Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 68

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 65Archive 66Archive 67Archive 68Archive 69Archive 70→Archive 75

Hyperlink to Wikipedia entry where more than one exists?

Please answer this question. I added to an entry recently and included the name of a person who has his own Wikipedia page. I enclosed his name within double square brackets to create a link, but the resulting hyperlink connected with a disambiguation page because there were two separate entries for people of the same name.

My question is, how can I alter my text in order to hyperlink to the correct individual rather than the disambiguation page? Thank you.

Infoproofer (talk) 15:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Infoproofer, welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse! I take it you're talking about the link to Chris Leslie that you put into Master of Arts? The best thing to do here is a neat trick called "piping". What you do is put the name of the page you're trying to link first, then put what's called a pipe character ("|", typed with a shift+\ on a US keyboard), and then the text you want to display. So, if you want to link to Chris Leslie (politician), you can type: [[Chris Leslie (politician)|Chris Leslie]]. This will end up looking like Chris Leslie, but it'll point to the right article. Does that help? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, just so you know: I've gone ahead and fixed the Chris Leslie link above; you can see the change I made here. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:47, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Brilliant, thank you Writ Keeper. That's a perfect answer and yes, it was Chris Leslie I was referring to. Thanks also for fixing the link. I'll take a look at it now.
Infoproofer (talk) 16:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
It's even easier than that. The "pipe trick" saves you some typing. Just entering [[Chris Leslie (politician)|]] (watch out for that pipe right at the end) will automatically split the wikilink page name at the right place (save it in a sandbox and look again at it afterwards). This works for both brackets and also for commas, like [[Chris Leslie, politician|]] Andy Dingley (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Great, thanks to you also Andy.

Infoproofer (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

change the name of a page

Someone wrote an article/page on the Reel Shorts Film Festival and called it "Reel Shorts Film Festival (Grande Prairie)". Grande Prairie is the location of the festival but it's not part of the name. I'd like to remove "Grande Prairie" from the title of the article. How can I do that? Tscerbak (talk) 02:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tscerback, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can change the name of a page by moving it. It's pretty easy. As long as you've been autoconfirmed (10 edits and registered more than 4 days ago), you can click on the dropdown triangle next to the star button and click on "Move". Then you just fill out the form with a reason why and the title you want to move it to, and it's done! I hope this helps, if you need a hand or some more explanation please feel free to ask! Best, Keilana|Parlez ici 02:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
However... note: there also is a Reel Shorts Film Festival in Chicago - the parenthesis are generally used for disambiguation, although there doesn't seem to be a Wikipedia article for the Chicago one. There should be some sort of clarification in the lead for Reel Shorts Film Festival. ←This link goes to the 'Recreation and culture' section of the Grande Prairie article. It looks like there needs to be some recombobulation - which is beyond this IP's current ability. ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 05:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Two people with the same name

I recently came across the article Carlos Urrutia, about a Peruvian diplomat. The article lacked references, so I tried finding some, and discovered that there is another Carlos Urrutia, who is also a diplomat, but from Colombia. I created a new article about him (Carlos Urrutia (Colombian diplomat)), but not I'm not sure what more I should do. I've seen disambiguation pages, but I'm not sure how to create one. Also, should I change the name of the first article to specify that he's the Peruvian diplomat? Thanks in advance. Keihatsu talk 01:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

You're on the right track. I'd now move the existing article to Carlos Urrutia (Peruvian diplomat), using the move tab. Then edit the redirect this leaves behind (or don't create a redirect) and make Carlos Urrutia a disambig. See WP:DISAMBIG, but broadly you just list the linked articles and then stick this as a footer:
* [[Carlos Urrutia (Colombian diplomat)]]
* [[Carlos Urrutia (Peruvian diplomat)]]

{{disambig}}
[[Category:Human name disambiguation pages|Urrutia, Carlos ]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Urrutia, Carlos }}
Tag the talk page for the diambiguation WikiProject too.
{{WikiProject Disambiguation}}
{{WikiProject Biography
|living=yes
|class=Dab
|listas=Urrutia, Carlos
}}
Finally, go through Special:WhatLinksHere/Carlos_Urrutia and fix up the links on all the relevant pages (mostly those from the main article namespace). Andy Dingley (talk) 01:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
If the above sounds daunting then you can also just add this to the top of Carlos Urrutia so readers can find the other article:
{{For|the Colombian diplomat|Carlos Urrutia (Colombian diplomat)}}
It produces this hatnote:
For the Colombian diplomat, see Carlos Urrutia (Colombian diplomat).
Hatnotes are often used when there are only two articles to disambiguate between. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

How do I respond to a notice that "it has been suggested that this article or section be merged" into a longer article when I prefer that it stay as a separate page?

I put up a very short page (stub) on the Reel Shorts Film Festival in Grande Prairie, Alberta months ago and someone merged it into a short entry on the City of Grande Prairie's page. Yesterday, someone else put up a longer, more complete page on the Reel Shorts Film Festival at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel_Shorts_Film_Festival_(Grande_Prairie) but again a notice appeared at the top that "It has been suggested that this article be merged into Reel Shorts Film Festival" which is the short mention included on the City of Grande Prairie's page. I've edited the page, making it more objective, and I've added references. Is there anything else I should do to keep this page as a separate page on Wikipedia? The City of Grande Prairie has nothing to do with the production of the film festival, and there are a lot of other festivals of similar size with their own Wikipedia pages, so I'm not sure why someone has suggested merging it. And when I click on Discuss, there is no comment to respond to, and I haven't figured out how to add my own comment. It's all quite confusing. Thanks for any insights you can give me on the process. Tscerbak (talk) 00:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I didn't really see a way to easily merge the article, so I went ahead and removed the tag. Personally, I think both articles could still use some work, but they can't easily be merged together without losing some information. There is still the issue of if the festival meets our notability requirements on it's own, as all of your references seem to be from one person, or from the festival itself. It'd be better if you can find sources from major newspapers (try news.google.com for that) or from any major news outlet such as CNN, BBC, ABC, and others. If you can find more sources I can't see anything really big wrong with the article. Thanks! gwickwiretalkedits 00:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Is there any zero-width non-breaking space character that can be used on Wikipedia?

I was looking at the article on hiragana, and I noticed that my browser inserted a line break between two characters in the text. I thought that this was undesireable (as it is one single word), so I tried inserting a zero-width non-breaking space between them (with '⁠' or '⁠'). This didn't appear to do anything, but I copied the text to somewhere else to examine it further, and saw that the character was indeed there, it just did't do anything. I tried putting the character in an html document to see if it was my browser that was causing the problem, but this worked just fine.

Now, am I doing something wrong, or does this character simply not work on Wikipedia? If it does work, how do I insert it properly? If it doesn't work, are there any other characters that do, that can be used instead? I tried using ' ', which worked, but obviously inserted a space between the characters.

And also, if there is any character that I can use, should I insert it between all the japanese characters in the text? (I guess not everyone will have the line break at the same place.)

Xwayj (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Xwayj, and welcome to the Teahouse! ~ You can use the {{nowrap}} template. Simply put the text after the pipe | in {{nowrap|your text here}}. ~I hope that helps, ~E :modified:74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC) 74.60.29.141 (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Awesome! Thanks.

Xwayj (talk) 23:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

There's also the zero width joiner, ‍, which may be what you're looking for. Yunshui 雲‍水 23:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Make "multiple issues" box go away

I've been fixing the "multiple issues" in my new article Douglas Messerli.

Now how can I get the "multiple issues" list at the top of this article to go away (partially or completely)? Any suggestions for how I could further improve this article are welcome. Thank you!

Pcaabplroa (talk) 17:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Pcaabplroa, welcome to the Teahouse. The first tag - inline citations - can go as the citations are correctly formatted. The last about the lead can probably go to, but the second needs to stay for the time being. There are only three citations for the entire article and the entire biography is only supported by one citation; there need to be a lot more for a section this long. I'd also be tempted to remove all the links to his works on the greeninteger site - as this is a commercial site these links could be considered as spam. NtheP (talk) 17:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
First of all, thank you for contributing a new article! Creating a new article in a suitable form for Wikipedia can be frustrating, but seems to be a rewarding endeavor. The main concern regarding the Douglas Messerli article is the lack of verifiability. A reader needs to be able to find the sources for the information in an article. This is especially true for biographies of living persons. The lack of inline-citations also raises another concern; when reading large sections of text that is well-written and consistant in tone (and lacks proper citations), one may suspect a possible copyright violation. Again, inline citations to reliable sources would alleviate this concern. ~Thanks again, Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks NtheP and Eric F for your help!

Pcaabplroa (talk) 18:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Page

Hi there! I am working on a GLAM WikiProject page for the George Washington University's Special Collections Research Center. Does anyone have any tips or can anyone point me to previous posts with suggestions for creating a page? I can't figure out how to add tabs to the top of my page, or how to add the "Article quality assessment" box. I'd also be interested in creating a Special Collections badge for volunteers.

Any assistance would be much appreciated. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and feel like I have a lot to learn, so I'm open to all suggestions!

Thanks! - ChloeCraub (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Chloe. I suspect that the easiest way to develop your project pageS is to copy one of the existing pages like Wikipedia:GLAM/SIA to your sandbox and then modify the text and code to meet your needs. Start by creating your sandbox pages with suitable names such as User:Craub/sandbox/GLAM/GWUSCRC. Just type in a space or a single period and save to create the page. Do the same for sub-pages like /GWUSCRC/Participants and /ToDo using the existing pages as a model. Then click the 'Edit' at the top of each of the model pages and, rihgt-click your mouse at the top of the page and copy-and-paste the contents into your sandbox. Chop out things that don't yet apply like the other project's awards and such, then start building your pages by writing your project's information over the old information.
Be sure to advertise the project with locals at WP:Meetup/DC and WikiMedia DC! Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 20:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

help

i am a musician mentioned several times on bands pages and i wanted to ensure my name appears as a blue link to a new page. how the heck do i start? many thanks in advance86.138.239.150 (talk) 08:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. As an unregistered editor, you can't create new pages (although you can start a page at Articles for creation, where it can be reviewed before being created). However, even if you register an account (click the "Create account" link in the top right of your screen to do so), you should not create an article about yourself. The reason for this is that it's very difficult to write objectively about oneself (the conflict of interest is considerable), and since Wikipedia has to be written in a neutral voice, we strongly discourage people from writing autobiographies.
If your work as a musician has been reported on in reliable sources (such as newspapers, magazines or books), then you may well merit a Wikipedia article - if so, you should add a listing at Requested articles, together with links to any useful sources, so that an uninvolved editor can create the page for you.
Hope this helps. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
ok many thanks, my work is well known so i will take your advice. many thanks for your time. best wishes, rich.86.138.239.150 (talk) 10:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Strange

I've tried suggesting edits to 'alternative medicine' but an IP editor is moving my comments around, asking other editors to watch me and making insinuations on my talk page. Is this to be expected when editing controversial pages and do I have to just ignore it ? Aspheric (talk) 00:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Aspheric and welcome to the Teahouse. This doesn't sound like acceptable behavior, but I haven't seen it. I can say that moving other people's talk page comments is not acceptable if there's not a very good reason. You don't need to ignore it, but I don't want to give you the wrong advice because it's certainly not time for the dispute resolution noticeboard. If you follow the directions for dispute resolution, you may be able to solve the problems without getting administrators involved. Good luck.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Different Language Wikipedia

Hi There, I'm trying to double bracket someone in an article so that their name, in blue, will lead to the article. The problem I have is that the article, on the said person, is on another language Wikipedia only. Can I still get it to work? thanks SamCardioNgo (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse!
It can be done, but I'm not sure if it would be proper. Perhaps a better option would be to use an 'explanatory foot-note' or something similar. See: {{efn}} and {{notelist}} (?) You could put the link in the footnote, and explain that this links to [whatever language] Wikipedia. ~Just a suggestion, ~Eric F :modified:74.60.29.141 (talk) 20:04, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi SamCardioNgo. The rule of thumb is that if the English Wikipedia could have an article on the subject (i.e. he/she meets the en-wiki notability requirements) then the correct approach is to add a red link (enclose the name in double square brackets as though creating a regular wikilink) to show future editors that an article needs to be created. If the subject hasn't received enough coverage to sustain an article on the English Wikipedia, you can create an inline interlanguage link - the format is [[:language code:foreign wiki article title|display text]]. Thus, to create a link to the French article on the poet José Velarde, I'd write [[:fr:José Velarde|José Velarde]], which produces this: José Velarde. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:42, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the feedback SamCardioNgo (talk) 09:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Referencing

Hi! I have a draft for an AFC here, but I don't think it will pass as is. Could someone help me find some more references? Thanks, Jakob 00:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jakob and welcome back to the Teahouse! I would say that the subject fails the notability guideline because more reliable sources are needed. Also, the critical acclaim section fails the neutral point of view guideline because these reviews are bias. I tried a Google search and I couldn't find any reliable sources, but as I was browsing through Wikipedia, I found this. In one paragraph, this explains how to find sources for cookbooks. Hope this helps! JHUbal27 19:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Jakob 17:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Perplexing message in my e-mail

Hello! Today in my e-mail I received a notice from WikiPedia that User:talk Marshallnorth had been created. I had left a message last week on the talk page for an article that Marshallnorth was submitting for creation. Is this normal? I left plenty of other messages, and I haven't received other notifications. I am worried that there may have been a mistake and that I was notified instead of Marshallnorth, who may be waiting to hear about his submission. —Anne Delong (talk) 02:42, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

That may be because you have it set to email you every time a page you watched has been changed (that's assuming that you have watched the page). --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 02:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Anne, welcome to the Teahouse. You created User:Marshallnorth (with a post which should have been on User talk:Marshallnorth). I guess the page was placed on your watchlist and you have selected "E-mail me when a page or file on my watchlist is changed" at Special:Preferences. A talk page and the corresponding non-talk page are always watchlisted at the same time. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I can see that I have put my comment about the Backgammon page in the wrong place. The comment is obsolete now; my suggestion has been followed even though he may not have read it. Should I just delete it? I didn't mean to mess up someone else's user page.

—Anne Delong (talk) 05:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Either deleting it or moving it to the talk page would be fine. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Difficulty getting approved

HI! I've been trying to publish an article about an author but it still isn't neutral enough. I've trimmed it down again and took out best selling author but his books have been best sellers - though not NYT - but on Amazon and the rankings are outdated so I don't have a highly credible source. Not sure what to do about this. If I could get more specific feedback I'd be thrilled! Thanks! (Princetondt (talk) 06:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Princetondt and welcome to the Teahouse. I resubmitted the submission for review since the last review was in late August 2012. If I might be able to make a thorough review soon, but if not, another reviewer will. (You're in luck – we're having a review drive right now to eliminate all pending submissions.) The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 06:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

How to left align some material, and right align other material on the same line?

Is it possible to obtain the functionality that the {{align|position|content}} command seemingly gives when using a table for: 1) a single line of text, and 2) a simple (single-line) formula when using <math> </math> markup? The closest I have been able to get to this functionality is with the <div style="text-align: [position;"> content </div> markup but it isn't close at all because the aligned material is on the wrong line (i.e., it is one line above or one line below the line (row) that I want it to appear on). Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. HamiltonRoberts (talk) 00:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

You can <span style="float:right">float the content</span> to right align on the same line. float the content
 --My76Strat (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for this very simple solution to the problem I spent hours trying to solve! HamiltonRoberts (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

problem with the reference section

I am working on a biography for singer songwriter Michael Caruso. I have part of it completed and am trying to set up references section. I think I am doing it correctly but keep getting an error message. What I am doing is ==References== then {{Reflist}} then <ref>http link here</ref>; I have also tried adding with cite refs; external and internal(wiki) links. The links in the biography do work. I don't remember having this problem before. Please let me know if I am doing this incorrectly. Also is it imperative to have a reference section as long as there is proof, working links in the bio and a complete discography. thanks Paulhus15 (talk) 22:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Paulhus15, and welcome. What you needed to do is to encase the references in tags: <ref> and </ref>. I have gone ahead and done this (along with some other minor formatting things) as you can see here. If you want some more information on how to properly format references at Wikipedia, there's a page titled Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners which should help you with the syntax. There's still a LOT of work to be done on your article, but hopefully this will help with that one problem. Does this help? --Jayron32 22:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Paulhus15! to make your reference list, you enclose the reference itself with <ref></ref> at the fact in the article you are referencing. Then you make your heading ==References==, hit enter and type {Reflist}. Hope that helpe. all the footnoting is automatic one you put your references where they go, inside the "ref" tags". Gtwfan52 (talk) 22:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, and welcome to the Teahouse! You need to put the <ref>{{citeweb etc. </ref> tags right after the claim or statement you can source with that source. For example, if I were to say "The sun is bigger than the Earth" and wanted to cite that with www.nasa.gov, I'd type "The sun is bigger than the Earth.<ref>the template</ref> Next sentence goes here", and then at the end of the article type this: ==References== <push enter once> then type {{reflist}} to display the references. If you can provide a link to the article I can see what I can do. Did all of that make sense? gwickwiretalkedits 22:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
thank you all so much. I have been playing with this since the weekend. thanks for stopping by and giving it your expertise. Hopefully I will be able to publish in a week or 2 after i tweak it a bit more. maryPaulhus15 (talk) 22:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Having difficulty getting new article approved

Hello, I've tried a couple of times to get the following new article submission approved but it has been rejected both times.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Leonard Jacobson (spiritual teacher)

The latest criticisms are

1. That it needs a range of independent, reliable, published sources. (I feel that I've met these criteria. Could you please tell me why I received this criticsm?)

2. Declining submission: submission is not written from a neutral point of view (Would you please point out an example of what is not written from a neutral point of view, and what is an example of a "peacock term" used in this article?

Any suggestions or insight you could offer, which will help me get this article approved would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you. Thesevan (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Thesevan, welcome to the teahouse! At the moment, your article draft has about six times more information about Jacobson's teachings, than it does about Jacobson. And, the information about his teachings is written in a wildly inappropriate style for an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias do not say things like "The moment you are truly present with something that is of the moment, thoughts will stop. Your mind will be silent. In those moments of deep Presence, you are an awakened Being."
I haven't reviewed the sources you provide in detail, but I suspect that some of them may not be reliable by Wikipedia's standards. For example, the author whose works you cite most often in the references, has one of the works you cite described at Amazon using language like "Discover 14 easy-to-use spiritual tools to strengthen your intuition to profound levels and develop an inner source of guidance and wisdom for any situation". This doesn't sound like something that would be a reliable and independent source for a biography about a person. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

create a profile?

Good Afternoon, Im looking to add my husband on here. He is a singer/songwriter and I have no idea how to do it. Any help wld be great xxx. 4fingaz (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello 4fingaz and welcome to the Teahouse. Before going on to create a page about this subject, I would recommend having a look at these two pages.
  1. - Conflict of interest - As you have mentioned you are the husband of the person you wish to create a page about, it may be pertinent for you to have a look at the
  2. - Notability (music) - You need to make sure that the subject is notable under these guidlines.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to drop me a line at my talk page. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Notability

Hi! I was just wondering, do you think this is notable enough? Thanks, Jakob 00:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The OP probably intended to link to User:SpeedReader/sandbox, rather than the redlink to User:SpeedReader/sandbok in his question. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
The relevant guideline says that unless the author is really, really famous, the book needs to have some significance. For example, if the book won an award, or appeared in multiple secondary reliable sources (the general notability criterion), or had a big impact on something else that's notable, the book's notable. Try searching the Web; if nothing turns up the book's probably non-notable. -- Ypnypn (talk)
Yes, sorry for the mixed up link, and thanks for the advise. Thanks again, Jakob 22:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Help with submission

I have created a submission for Sharp Nine Records. I am being asked for citations. I cited an article contained in the Sharp Nine Website. Other than this I don't know what else to cite. I am submitting this on behalf of sharpnine.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sharp Nine Records Ednaedel (talk) 14:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I have cited the article in URL: http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/article.php?id=25119 is that not adequate? Ednaedel (talk) 14:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Ednaedel, welcome to the Teahouse. There is nothing wrong with the link but if that is all you can find the notability of the company has to be questioned. From the general notability guidelines "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article" Note the plural of sources, multiple sources are expected to support the notability of a subject - if these can't be produced then the article will continue to be rejected. Also I see you say are submitting this on behalf on sharpnine, in which case you should read the guidelines on conflict of interest before proceeding too much further. NtheP (talk) 18:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I'd disagree with NtheP in his statement on "there is nothing wrong with the link", as we really don't like articles by or on the company's own website. What you really need is an article in a respected newspaper, or a respected music magazine, or even just some proof that they have been put into the lineup by a national music constortium. Sorry, that's for bands, not for corporations like this. That basically means that a company that owns radio stations (Clear Channel for example, but not TuneIn online or other online-only radios) has accepted the band's song as acceptable for a live/on air DJ to choose to play it. If you can find that, the band passes our notability guidelines. I do however agree with the rest of NtheP's statement. Thanks for keeping at it, and I'm sure you'll get it eventually! gwickwiretalkedits 21:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Edit: I mistook it for a band, but it's a record label, sorry for that! If I remember right, the record label needs to be covered in major sources, such as having articles in major magazines, etc. Also, this is its own label, right, and not an imprint of another label? For example, Cherrytree Records was an imprint of Interscope. gwickwiretalkedits 21:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Minor record labels are some of the hardest articles to reach notability standards. This is because the job of the label is to publicise its artists, not itself, so there is a derth of intendant coverage focussed on the label itself. You may find this article relevant to Sharp Nine Records, essentially if you can find another independent article in the music press about the label you can probably claim notability. Rich Farmbrough, 22:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC).
And the article you linked too seems a perfectly good source for establishing notability too. Rich Farmbrough, 22:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC).

Are graphics allowed on talk pages?

I'm working on a submission to a talk page trying to justify to the community a revision to an article. I would like to include a graphic (original to me and not copyrighted) that will probably not become part of the article. Is that allowed, and if so, how to I go about it? I looked at the file upload wizard, and it seems to assume that the file is to be used in an article. 75.172.20.41 (talk) 05:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, 75! Welcome to Teahouse! You can upload graphics as long as they are going into article space, which does include the article talk pages. You could not, however upload an image to put on your talk page. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi 75.172.20.41. As long as the graphic is created by you and it's uploaded as free, you can use it basically anywhere. However, IP users are not allowed to upload images – do you already have a registered account? If not, it's quick and free to register; just click here or click the "Create account" link at the top right of the page. If you are unable to upload an image here, you might want to try over at Commons, Wikipedia's sister project that handles media. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask here. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 06:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. This answers my question (Looks like I was logged out when I submitted it). J Doug McLean (talk) 06:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

No secondary sources available. What should I do?

I want to revise an article about a small and relatively new non-profit organization. The problem is that there is no real secondary sources for this organization, none. No press coverage or anything. I feel that the article is severely lacking and I have major edits in mind. What should I do? Sosthenes12 (talk) 00:39, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

What article? If there are really no secondary sources then it might not be notable and it might need deleting. I could try to look up the organization in a research database to see if there are any secondary sources I can find. Also, maybe you could find another article that suits your interests. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 00:45, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Feedback on new article draft

Hi, I have been working on my first article and I would like to get feedback before I send it for review http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Geoneutrino

UncleDrO (talk) 18:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I think it looks pretty good, though the introductory sentence (the very first one) should probably be rephrased a bit, as it really is just a general definition of neutrinos. The first sentence should probably say something about geoneutrinos being those which are produced via processes within the Earth itself, the Earth isn't mentioned until the end of the first paragraph, and even there it is hard to make the connection directly. The first sentence should unambigously define the topic in as concise and straightforward a manner as possible. However, I don't see why this couldn't be moved to article space now, as it seems to be pretty good. --Jayron32 18:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, Jayron32, I appreciate your feedback. UncleDrO (talk) 18:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

New article

Hello, I am trying to get an article submitted, any ideas/help? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/.Net_Gadgeteer

Sjj698 (talk) 15:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Note: This article has been accepted from AfC, I assume no more help is needed. heather walls (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Question on making a certain picture.

I want to make a image such as the map shown on the Subway (restaurant) page in which certain countries are a different color to represent something. In my case, I want to make a map showing all of the countries visited in The 39 Clues books. However, I don't know how to make such a map.Horai 551 (talk) 12:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey Horai! Welcome to the Teahouse :) The thing is, Wikipedia doesn't have native support for maps. The maps you see in articles are all created by hand from blank ones, which can be a time consuming process. If you're really in need of it, check out Category:Maps to see if you can find the blank one you're looking for. Then use an image editor such as photoshop, paint, etc. to add the color as you wish to. Did that make sense? gwickwiretalkedits 13:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to the world of Wikipedia and the Teahouse, Horai. Try the Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop where you can request that a map be created by folks who are skilled in creating maps. It often takes a while because there are far more who want maps than Widipedians skilled at making maps. You can also take a tutorial there on creating your own maps. Also check Commons Map Resources for more ideas and help. Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 17:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Newby here; currently updating an article and wish to include a bibliography; this is fine for works written by my subject but is there a recommended format for works of others edited by my subject; ie Volume 42 of The Summa Theologiae written by St Thomas Aquinas edited by Anthony Ross and P G Walsh? Any suggestions? Portnoy58 (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Portnoy, welcome to the teahouse. Take a look at Template:Cite book - this has a space where you can add editor name(s). If you need any more advice on using it, just let us know. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Deleted article

Dear, can you please tell me i am write an Article But someone remove this how that's Possible? Article Name is Malik Liaquat Ali — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sameer.liaquat (talk • contribs) 06:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

moved by me: heather walls (talk) 07:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sameer! The issue with your article looks like you didn't have sources to establish notability. Basically, you need to prove to us that your topic deserves to take up space on our servers before we have an article on it. You do this through having many independent reliable sources to substantiate your claims. For example, you should use newspapers, academic journals, and news outlets. You should not use personal websites, any blogs, or random websites from the web. Make sense? gwickwiretalkedits 13:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Recombobulate the lead for an article

The link/lead for Reel Shorts Film Festival goes to the 'Recreation and culture' section of the Grande Prairie article because a previous article stub was merged with the Grande Prairie article, however, a newer Reel Shorts Film Festival (Grande Prairie) article has more information. How can I get a Wikipedia search for "Reel Shorts Film Festival" to go to the Reel Shorts Film Festival (Grande Prairie) article rather than the Grande Prairie article? Tscerbak (talk) 04:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tscerbak, welcome back! What you actually want to do is change what is called a "redirect". If you scroll to the top of the page after clicking on the Reel Shorts Film Festival link, you will see a message under the main title in the upper left (Grand Praire) that says "(Redirected from Reel Shorts Film Festival)". If you click again on the Reel Shorts link there, it will take you to the redirected page. You can edit that page and change the part that says, "Grande Prairie#Recreation and culture" to "Reel Shorts Film Festival (Grande Prairie)". Good luck! Let me know if you have any problems. heather walls (talk) 07:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm confused.

I submitted feedback saying that I was confused and couldn't edit anything... I got an answer but it didn't really make a lot of sense... FlourpowerMP (talk) 01:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, FlourPowerMP. What the user in question is saying is that, until your account is four days old and you have made ten edits with that account, you will not be able to edit pages that have been protected against vandalism. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 01:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks! FlourpowerMP (talk) 01:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
However, some other pages have been fully protected, which means that no one but Administrators can edit them. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 23:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't the name of "Ted Brown" should be included in the article linked below?

RE: Article at: WBBR

In the above-linked article, it says: "A radio institution throughout the majority of the 20th century, WNEW is known for its music selection as well as its staff of radio personalities including Martin Block, Dee Finch, Gene Rayburn, Gene Klaven and William B. Williams. WNEW is credited with pioneering the role of the disc jockey... "

Shouldn't the name of "Ted Brown" be included in the list of names above? Ted Brown was a radio personality on WNEW and he used to sign off by saying: "Put on the coffee, Mama. I'm coming home."

PS-Below is a link to the Wiki article about Ted Brown:
Ted Brown (radio) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

It says: "Ted Brown (May 5, 1924-March 20, 2005), was a charismatic radio personality who worked at several stations in New York City including WMGM, WNEW and WNBC during the 1950s and 1960s, the golden age of AM radio."

Terry Cagney (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps. But he is mentioned in the '50s and 60s' section. 74.60.29.141 (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

My reply: William B. Williams is in the list. So Ted Brown should be there as well. They were both on the air around the same time. ---Terry Cagney Terry Cagney (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Terry Cagney (talk) 17:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

A little research is in order, since that section refers to when it was WNEW - not sure what the call letters were when Ted Brown was there. (I linked his name to his article) ~:74.60.29.141 (talk) 17:16, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
[I tidied things up a bit: removed underscores, convert external links to Wikilinks]
 Added ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 17:41, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
P.s.: Welcome to the Teahouse! Just a note: you can link to an article using Wikilinks by putting brackets [[ ]] around the article name - or use the link button on the toolbar (looks like a chain). Disambiguations, such as Ted Brown (which goes to the football player) can be resolved as follows: when selecting the name and pressing 'link', you can press the down-arrow ↓ to generate a list of articles beginning with that name, then go down and select Ted Brown (radio). Also, to put a line in talk, use 4 dashes at the beginning of line: ---- (as below) -but this is generally discouraged. ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 18:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure Ted Brown was on WNEW. That's the only station I remember hearing him on. I listened to WNEW all the time when I lived in downstate NY back in the 40s and 50s. IIRC, he alternated with William B. Williams on WNEW. The two names are linked in my mind. ---Terry Terry Cagney (talk) 00:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
PS-I see that Ted Brown's name has been added to the list in question. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

I wonder if his "sign-off" words might be included at his Wiki page. As I said above, he signed off with: "Put on the coffee Mama. I'm coming home." That was memorable!

BTW, I hesitate to add anything to the Wiki articles. I just don't feel competent enough to follow all the instructions about adding items to the articles. (Thanks for trying to teach me.) I'm 78 years old and am barely keeping up with the technology. Terry Cagney (talk) 00:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

 added (with citation) ~Eric F ~ P.s.: You can also feel free to contact me on my talk page at any time 74.60.29.141 (talk) 01:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

How do I incorporate actual quotation marks in an article and not have them suggest editing/formatting?

How do I incorporate actual quotation marks in an article and not have them suggest editing/formatting? Unisonreading (talk) 21:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Unisonreading! To do this, you can surround your text in nowiki tags (which are like HTML tags, if you know what those are), so that it looks like: <nowiki>''Text''</nowiki>. If you type that into the edit screen and save it, the nowiki tags (which are the things between the angle brackets) disappear, and the text between them will show without any formatting. Does that help? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hey Unisonreading, and Welcome! If you wish to use double quote marks, use the double quote character,: ", don't hit the apostrophe twice. Using multiple consecutive apostrophes is what causes text two be formatted at Wikipedia. One apostrophe does nothing: 'like this'. Two apostrophes causes italics: like this. Three apostrophes causes bold like this. Double quote characters don't do anything: "like this". See the difference? Does that help? --Jayron32 21:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Just type them. ' (single quote) and " (double quote) both work fine. The problem begins with repeated single quotes, as these indicate wikimarkup for italic or bold. Don't use them, use the character for a double quote instead. "Curly quotes" are discouraged by the Manual of Style (WP:MOS). Andy Dingley (talk) 21:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
As others have said, using a straight quote(s) is preferred. If you live in the United States, or are on an English language keyboard, they should be the keys right next to Enter, to the left. It'll have the " and ' on the same key, and you use the Shift key to switch between the two. For example, pushing SHIFT+' produces " (the double quote). In the wiki editor box, they'll show as ' and " due to the different font used, but the double quote will still look normal once you save the page. gwickwiretalkedits 21:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for both of the above answers. Unisonreading (talk) 21:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Please review the reference image as follows?

Glamour (Presentation) "A glamour photograph of Michele Merkin."


Though the term Glamour is subjective, by as many means as its meaning defines; The trends of the times that this reference image represents; In my opinion, is better suited for use in soft pornography, and has no place among the Wikipedia family as such.

The times as it were, have come to an obvious degradation, or diminished tolerances, according to modesty, and ethics in journalism, and this is apparent among all forms of public media, without a caption indicating most specifically this idea, I reiterate, a nude model revealing her physical persona, perhaps best defining modern sexuality, as opposing the origin of that which tradition has defined "galmour" to be among as may renowned Hollywood celebrities, I am appalled to have found and noted such a common lacking of ethics in dutiful management of our base responsibility, to the world we serve. Which in fact is accurately defining the nature of the terms, ideas, and considerations, that comprise the spoken language, and all that it represents.

If ethics in journalism is dead to the trending times, than there's no reason for any future generation to have hope, and as much as try to maintain this ideal, but to exceed it in degradation, by modelling our example.

Regardless of my place among the Wikipedia community, I do not feel that it is my place to edit this entry, without the agreement of the local authority, who may very well possess a greater ability than my own, that any such action not offend the contributor, that originally determined that any such image has any place among a modern encyclopedia, without the strictest consideration for the youthful or sensitive minds it may offend.

Please see that this image is removed, or properly described for what it is, where it is located?

Upon notice of any such questionable materials within any Wikipedia page; I'm sorry but I will not be party to any such guilt, supporting as many ancient scrite prophetic suggestions, that the times we share would fall to any like lacking in ethical judgement.

I suggest that any reading this correspondence, consider my words, and take care in your own contributions here, that if none other chooses to maintain that which as many have spent lifetimes to preserve, we not be guilty of failing the responsibility, of the legacy entrusted our generation's contribution to history.

I add a final consideration here for future reference:

If you believe that this comment is excessive in any capacity, than I submit that before any man is permitted to contribute to the content of Wikipedia, that he be made to prove that he has taken the time from his busy life, and schedule, to read any selection of that which has been prepared by our nation's founding fathers, in correspondence among one another regarding such important issues, and I do not mean the most common documents of establishment, but simple correspondence among our US founding statesmen, in negotiating the simplest of terms of agreement.

I intentionally do not leave references, that it become the responsibility of others to define such works, that in the finding, any such individuals are permanently marked with the genius, and intellectual certainty that we as like representatives now possess in responsibility here.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

God be with you always, Maya`Tae Heno

Maya`Tae Heno (talk) 17:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Maya`Tae Heno. Welcome to Teahouse. I am sorry you were offended by an image you found on Wikipedia, but you need to know that Wikipedia is uncensored. There are settings on your web browser you can use to block images you find distasteful, but you cannot remove them from Wikipedia. Gtwfan52 (talk) 17:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
It seems the UK perspective on "glamour" does not reflect an international view of the subject. Apparently (at least as far as Glamour photography is concerned) it has become synonymous with "softcore porn". Perhaps the lead/lede needs some clarification (?). ~:74.60.29.141 (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I think is an argument to be made about why File:Michele Merkin 1.jpg appears at Glamour (presentation) when the topic it illustrates, Glamour photography, has it's own article. Much as I agree with Wikipedia is not censored it does strike me as a slightly gratuitous use here. NtheP (talk) 19:59, 10 January 2013

achieving neutral point of view

Hi there,

I have an article that has been declined a few times now and the lingering issue is for it to have a more "encyclopedic, neutral tone".

The article is about a living person, and all of the notable sources cover achievements from the individual. Everything mentioned is fact so I am unsure how to improve the article. Thanks, AshleyAmmitchell (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

This is the article. I have been told in live chat this it is notable. I have improved the ref, list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Pete_Sonsini Ammitchell (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Ammitchell. I will take a look at the article and get back to you on your talk page about what can be done. Generally though, it has been declined because it has failed some point of WP:NPOV, but I will be better able to advise you once I have taken a look at it. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 16:54, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Great, thank you! I look forward to your advice. Ammitchell (talk) 17:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Why has edit and additional info been removed?

I have spent five years researching the sinking of the Arandora Star and its aftermath in Ireland. We re-discovered from 1940 newspapers that dozens of bodies had been washed ashore and buried in unmarked graves. This information was of great interest to the families, particularly those in Bardi whence came one in 10 of the victims. We also made a video which has had more than 5000 visits on Youtube.

The work has no commercial intent and in fact has been quite expensive, but has brought scores of appreciative mails from the families for whom it was carried out. I spent some time adding this info and a link to the video. This has been removed. Why, please?

Archie LindsayArchieLindsay (talk) 16:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse ArchieLindsay. Youtube links, as well as links to other social media sites are not classed as reliable sources under WP:SPS. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
OK but the Youtube video contains info which I researched rather than being the source of such info. You might like to remove the first two links as they now refer to a (Japanese?) product.

I would still like to know why the text and corrections which I provided has been removed. Some of your existing copy is wrong: eg casualty name is Cesare Camozzi NOT Ceazar as appears in Wiki. [source: his granddaughter, and his headstone]. Luigi Tapparo is NOT buried alongside John Connelly, there is about 50m between the graves; and the body of il signor Tapparo was removed by relatives for home burial. [source: Termoncarragh burial register held by the parish priest].


Archie LindsayArchieLindsay (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

This is just a suggestion that perhaps a more knowledgeable editor can expand on: could this video be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons? ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 17:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
If you are basing the text solely on the video that you sourced, then it could well have been removed because the source itself wasn't notable. As to the question posed by User:74.60.29.141, this page may be of interest if you want to try and upload the video here. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 18:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Linking to Coat

As a follow-up to my previous question, I'm now trying to figure out how to get the coat of arms of Sax caption on the page of Sax, Alicante to link to the Coat of arms of Sax page. It appears to be possible, as a few other pages look to have managed to do it. Reinana kyuu (talk) 16:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I've done that for you. The parameter name is shield_link, and the details are in Template:Infobox settlement. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much for explaining that. Reinana kyuu (talk) 01:49, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Creating Wikipedia links in an article

I would like to get some clarification. In Wikipedia:Tutorial/Wikipedia links, under "When to link," it states, "To avoid excessive links, you should normally create a link in an article only where the first occurrence of a word or phrase occurs." I can understand that, but was wondering about an article which may be very long and has a certain word or phrase occurring perhaps near the beginning that's a wiki link. Then a new section or additional information is added much farther down in which the same word of phrase is used. Is the first occurrence still the only one where a link should be created in the article? K828 (talk) 14:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi K828, welcome to the teahouse! The Wikipedia manual of style says much the same thing, although I think it is worded slightly more weakly. Personally I agree that only wikilinking the first occurrence is not necessarily sensible as a hard and fast rule. I don't see anything wrong with wikilinking a second time, if the second mention is a couple of thousand words further down the article. So it's fine to put a second (or third...) wikilink in if you think it's needed.
Other editors might change it back, but that's fine too! I think most copyeditors and reviewers generally recommend a maximum of one wikilink in the lead and then another the first time it's mentioned in the body of the article. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 14:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I was thinking that as well. The thing is, in really long articles, a reader may only go straight to one particular section that may be of interest, and it may be quite far down the page from where certain words may have been first wikilinked. K828 (talk) 15:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Another issue (also supporting this) is that the lead section of an article is supposed to summarize the article's content, and the body and the lead should be able to be read entirely separately—one for a precis and the other for detailed information—which is a way many people do read articles. Thought about in this way, it is eminently sensible and even necessary that properly linked items in the lead should be duplicated upon their first mention in the body, and vice-versa.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:16, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Article submission continuously gets refused!

Hi, I wonder if someone can point me in the right direction. I'm trying to submit the following article about our department and its scientific work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/TwinsUK

At first it was being refused due to the "lack of reliable sources". Now it's been refused twice due to its "lack of notability". I've edited it as much as I can but am stuck now for the correct format to be accepted. Can anyone help? Yarandd (talk) 13:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Yarandd, and welcome to the Teahouse!
It seems from your situation that you might be getting frustrated, which is certainly understandable. It can take a bit of patience to get an article suitable for inclusion to Wikipedia; and there are many times that a subject simply is not suitable. This is not to say that your article necessarily falls into this category, it is just that in its current form, it is difficult to evaluate the notability of the subject. It would be helpful if the inline citations were fully formatted. I have taken the liberty of changing the 1st reference as an example.
Although getting the article to conform to guidelines in Wikipedia's Manual of style would be useful, not all properly formatted articles are accepted. I wish you luck, and am confident that other editors will provide some useful advice. ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 17:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello :) To further his comment on the inline references, if you need help, there's a great template you use ({{cite}}, which in turn is broken into {{tl|citenews)),{{citeweb}}, and others). This is explained in more detail at our referencing for beginners page, which should help with any other questions you have. It even has pictures (which is good for some visual learners). Sorry it takes so long to get used to! gwickwiretalkedits 03:26, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Counter editing of my brand Wikipedia Page

Hello,

I recently updated my profile with links to each of my brands social media profiles, to ensure that users of Wikipedia are given all of the relevant links to their social properties (should they wish to visit Facebook, Google+ etc.

To my frustration there appears to be someone who has revisited the profile within the last 24 hours and made an amendment to remove the links I previously included.

Is there any way at all to prevent this from happening - as this is extremely frustrating.

Stephen.murphy1982 (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Stephen. It would have been much better if the person who performed the removal had provided an informative edit summary but I agree with the removal. Please see Wikipedia:External links generally and its subsections on Links normally to be avoided (and on Advertising and conflicts of interest). See also WP:LINKFARM.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Two part movies

Hi guys, if a film were to be released in two parts (note: Not a sequel, just that the film was split into two parts due to time constraint) should there be two separate pages about it or is one article be enough to encompass info both parts? I tried to take clue from Kill Bill, but I'm still not sure what to do with the content I have. If I were to merge/ split into a separate article, it'd be very difficult due to the amount of content (which could be potentially swamped then). What should I do? If you're wondering, the page in reference is Ah Boys to Men. Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 12:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I haven't checked to see if we have a guideline on this, but my assumption would be that it depends on the sources. If you have sources that specifically discuss Part One without reference to Part Two and/or vice versa, then we should have two articles. If pretty much all the sources treat both parts as elements of the same film, then we only need the one article. That's just my 2¢, though - as I said, I don't know whether we have a specific policy or guideline on this or not. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Bonkers, and welcome to The Teahouse. My first thought was Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, whose two parts as movies were released so far apart they would certainly have to be treated as two separate movies.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
And I see that Wikipedia does have two separate articles. It would be hard for me to say if your situation is similar.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_68&oldid=1144354614"