police conference this time its going on in Cochin (18th and 19th of August 2017), the program details are given here http://is-ra.org/c0c0n/ , http://www.keralapolice.org/kerala-police/innovative-initiatives/cOcOn, previous talk in news channels https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OEj7JKTmw4 Trishna2017 (talk) 11:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

I added the "not in citation given" tag, because although the citation supports the fact that c0c0n is an international cyber security conference, Manoj Abraham is not mentioned anywhere in the citations given in the article or above. (The news story in the Youtube link is in Malayalam which I unfortunately can't understand, but from what I can tell it is about the conference, not about Abraham's role in it.) If the conference website actually names Abraham as "the man behind" the conference, it is not very easy to find (and if the information is not supported by an independent source, it shouldn't be in the article). The same thing applies to the text about him being responsible for the "Cyber Dome " project - his name is not anywhere in the source. In addition, I don't think a local police project is really encyclopedic information, unless it has been written about in independent sources (as opposed to th Kerala Police website, which is a primary source). Hope this makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 11:57, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Associated with Cyber Dome Kerala Police initiative his name is given in the Police website http://cyberdome.kerala.gov.in/contactus.html //The news story in the Youtube link is in Malayalam which I unfortunately can't understand// I shall try to submit supporting links here Trishna2017 (talk) 12:20, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

From the cyberdome.kerala.gov.in website, Abraham is apparently one of the main officers on the project (not the chairman nor the person "behind" the project). Since there are no secondary sources discussing his role or, indeed, any secondary sources at all discussing the Cyber Dome, it does not look like something that would normally be included in an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is not a CV and we don't want to cover every single thing a person has done in their career. --bonadea contributions talk 12:24, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Trishna2017, I've done some changes in the sentence structures. I went through all of the references under 'Cyber Crime' and found none of those except 'Asia-Pacific ISLA Senior Information Security Professional Award 2013' support the claims. A lot has to be worked upon this to be worthy of an encyclopedic article. Though I found about the educational (university) claim here, neither does it give the details nor does it qualify to be a citation. Vignyana^talk 18:14, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

References

In the "Career" head and in the line "He worked for seven years as Commissioner of Police of Cochin and Thiruvananthapuram.[2][3][not in citation given]" here I have added proper citation for Commissioner of Police Thiruvananthapuram " http://tvmcity.keralapolice.gov.in/thiruvananthapuram-city-police/history/former-chiefs" any chance to remove the citation tag now? 

For Cochin this link can be used as reference "http://www.kochicitypolice.org/commissioner.htm" Trishna2017 (talk) 12:02, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

I wish If I could add the photo of Manoj Abraham, a new photo has been taken by myself, and it still not appeared or published anywhere in web but whenever I tried to add this Jpeg image Wiki prevents me from further process Trishna2017 (talk) 10:06, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

You can follow the guidelines here and determine what kind of copyright is applicable to the image. Wikimedia commons should allow you to upload the image if everything's right. Vignyana^talk 16:29, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Trishna2017: I see that you have uploaded the photo to Wikimedia Commons. I have added it to the article. I cropped it severely: it is there to show the man, not his grand table and his swords. Maproom (talk) 16:45, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

ok, pls see the education part //Abraham holds a master's degree in Economics from Hyderabad Central University.[citation needed]// and in this part what citation can be produced , his "master's degree" certificate's copy can satisfy the need? Trishna2017 (talk) 02:41, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

If it has been published somewhere, yes. Uploading an image of the certificate would not count as a reliable source.

Trishna2017, because you have stated that you have taken the photo of Abraham, and you seem to have access to a lot of information that is not published, it looks as if you are in contact with him, and perhaps writing the article on his behalf. Please read this guide to Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline. If you are getting paid to create the article, you also have to read and comply with this. Editing with a conflict of interest is not prohibited as long as it is disclosed. --bonadea contributions talk 18:10, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

and I have received a notification "File:Manoj Abraham IPS.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!" there is no copy right issue since the photo taken by myself only, please advise Maproom Trishna2017 (talk) 02:47, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The message on the photo's Commons page says "DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather thumbnail format, personality right isusses, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?" I see you have already responded in the correct place (though you didn't put your response on a new line starting with a colon). I can't advise you much more, I have often found the bureaucracy at Commons difficult when using it myself. When I take a picture with my smartphone and upload it, it automatically includes EXIF data, I think almost all modern cameras do, and yours apparently didn't, which has made someone at Commons suspicious. Maproom (talk) 06:38, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

its very unfortunate that Wiki published a deletion warning for this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Manoj_Abraham, can I get any experienced editors, how to retain the page! and at first what reference document can be produced Abraham holds a master's degree in Economics from Hyderabad Central University.[citation needed] in this citation requirement ? copy of certificates can satisfy the need? "He worked for seven years as Commissioner of Police of Cochin and Thiruvananthapuram.[2][3][not in citation given]" in this part previous police commissioner's list is published in Government websites and is available on line also http://www.kochicitypolice.org/commissioner.htm ( list of police commissioners in Cochin) http://tvmcity.keralapolice.gov.in/thiruvananthapuram-city-police/history/former-chiefs ( list of police commissioners in Thiruvananthapuram) Trishna2017 (talk) 06:56, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Created a draft page. Anything I need to do re. submission/approval?

It's a draft page about singer-songwriter from the 60s, Marc Brierley. I've included his biog and links to allmusic and discography. Wondering what happens next ....

Any comments appreciated!

Fenderstratuk1 (talk) 10:54, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Fenderstratuk1, welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, the subject's blog is not a WP:Reliable source, though it could possibly be used for some uncontroversial statements. Please read WP:biographies of living persons and WP:Referencing for beginners, and find independent reliable sources to back up statements in the article. Google doesn't find much for me in the way of sources that you could use to establish WP:Notability, but the fact that I vaguely remember the name from the 60s suggests that perhaps there might be some articles in old magazines? You have some work to do to improve the draft before it can be published as an article. Have a look at some similar articles (perhaps Donovan or Bob Dylan) to see how Wikipedia usually sets out articles on musicians. Link to draft: Draft:Marc Brierley. Dbfirs 11:29, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Public Figure page

I set up a page about a particular British Playwright who subsequently got in touch with me himself to ask me to delete it. I am unable to do so as it has been edited by another user. This new user has added quite a lot of detailed information which the Playwright would rather not have presented here - some personal information about who he's friends with, his martial status and city of residence, for example. There's also a new section on his 'Philosophy' which he feels (and I agree) is reductive of his work and potentially damaging, and a lengthy section of cut-and-paste interview responses which are out-of-context, out-of-date and misleading about his current/future work. I seem to have got into a bit of an edit-war in which I've deleted the additional material only for it to be reinstated by the other user almost immediately. I've sent them a message on their 'Talk' page asking them to desist. While it's true that the information they're providing is available elsewhere on the internet I understand it is something else to have it all collected on one Wiki page. I understand other playwrights and directors have managed to safeguard their privacy by making it impossible to build pages about them - how is this achieved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookish1989 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Bookish1989, and welcome to the Teahouse. The subject could post a request on the article talk page (I believe it is Talk:Duncan Macmillan (playwright) in this case.) But both you and Mr. Macmillan need to understand that if he is notable (in the sense that Wikipedia uses that term) and if the content is accurate and supported by reliable sources he has no way to prevent it being in the article, and neither do you. A direct request from him might get more attention than one from you on his behalf, but there is no guarantee. If his notability is marginal, deletion is more likely to be considered. (I haven't yet examined the article in any detail). If the statements are incorrect, or are being given undue weight, posting about that on the article talk page (not here at the teahouse) may be helpful, particularly if the post includes pointers to sources supporting its arguments.

There is no way to make it impossible to build pages about them except by not being notable. Trying to make sure that one is never covered by news media or discussed in published sources might do it, but that is very unlikely for a playwright or director, as their work is inherently public. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:52, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

(I'm confused. Is Destay who started the article the same person as Bookish1989 who added content?) Any inaccurate unreferenced information can, of course be removed and should not be re-added. There is some advice on what should and should not be in the article at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Dbfirs 12:11, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

created page for jason innocent

need help keeping jason innocent page. please helpTice89 (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The article Jason Innocent has already been published, so why do we still have a draft? Adding further independent WP:Reliable sources will improve the chances that the article is kept. Dbfirs 12:18, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

How can I deal with warring?

I am new to wikipedia and am learning.

About 3 years ago, I went to the William M. Branham site and it was very accurate. Since then several things have been changed because of a new book by Weaver that is very critical about Branham. One thing is there was a picture taken of him by a professional photographer that showed a halo above his head. It was scientifically examined and found to be genuine. In Weaver's book he says the photo was going to be examined and that's all he says about it. I have tried 2 or 3 times to put the information back only to have it deleted by a person called "Dammitkevin". He will only talk on his site and I put {{Admin Help}} after my last message and I guess no one can see it there.

Another thing: The site lists 2 preachers who think the healings were fake, yet there are newspaper articles saying that there were scenes of mass healings after prayer. I tried to put this information back on the site along with the newspaper and page numbers, only to have it deleted by the same person who said it must be similar to the previous sentence and it can't be a different opinion. Before Weaver's quotes were put in, the whole article was different.

Is there anything that can be done to get some of the original material back on this site? It's ok to say that Weaver disagreed, but the documented information needs to be there too.

DanpeanutsDanpeanuts (talk) 12:24, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

You could report them at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, if they are refusing to listen to you. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:27, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Emir! danpeanutsll (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2017

How to remove 'close connection' from article? (Susan Collett)

Hi there, I'm a new editor on wikipedia, and am a curator in the Canadian professional craft community. I created a page for Susan Collett in order to help build up the presence of professional Canadian women ceramic artists on Wikipedia. How can I remove the 'close connection' tag from the article? Susan_Collett. Thanks for your help! COeditor COeditor (talk) 13:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, COeditor, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It looks like the connected-contributor flag was added by Missvain when she approved the draft article you created. Have you curated any shows in which Ms. Collett participated? If so, that could be the reason for the flag. To be honest, I would be more concerned with the other issues flagged at the top of the article; editors are allowed to edit an article when they have a conflict of interest (although it is discouraged), but such contributions do need to be publicly acknowledged so that readers are informed and can evaluate the article accordingly, in much the same way that the sources an article uses need to be cited so that readers can evaluate those. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 15:12, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

support on creating an entry for Knoel Scott

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia and I am struggling a bit on creating an entry for Knoel Scott (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knoel_Scott), one of the original members and second in command of the Sun Ra Arkestra and for a long time personal aide to Sun Ra himself. I am obviously talking about Sun Ra the Musician/composer/band leader. I am for example having trouble getting approved discography and other personal details of the artist even though I am currently his manager and I obviously speak directly with him. A lot of the recordings, both with the Sun Ra and as solo are not available anymore and only collectors have copies. Same for his past as "King Tut of Harlem" which is only referenced on Knoel's website. Knoel is certainly a saxophonist which is part of the high league and I am working really hard in raising his status. I have obviously a direct interest in him and his career, but I took him in my roster out of appreciation for his many talents and love for the Jazz masters, a club I believe he should be part of. Any help anyone? Best Francesco Accurso Tonetrade (talk) 13:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Tonetrade, and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia, the primary criterion in determining whether a Wikipedia article should be kept (aside from ensuring there's no copyright violation) is what we call notability (click to read more). Proving notability, as Wikipedia uses the term, requires multiple references (three is usually considered the bare minimum) which are to reliable sources (click to read more), which are independent of the subject (so his own website doesn't count, and interviews don't either), and which each discuss the person (or other subject) in some detail — more than a passing mention.

Of the sources currently included on the Knoel Scott article, only the Jazzwise piece seems to qualify. (The AllAboutJazz copy of the Encyclopedia of Jazz Musicians bio is a marginal case, as it's not clear AllAboutJazz isn't violating copyright by putting it online.) I see that participants in the deletion discussion have looked for archived old newspaper coverage, and not found anything substantive. However, there may be magazine articles from the pre-internet era which would satisfy the notability requirements; I would focus your efforts on finding any such sources. Note that they do not need to be online! They just need to exist. Good luck, and feel free to return to the Teahouse with any further questions you may have. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 15:44, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Many Thanks for your help GrammarFascist. I also included a detailed discography with links to credit pages etc.. Would this help with the sources? Tonetrade (talk) 16:07, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Sending a batch message to talk pages of users of a certain category

Hello - I'd like to post a message to the talk page of all users in certain category (Category:Wikipedian librarians). Could you point me to guidelines on this? Monikasj (talk) 16:01, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Monikasj, and welcome to the Teahouse. See: Wikipedia:Mass message senders who can help you with this. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:51, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

the struggle with Knoel Scott entry goes on

I keep hitting walls when it comes to submit entries for Knoel Scott. I received good tips from GrammarFascist and I looked for reviews on magazines and blogs to support the notability clause. I also included a discography section with a detailed list of all the albums he played on and I linked every album to an external site showing his name on the credits. For some reason the whole discography section has been removed and I don't understand what I've done wrong. Surely having such a huge discography should count for something but I don't seem to do things right. And sure there is a potential conflict of interest since I recently took on the challenge of raising his profile, but it's not like I am spreading false information. The fact that he played on so many records and that he was Sun Ra aide is pretty much documented, plus he's still an active member of the Arkestra. If anything I was surprised that his name didn't appear on Wikipedia. Any help or clarification on what I am doing wrong would be much appreciated. Best. Tonetrade Tonetrade (talk) 18:15, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

I have also been asked to define my relationship with Knoel Scott and I can honestly say that I am not paid to create a page for him even though I started looking for gigs for him for which I will be paid a booking fee. There is no other economic agreement between us and it was my idea of creating a profile for him on Wikipedia since his name is yet to be included Tonetrade (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Tonetrade. I'm sorry you are having a frustrating time. I'm afraid this often happens when people come new to editing Wikipedia and immediately plunge into one of the hardest tasks: creating a new article. I always advise people to spend a few weeks or months editing and learning how Wikipedia works before they try it. Part of your problem may be related to the fact that you use the word "profile". Wikipedia does not contain profiles. It contains encyclopaedic articles. It does not care at all what you (or I!) think or know about a subject; and it cares very little what the subject or their friends and associates say about them. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about them. If there is little such material, then it is literally impossible to write an acceptable article about them (which is what the notability requirement is about). For example has somebody written a critical article about Scott's oeuvre? If not, then only a short selective discography should appear, of the albums which have been independently written about. --ColinFine (talk) 19:50, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Tonetrade. Thanks for stopping back. First, since you stand to gain financially from any increase in publicity for Scott, it's my considered opinion you are a WP:PAID editor. You're doing OK when it comes to being upfront about it, so I wouldn't let it worry you. Just read the link and comply with the requirements. notability is probably the most difficult concept for newer editors to grasp, but it's one of those concepts that people grasp in a "light bulb" moment like in the old time cartoons. For notability, what a person has done is of no importance. The ONLY thing that matters for notability is what has been written about what a person has done. Any source considered towards notability must be independent if the subject. Because of this, interviews do not count. Reviews of him (not SunRa) count toward notability. The better the source, the more they show notability. I think the article as it stands now is very close to notability and will be adding a "weak keep" vote at the deletion discussion. IMO, a little slack should be given due to the cultural differences in acceptance between jazz and more popular music forms. John from Idegon (talk) 20:08, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Are you saying it's not a very saxxy topic as compared to other musical stylings? (*sorry, I couldn't help myself*) - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 20:12, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

• You sir lose the Internet today. That was baaaaaad. John from Idegon (talk) 20:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you all for your input and support. I will look more into the PAID editor section even though, being my efforts so laughable, I don't really look like a paid editor :D

For what concern the album he played on, what should I publish? The Sun Ra Arkestra he has been playing and recording with for the past 40 years is in all music history books and there are plenty of articles on those. Do I need to reference them all or just the ones with references to Knoel's contribution? I also fail to understand why an historic jazz album with credits and all doesn't retain encyclopaedic value. Should I only mention those album which are already listed on Wikipedia like Mayan_Temples? Tonetrade (talk) 21:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

This is where Wikipedia's definition of Notability (that's a link to the specific criteria for music/musicians) can be difficult to grasp. That band and those albums are, in themselves, notable, because they have been extensively reviewed and doubtless otherwise written about. The fact that Knoel Scott was a band member and played on them does not in itself make him notable, unless reviews and other writings specifically discuss his contributions at some length. For references that confirm his notability, you need Reliable Sources that specifically talk about him. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.202.208.101 (talk) 21:52, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

{{about}} vs DISPLAYTITLE

I recently ran into a page that uses {{about}} to point to another page which uses DISPLAYTITLE to modify the appearance of its title. I wanted to update this so that the hatnote matched the modified title. However, as far as I can tell, {{about}} seems not to be sophisticated enough to allow overriding like this. Does anyone have any suggestions about how to proceed from here? Or even where might be a better place to ask? Thanks. --Deacon Vorbis (talk) 22:35, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Deacon Vorbis. There may be a substitute template or trick to format it through this one, but use of templates simply standardizes display in an easy to use manner. We are concerned about display to readers nearly to the exclusion of what can be seen in edit mode. Anytime—anytime at all—a template gets in the way and you can manually place text, go right ahead. Hatnote templates provide one indent, and are italicized. So, you can just use:

:''Text with a piped link to the displaytitle''

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:01, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

But please use the general {{hatnote}} if you want to write your own hatnote with the normal styling. {{about2}} may work here. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:22, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks all, I went ahead and just wrote it manually with {{hatnote}}, and it seems to work fine. --Deacon Vorbis (talk) 00:27, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

What are the restrictions on who a wikipedia page can be made for?

Can a page be made about anyone that doesn't already have a page? Does a person have to be so to speak famous to have a page made about them?Northman3623 (talk) 01:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

@Northman3623: Hello and welcome. A person needs to be not "famous" but "notable", as Wikipedia defines notability. For people, you can read the notability guidelines by visiting WP:BIO(click to access). An article about a person needs to have independent reliable sources to indicate how the guidelines are met. 331dot (talk) 01:59, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Cite Source

Can I use company website as sourceCMoon (talk) 02:59, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, CMoon, and welcome to the Teahouse. Whether a company website can be used as a reference in a Wikipedia article depends on the company website in question and also the Wikipedia article in question. Generally company websites are what is considered a primary source, so cannot be used to establish notability (as that term is used on Wikipedia), but in some cases can be used to substantiate uncontroversial information, such as who the CEO of a company is. I hope this answers your question; if not, or if you have other questions, please feel free to return to the Teahouse. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 04:47, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

create page for Actor Colton Baumgartner

<copyright violation (bio from IMDb) removed and page history redacted--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)>

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ColtonBaumgartner (talk • contribs)

ColtonBaumgartner, absolutely the only thing I could find on the web about you were your Facebook and LinkedIn pages and your obviously self authored bio on IMDB, which by the way contains no other info on you. IMDB is not a reliable source, and we have absolutely no interest in what you have to say about yourself. Unless or until you have been written about in detail by multiple reliable sources, totally independent of yourself or any studios or production companies you have worked for, you will not qualify to have a biography on Wikipedia. Wikipedia's purpose is not publicity; it is the last stop on the publicity train, not the first. John from Idegon (talk) 06:47, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Sadly, all my edits were speedily deleted

Is there any way to get all my edits back for an article that got speedily deleted? I made a mistake at some point and switched between visual and text editor and messed it up. That being said, starting over would be a pain. Is there no way to get my content back and throw it in my sandbox? Poi ponder (talk) 07:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

If you are talking about Michael Barbaro, it hasn't been deleted (yet), but it will be. Suggest you copy it to your computer. John from Idegon (talk) 07:28, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

New Text editor

Is different from before, is there anyway to change back to the previous source editor? Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 02:42, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, L3X1, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you can change back to using the wikitext editor. To do so, click on Preferences at the top of any Wikipedia page, then select the Editing tab; there, under the Editor section, change Editing mode from "Always give me the visual editor if possible" to either "Always give me the source editor" or "Show me both editor tabs". If you choose the latter option, you will be able to click "Edit" on a given page to use visual editor or "Edit source" to use wikitext. Personally I prefer to edit in wikitext also, but the visual editor has some good features like and automatic citation generator. Feel free to return to the Teahouse with any further questions you may have. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 04:39, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

@L3X1: are you perhaps affected by a change recently made in the wikitext editor? The font choice for your edit window may have been affected. Most people, who had already selected "monospace" as their font choice were not affected, but this was recently made the default choice on your behalf and may have changed the way things look. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

It was middle of the night, and I thought I was the only one affected. The monospace font was almost impossible to read on my laptop. Alex Shih^Talk 06:42, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

GrammarFascist, jmcgnh, & Alex Shih Thanks for the help. I was referring to the font/look change of the source editor. I cycled through all the appearance skins in my preference from Vector through Cologne Blue to no avail, so I ended up changing the font from Mono-spaced to snas-serif, and now the old look is back. When they do this again, the site devs should consider an RfC. L3X1 (distænt write) 13:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Question.

Can also upload my own artwork here? I am afraid that it will deleted if I uploaded it. By the way I am from Canada Alamat123456

Hello Alamat123456, and welcome to the Teahouse! As I understand your question, the answer is no, see WP:NOTWEBHOST. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Let's not judge so hastily, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Alamat123456, you can upload your artwork on Wikimedia Commons (a sister project of Wikipedia. Most of the images you see here are actually hosted on Commons). But you can only do so if they are within the project scope of Commons (usually: the images have educational potential), and only if you agree to release them under an irrevocable free license that allows anyone to republish the images for any purpose, even commercially. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:41, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

notability

hello, thank you for your time, my article on musician artist J.E.V.I Pe$ci was speedy deleted says due to notability issue? google his name and find many notable articles as in i did NOT have an option to link or show to prove this? On re-creating the article, in short, how do do this & what should i do to avoid similar problems of getting this article retained? Juggernaut19 (talk) 01:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Juggernaut19, and welcome to the Teahouse. I know having an article you created be deleted can be confusing and frustrating. When trying to create a new article, it's best to begin by titling the article, for example, Draft:GrammarFascist instead of GrammarFascist (if you were writing about me); that lets other editors know that you know the article isn't ready yet.

But I wouldn't try recreating an article about J.E.V.I Pe$ci just yet. You said that there are "many" articles about him, yet my Google search found only one (this one) which might be usable to establish his notability (click for policy details) for Wikipedia purposes. You need a minimum of three such articles; each one must be from a reliable source (click for WP definition), cover J.E.V.I Pe$ci in some detail (more than a passing mention), and be independent of him — this means his own website and profiles on music-sharing sites are not useful, and neither are interviews. It looks to me like J.E.V.I Pe$ci just hasn't attracted enough independent coverage yet, and so can't have a Wikipedia article yet.

Don't be discouraged, though; there are millions of articles of Wikipedia, and most of them can stand to be improved. Improving existing articles is much easier than trying to write an article from scratch, and will give you a chance to learn how things work. You could have a look at articles about other musicians you're interested in and see where you can make improvements. Good luck, and don't forget you're always welcome to return to the Teahouse with any further questions you have. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

GrammarFascist makes some fine points and I agree with almost everything said above. However, for those who may at some time participate in WP:Articles for deletion, I'll point out that the notability guideline for biographies calls for multiple (three is not mentioned) reliable secondary sources. Gab4gab (talk) 13:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Gab4gab is correct that the guidelines themselves do not specify a minimum number of references for establishing notability; it has been my experience, however, that three is the minimum many editors who participate in deletion discussions expect. I should have made that clearer, but I was trying to be succinct (no, really). —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 14:33, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

What Portrait is appropriate for publishing in Wiki (Biographcal content)

Atul Prasad Sen was born in 1871 and died in 1934. He was a very famous person and was a public figure. A portrait of Atul Prasad, which, most likely, was taken around 1910, is available in one website of a college which he founded at Lucknow. That is a very rare and unknown photograph, not known to many. Considering the fame and notability of Atul Prasad Sen, the photograph may be given due publicity. I like to know whether this phograph can be uploaded and used in the Wikipedia file https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atul_Prasad_Sen or not? Paribrajak (talk) 14:33, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey Paribrajak. This is a potentially really complicated question. Images on Wikipedia generally need to be available for unrestricted public use (with some exceptions that often don't apply to images of people). According to Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory#India, works in India pass into the public domain when 60 years have passed from 1 January of the calendar year following the year in which the work was published. However, that requires that we know when the work was first published (made available to the public through nearly any means) and whether the work was published during the author's lifetime or posthumously (posthumous publications are different and be copyrighted longer). So long as it was also not first published in the United States following January 1 1923, then it should be safe to upload to Commons using Commons:Template:PD-India. Hopefully this is helpful and not just more confusing. TimothyJosephWood 14:58, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

links to wikipedia pages

Two questions related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anna_Spitzm%C3%BCller:

How can I link to Wikipedia pages in other languages, in this case German?

Shouldn't I take out links to as yet non-existent Wikipedia pages? eg: ... students through the Austro-American Institute of Education since the 1930s..

Thanks George Boeckgeorge.boeck (talk) 16:34, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, George.boeck, and welcome to the Teahouse. There are a couple of ways of linking to foreign-language Wikipedias, but I'll tell you my preferred method. Use the following code: {{ill|English article title|language code|Title in foreign language}}. So, for instance {{ill|Ulrike Bechmann|de|Ulrike Bechmann}} will produce Ulrike Bechmann.

As for linking to non-existent Wikipedia pages, please read Wikipedia:Red link. In short, it's acceptable, and actually a good idea, to link to non-existent pages when it's conceivable that there could be an article under that title sometime in the future. (This is why I introduced you to the method above that not only produces a link to the German language Wikipedia, but also retains a red link here that will be replaced with an actual link as soon as an article is created in English). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:44, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Yankees Tigers Brawl

After seeing the Yankees and the tigers yesterday, do you think we should make a main article on it?18:05, 25 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinnylospo (talk • contribs)

Hello, Vinnylospo, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm far from an expert in baseball (I know the basic rules, but I don't follow the sport) but I think the answer is that Wikipedia does not need an article about the brawl, based on the policy that says Wikipedia is not a newspaper; that is, Wikipedia does not generally report on events as they happen, but waits for sustained coverage to demonstrate an event's lasting notability. As that page says, however, the brawl may be an appropriate topic for Wikinews (and Wikinews may already have an article on it). I hope I've answered your question; either way, you're welcome to return to the Teahouse anytime with further questions about this or other topics. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 19:28, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

How do I merge a page?

There are two pages for the same topic. Usedtoknowthat & I have discussed it and we want to either delete my article (British Higher Headquarters Formation Patches) or merge it into his article (Higher Formation Insignia of the British Army). How can we do that? Mikeofv (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey Mikeofv. Well... I don't think either of you are going to like this answer very much, but both of those have almost no prose whatsoever, and seem on their face to be fairly clean cut violations of WP:NOTGALLERY. If there is additional encyclopedic content on the patches, and the images support that content, then it may be appropriate, but if the primary purpose is to house a collection of related images, it may be appropriate for something like Commons:Higher Formation Insignia of the British Army, since Commons does accept galleries, but it they probably doesn't belong here. TimothyJosephWood 19:36, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Marlene Dietrich Actress

I tried to update it because the last update was around 2000 to 2005. Also their is lots of new material which has emerged not least her daughter's republished biography of her mother's published 2017. Also the German wikipedia site for Dietrich is far more accurate and truthful; why not translate it into English and replace the English language versions.

See Marlene Dietrich German Wikipedia See Marlene daughter Maria Riva lnterviews for her book 1992 and 2017. Annette Tapert The power of Glamour book with Dietrich published in 1998.

(Redacted)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Filmfan65 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Filmfan65 and welcome to the Teahouse.

These are good suggestions to put on the Talk page of Marlene Dietrich. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

If the German page for her is much better, you can put in a request for the content to be translated into English. See Wikipedia:Translation. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:28, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Filmfan65. There have been over 1000 edits to Marlene Dietrich since 2010 so it is not really accurate to say that the article has not been updated since 2005. Has her daughter's biography been widely reviewed by experts in film history and do they evaluate this new biography as reliable and containing new information? If so, it may be a good source for expanding the biography. As suggested above, Talk: Marlene Dietrich is the proper place to make your case for changes. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:14, 26 August 2017 (UTC)