This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.
I so far have only made a couple of small edits on wikipedia, but when I was looking for information on SOFEX (trade fair for various military equipment) I only found something that looked like an advertisement. I would like to create this article, since this is actually a pretty big deal. A lot of money is involved and high ranking officials of various countries visit it, as well as most weapon manufacturers.
I'm having some trouble finding reliable sources, but my most pressing question is actually about something else, namely, could you direct me to an example of a good article about a related subject? I found the bilderberg conference page, but I don't think I can find that much information about SOFEX to be honest. I also don't really know about similar events, so I'm a bit lost even on how to start this. Is there also a general guideline on layout I should be aware of before starting this? The help pages all seem somewhat vague to me.
Greetings,
Helemaalnicks (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I will read that material first, not sure when I'll be ready for the next step because I have a job, but this helps me to get started.
Helemaalnicks (talk) 22:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
How can my article be removed without notice and by a retired user?
Hi,
I tried to publish my first article (on print management) here on wikipedia but within a day it has been deleted...
My problem is that when I want to find out why exactly (to imnprove the article) I am told:
"20:04, 16 January 2008 Accounting4Taste (talk | contribs) deleted page Print management (CSD G11: Blatant advertising)"
What about the time there... I published it today (Feb.10th2013) and what was considered "Blatant advertising"?
Why wasn't I given the chance to improve my article? And how can somebody marked as retired delete my article that fast???
From what i can read on the "talk"link I am not the only one having a problem with him/her.
Can anybody please help me because it took me quite a while to write and publish it!!! I wouldn't want this time to be wasted
Tyra007 (talk) 22:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Tyra007, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm a little confused by what you write -- I've looked at the deleted article "print management", and it was deleted back in 2008! I can't see it in your deleted contributions, either. I wonder if you somehow didn't successfully hit save page? One thing to try is to start the article in your sandbox -- there should be a link to it top right on your screen -- where you can get used to editing without anyone coming by and deleting your work. Sorry I can't be more helpful! Espresso Addict (talk) 23:07, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Another thing that's interesting is that there doesn't seem to be a record of Accounting4Taste having deleted this page on 16 January 2008 in his list of contributions. —Anne Delong (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Anne -- deletions go in the admin's logs, not their contributions list. If you go the the user contributions page, you can find logs just under the page header, where it says: "For [User] (talk | block | block log | uploads | logs | deleted user contributions | user rights management | filter log)". I've bolded the log of actions performed. Hope this helps, Espresso Addict (talk) 00:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi all, thank you very much for your help. I know it was confusing... for me as well and what is even more so... it is back online?! Has a note that it has to be improved but at least I can now work on it... I have no idea how it happened but I m happy anyway... and thank you Espresso Addict for welcoming me Tyra007 (talk) 16:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Need further help with previous question!
Brambleberry kindly replied to my question about how to clear the top box of flagged issues, instructing me to "just remove them." But that is my problem: HOW do I remove them? I'm a new contributor and can't find this information on the site. Help! Andrewade (talk) 22:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't explain the first time! It's easy to remove them. At the top it says {{Multiple issues|BLP sources=July 2012|one source=July 2012|update=July 2012}}. Hit the backspace button until the whole thing is gone if you think you got rid of all of them. Just erase the section you thought you got rid of if you only think you got rid of one issue. Does that help? öBrambleberryofRiverClan22:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
still need help getting article approved
I've been struggling with this for over a week... I posted here once and got some suggestions, which I followed and yet I still can't get it approved.
I don't know if I should give up or not, it's really frustrating...
I have 40 sources to prove notability of the subject so I don't know what the issue.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
66.65.115.48 (talk) 18:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi and welcome back to the Teahouse! Having articles continually not approved at AFC is frustrating. I empathize with you on that. But don't worry! Everything they're telling you is a suggestion for making the article as good as it can be. After reading the article, the key seems to be that we need additional third-party reliable sources. Has this gentleman ever received coverage from, for example, a major newspaper (like the New York Times, Dallas Morning News, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, etc.) or a major news source (like CNN, NBC, ABC, etc.)? If not, he may not, unfortunately, pass our general notability guideline. According to that guideline, in order to be notable, one must have received multiple instances of coverage from a reliable source beyond a trivial mention. That said, the article doesn't have to be solely about the person. I will take a look on HighBeam Research, a news archive, to see if I can find anything. Why don't you check out Google News or something similar? Maybe he's in a book at your local library. I have never heard of him, but that's not to say, necessarily, that he isn't notable. I will let you know at your talk page if I find anything on HighBeam. Good luck! GoPhightins!19:09, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
References
Hi, I joined wikipedia a few months ago, but I haven't figured out how to put in references. This is a problem as I edit a lot of music pages, and need references to back up genres.
ClashFan2 17:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clashfan2 (talk • contribs)
Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! The thing to do is to put a {{Citation}} template inside a pair of ref tags (i.e. <ref></ref>). The citation template takes a number of parameters (the author's last name (last), the author's first name (first), the title (title), the url (url, optional), and the date (date), and the date you retrieved the information (accessdate)). So you'd a typical reference might look something like this: Wikipedia is a great encyclopedia<ref>{{Citation|last = Wales|first = Jimmy|title = Wikipedia|url = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page|date = January 15, 2001|accessdate = January 1, 2013}}</ref>. This would produce:
You can also give the reference a name if you are using it multiple times in the same article, like this: <ref name = "Wikipedia"> and then your reference, and then use the same source be typing <ref name = "Wikipedia"/>. Does that help? KingJakobC217:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey ClasFan2!!! I have no doubt that your a hardcore music fan, and so am I... Anyways coming to the point- What you can do is:
2. Look up this user's comprehensive page- user:Nthep, cause this host's explanation is brief, direct, very precise and tremendously easy to remember or understand...
3. Or you could read through my short summary (although I would strongly suggest options 1. and 2.)
Well, you start of with the tags [2].Here's an example The Sun is pretty big,[3] but the Moon is not so big.[4] The Sun is also quite hot.[5] But there is more to it than just the two tags... So please look through the links given above
You must also follow other guidelines that I have also taken the liberty to place on your user talk... Hope that's ok with you... And I'm sure your going to be citing references very aptly and easily quite soon... Cheers!!! Ajayupai95 (talk) 17:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Citation Needed
I inspected the baseball player's page: Roger Bowman. I added several facts to the page. Later I discovered that "citation needed" notes have been added. I want to make this proper but I don't know how to source my facts. Roger Bowman was my dad and so I just know these things. What should I do? Jocelyn314 (talk) 08:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Jocelyn314. It is unfortunate, but the information that you know from personal knowledge is not really suitable to an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias are tertiary sources and as such only report on what others have written. I looked at his article, and most of what you put in appears to be unsourcable. The only thing I can think of is possibly some newspaper articles may exist where he talked about some of the things you have written with a reporter. Just a side note...the existence of those tags don't mean that the info must be removed, it only means that if a source isn't added within a reasonable, undefined time, it can be removed. Thanks for adding information here and you are welcome to make additions to some other articles! You have a good attitude> Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello again Anne :) I'd just like to add that since Wikipedia is licensed under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported license (and the GFDL), any website can reuse the text as long as they provide attribution and license it similarly. This also means that a lot of websites DO use our articles. For example, Google Maps is known to give snippets of articles in search results through Web Search and Maps. However. I snooped around a bit more to check the copyright status of the website. There are a few things that worry me, and I will be conferring with others about this site. Namely, the fact that a copyright notice is on the bottom of the pages. In the disclaimer, it also says "Unless otherwise stated on the goo, layout copyright and industrial property rights of goo, about the structure and design are the property of the Company" (sucky Google translation, but I'm not sure that even Google could mess up "copyrighted"). Thirdly, the website really only mentions Wikipedia once (here), and doesn't provide complete attribution or a similar licensing as required. Thanks for asking! gwickwiretalkedits14:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Well, technically yes. What I meant was we aren't copyrighted to the point that other sites are completely disallowed from using our material :) This one just isn't doing in the right methods. gwickwiretalkedits18:09, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Working on a deleted page, to rally for reinstatement, how?
Hi there! I'm a new editor, and I've found a page that was deleted back in 2008 for a podcast that has been going strong, won some awards, etc, since then. I'd like to make some changes to the original deleted page, and then rally for it's reinstatement.
I've copied the text of the page to my sandbox, and will make updates, including references, there.
Once I have a full page that I think is ready for reinstatement, what do I do?
So far I've only made minor and small edits to existing pages, and this feels like a Big Deal to me.
Hey Kbk. The method of deletion back in 2008 was via proposed deletion (often called "Prod"). Prod is uncontroversial deletion not on the merits of whether it meet our policies, such as after debate and consensus at articles for deletion. This also means that undeletion is normally uncontroversially granted, which can be requested at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. However, the article in its former form, and in the same form in your sandbox, is subject to speedy deletion as an article which does not indicate the importance of the topic (under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion), and more crucially, does not contain content indicating it could meet our notability standards. You said you would make updates, including references but just to be clear, all of the citations in the preexisting content are not independent, third-party, reliable, which is what is needed. If those are added, this should not be a Big Deal. Once you make edits transforming this into an article that meets our inclusion policies and guidelines, you can move it to the article main space from your sandbox, and then just request undeletion of the earlier edits (which is needed for copyright attribution since that's the source of the content you're working from). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
On a side note, the reason sine bot is signing for you is because your signature is not being recognized because it does not contain a link to your user page, user talk page or contribution history (a link to one of them is required by policy). I suspect this is because of a setting turned off in your Preferences. Go there, scroll down to "Signature" and uncheck the box that says "Treat the above as wiki markup." That should fix the issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, kbk tha grue! Welcome to Teahouse. Unfortunately, that could be a problem. Everything on Wikipedia is under a license called a CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. Although that allows free use, it does require attribution to the people who wrote it. Hence, by copying it from before deletion, you are actually violating the copyrights of the authors of the previous version. What you need to do is go back to the adimistrator that deleted it and have them "userfy" it to you. That way, the attribution of the prior version is maintained. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:57, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks so much, Fuhgettaboutit and Gtwfan52.
Next question: Do I contact the admin (who appears to be Maxim) by going to his talk page and posting there?
kbk tha grue (talk) 07:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Yup! Maxim appears to still be active, so drop him a note, and mention the exact title of the article you want. Good Luck! Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:17, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I recently came across a case where user: Harishrawat11 has been blocked under the possibility that edits of this user's are similar edits to another user's user: Blamecivil95 who is a blocked user, and so under the reasoning of sock puppetry, apparently... I checked up on this case and found that Harishrawat11 was merely creating a page on Investigation Division of the Central Board of Direct Taxes and found a DMI link that was red (not created). The page was deleted by another user user: SpacemanSpiff and so a request was made by Harishrawat11 to Spacemanspiff if that page could be created again and as soon as the page was created, Harishrawat11 was blocked (or so Harishrawat11 says). I know I maybe be wrong but according to me although there were very similar edits made by the two users, there was no substantial proof to show that the user was a sock puppet... I want to know if there is a higher authority to whom this case can be taken... I would also be happy to receive some detailed advice on how a user is considered as a sock puppet or meat puppet... Thank You Ajayupai95 (talk) 05:44, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Ajay, I haven't studied Harishrawat's contributions in detail but looking at the responses to unblock requests it was a lot more than one article being edited in the same way. That appears to be the main basis for the block but don't overlook the fact that admins have more tools at their disposal for checking that you or I do so there may be a whole lot more admins know about but haven't (correctly) made public. If Harishrawat want's to appeal the ban then they can do so by lodging a request at http://toolserver.org/~unblock/ As with any unblock request it will be reviewed by an admin who wasn't involved in the original block process. NtheP (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
There are some limitations but they are not set in stone. The projects generaly should not overlap each other unless the subjects are independent of each other tand even then there is some complaining due to such an overlap in differing projects. Also it is always best to propose the project properly and not just slap it up. See the Council proposal page to make your project proposal.--Amadscientist (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Editing my user page
Hello all,
I'm getting the hang of editing on Wikipedia, but there's one more question I would like to ask. :)
I want my Barnstar to appear on my user page, but as a picture thumbnail with the caption underneath. I see that another user has been able to successfully do this, but I don't know how to. Can anyone help me? Thanks! :) --PrincessAlice13 (talk) 14:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Welcome back to the Teahouse, PrincessAlice13! Barnstars can be very rewarding. To add one to your suerpage with a picture thumbnail and caption, you would put the following: {{barnstar|image=|text=}} and fill in the "image" and "text". For example, if I were to convert my Barnstar of Good Humor into this format, I would do {{barnstar|image=Barnstar of Humour Hires.png|text=For your widespread contributions to the Department of Fun! Good job! [[User:Whoop whoop pull up|Whoop whoop pull up]] <sup>[[User talk:Whoop whoop pull up|Bitching Betty]] | [[Special:Contributions/Whoop whoop pull up|Averted crashes]]</sup> 23:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)}}.
I've putted 2 formats of your style at your sandbox. One is hidden and one isn't. I've putted 2 stars in left with barnstar template and 2 stars in right without using barnstar template . See them whether you like. And of course don't forget to give me notifications whether you liked that or not. Happy editing.--Pratyya(Hello!)14:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you! :) Pratyya, thank you for taking the time in doing this, it's much appreciated. I would like the second thumbnail, with the purple drop-down box. I'll add it in my user page! Thanks! --PrincessAlice13 (talk) 15:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for quick reply. I already know this and I wanted to know any other method to do so, especially a tool to find that for every user having more or less edits. Suppose, a user who is not listed in "Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits", then how to find his or her rank. And, afterall how are the ranks in this table found ?? Please reply Mkg just4u (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey Mkg! Those users are ranked by, obviously, number of edits. It's difficult to rank users who aren't on that list, but if you want, you can use a edit counting tool to find their number of edits. My favorite is here. It's a Fox! (Talk to me?)18:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
About asking questions
I want to know whether the hosts can ask questions at the teahouse. I'm asking because one can't know all. So he/she has to ask or read somewhere in order to know it. But can the hosts ask question here?--Pratyya(Hello!)03:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Pratyya....I do it all the time. The best way to learn to answer questions is to ask them, and you might as well do it here so our guests can see the answers too! Gtwfan52 (talk) 03:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
I can't see why not! Just click the link next to the picture at the top and be sure to read the Expectations page. There are some javascripts you may wish to install, but the instructions are all there! Welcome! Gtwfan52 (talk) 04:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Go ahead and be a host! I like pandas, so my picture is a panda. I'm a host and I ask questions. I even got a good host badge today :) I don't know everything about Wikipedia, but I judged myself as experienced enough to become a host. Does anyone think I am a good host? I notify people about the Teahouse and welcome new users sometimes. JHUbal27Roar!04:33, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I wanted to add some text and information to an article but I did not want to delete the original. How can I be sure that the original will stay ?Bob7527 (talk) 09:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bob. I'm not sure if I understand your question, but if you click the "edit" button, it should show you the full plain text of the page. As long as you don't delete anything from that text, nothing will be deleted from the page, so feel free to add information anywhere in the article body.
A very useful resource is the "Show preview" button at the bottom of the edit screen. Clicking it will show you how the page will look after your edits, so you can make sure nothing is being deleted on the page by your changes. The "Show changes" button right next to it might also be useful, as it shows exactly what changes your edit will make to the article.
Article titles can be changed via page move, but not by editing the article directly. If your account is not autoconfirmed, you will need to ask someone else to perform the move for you, or request to be confirmed at WP:PERM. Otherwise, anybody can perform a page move. —Rutebega (talk) 04:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
How to flag an article that reads like an advertisement
Is it possible for an editor to flag an article that reads like an ad? Where can I find documentation on markup for the standard issue flag types?
Sivamoira (talk) 22:04, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
A short article I have written has been rejected, because the content is said to be "unverifiable". Since everything in the short piece is entirely factual, and states plain fact about works which are published and in print, I don't see where I am going wrong.
I have written another article, The Aerodrome (poem) which is along similar lines, and was accepted straight away, though another, The Turnip-Snedder, which, as far as I can see is extremely similar in content, was rejected.
Hi Jason, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm sorry Hasteur wasn't very helpful; I may have a word with him about that. He is correct though in that content on wikipedia must be sourced, even if it's completely obvious. For instance, our article on the sky has four reliable sources showing that the sky is blue (and why), even though anybody can look up on a clear day and see what color it is. All content on Wikipedia is like this, because something that's obvious to you might not be to someone else, so we require articles to be sourced. You should probably read our verifiability policy if you haven't already, and if you need any more help with sources or anything else, don't hesitate to ask us. —Rutebega (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Actually, things that are patently obvious to everyone (like the sky being blue) don't need sources. But it is true that most things need to be verifiable in reliable sources. On top of this, we generally need to be convinced that things on Wikipedia are important enough to be included in an encyclopedia - what we call 'notability'. Just because a poet is well-known doesn't necessarily mean that everything they have written is 'notable'. So reliable published sources help to prove something (such as a poem) are widely known. For example your article The Aerodrome (poem) cites a book source that discusses the poem, which seems to have convinced the AfC reviewer to accept your article. Sionk (talk) 23:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jason! Short poems, even by very notable poets, often don't have enough discussion about them in secondary sources to have notability as separate articles. You could, however, consider just adding the material to the relevant collection. (Or in the Rilke case, perhaps the original collection?) As long as what you write is uncontroversially sourced to the poem itself, there shouldn't be a problem with lack of references in that context. Perhaps someone else will come along later and add more information from sources you don't have access to. Hope this helps, Espresso Addict (talk) 03:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
deleting photos
Good morning. I'm a new user and have been having several problems uploading photos....they will upload to wiki media, but not to wikipedia. I want to delete my photos and try again since everytime I try to upload something, it says duplicate......can someone please help me. RichardCacioppo (talk) 16:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
If you have a "freely licensed" photo, it is supposed to upload to a site called "Wikimedia Commons" at commons.wikimedia.org. You're probably doing it right! To use that file on Wikipedia, do the same thing that you would do with a file uploaded directly to Wikipedia - copy its filename and put it in brackets. Here's an example - this file is on Commons - I can use it here by typing thumb (the |thumb= is a size/behavior setting, you can also use pixel size) and it'll show up, like so (you should see an Iowa flag on the right, though the Table of Contents is bumping it down). Hope this helps! – PhilosopherLet us reason together.19:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry if this has been answered before: when I go to the Contributions tab, I see a list of the edits I've made in Wikipedia. What are those green +(numbers)? What are they called and what do they mean? Muromi (talk) 16:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. The green numbers on your contributions page are the number of bytes you have added to a page (bold text is for contributions of over 500 bytes). The red numbers are the same except they indicated the number of bytes subtracted from an article. Does that help?KingJakobC216:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
What do Wiki users think? Do you think Henry Lowood deserves his own wiki page or not?
Lowood is a librarian at Stanford University and had contributed to Machinima. He headed a project named ‘How They Got Game’. The history and preservation of digital games, virtual worlds and interactive simulations as new media forms now emerging together, was the main focus of the overall project.
I would like to know what your thoughts are on Henry Lowood. ClaraRoperClaraRoper (talk) 16:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Clara, welcome to the Teahouse! The first question I would ask is what independent reliable sources can be found that discuss Henry Lowood in detail. For example, newspapers, magazines, books, academic journals. What is there out there? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I did a google search for him, and judging by what comes up, I would say he is probably not notable, but I'm not 100% certain, so if you think he merits an article, go for it.KingJakobC216:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
A question about frag movies as an article.
Hello. I'm a student on a digital media course, which I've linked to in a tag at the bottom of this question. My question is whether or not frag movies should have their own page, or if they should just be outlined in a subheading on either the Machinima (Virtual Filmmaking) page or the Frag page, and if so why they haven't been outlined already.
This article was the subject of an educational assignment in February 2013. Further details are available here.
Could you please provide us with a few links so that we can figure out the context of your question. I'm fairly sure most readers here will not have the faintest idea what a "frag movie" is. Roger (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure if by links you want actual frag movies or definitions of frag movies, but I've got some very incomplete writings on the subject on the sandbox of one of the people that I'm collaborating with. JPeachman. If you want specific examples of frag movies, I'm happy to provide those as well.
Hi RStoakes. Basically, like everything on Wikipedia, this boils down to sources. If multiple, reliable, independent sources have written about frag movies (as distinct from machinima generally), the Wikipedia would support an article on them. So, for example, if you can find a couple of newspaper or magazine articles that discuss frag movies as a genre, you can go ahead. However, if all you have as sources are examples of such movies, or, say, forum posts between enthusiasts or frag movie creators, that isn't enough to sustain an article. The most basic expression of this concept can be found here, but you may want to read the general inclusion requirements and the guide to reliable sources as well, for extra information.
If you have sources which attest to the existence of frag movies, but aren't sufficient to support a standalone article, you could consider adding the information to the general page on Machinima instead. Yunshui雲水11:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
The stated reason for the removal of the material is "too many additions and too much POV". I have reinstated the material that has been removed. All reinstated material is supported by external links, which I have listed in the reference section for ease of consultation.
FactfinderMalta (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi FactFinderMalta, welcome to the teahouse. The other editor felt that your additions compromised the neutral point of view of the article. (As an example of why they might think that, can you explain why you felt the picture of the person should be replaced with part of a piece of political literature from a past political campaign?) The best thing to do when there is a disagreement about whether material should be included in an article, is to discuss it on the article's talk page. I've reverted your changes so that you can do that. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:53, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Muscat's biography introduces him as a politician and his listed history begins with his years as a journalist. When he ran for election to the European parliament, Muscat had been a journalist of several years' standing who was strongly opposed to Malta's EU membership. The suggested image is iconic and defines him as a politician and as a journalist.FactfinderMalta (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey FactfinderMalta, welcome back to the teahouse! Did you see my suggestion above about discussing disagreements on the talk page of the article? Well, I've opened a discussion there, to further help you in doing so :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:44, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Josephthal to Yoseftal - a question for someone who knows Hebrew
I have created a redirect from Josephthal to Yoseftal, and explained why.
One of the people with that name is Senetta Yoseftal - she is written Senetta all over Wikipedia (she was a Member of the Knesset, the Israeli Parliament) and her actual name was Senta, and is written Senetta because of transliteration issues from the Latin alphabet to the Hebrew alphabet and back again.
Outside Israel she was known as Senta but she can't be found under that name on Wikipedia. This may not seem important but I care because I was related to her and I loved her.
Is it OK to create two redirects - as Senta Josephthal and Senta Yoseftal, both possible versions of her name Michalsuz (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Why was my photo removed and how can I get it back up
I uploaded a pic of the present members of the music group I'm in (The Celtic Fiddle Festival). It was deleted because, apparently, there is another pic available. I don't know of any other free use pic with the current members. I own the rights to the pic I uploaded, I credited the photographer. WHy was it taken down and, if whoever took it down knows of another one why not put that up in its place?
Hey Kevin :) Welcome to the Teahouse! Most likely the reason it was deleted is because you in fact don't own the copyright. If someone else took the picture, they own the copyright. For example, if I go take a picture of Barack Obama at a public speech, he doesn't own the copyright, I do. It's my choice to release the picture. What you'll need to do is go to WP:Donating copyrighted materials and have the actual photographer send an e-mail releasing it under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 or GFDL license, or anything more copyleft (CC-BY, CC-0, Public Domain). If the photographer won't agree to one of those licenses, then we can't use it. Make sure you tell the photographer that the licenses in question will allow the image to be used by anyone, at any time, for any reason, even commercial purposes, with so little as a hyperlink back to the original file (on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons) and a similar license. If the photographer will agree to that, then have them send the e-mail, re-upload it after they send the e-mail and put {{OTRS pending}} on the page. Otherwise, as you have shows in public, we'll need a free image under one of those licenses. Sorry for all the trouble! gwickwiretalkedits02:40, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, you uploaded it as fair use in a situation where fair use is not allowed. If you have permission and are willing to upload it with a free license then it can be used, but note that this will also allow others to use it. Template:Di-replaceable fair use doesn't claim a free image is known. It only says "a free image might reasonably be found or created". The messages at User talk:Burke89 say "could be found or created". If the four people are still alive and performing together then a free image might be created at a later performance, or might already exist somewhere without being known to us. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
My photo of myself was replaced with a place filler of space. Is this a copyright issue or something else, as I owned the copyright. Tomswainson (talk) 10:45, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Can you help me with an article please?
I'm working on this article and I was wondering if my sources establish notability. I'm nowhere near done, but I'm sure the subject is notable, as it is a kids show on national television. Can anyone please help/offer suggestions? Thanks. JHUbal27Roar!00:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello, JHUbal27! I did take a look at the sources you've provided, and I think you're on the right track. More will be helpful, of course, but you did find one really good one - the news story about how the show is filmed in Holland, Michigan. That one should provide a lot of information, as a good Wikipedia TV show article doesn't just talk about the show itself; it also goes into how it's produced, what impact the production has had, how the show has been received, etc.
Also, when using references, make sure you place the citations in-line with the comments they are meant to reinforce. I know you said this was a work in progress, so I encourage you to be bold and keep at it! Feel free to visit again if you have any other questions!
Thank you! I know to keep the citations in-line, and as you said, I'm still working on it. I would move it into the mainspace when I'm done, but I want to have it accepted at AFC. Thanks again. JHUbal27Roar!20:46, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Adding YouTube videos to articles
Dear editors,
I am new to Wikipedia and I am editing an article about Culture of Second Life as part of an assignment at university. Could you link YouTube videos as part of the references and within the article itself? Thanks for any feedback.
Hi Rosiesievers20, and welcome to the Teahouse. As a general rule, we avoid linking to YouTube videos on Wikipedia. This is because YouTube's content is entirely primarily user-generated, meaning that it is considered unreliable for statements of fact. They also often contain material that violates copyright, which we naturally do not wish to link to - and depending on the video in question, including them in articles could also constitute a breach of the video-maker's copyright. Some video files are also too large (over 100MB) for Wikipedia to accommodate.
To add video media to Wikipedia, you would need to upload it to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons yourself; instructions on how to do so (and the technical requirements for such media) can be found here. Yunshui雲水13:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
The idea was mentioned by someone in the discussion, but I am not bold enough to do it without further input. (It also seems to be a bit complicated.) The discussed item is a part of the process for a main page item, so it seems high-profile enough to not be left up to a local consensus. 88.88.165.222 (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Quotes from other Wilkepedia Articles?
If adding detail to an article, am I allowed to copy/paste a few sentences someone else wrote for a different Wilkepedia article? Rivka3 (talk) 04:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Rivka3! Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, of course you can! What must happen, though, is that the attribution for the work is maintained, so it's possible to trace who wrote it. For short additions, this is usually done informally by putting in the edit summary something like, "Adding information from Article". It's important to get the exact title of the article and to make it a wikilink (by enclosing it in [[]]). For more than a few sentences, it might be best to use a note on the talk page as well explaining what you've done; again the article needs to be wikilinked. Hope this helps, Espresso Addict (talk) 05:00, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
This is one of the issues that confuses editors. The attribution in the edit summary was correct as the other editor has stated and it is also best to add a link to the same article you juts edited in that edit summary so it is something like "Content from [[Article title]] was copied/merged into [[Article title of page material was merged into]].
This is the minimum requirement. The step should never be forgotten and if you do, it can always be made using a Dummy edit afterwards. The reason this is needed is to insure that the attribution is always in the history and not just on the article talkpage. But you can add the attribution that way as well with the [[copied]] template and filling in the parameters.Amadscientist (talk) 05:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Article constantly being checked and pending for removal later.
Hey everyone,
Please help me develop the article Alex Gilbert. I have tried to write up something good but it keeps on getting changes and now it has a deletion warning. I feel this should be a growing article and should not be deleted. Please have a look here - Alex Gilbert Thank You! Makethingsbetter456 (talk) 04:29, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Makingthingsbetter. Unfortunately, this article is no where near meeting the standards for inclusion here on Wikipedia. None of the sources are what we consider reliable sources. Without reliable sources, there is no way the article can meet the standards for inclusion. Would you like it moved to articles for creation so you can work on it at your leisure and not worry about it being deleted? Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:14, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
How can I correct a misspelling in my pages title? The page represents a large real estate development that has undergone a slight name adjustment.98.203.120.145 (talk) 01:55, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I wanted to see the message you get when you try (but fail) to post a link that is blocked by the spam filter. I went to the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist and chose one of the first supposedly blocked items on that list. I then went to a random article and typed out what looks to me like a proper link to the one I had found, expecting not to be able to save and see the error message, but I was able to save the link (I would have removed the link immediately but cluebot reverted me in about a millisecond [in fact, when I tried to undo the edit, I ended up reverting cluebot]). Anyway, why did this link work? 108.54.26.164 (talk) 23:53, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, welcome to the Teahouse! All entries at MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist start with \b which indicates a word boundary. See Regular expression#POSIX character classes. The entry says \b1choicedating\.com\b which blocks http://www.1choicedating.com. Your test included the 'b' and said http://www.b1choicedating.com. This is not blocked because there is a letter and no word boundary before 1choicedating. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:28, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
How to help an editor who is doing the wrong thing, but not responding to messages?
User 117.197.144.236 ([1] | talk) wants to create a page for an Indian company called "Golden Sparrow". He is trying to do this on the Golden Sparrow disambiguation page. I reverted his changes and put a polite message on his talk page telling him why and what he needed to do instead. I also explained what I was doing in the history comment for the change. But he re-added his material to the disambiguation page. I believe he isn't seeing the message I left him, or the history page, but instead just thinks WP is undoing his work at random or in error. How should I proceed here? I could go ahead and create the page he wants, but since he provides no references, I have concerns about notability and self-promotion, and would rather he did the page himself (if at all). Of course, he may abandon his efforts, but I am still interested in how one handles the general case of someone who persists in doing the wrong thing through inexperience, and who cannot be reached through normal channels. ubiquity (talk) 22:07, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. I believe that if the user is disruptive (but acting in good faith), short-term blocks can be issued (that is on Wiktionary, I'm not 100% certain if the same rule applies here). Another possibility is, if you're certain they're acting in bad faith and trying to promote the company, to report them to the Spam Noticeboard, but I'd recommend assuming good faith until they do it one or two more times.KingJakobC222:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Because they're editing from the same IP address they'll get the big yellow "you've got messages" message, so I expect they'll have seen the advice. Whether they've understood it is another matter. Their first language may not be English and, even if it is, they may not fully understand the Wikipedia jargon. If the IP adds the information again (probably when it is Wednesday on the Indian subcontinent) maybe leave a very simple message telling them to create their article using the Article Wizard. Sionk (talk) 22:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) There are other factors to consider though, such as language, technical skills, and intelligence. WP:COMPETENCE blocks are rare, but they do happen and are acceptable in certain situations. If the user just can't take a hint, a short block may be necessary. Try to the best of your ability to communicate with the user before you seek administrative attention though. Good luck, and happy editing! —Rutebega (talk) 22:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I want to improve The Singularity is Near. So far it has two really long summaries of 2 chapters, and nothing much on the other 7 chapters in the book. My thought it just slim down the 2 existing sections, and do lighter weight summaries of the next 7. But I think I read somewhere that chapter-by-chapter summaries are frowned upon? For a dense non-fiction book, I don't know how else to do it. So first question is how frowned upon are chapter-by-chapter summaries, and second what is the better way, how do you pull it off? Thanks. Silas Ropac (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Welcome back to the Teahouse, Silas Ropac! Yes, chapter-by-chapter summaries are frowned upon because they bog down the article. It's only a minor no-no, however. To start off, I would probably combine all of the chapter headings into one under "Overview" and add {{Plot}} to the top of the article. Then I would "trim the fat". This would involve cutting down anything not integral to the understanding of the story. Since you say they are leaving out the other seven chapters, I would include quick notes about that. For a book as dense as The Singularity is Near, I think that seven paragraphs maximum (which would level out to a paragraph a chapter) would be a nice size. Happy editing! öBrambleberryofRiverClan22:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
How to report vandalism/ testing
I have tried to follow the available instructions on how to report vandalism or testing on live articles but as yet I haven't been able to figure it out. I won't be offended if you explain it as you would to a child!Jodosma (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jodosma! Lots of people make changes to articles just to see that they can do it. Unfortunately, there's also a fair number of people who want to cause problems and make changes to articles that simply aren't correct. Here's how I generally handle such incidents.
If someone makes a change that doesn't entirely work, sometimes I'll see what they're trying to do and fix it myself. Other times, I'll revert or undo the change. Then I'll leave a note on the editor's talk page letting them know what happened. In this case, it's always best to assume good faith and believe that the person was well-meaning. As such, I leave a simple note telling them that I've fixed their test, and leave it at that. There are templates to help you with this, such as Template:Uw-test1.
On the other hand, if someone's truly being disruptive, and has done so repeatedly, the notices become warnings, alerting them that if they continue, they may find their ability to edit the encyclopedia blocked. One such template is here: Template:Uw-vandal4. If the editor still won't quit, it's unfortunately time to report them to the administrators. Head to this page and follow the directions. If the administrator agrees, the editor's privileges are blocked for a period. This is not punishment; it's meant to protect the project from damage.
If you get comfortable enough with using the project's automated tools, consider adding Twinkle or Huggle (I use Twinkle, myself). These make leaving notices easier. I hope this answers your question, but feel free to ask for more details!
Sorry to do this am a total newbie to the wiki game so have a broad sort of question.
A quick bit about me - I used to run the music department for Christie's in London, before running my own auction houses selling instruments etc. In other words I am a bit of a violin nerd.
Before selling my old company I had commissioned from one of the experts in the field (John Dilworth), a dictionary of violin and bow makers. One hasn't been written for nearly 70 years and it was about time.
I am now dropping small biographies from the book into my website (www.amati.com) and they are widely respected. I would like to drop links to these in Wiki, but don't want to look like an Uber-Spammer!
Is there a line I shouldn't cross - I am aware that there are no-follows, so will not benefit particularly from these links - but I want people to have the correct information; there are too many old references with incorrect info out there.
Hi Bucky. We always appreciate accurate information. However, from what you say above, there's no need to link to your website at all - you can simply cite Brompton's Dictionary of Violin & Bow Makers itself as the source. We don't require that information be available online in order for it to be a valid reference; as long as it's somehow available to the general public, it can be cited. Yunshui雲水11:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Dear Yunshui,
Perfect thank you. The advantage of linking is that I put in some images of the makers' instruments. But thank you I think that clears it up - I don't want to appear like a one trick pony, only ever citing one source, but as long as someone is prepared to warn me if I get tedious.
Bucky2012 (talk) 11:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello Netbrock. Welcome to the tea house. It is certainly better to have more references and good quality reliable sources at that. A fact supported by only one ref might later be removed as having undue weight relative to its sourcing. A lot depends on the type of fact being established. Some are straightforward and might be clear from one source while things that are more opinion based may need citing from a number of authorities. Linking to other pages is a matter of judgement as to what is likely to be useful to the reader. There is no set number required and no point in linking common words that will be understood by most people. There is a minimum number of incoming links from other pages, three I believe, needed if the article is not to be classed as an orphan. I hope this helps. Feel free to ask more questions.--Charles (talk) 09:53, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Thankyou, this has given me a better understanding of referencing and wiki links,
I'm just getting going with editing articles, and I have a personal preference NOT to see comparisons to other products, sites, associations, etc. I'm thinking of editing the Google+ entry because it makes too many references to Facebook, for example Google's +1 being "similar to Facebook's 'Like'" is that a fair edit, or OTT?
Dougscottlee
(talk) 06:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
But don't worry! Everything they're telling you is a suggestion for making the article as good as it can be. After reading the article, the key seems to be that we need additional third-party reliable sources. Has this gentleman ever received coverage from, for example, a major newspaper (like the New York Times, Dallas Morning News, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, etc.) or a major news source (like CNN, NBC, ABC, etc.)? If not, he may not, unfortunately, pass our general notability guideline. According to that guideline, in order to be notable, one must have received multiple instances of coverage from a reliable source beyond a trivial mention. That said, the article doesn't have to be solely about the person. I will take a look on HighBeam Research, a news archive, to see if I can find anything. Why don't you check out Google News or something similar? Maybe he's in a book at your local library. I have never heard of him, but that's not to say, necessarily, that he isn't notable. I will let you know at your talk page if I find anything on HighBeam. Good luck! Go Phightins! 19:09, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
.
