Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 96

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 90←Archive 94Archive 95Archive 96Archive 97Archive 98→Archive 100

Adding Further Reading Section

Hi, I'd like to add a Further Reading section to an existing article but can't find any instructions on how to do so. I've never edited before.

Thanks!

63.245.137.92 (talk) 02:38, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I would create a header like so: ==Further reading== towards the bottom of the page, then provide the materials in a bulleted list (asterisk and a space before each item). Then list the items in a generally accepted citation style, perhaps with the use of a citation template such as Template:Cite book if so inclined.—Strachkvas (talk) 05:29, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
An example of what to type would be:
==Further reading==
* Smith, Alex. ''Book Title.'' Publisher Name. May 13, 1976.
* Jones, Taylor. ''Another Book Title.'' Another Publisher Name. August 27, 1968.
The "Further reading" section should go before the "External links" section but after the "References" section. – 29611670.x (talk) 05:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Rewrite

How do I get a large number of editors to visit my userfied page User:Redddbaron/Holistic management or my talk page, so I can get a consensus as to whether or not my rewrite now meets wiki standards, or needs more work? A couple people have been helping me, and the article no longer resembles the original at all, but the original page was deleted and the page is now a redirect. Which isn't good at all, because it redirects to a biography of living persons page. A "management system" is not the same as "the person who originally mainly developed the system". Redddbaron (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I just ran the citation bot (which cleans up reference links) and ran some simple wikEd formating adjustments. The article looks okay to me as far as format and style go. It is reasonably cited and seems to offer both sides to the topic making it appear neutral. I would suggest at this point you be bold and replace the redirect with the new article. If you need help with that, I would be happy to do it for you. Technical 13 (talk) 21:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes please, I don't know how to do that, or even if I should without consensus? But so far two people have looked at it and both say it is fine now.Redddbaron (talk) 21:19, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for everyone's helpRedddbaron (talk) 03:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

3RR and edit war attention

How do I elicit senior editors to review disruptive, not representative, repeat revert (3RR) edits in Breast Cancer?32cllou (talk) 16:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! I think you can report such violations to WP:AN3 but you should first leave a note on the talk page of the edit warrior(s). King Jakob C2 16:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! I placed the notice on his Talk, and will proceed with the AN3.32cllou (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

A fellow editor on Wikipedia told me to get the copyright permissions correct from an image. How do I get the permissions correct?

From, Secondhand Work (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to Kirby Bliss Blanton section on your talk page. What Milowent (talk · contribs) is saying is to make sure that you read up on requesting copyright permissions when uploading non-free content and make sure that you apply the correct image copyright template for your image. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 15:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Archiving

How do I go about archiving my talk page when it gets full? FOX 52 (talk) 14:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Have you had a chance to check out WP:ARCHIVE Yet? Technical 13 (talk) 15:03, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I have now, Thank you FOX 52 (talk) 16:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Censorship & double standard of editing?

Dear fiends,

I'm new to Wikipedia and need your advice. My first attempt at contributing ended in an administrator accusing me of "vandalizing" and blocking my account. He was very territorial about a certain webpage he seemed to protect in the interest of a resourceful British law firm. He finally told me I should go and draft an article on a separate page but not "mess around" with the existing one. When I tried exactly this, the result was someone else deleting this page because he felt the content was "too promotional". Now the thing that is shocking me: this new entry was actually written in the same style and structure as the other one.

So either there is random admin behaviour or some are "more equal than others". What course of action do you recommend? Is there a way to restore my initial belief that Wikipedia is about free sharing of knowledge?

Looking forward to any ideas.

Best regards, EU lawyer EUlawyer (talk) 16:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! You should be careful to avoid advertising. If you can write about an article from the point of view of someone who has nothing to do with the subject, that would be a good start. If you can do that and find enough reliable sources to establish the subject's notability, no one will mind you recreating the article. If you click on this link, you'll find a place to work on the article in relative peace. When you're ready to publish the article, you can just go to the little gray arrow next to the edit button and click "move" in the resulting dropdown menu (note: if your account is less than 4 days old or has made under 10 edits, you won't see that option, but you can ask someone else to do it in that case). Happy editing!
King Jakob C2 16:57, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
I believe this discussion from the help desk archives is related to this question, if any of the answering hosts feel like they need some background on the situation. Chamal T•C 16:59, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, EULawyer. Please be more cautious about throwing round phrases like "censorship". If Chamal has correctly identified the issue, then the problems you had were that you were wrongly assuming that the article in question was a general one, rather than one on a particular subject. It sounds like the subsequent problem you had was that you were writing about your own company, an activity well known to be difficult to do successfully (see WP:COI). I suggest you read WP:CORP and WP:BESTCOI. --ColinFine (talk) 15:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Templates...again

How can I create a template for a dancer, with background color and stuffs?  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:32, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Miss Bono. Do you mean one of those templates one often sees on the right hand side of an article which contains a picture and other information? If so, you might try using {{infobox dancer}}. However, I don't know how to change the colors. Maybe someone else does, if it's possible. (Changing colors is sometimes inadvisable because of accessibility concerns; see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Color.) In any event, you would place in the article, at or near the top, the following
{{Infobox dancer
| name          = 
| image         = <!-- Name.jpg (do not place "File:")--> 
| birth_place   = 
| alt           = 
| caption       = 
| full_name     = 
| birth_name    = 
| birth_date    = <!-- {{birth date and age|yyyy|mm|dd}} or {{birth date|yyyy|mm|dd}} --> 
| birth_place   = 
| death_date    = <!-- {{death date and age|deathyear|mm|dd|birthyear|mm|dd}} -->
| death_place   = 
| height        = 
| occupation    = 
| years_active  = 
| current_group = 
| former_groups = 
| dances        = 
| website       = <!-- {{URL|website}} -->
}}

Fill in the parameters after the equal signs with the pertinent information for the person. You can simply leave blank or even remove any parameters that are inapplicable. If you meant something else, please advise.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

{{Infobox dancer}} does not permit styling customizations. The template that {{Infobox dancer}} uses, {{Infobox person}}, does allow it; however, I don't recommend an inexperienced editor try to use this template. What I would recommend for you Miss Bono, is to ask one of your WikiProject colleagues if they can help you get it set-up, and then just add the information that is needed. Good luck! Technical 13 (talk) 23:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, Miss Bono. I'm going to disagree with Technical 13 this time. Check the essay Thinking outside the infobox. Feel free to experiment in your sandbox or the sandbox and testcases pages of any infobox (listed on the very bottom of the template's page). Read Template HELP to learn how to really mess up, sorry, how to customize templates. No harm is done as long as you're in a sandbox. Almost all existing templates are protected; only administrators may edit them. That's why you see a View source tab instead of edit. New editors bring new ideas for improving Wikipedia. Miss Bono, a colleague can probably set up an infobox for you a lot faster than you. When that's done, you still won't know how to set up an infobox. My opinion is to go for it. Make mistakes in your sandbox and learn how to fix them yourself. Put in some bare dates and somebody will come along and explain subtemplates for dates. Mistakes don't harm Wikipedia.
Be Bold. Try customizing some templates in your sandbox. If they look good and work there, they will work in a mainspace article. You won't break anything. Templates are protected. I do ask that you view your customization with at least three different browsers, perhaps Firefox, Internet Explorer and Chrome or Opera. If it looks OK in the two dominant browsers and an alternate, it's good to go. Let others know about your brilliance in article and template talk pages. Expect resistance from those who don't like change and congratulations from others who like what you accomplished. Consensus will be reached; both you and Wikipedia will be better for your efforts. Just my opinion. Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 01:09, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks!! Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:51, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Creating new articles

Hey everybody! Simple question. This is embarrassing but, How do u create a new article? please help me as I am a new member of Wikipedia and have only done some minor edits and I really want to help contribute to wiki. thanks, Haneen Khan (talk) 13:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

See the Search box at the top of the page. Search the article you want to create. If it exists then no need to create. but if doesn't then you'll get a suggestion and under the suggestion you'll get your searched content in redlink. Click that and start your article. Hope this helps you.--Pratyya (Hello!) 14:03, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Also see the tab searchbox and give your article directly like en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your content.

Then you'll see

  • Start the *** article, using the Article Wizard if you wish, or add a request for it.
  • Search for "***" in existing articles.
  • Look for pages within Wikipedia that link to this title.

These three lines.

Click the first line to start your article.--Pratyya (Hello!) 14:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Haneen. I'd strongly recommend you use the Article Wizard, which will take you through the process of creating an article step-by-step, it's far easier than trying to do it all in one go in mainspace. Just click here to get started. Good luck, and feel free to ask for help if you need it. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

THANK YOU Yunshui and Pratyya for those really helpful responses. I really appreciate them :) Haneen Khan (talk) 14:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

But Yunshui, I was helped by someone the same way I recommended Haneen when I was a newbie. Can you please explain why you asked him to use the Article Wizard?--Pratyya (Hello!) 14:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Replying on your tp, Pratyya. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Haneen. Welcome back to Wikipedia. I suggest that find a featured or good article on a similar topic to the article that you will write. If you intend to write an article about Pakistan, go to WikiProject Pakistan and look for the table showing FA and GA articles. Click on the number in the Total column for a list of those articles and scan over a few of them. Use an article as a sample as you write. If you will write about a person, go to WikiProject Biography and scan high quality biographical articles. I find that imitating good writing helps improve my writing. Take care, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 15:56, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much everybody. Really. And thank you for giving me some important tips on creating an article, Doctree. Haneen Khan (talk) 16:42, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Documents as a Reference

Hello All,

I have a letter, written by the head of a government department, signed by him, on official letter-headed paper, giving an organisation official credence. Is there a way that I can use it as a reference?
Under freedom of information it would be available to any member of the public, should they choose to pay the exorbitant fee. After 30 years it would be openly available for a greatly reduced fee. I just don't fancy waiting 30 years to create the article.
So is there a way to do this? To get Wikipedia to recognise it as a source? Kiltpin (talk) 13:03, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
If the organisation is truly notable, it will have received extensive coverage in numerous published reliable sources, so you won't have to rely on unpublished material. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:10, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
David's right, if the subject meets Wikipedia's notability requirements then you should be able to find suitable sources in addition. However, if you do wish to cite the document as a source, you can - Wikipedia's rules do not require that sources be free, only that they be available. If a member of the public could (at least in theory) get their hands on the document, then it can be used as a source. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:22, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you both for your swift replies. I shan't use the letter nor shall I submit the article. I have to admit, to more than a little bitterness about this whole procedure. Wikipedia's standards of notability have risen dramatically over the years and it is no longer good enough to be a prince to get an article - you have to be a king now. I believe that Wikipedia's almost total reliance on internet referencing just cheapens and damages it. In the real world it is vox populi that matters. Kiltpin (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I think you have misunderstood, Kiltpin. There is no requirement that the material be available on the internet; it merely needs to have been published. Books and reputable newspapers are perfectly acceptable even if not available on-line. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Nor has there ever been such a requirement.--ukexpat (talk) 16:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I understand perfectly well, David. I asked if it were possible and the subtext was, that if it were, how to do it. The answer I got was "If the organisation is truly notable, it will have received extensive coverage in numerous published reliable sources, so you won't have to rely on unpublished material." Well, frankly that is exactly the kind of dance I am getting across at AfC. Chanting not notable, not notable, not notable is not a recognised form of encouragement. Enough, I am going back to Commons and do some real work. Where, I have to say, the standards are clear cut and we all understand what is required of us. If this sounds bitter, it is because I am. Kiltpin (talk) 17:26, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
i sympathize, however a letter is a primary source, and secondary sources are preferred. if you want to use it, put it in external links, or upload it to commons as a jpg, (assuming there is not crown copyright), and show the image of the letter. keep in mind that this is an encyclopedia, a tertiary source for subjects of general interest. it's not an avenue to supplant, but to supplement the academic or journalistic process. (i'm bitter too)Slowking4Farmbrough's revenge⇔ †@1₭ 14:06, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, Slowking4. Just what I needed to know. Kiltpin (talk) 08:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikikids

Hi,

I'm working again on meta on the m:Wikikids proposal for a new Wikimedia Sister Project (which is for some language adopting an existing project into Wikimedia). English is not my firt language, so I would be glad if you can check my english (or even ask question and tell what you think is missing).

I've recently made these pages :

Thank you for your help ! Astirmays (talk) 06:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

"Writer",Author"or"Editor"

I have a book called "The Sieges of Pontefract Castle". No author is given, only an Editor (Richard Holmes), (who collected many diary extracts from many sources. If I cite this as a source, should I say "Holmes, Richard (Editor)" or just "(Holmes, Richard)" Jodosma (talk) 20:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Jodosma, and thanks for stopping by. I would use the former if you're citing it as a general reference. If you are using a specific article or chapter or essay within that work, and that bit has a known author (for example, Holmes may be the editor of the entire volume, but the individual works compiled in it have their own authors) then you would cite the specific article and its author. What I usually do is something like this:
  • Doe, Jane. "On the use of FOO in BAR." Collected Essays on Foo Bar, Richard Holmes (Editor). New York: Gotham University Press, 2001. (using MLA format)
You can also use a template like {{cite book}} which contains separate fields for authors and editors, and will format the reference for you. --Jayron32 20:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Much obliged Jodosma (talk) 20:26, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

A training page for researcher

I'm fascinated by this Wikipedia: Training [1] for newcomers, educators and students. I'm currently working with an agricultural research institute. We always want to encourage researchers in our niche to contribute to Wikipedia. I would like to create a similar page like the above-mentioned, but target to the agricultural community. Where and how can I do that? MKwek (talk) 07:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the TeaHouse. I suggest that you head on over to Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture which is where all the agriculture stuff gets worked on. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Closed Articles for Deletion discussions and AfD article tags

If an Articles for Deletion discussion is closed by a non-administrator with a result of keep, but the article's AfD tag is not removed, will an admin eventually sort out the tags "automatically"? Wind Music Awards' AfD nomination was withdrawn and the discussion archived by the nominator, but I'm hesitant to deal with the article tags because I both contributed to the article and voted to keep it. (Not to mention that the {{Old AfD}} template's comment states: "For administrator use only" ☺) Thanks, – 29611670.x (talk) 05:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi 29611670.x. There's no "automatic" process for this; despite the "For admin use only" note NA-closes should be properly completed by moving the {{Old afd}} template and removing the tag on the article. I've cleaned up the problem in this instance, thanks for flagging it up. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. – 29611670.x (talk) 07:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

There are a few claims in this page that I tried to find substantiation for, but couldn't (The offered citation is a broken link, not such article appears when doing a google search of title).

Can I remove the information itself, or should I simply mark it for another more important person than me to come along and check it?

This is the line in question: " Ballistics tests proved the bullet that killed the boy was not from Shakur's or any members of his entourage's gun". I added a 'citation needed", but wasn't sure the exact protocol. It's been a while... Tupac_Shakur#1990.E2.80.9392:_2Pacalypse_Now.2C_police_brutality_and_shooting_in_Marin_City

Goldendelicious1 (talk) 02:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. After doing a bit of research, I have found this [2] and have replaced the citation needed template with it. And the way you have added citation needed is wrong. You do it by adding {{cn}} instead of typing in citation needed plainly. By this way you can get a [citation needed] which is better than the previous one. And with this edit you added [citation needed] since you couldn't access the source. But we actually add {{dl}} which will give [dead link‍] which is better in that case. Hope this helped you. If there are anymore questions, just ask us. --Ushau97 (talk) 09:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your response. I notice the citation you found and added still has no actual proof. It's the exact same claim made in the wiki article, but in a book with no corroboration. Conversely, there is already a news article linked in that section which states the opposite about ballistic tests, and there are quotes from his lawyer saying he doesn't deny it was his gun. To be honest, the book you cite as a source does not appear reputable to me, since it gives no proof for it's claim. I would like to remove the claim entirely, since it isn't a proven claim, and there is substantiation in an actual news article, with his lawyer agreeing, that the ballistic tests proved it has indeed his gun. I consider a news article far more trustworthy than a book with no citations compiled by a fan.

Goldendelicious1 (talk) 17:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree that what I added isn't what we call a reliable source. So I have replaced it with a cn until it's clear. And if you have got a news article which is a WP:RS, please do add it as a source and change the line. Or you could start a discussion at Talk:Tupac Shakur. Article watchers and other editors who are interested will join the discussion. Cheers! --Ushau97 (talk) 12:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Title of an article about a documentary

I'm not sure if this is the place to post but I have no Wiki account, so I wanted it to not stay like that. Can you change title of this article? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Dragon_%282004_TV_series%29 It says TV series in the title but it should be TV movie. It consists of only one part 99 min video. You can check it from IMDb, which is also listed on the same page as source. 85.101.239.174 (talk) 03:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome! I've moved the page to The Last Dragon (2004 film). Here are some instructions on how to request page moves (title changes). – 29611670.x (talk) 04:07, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

deleted info needing retrieval

Hi, i made some updates to the R/GA wiki page but they have gone. not only have they gone but an entire section that was previously there has been removed. How can i get this restored to how it was?

thanks,

george

Griffwell (talk) 15:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Griffwell, welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse! History isn't lost on Wikipedia; there's always a way to look back at what's been done. For this, all you need to do is click on the "View history" tab at the top of the R/GA page; this will give you a listing of all the edits made to that page. If you click on the timestamps in the list, you'll be able to see what the page looked like at that time. As far as your edits go, it looks like they were removed by an editor named User:Smartse in this edit, due to sourcing and promotional tone concerns. You should definitely try to discuss the issue with them, either on the article's talk page or on his user talk page. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Pictures from books

Can I scan pictures from a book I purchased to my computer and use it on Wikipedia and create my own copyright of the picture? (Monkelese (talk) 21:55, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Monkelese, and thanks for stopping by The Teahouse. No, you cannot. A scan of a picture is a Derivative work. There are two issues here: if you create a faithful reproduction of a copyrighted work, and make no modifications, then you create no new copyright (by U.S. law, which does not support the Sweat of the brow doctrine), so the copyright on your digital scan is owned by the original copyright holder. Wikipedia cannot use such scans, except in very limited cases known as "fair use", which are way to complex and detailed to go into here, but which you can read about at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. But in basic terms, no, scanning a photograph doesn't grant you any copyright on the scan. A second issue is if you creatively modify the scan in such a way as to overcome what is known as the Threshold of originality, that is if you creatively change the picture; if you do so you create a new copyright but you do not invalidate the old copyright. Basically, the new derivative work is now dually copyrighted, to you and to the original creator. Wikipedia also cannot accept these works, as the work is not wholly your own. Wikipedia can only accept images which
a) the creator has previously licensed under a "copyleft" license which is compatible with Wikipedia's own licenses, which are cc-by-sa and GFDL,
b) which have entered into the public domain either because the copyright has expired or because the creator specifically designated them as being in the public domain or
c) newly created, never before published works which the author has created specifically for use at Wikipedia and has also agreed to license under the terms of cc-by-sa and GFDL.
Any other works you find, where the copyright is owned by someone else (or where you cannot unambiguously prove that it is in the public domain or properly licensed) are not allowed at Wikipedia. Wikipedia basically assumes that all pictures are under copyright, and it is the responsibility of the uploader to establish that they can be used at Wikipedia; if they cannot then the uploaded picture will be deleted. You can also ask questions at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions which is a noticeboard designed to handle exactly this kind of question. I know this answer was a bit wordy, but copyright rules are Wikipedia are a bit arcane and complicated, so you need to tread carefully and fully understand what you are getting into when you upload a picture. The safest (and easiest) assumption to work under as a new user is that if you didn't create the work (either draw it yourself or push the button on the camera yourself) then it's probably not eligible to be used at Wikipedia. Does that help answer your question? --Jayron32 22:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
yea thanks (Monkelese (talk) 22:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Jayron has it right, but there is an important exception regarding old books. If the book was originally published in the United States before 1923, then copyright no longer applies. You can scan whatever you want from such books, and upload them to Wikimedia Commons. I've done this quite a few times. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
That'd be point "b" I made directly above. Sorry it got buried, but I did state pretty much exactly that. --Jayron32 05:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I've taken the liberty of slightly re-formatting your earlier reply, so that the points which you were making are more clearly visible. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Jayron32, your answer was spot on. I was just trying to highlight the 1923 date, since I think that is a useful and easily understood distinction for new users, especially those like me who hang out in used book stores. There are great images in books published 90+ years ago, which we can freely use in Wikipedia. Sorry if my addition implied your answer was not correct. It was, as far as I know. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Mistake in naming a file

Hi. I uploaded a 30 sec audio file to an article on a band to demonstrate their sound and realized after i uploaded it that I had named it incorrectly and now cant figure out how to change the name of the song. Robvanvee 17:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. The best thing to do is add {{Rename media|Name of file|Reason for renaming}} to the file's description page (that's what you get if you click on the file). King Jakob C2 17:22, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Robvanvee, the file can be moved just like any other page to the correct name. However, only admins and file movers can do this. You can request the move at Requested Moves (see response above). Alternatively you can simply tell us the correct name here, and I or another admin can move it for you. Chamal T•C 17:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the responses. I tried, but couldn't figure it out. Would appreciate it if someone could sort it out and i will review history afterwards to see how it's done. The file is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:%22Chameleon%22_by_Boo!_from_Seventies,_Eighties,_Nineties,_Naughties.ogg (cant seem to link this). The title I incorrectly named it is "Chameleon". It should actually be "Champion". Any help would be much appreciated! Robvanvee 07:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Done, it's now at File:"Champion" by Boo! from Seventies, Eighties, Nineties, Naughties.ogg. (As an aside, to create a link to a file without actually embedding the file, just previx it with a colon, like this: [[:File:Picture of a kitten]].) Yunshui 雲‍水 08:03, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Awesome thanks so much guys! Robvanvee 12:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

How to Use This

Template: Find sources Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Miss Bono! I've never seen that template before, but from checking 'what links here' and poking around a bit it looks like the template is used on WikiProject task lists and article talk pages a lot, to help people find sources for articles that need improvement. It provides an easy way to query Google and other search engines. Hope that helps! - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 19:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for Comments that are closed

What about articles where a controversy was resolved by consensus, but since then other sources have shored up the losing position? How do you re-open an RfC in light of new sources?

Michelledavison (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Once an RfC is closed, it is closed. THat being said, there is no reason you can't open a new RfC with a link referencing the old one. Make sure to include all of the detail about the new sources and why you think the outcome should be different in light of those sources. Technical 13 (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I will do that. Michelledavison (talk) 17:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Why was my article declined?

Hello! This is my first time using teahouse and my first time trying to write a Wikipedia article. I am writing on poet Mihku Paul. Can someone give me any helpful feedback on getting my article to stick?Rsp28 (talk) 15:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! The reason that your submission was declined is because Mihku Paul already exists, of which yours is a near exact copy of. You should instead make your edits to the page directly instead of trying to "re-invent the wheel" so to speak... Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 15:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Where should I post reviewing questions about mainspace articles?

Dear editors:

I've been reviewing articles in the Articles for creation queue for the past week or two (did you miss me?) and asking questions at the talk page there. But sometimes I also need some reviewing help or second opinion on mainspace pages that have problems. Is there a talk/help page for this sort of thing? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

You can always ask here, WP:HD, WP:VPT, or at the AfC talk page (I watch and use all four and am sure others do too) Technical 13 (talk) 14:48, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Anne! If the article falls within the remit of a WikiProject then their talk page might be a good place to try, too. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:11, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you both for the advice. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Roll back and Vandalism

Dear editors:

When I look at lists of contributions of other editors, some of the entries have [rollback] [vandalism] written beside them. Others don't, and I never see that beside my own contributions. What is this for, and under what circumstances does it appear? — Anne Delong (talk) 12:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Revert and rollback may be of interest to you. If you still have questions, let us know! Technical 13 (talk) 12:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Anne. That sounds to me as though you've got Twinkle enabled. As part of its antivandalism funtions, it gives you a couple of rollback options on a page's most recent edit. Both do the same thing (revert the page to the last version that wasn't by the user you're reverting), but the "vandalism" one will open that user's talkpage in a new browser tab, to allow you to give them a warning.
If you haven't got Twinkle on your account, then I've no idea what you're seeing... Yunshui 雲‍水 12:38, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you both. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:09, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Good-faith edits by a relative of an subject

Senor Wences's granddaughter is having difficulty with his article. The latest example is here. You can find more in the edit history. I've reverted her most recent edit and directed her here or to the WP:Help desk, but I imagine a proactive contact from some who hasn't frustrated her by reverting her good faith efforts might be more likely to help. Thanks.

David in DC (talk) 11:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I have found a company that isn't listed in the Wikipedia Encyclopedia, how do I write about it?

Dear Teahouse

How would you recommend that I add to the Encyclopedia? As a long time user of the site I would now like to contribute to the site by composing an article on something absent from the site. May I freely write about the things that I have found out or is there another way to contribute a new page to the site, the article is related to education.

I have all the resources and references to make a great article. I need to get started but I find the site a little difficult to understand and navigate. Probably because of my age!

Thanks

AdamAcesap4 (talk) 16:12, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Acesap4, welcome to the Teahouse (and Wikipedia!)! To help you with your first article, you may want to take a look at WP:Article Wizard. There, you should be able to find all the help you need with links on how to create an article, and step-by-step guidiance as you create your article. If you still encounter any problems/not sure what to do, feel free to post more questions here at the Teahouse. If you use the Article Wizard to create your article, it needs to be reviewed at WP:AFC before it can be moved to the Wikipedia mainspace. Cheers. Arctic Kangaroo 16:18, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello Adam! Welcome to the Teahouse! You are certainly encouraged to contribute new articles, but it's important to make sure the topic of your article is sufficiently notable to be included in the encyclopedia. Basically the topic needs to have received detailed coverage in several reliable sources, such as books and newspapers, that are independent of the subject. (Press releases and advertisements don't count.) There are lots of guidelines to help decide how this is applied in practice, eg one for companies. Hope this helps and good luck! Espresso Addict (talk) 01:39, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

RELIABLE SOURCE??

GOOD MORNING people at the Teahouse, I am Back.... I need to now if this is a reliable source: "Dublin Daily Interactive"  Miss Bono (zootalk) 11:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back Miss Bono! Do you have a link to your source or a URL? A Goggle search for "Dublin Daily Interactive" didn't turn up anything. Technical 13 (talk)
It says DUblin Daily...  Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:03, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Are you referring to Daily Express (Dublin)? https://twitter.com/DublinDaily? I'm sorry, I'm just not finding it. What is it exactly? A newspaper, magazine, TV broadcast, ??? Technical 13 (talk) 12:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I think is that one. Let me ask Cullen328 Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Miss Bono is referring to a transcript of a 2003 interview of Morleigh Steinberg, wife of U2 guitarist The Edge. I found the transcript on a U2 fan site, credited to "Dublin Daily Interactive". There is no such site active now, but I've found them credited as a source on a few other stories on Irish topics. My hunch is that it was a short-lived Irish news website from about ten years ago. So, unless we can find the original interview, or a similar interview in a reliable publication, we can't use this transcript as a reliable source.Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
The Dublin Daily Interactive was once at dublindaily.com, but I guess they let their domain name lapse, and it has been taken over by a promotional company. I tried the Wayback Machine, which often can find old web content, but no luck. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
No goodies from WP:WebCite either. :( Technical 13 (talk) 13:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Titling entry

I recently moved a draft article out of draft stage, and it has the word Wikipedia in front of its title. How do I move it to where it needs to be so it doesn't have that? The page is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lorenzo_Scott Alison Watkins (talk) 06:50, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. It has been done already... Regards, Ariconte (talk) 07:02, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Alison, it was in the wrong namespace but I have moved it now. I didn't look at the article thoroughly, but there are a couple of issues at first glance. I've left a notice on the top of the page about it. Chamal T•C 07:14, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

help writing

please i need help in writing an article. i tried and my first article was deleted Netbelievers (talk) 06:07, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I would suggest working through the Article Wizard WP:WIZ <-- Click here. It will help you understand what you need to support the article. While the article in in 'Articles for Creation' space you will be given time to improve the article. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 06:20, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Images ommited when downloading as pdf

I am having a little problem with the "Download as PDF" option: some of the images on the page disappear in the pdf version. For Example, when using this option on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castlevania:_Lords_of_Shadow, the box art image at the top of the page does not make it to the pdf version. I was hoping you can help me with that.

41.33.178.179 (talk) 18:38, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome! Unfortunately, the box art will not appear in an exported PDF, as it is a non-free image; this is to avoid violating copyright. – 29611670.x (talk) 20:42, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

How long will it be before talk edits take effect in the actual article

Hey Guys!

I recently joined wiki as I came across some pretty shocking recommendations in the treatment section regarding jellyfish stings. As a college professor in Biology I was surprised to see recommendations that marine biologists and beach lifeguards strongly suggest not using. I edited the talk page of the article with proper recommendations and literature solidifying these concepts. I was wondering how long it would take before an autoconfirmed user integrated these changes? [AaronKampe]

AaronKampe (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

There is a backlog of edit requests, so it might be awhile. It looks like you will be autoconfirmed soon, so if the request isn't answered in the next day or two, you can put in the changes yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 01:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I am terrified to do much here

My mom and I have to use the same computer, although we do different things. I am new to Wikipedia and I just learned about something called sockpuppetry. How do I let people know that my mom and I are different even though we might appear at the same Wikipedia page at the same time--especially when we both have thoughts on the same subject? I have been reading about very strange and angry "editors" going after people and blocking their accounts for this sockpuppetry thing. I can't let my mom's account get blocked. What should I do to let people know that we are two different people though we have to use the same computer? (A few times I had to use her email account too, because there was a problem with mine.) Right now this seems like a very frightening place to gather knowledge. People are so angry and hurtful. Thank you. ForGreaterGlory (talk) 16:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi there ForGreaterGlory, welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse. Please take a look at WP:FAMILY for details on what to do and how to do it. It's best if both accounts disclose the connection to the other on your userpages. Although it does cause inconvenience in some situations, our policy on sockpuppets is necessary to keep Wikipedia running smoothly (or as smoothly as possible anyway). Chamal T•C 16:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, Chamal! Somebody's been hurting my mom, so I added that to my page. ForGreaterGlory (talk) 16:45, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Falce information

Hello all,

Please tell me, why do wikpedia allow falce information to be inserted about topic's, i have up dated the backhoe and backhoe loader and hydraulic excavator and crane wiki's, with true information, researched and proved, and yet it gets deleted, i have started a hymac page, and it gets deleted, please do not tell me a bot, deleted this on its own actions, these pages are being watched and controled by certain people, on behalf of a certain brand name, why would they keep inputing falce information over & over again. I await a true responce from a real person. Fred. Fredcolman (talk) 12:56, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, I'm a real person per your request, please give me a moment to review your edits and I will respond again shortly. Technical 13 (talk) 13:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Okay, on Backhoe:
    • This information is wrong, from our research, and inspecting the actual machines, Whitlock Bros Essex uk, Produced the first backhoe, on a massey ferguson 20, and then mounted on a fordon major,
      Photos do not lie, ckeck the wiki page whitlock diggers. so please do not insult us machinery followers and users, we are sick of marketing promos on this site, a fool will beleave any thing.
  • On Backhoe loader:
    • Please varify this information, if you can, because on researching the history of backhoe loaders,
      Mr JCB states he got the idea in Norway, and states the first produced was in 1957, yet i find a Whitlock backhoe fordson major mounted, ID BADGE dated 1955, and a Massey mounted backhoe preceded this, i also checked the id badge, To further my point i have contacted Mr Whitlock's Daughter, Trudie, and confirms the same, so please do not tell us machinery followers and users, wrong information and exspect us to swallow, do not embarase the good people. Do your research and then redo this page, because we are sick of it, let the asia boys make the falce claims of inventing this that and tat, est 1703 and all that you no what. get with it. jcb did not invent the world. Jesus is not also called a jcb in his spare time. Tahe note we have copied this page before and after editing, as proof if the same wrong information is re entered.
    • You then added a couple of redlinks to pages that don't exist yet (HyMac && Whitlock).
    • The backhoe loader was not invented by jcb, do not keep inputing falce information you know well is not true, whos puppet are you. Its well documented that whitlock[taken over by hymac 1972] pioneered the backhoe loader.
    • You then added an image gallery that looks like a test edit and an improper link.
  • on Excavator:
    • are also called diggers, JCBs (a proprietary name,
    • "Komatsu PW130-7". H.E. Services. Retrieved 13 April 2010.</ref>
    • A LiuGong CLG920D 21Ton Excavator
  • on your talk page:
Does that seem fairly accurate to you? If so...
Your discussion on Backhoe should have been posted on Talk:Backhoe instead, and I encourage you to post it there.
Your discussion on Backhoe loader should have been posted on Talk:Backhoe loader instead, and I encourage you to post it there.
The response you'll likely get for both of those is a request for a link to your reliable source that confirms your claims.
HyMac seems like a possibly notable company, and I will try to build an article for them (which you can watch at User:Technical_13/Drafts/HyMac). When I complete it, if it seems plausible that they "may" be notable, I will move it into article space (HyMac) and restore the link in the appropriate articles (Backhoe,

Backhoe loader, Excavator, Crawler, etc...)

I'm not sure why you attempted to remove the things that you did.
On your talk page, there were two events in regards to a copyright violation, which are not something taken lightly on this wiki. They quickly get deleted. You can avoid them by not copy and pasting from sources, but instead re-writing the information (without embellishing) in your own words.
After those, since the user that CSDed your article notice your edit count/contributions page is near empty offered you a resource to get some help and build proper articles. I'm glad you followed it an are here. :)
The last post offered you a little more advice because some of your previous edits, possibly could have avoided being revert if they were properly marked as minor.
I hope this helps, and feel free to ask any questions. I'm about to go out for a long breakfast with my family, but I'll be back later and I'm sure none of the other hosts would mind helping you out with your questions. Happy editing Technical 13 (talk) 13:44, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

References text entry

At Visual Analytics I inserted text identified with superscript 7. I get this error msg:


"Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named $1; see the help page."

I still can't understand how to enter the reference text, which should be, after my name (the 7): System and Method for Contextual Data Modeling Utlilizing Tags, US Patent 8,321,4759 (2012) and references, then a link to where they are, i.e. htp://www.execware.com. Help, please!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlistou (talk • contribs) 10:02, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Technical 13 (talk) 12:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Also, tagged WP:COI Technical 13 (talk) 12:34, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible to search by symbol?

Hi, I am trying to search all of wikipedia for any footballers with the Scotland flag icon next to their name, I believe it comes up on editor as 'Flagicon|Scotland' is there anyway to search this way and get a complete list of results? 90.200.223.178 (talk) 20:44, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome! I don't know if there's any way to do that, but going to Category:Scottish footballers should be just as good. Interesting question! King Jakob C2 21:54, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
I was just poking around and it seems most of them don't have the flag displayed on their page. I suggest using Jakob's suggestion. I suppose if you were hard set to see what ones use the flag, you could always use the "What links here" link int the toolbar of your sidebar from the flag file page or query the API for a list. Technical 13 (talk) 00:52, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I believe many flags in articles are placed by the template {{flagicon}}. Accordingly, I tried a search using the quite awesome tool Catscan2. I Can't post the results because there is no URL for a search's output, but I found 354 out of the 4,478 in the category that use that template. The search would be done by placing Scottish footballers in the field for "Categories", and flagicon in the field for "Has any of these templates". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Can I embed a PDF document in Wikipedia?

I would like to embed a PDF document in an article. The PDF document has interactive features. So when it is embedded, any person reading the article should be able to interact with the embedded PDF document. I believe this is possible in HTML with the <object>...</object> tag.

Can I embed a PDF document in Wikipedia? If not I think this would be a good idea. Thanks.

Regards, Jchionglo Jchionglo (talk) 19:40, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you want to simply link the article, or have someone be able to interact with it in the Wikipedia namespace. The former is definitely possible, just link it like you would anything else (inside of []), the latter, however, I do not believe is possible. Thanks! Go Phightins! 21:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
According to MW:Extension:PdfHandler#Usage you actually can, but only one page at a time. I've never done it, so I'm not exactly sure how it works, but the documentation says you add it to the page using the same syntax, arguments, and parameters as you do for an image. Technical 13 (talk) 01:01, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jchionglo. Do you own the copyright to the PDF document? If you don't, and it's not in the public domain or freely-copyright licensed with a license compatible with ours (note: we assume all works are non-free copyrighted unless there's actual evidence to the contrary), then you could only use it under a claim of fair use. I can't rule out that fair use would be impossible to make out here since we don't have the specifics but I think it unlikely.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Jchionglo. Jchionglo (talk) 14:11, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Want to bring wrong statement to attention of someone with law training

In the article "Double Jeopardy Clause" there's a statement that looks totally wrong to me. In the introduction, it says "Jeopardy does not attach in a retrial of a conviction that was reversed on appeal" I don't have legal expertise so I don't want to edit this. But it's an important wrong statement. So how could I bring it to the attention of people who can edit it? Puffysphere (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Puffysphere! Welcome to the Teahouse! One thing to do is to bring it up at the article's talk page. You do this by clicking the "talk" tab, and then using the + tab to create a new query. Another place to try is WikiProject Law, a group of editors who look after legal articles, again by asking a question on the talk page. Hope this helps! Espresso Addict (talk) 15:42, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I put it as a task in the Wikiproject Law.

I know about the talk page, but it doesn't seem like something that should wait until someone gets around to looking at the talk page.Puffysphere (talk) 23:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I've fixed it with this edit. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:57, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Emergency Answer Needed

Do we need permission for creating article about 'Person' ? If we are creating an article of a person and if the person doesn't want the same, what will be the option for that ? Is it possible to delete ? Mydreamsparrow (talk) 12:12, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mydreamsparrow. No, you don't need the subject's permission to write an article about them. As long as they meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and your article does not violate the biographies policy, you're good to go. If it's your first time writing for Wikipedia, you might want to take a look at Your first article for some tips. Best of luck, Yunshui 雲‍水 12:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your reply Yunshui. Mydreamsparrow (talk) 12:21, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

How do I get my page reinstated?

Hi, my page was deleted and I sent further information through to reverse the deletion but I now cannot see the deletion note or my response to it. How do I get my page reinstated? 94.5.106.8 (talk) 10:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi anonymous editor. Since you're logged out (and since the above question is the only thing you've ever posted with this IP) it's difficult to give you a precise answer, since we've no idea who you are or which article you're talking about. That said, you've got three main options:
  • Ask the administrator who deleted the page to restore it (they'll be listed in the deletion notice where the page used to be).
  • If it's an uncontroversial undeletion (e.g. a contested proposed deletion) you can file a request at requests for undeletion.
  • If it was deleted after a community discussion or for some other significant reason (copyright violation, attack page, BLP violation) then you will need to make a case at deletion review.
Of course, if you let us know what the page was called or your user ID, we can provide more tangible assistance. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:20, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello
Thank you very much for your response.
My apologies - I responded to the article below by mistake. My username was iwilltell09 but I recall that was not allowed because it sounded like self promotion. I suggested a new name but I did not get a response and now the entire deletions log page is missing so although I requested a deletion review I am not sure what the result was or the rationale for it.
Here is the page that was deleted - I Will Tell international film festival
The festival has been running for 7 years now and some of the comments made seem to indicate that because it is Christian-based that it is somehow not a real festival or that because there is a link to the page from the sponsoring company's website that it was not an independent festival. Neither of these is true. Also we have many new independent sources to meet the notability criteria.
I would be grateful for any help you can give on this.
Thanks Jenny 94.5.106.8 (talk) 10:30, 12 April 2013 (UTC) 94.5.106.8 (talk) 10:33, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Jenny, the article has been deleted twice. The first time round following a deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Will Tell international film festival) and the second time because the new version appeared to be little different from the previously deleted version. However these were three and four years ago so with seven years behind it, the notability of the festival may well have changed. I would strongly recommend you to start the article using the Articles for creation (AFC) process as any issues can be ironed out without the threat of imminent deletion hanging over the article's head. The other point is that it would appear that you are connected with the festival? and therefore may have a Wikipedia:conflict of interest. If so then don't hide it, be open about it and work as much as possible to write neutrally about the festival. Just because you may be involved with the subject, doesn't automatically invalidate your creating/editing an article but that you have to convinvce other editors that your edits are not promotional or show favouritism. Because of this, once there is an approved article (rather than a draft at AFC) I would urge you to step back from editing it yourself and contain your involvement to making suggestions for improvement etc rather than directly editing it. You can find more practical guidance on dealing with a conflict of interest at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Good luck. NtheP (talk) 11:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jenny, welcome to the Teahouse! I've looked at the article that was deleted and it looks to have no references independent of the festival. If you want to recreate the article you need to be sure to make it clear how the festival meets the encyclopedia's guidelines on notability for inclusion. This is usually easiest done by referencing books or newspapers that discuss the topic in depth -- in this case, major newspapers or film review websites that have discussed the festival in detail (not just film listings). You also need to choose a new user name for yourself that doesn't mention the festival. Good luck! Espresso Addict (talk) 15:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks everyone

I really appreciate your input.

I'll give it another go!

Cheers Jenny 94.5.106.8 (talk) 19:05, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_96&oldid=1138541859"