Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 990

Archive 985

←

Archive 988

Archive 989

Archive 990

Archive 991

Archive 992

→

Archive 995

Follow-up to Appeal Of Decline Of Article: Notability of Marisa McKaye

Teahouse isn't the place to appeal anything. This is a question and answer board on how to edit Wikipedia. Don't see that here. If you have a question please come by and ask. In short, no you're not going to bring this here. If you have a complaint about a specific editor acting outside of policy, make a report at WP:ANI. If you want to debate AfC policy, do so at WT:AFC John from Idegon (talk) 00:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

As there does not seem to be a clear appeal procedure, and it has even been suggested that each reviewer can make up new reasons to decline an article, I propose to put my case that the Draft:Marisa McKaye already meets the requirement of notability here, let the community debate it and, if proven to the contrary, I shall take down the Draft myself. Otherwise, I can only hope that reviewers will be guided by a consensus here. Those requirements for notability of a living musician, which I consider relevant to this Draft, follow: (1) the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. Marisa has been one of the most prominent performers in metro Nashville. Proof follows: (a) (b) I only mention these two because they are: (i) totally about Marisa (ii) have no connection with Marisa or her family (iii) independently edited not open to editing by the public Actually, covers an event where 9 young artists were playing: but they only chose to mention Marisa's name, as notable. williamsonsource.com is independently edited, not open to editing by the public and independent of Marisa and her family. Note: I was not aware that imdb.com was editable by the public and have removed that source from the article. (2) performance in a television show Marisa performed in America's Got Talent in 2017. Proof follows: (a) (b) Again, these articles are: (i) totally about Marisa (ii) have no connection with Marisa or her family (iii) independently edited not open to editing by the public (3) inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. Marisa was included on the Homegrown Kids Vol 1 and Homegrown Kids 1990s albums - a source that is verifiable, not connected with Marisa or her family and not open to editing by the public Further annotation of the meaning of notability for a musician, which the above sources comply with, follows: Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. The published works must be someone else writing about the musician, ensemble, composer, or lyricist, or their works. The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself have actually considered the musician, ensemble, composer, or lyricist notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries. What constitutes a "published work" is deliberately broad, except for the following: (1) Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.<ref group=note /> (2) Works consisting merely of trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories. The above sources are reliable, independent, published (on the internet) about Marisa and are neither press releases by Marisa, advertising nor trivial. There is the evidence of notability, according to Wikipedia's own published requirements. Marisa is not notable only for one album or one television show appearance but both of these things plus her status as a star in Nashville. So, given the above evidence in reliable, independent, published sources, already cited in the Draft, what is the problem with notability? Pequena Princesa (talk) 20:32, 31 July 2019 (UTC) References

Editing a current list

Hi, I`ve tried to add a name to a current list and somehow the added name appears next to the current list rather than incorporated in the list ? On the edit page all looks fine, but preview and publish are completely different ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.18.154.68 (talk) 02:57, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't know exactly what problem you were having, was it with List of wineries in McLaren Vale? Table syntax is tricky. Since they were single-column tables, it made more sense for them to be bulleted lists, so I converted them to that format. Maybe you will have less trouble now. Eman235/talk 03:16, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

How to create an article on mobile?

So, I am trying to make the article New Chicago, Montana translated into French. Even after searching, I still don’t see an option to create the French version.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.175.177.14 (talk) 04:38, 1 August 2019 (UTC)‎

Hi IP 72.175.177.14. A good person to ask about editing using a mobile device or smartphone might be Cullen328. He wrote an essay about it titled User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing; so, perhaps he might be able to help. I've WP:PINGED him about your question, and he often answers questions here at the Teahouse.

You can translate articles you find on English Wikipedia into other languages, but you need to be aware of WP:TRANSLATEUS when you do. While it's true that most of the content found on Wikipedia has been released under a free license, there are still some steps which need to be taken to comply with the terms of that license.

You should also understand that French Wikipedia and English Wikipedia are separate projects with their own resepective policies and guidelines; so, if you want to add something to French Wikipedia, then you will need to make sure that you comply with its policies and guidelines. Although in many cases there's not much difference among projects, there are still differences that need to be taken into account. An article written about something on English Wikipedia doesn't automatically mean that and article should be written about something on French Wikipedia, and vice versa. If you're able to understand French, then you can probably get more specific assistance about editing on French Wikipedia at fr:Wikipédia:Forum des nouveaux or maybe at one of the pages listed at fr:Aide:Accueil -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:16, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I am a highly active editor and the vast majority of my editing in the last six or seven years has been carried out on a succession of Android smartphones. I have been an administrator for the past two years, and almost all of my adminstrative actions have been carried out on my smartphones. The very best advice that I can give is to scroll down to the bottom of the mobile site, and click on "desktop site". Forget, if you can, that you are editing on a phone and think that you are editing on a miniature computer. Because you are. Hold the phone close enough that the screen fills your field of view as it would when using a desktop computer. Yes, you will be typing on a tiny screen but billions of people do that without difficulty every day on messaging apps, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and so on. The fully functional desktop site works just fine on 2019-era Android smartphones, and I recommend that you ignore the mobile site and the mobile apps, and use the fully functional "desktop" site only. I wish the WMF would drop the misleading "desktop" moniker. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:45, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Presidential candidates nationality?

It seems the nationality of all the candidates except Yang is American. He is listed as Chinese (which I think would make him ineligible). Since he was born in New York he is still American. Are we confusing nationality with ethnicity?--2602:306:3aaa:b5d0:a052:4589:4ad2:442e— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3aaa:b5d0:a052:4589:4ad2:442e (talk) 04:00, 1 August 2019 (UTC)‎

Hi IP 2602:306:3aaa:b5d0:a052:4589:4ad2:442e. The best place to discuss something like this would be at Talk:Andrew Yang. Perhaps you have noticed something others have missed, but it's also possible that there's a reason for listing Yang as Chinese. Either way, discussing this on the article's talk page is likely going clarify things faster than here at the Teahouse, will make it much easier for others editors interested in the subject matter to comment, and make it much easier for a record of any discussion to be found just in case the same question is asked by someone else at a later date. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:24, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Which page are you referring to? Andrew Yang does not contain the words Chinese or China. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Review of revised submission waiting several months

I submitted a contribution which was rejected on April 25, 2019. I made changes/corrections in May, but I have not seen a second review of my now changed submission for: Draft:Takashi Inoue (author). What do I have to do to get it reviewed again.

Regards, Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul LaValla (talk • contribs) 03:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@Paul LaValla: Hi there, to just get it reviewed again all that's needed is waiting. The draft submission rate has been extremely high for the last couple of months, so the backlog has been growing. Some drafts have been in for 14 weeks.

You can continue to improve the article in the meantime, obviously checking over what got it declined last time. However, I see that Eman235 has just done some copyediting work to smooth the article out, which should help with that. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Why do one not also get hits in other languages than the one one do the search in

With a powerful encyclopedia as Wikipedia, there is a need for a generated hit list also in other languages than the one one do the search in, since some subjects may reside in one language only, while more important ones could have several entries in different linguistic versions of Wikipedia. E.g. when I do a search in the Swedish version, it would be very helpful to also get hits in the other Scandinavian languages (and of course even better in all languages). This would increase the value of Wikipedia, and at the same time keep it small and focused, since e.g. a hit in one of the Scandinavian language would be enough for certain authors and artists, while more famous authors and artists need entries in two or all three main Scandinavian languages. (In Scandinavia we understand Swedish, Norwegian and Danish). Are there a specific reason not to get hits in other languages than the one one do the search in, or do the monolinguisticality of English lie behind the decision to limit a search?

Cut-up (talk) 15:59, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Cut-up You would do such a search at Wikidata not here. Each language Wikipedia is actually a seperate website, while Wikidata is a shared database that cross-indexes pages at all Wikimedia sites. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:57, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Cut-up: You should probably address your question to the Swedish, Norwegian and Danish Wikipedias, rather than English Wikipedia, if multilinguicity (is that a real word?) is important. To be frank, I would hate it if every search I ever did here came up with multilanguage results. That said, wouldn't it be fantastic if, having got no results on one's home wiki, the search tool then offered a prompt to search for that topic on other language Wikipedias? Don't forget that another way to find alternative language articles is via the 'languages' links in the lower right side of the page in 'desktop' view. It shows you all the available languages that that topic has been written in in the available Wikipedias. (As an aside, I often wish it would flag articles size or class there, so I could find the largest/best foreign language article to visit first.) If an article doesn't exist in the language you want, another way to look for and find Wikipedia articles in other languages is to do a Google search for the relevant term, followed by the word 'wiki'. I find that helps me a lot, and I hope it does you, too\. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Using 'wiki' would find wikis other than Wikipedia. If you want to search Wikipedia from Google, use the qualifier site:wikipedia.org (or site:en.wikipedia.org if you want to restrict to the English Wikipedia). --David Biddulph (talk) 00:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Whilst you're quite right, David, I never bother. I find it easier to quickly look through a few extra results than it is to type more complex and accurate search criteria. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:06, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Dodger67, Nick Moyes and David Biddulph (and others), thanks for your answers. I forgot to write that what I meant was when I do not get a hit in the actual language, e.g. it would be of great help if an entry is absent in Swedish to get a list of hits in German, French or the other Scandinavian languages, and even Italian or Spanish would do, since I might be able to decode these languages as well. Of course, very many entries are not the same in different languages: dog, chien, canem would not generate any hit for a search on the Swedish word ”hund” (even though the German word: Hund is the same, and would), but other entries are the same in different languages, not least names. I do not think such a general search for words would generate very long lists, and in case they do, a suggestion is to include a search command that says search all languages (as well). For me that knows many languages, and live in a region where our languages are very close, such a function would be extremely helpful. As you can see, my aim is general, and not limited to Scandinavian languages. Best Cut-up Cut-up (talk) 09:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello

How do you send a draft for review. It's called Caroline Islands Air. ThePacificMan (talk) 08:38, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse ThePacificMan You need to click the large blue button that says "Submit" but before you do that you need to find at least three good independent,reliable sources otherwise it will be rejected straight away as not notable. Theroadislong (talk) 08:58, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Okay cheers. ThePacificMan (talk) 09:00, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello again ThePacificMan, I simply assumed yesterday, that you would review what I did on the other article and realise what was needed. My bad. Teaching a person to farm would definitely have been better than sharing bread in this instance. So, the template information is at Template:Submit. The gist of it is you copy the code {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page you want to submit for review. It also allows adding the username in case you have to submit for someone else, but that's a lesson for another day. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 10:01, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Facing problems in creating a wikipedia page

My Wikipedia username is amlan46 and I have been trying to create an owner page related to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Buddha_TV, but the page has been deleted after review. Kindly, help me in the creation of the page as Sharad DAhiya is the owner of Lord Buddha TV and the information that we provided for his Wikipedia page is a 100% authentic. If you want, you can check that on this link: https://www.lordbuddhasharnam.com/about-us/.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Amlan46 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

This has already been answered at the Helpdesk. Do not spam the same question across different locations. - X201 (talk) 07:17, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

The article and link you provided both state that Sharad Dahiya is managing director, not owner. It is unlikely that this status is Wikipedia criteria notable. David notMD (talk) 11:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposing Changes on Talk Pages

I wanted to propose changes to an article on its Talk page without publishing them until getting comments, so I pressed "Show Changes" and not "Publish Changes." A day later, my proposed changes on the Talk page have disappeared. Does this mean I should have pressed the "Publish Changes" button on the article Talk page to save the changes and that doing so would not publish them to the Article page? Will appreciate your help. Bleve51 (talk) 12:20, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@Bleve51: yes, unless you click "Publish changes", nothing will be posted - that applies to all Wikipedia pages, including articles and talk pages. "Show changes" only shows you what the change will look like if you publish it. You are not the only one to find those terms ambiguous and unclear... --bonadea contributions talk 12:24, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

content

how do i make a page about myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dizzie dogg (talk • contribs)

Hi Dizzie dogg, and welcome to Wikipedia. As a general rule the answer to that question is 'you don't', as you probably do not meet our notability guidelines, and you would be better off creating a blog or a social media profile about yourself. However, if in fact you are somebody who has received substantial independent coverage in reliable secondary sources then perhaps you could have a Wikipedia page made about you. In that case you need to be very aware of our WP:COI guidelines and in particular our guidelines on writing about yourself. Your best bet would be to submit a proposal to articles for creation so that it can be assessed by experienced wikipedians before publishing. Hug^syrup 12:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Question about Mission for non-profit organizations

HI,I am editing the page for the Asian Cultural Council : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Cultural_Council I have a question about adding the mission of the non-profit. Can I add it verbatim (does it need to be in quotes?" or should I explain it in a paragraph. I've been looking at similar institutions but they have different methods. I think it would make the most sense to add it verbatim in quotes instead of trying to re-word it, which might detract from the specificity of the words they chose when creating it. Thanks. SG4.14.7.170 (talk) 14:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

As long as you can find out it is in quotes and cited, it should be OK. Interstellarity (talk) 14:44, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello anon. Wikipedia generally does not include mission statement and slogans. These are rarely meaningful in any lasting encyclopedic sense and seldom tell us anything other than what clever sounding string of words an organization's public relations team put together. If you want to add content to the article, you should concentrate on what secondary published sources say about the subject, and not very much, if at all to what the organization says about itself. GMG^talk 14:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Timeline guideline?

Hi, is there a guideline as to how to format a timeline in a history section? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.14.7.170 (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:Timeline. Interstellarity (talk) 15:00, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Help in adding information to an article

Hello Wikipedia editors,

I'm an independent scholar and I would like to make an addition to the Wikipedia entry on the German historian, Georg Gottfried Gervinus. This would be my first editorial contribution to Wikipedia and I find the instructions regarding citations/footnotes to be confusing. I would appreciate some help in making the addition, which would go at the end of the current biography section. Here is the addition:

Gervinus was a close friend of Georg Friedrich Fallenstein, the father of Helene Fallenstein, who would become the mother of the famous scholar, Max Weber. In her biography of Weber, Marianne Weber, his wife, writes that Helene was sexually molested and probably raped by Gervinus, who was living upstairs in the Fallenstein household after Fallenstein’s death. The biography describes Gervinus as a “fatherly friend” of Fallenstein’s daughters who regularly read Homer to the girls in their youth. “When she [Helene] was 16,” Marianne Weber writes, “a chaste, closed bud of a girl, Gervinus, whom she respected as a teacher, loved like a father, and had trusted for years, one day lost control of himself. The aging man suddenly engulfed the unsuspecting girl with the searing heat of a passion beyond control. She was torn by horror, disgust, pity, and her old grateful devotion to her fatherly friend and teacher. Because her nerves were delicate, she came close to a breakdown. Helen never got over this shock. From that moment on she regarded physical passion as guilt-laden and sub-human. Even when she was an old woman, the memory of that experience would bring an expression of horror to her face.” Soon thereafter, the biography continues, Helene met Max Weber Sr. Engagement soon followed, and Helene subsequently described their marriage (which over time would become an unhappy one) as having saved her from the trauma of the Gervinus assault.

Here is the citation for this addition:

Source: Max Weber: A Biography, translated from the German by Harry Zohn, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1975 (originally published in German 1926), p. 20-21.

Any help appreciated. Note that there are no clear instructions here as to how I should receive responses to this inquiry.

Doug Hill — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barkalounger (talk • contribs) 14:47, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

​I fixed the reference errors. The problem was you wrote <ref [...] /ref>, instead of the correct syntax <ref> [...] </ref>. I also used a "named reference", because the same source was cited twice; you can read about that technique here. Eman235/talk 15:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Removing an image

Hi There

A question about images. How does one remove a image from a draft article if you don't want the image or the image section in the article anymore? Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Keith_Bothongo

Thanks

Falconfw (talk) 15:06, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@Falconfw

@Falconfw:  I have removed the image. Interstellarity (talk) 15:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

my first article on wikipedia

Hi. I found myself writing this article on an Artist from Copenhagen called Jan Klein. I just started working in an art gallery and I was quite surprise that this well known artist doesn't appear on wikipedia. So I eventually started working on it by myself although looks like more complicated then I thought. Do You have access to my article? Can anyone explain to me in simple words what shall I work on exactly? which part do I need to improve? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ErinaEffe (talk • contribs)

@ErinaEffe: Check out H:YFA. Interstellarity (talk) 15:52, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Article rejection query

My first article on wikipedia is rejected citing the reason it did not meet the notability requirements. When i posted a query regarding this i got a reply as your first priority should be to find reliable sources to get it published. I have one doubt, i have come across few articles which does not have any source references anywhere. still the page is live wikipedia. And few others, they have some references, but those are just mentions. so, what is the criteria in approving articles? Here i have provided 2 sources and i got reply as those 2 are also not reliable. the sources which i provided is purely independent and no where related to our company.--User:Stylus123

Hi Stylus123 and welcome to the Teahouse. Some of the other articles without references should be deleted. Others should have references added. The argument that WP:Other articles exist is not accepted here as a good reason for adding to the count of unreferenced articles. Wikipedia's WP:Notability rule requires that the subject has been written about at length in WP:Reliable sources. Of your two "references", one seems to be a listing in a business directory (this establishes existence but not notability) and the other doesn't seem to mention the subject at all (perhaps it has changed since you used it?) LinkedIn is not a reliable source since it is user-generated like Facebook. Dbfirs 06:34, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Stylus123, Wikipedia currently has 5,897,007 articles and all experienced editors know that a significant percentage of them are of very poor quality. Perhaps one million articles. Editors work very hard to either improve or delete these poor quality articles all the time. Using the existence of poor quality articles to justify the creation of even more poor quality articles is a logically weak argument. Instead, you should write only high quality articles and either improve or work to delete the poor quality articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:27, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I have one more query. There is a message showing in my talk page, which says, article may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. what is this and what i have to do in this? coming specifically to my article, can you explain what exactly the policy violation happend in my content, so that i can rectify it.

A more important message on your Talk page is "Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by User:Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." Another message states: "For notability purposes, you need multiple sources (not just one), which are reliably published (so no blogs or personal websites), which are independent of the company (so no company websites or press releases), and which devote significant coverage to the topic (usually taken to mean multiple paragraphs). You should also be aware that Wikipedia strongly discourages edits about a topic with which you are personally involved, due to the conflict of interest this creates. If you have any financial relationship with the subject of an article, you must disclose this in line with Wikipedia's Terms of Use; failure to do so will result in you being blocked from editing.".--Quisqualis (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you User:Quisqualis for your reply.

how to change title in sandbox

I'm trying to put in a new title because I don't like the old one and I cannot figure out how to edit. I found a way to add in Sandbox wizard, but I can't get rid of the old. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshuaLewis24! (talk • contribs) 16:28, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

If you mean User:JoshuaLewis24!/sandbox, the deletion log shows that it has been deleted as promotional and also as a copyright violation. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:39, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

How does Lua work?

Excuse me but how does Lua work? I need to know all of it. I know some of it already. Can you please teach me the rest? Thanks, Mr. Juicyfun ^{(Obliterator time!)} 17:18, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey Mr. Juicyfun. This is a place for asking questions related to contributing to Wikipedia. For general knowledge questions, you may want to try Wikipedia:Reference desk instead. GMG^talk 17:20, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't know Lua, Mr. Juicyfun, but one thing I can tell you is that it doesn't work in common.js files. Those are JavaScript-only (see Wikipedia:User scripts). (Which is not to say that it's not used by Wikipedia: see Wikipedia:Lua.) Eman235/talk 17:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I know it doesn’t work in common.js files. Mr. Juicyfun ^{(Obliterator time!)} 18:04, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

See mw:Extension:Scribunto/Lua_reference_manual. Ruslik_Zero 18:45, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

What exactly are Page Reviews?

Hello, Longtime reader, brand new editor here.

I've had multiple of the pages I've created reviewed, and just recently had my user page reviewed. I get the peer review system, but I'm just curious about what exactly having a page reviewed means. Are the reviews something I can read, or does simply getting a page review notification and nothing else mean it has been approved? And why was my user page that contains a grand total of four words reviewed? And, finally, what does it mean if a page I created that is clearly in the mainspace not having been reviewed mean?

Glad to (at last) an active member of the Wikipedia community! ANDROMITUS (talk) 19:39, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey ANDROMITUS. We're glad to have you here. The main thing that a review does is allow a page to be indexed by search engines. Before a page is reviewed it has a thing called a "no index" on it, which makes it basically invisible to things like Google. When a reviewer (a group of experienced volunteers) looks over a new page, they try to determine that it doesn't have any major problems, like copyright violations, defamatory content, or just content that is totally not appropriate for an online encyclopedia. Then they just click a button and mark it reviewed, and that lets you find it easily on the internet in general. GMG^talk 19:46, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for the help in getting my first Wikipedia edit in shape. Much appreciated! Barkalounger (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey Barkalounger. Welcome and thanks for helping out. You may want to consider taking our interactive tutorial at The Wikipedia Adventure, which can help get you oriented to how a lot of stuff works here. GMG^talk 19:52, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Orphan

I have a new bio on Wikipedia and see that I have been labeled an "orphan" I have a colleague who sites me in red font as one of his "influences" on his Wikipedia bio. Can this be an external like to my Wiki bio and thus make my name appear in blue so that the link is established?

Please help me with... Establishing this link and any other advice to enable me to graduate from "orphan" status. Thanks

BBbb0528 — Preceding unsigned comment added by BBbb0528 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Can you give us a link to the biography of you, and also to a link the article on your colleague who mentions you? --David Biddulph (talk) 20:42, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, BBbb0528. Please note that it is Wikipedia's article about you, not your article, and you are strongly discouraged from editing it directly, and the same applies to your colleague - see COI and AUTOBIOGRAPHY. The article about your colleague, like the articl,e about you should not be based on what he says or wants to say about himself, but almost entirely on what people who have no connection with him have chosen to publish about him. --ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, an orphan is an article that has no other article linking to it. As far as your name appearing as a redlink, I suspect you are referring to your username; if so, that means you have not yet created content for your user page (User:BBbb0528). Keep in mind that your user page is not an article and is not for a biography (some background info is fine); rather, it is intended as an introduction to other editors, and a bit about your editing interests, etc. —107.15.157.44 (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

New to this

Hello, I am very pleased to have joined this community.

I support the work that Wikipedia does, and while I have not previously done much in the way of editing as part of my job I am now required to make sure that information on the organisation (the renew party) that I work for is up to date and accurate. I have submitted a page for the deputy leader of my party as a 'trial run', I would be very appreciative of any help, tips, pointers or feedback that anyone is able to provide. I have added a COI note to my user page as per wiki guidelines, however I just wished to make sure that I do not fall into any common traps that new editors make. Thank you for your time and I look forward to contributing to this community. -JB — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesAB1 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello JamesAB1. One piece of advice regarding your connection to the Renew Party is to carefully read Wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest. --Quisqualis (talk) 16:42, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, JamesAB1 and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that I am going to suggest a couple of traps which you have already fallen into. One is to believe that you have the power to "make sure that information ... is up to date and accurate". While Wikipedia also wishes all its articles to be up to date and accurate according to information in reliably published sources, nobody controls an article, least of all somebody associated with the subject of the article. As you know from looking at information about COI, you are welcome to suggest edits to an article, preferably with citations to reliable published sources; but whether and how your suggestions are taken up is outside your control. In particular if you want information added which has not been reliably published, or information removed which has been, you are unlikely to be successful.

Secondly, I would caution you (and anybody else) against using the phrase "a page for", and substitute "an article about". While "a page for" is not an unreasonable way to refer to a Wikipedia article, I believe it can turn one's expectations in the wrong direction.

Third, I started looking at the references in Draft:James Clarke (Politician): the first is to Wikipedia, which is never allowed (see CIRCULAR); the next two are to business directory sites: these are not regarded as reliable (anybody can edit them, or set up a profile); the fourth is clearly based on an interview or press release; the fifth mentions his name, and does not even say what his role is. After that I gave up. The thing to remember is that Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that the subject says about themselves, whether in their own publications or websites, or as reported from interviews and press releases: it is only interested in what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject. It may be that some of your later references are on the money; but a large number of poor quality references is deleterious to an article or draft. --ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I have made changes to the draft article I submitted based on your advice. Thank you for the warm welcome. Certainly a fair number of blunders on my part. I understand that maintaining a database of knowledge on this scale must require a tremendous amount of work, and it certainly doesn't help to have to deal with sub-standard research. I genuinely am very new to this, and I understand that I will make mistakes, sorry. I will work on getting up to speed with the Wikipedia editing documentation, but you have been very helpful in clarifying the expected standards for a Wikipedia article's references. JamesAB1 (talk) 22:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting

Hi, is it okay, to link Category:LGBT people from the United States to the redirect page of Devon Erickson?. --181.27.173.57 (talk) 19:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I took a quick look at that page and can see no justifiable reason for putting STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting into that category. As neither of the two people named in the shooting is notable, this would not be an appropriate thing to do. For a category like this, I would expect only individual notable people to appear in it, not events. So please don't. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:04, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Contributing to Project Management and Data Science

Hi All, I got some time and thought of contributing to fields of my expertise viz., Project Management, Data Science. I tried searching and doing some edits but, wondering, is there a recommended way? Can I direct find articles which need improvement by categories? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎LetLive (talk • contribs) 04:23, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi LetLive. First, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Expert editors. Specilized knowledge about a particular subject matter is always welcomed, but it's not required and doesn't grant anyone any special editorial control over any articles which fall within their field of expertise. As for where you might find articles about subject that interest you, one way might be to go an article article like Project management or Data science, and scroll all the way down to the bottom and look for the categories the article has been added to; similar articles are often categorized the same way and you be able to find lists of similar articles on the various category pages. Just click on the blue category link and it will take you to the relevant category page. Another way it to check the top of the talk page of an article and see if there are any WikiProject banners displayed. Similar articles often fall under the scope of the same WikiProject and WikiProjects are often where you'll find other editors who might be interested in the same things as you. Many WikiProjects have lists of article that fall under their purview and often also list those who need some attention. You don't need to be a member of a WikiProject to edit an article that falls under its scope, but it can be a good way to discuss things and exchange ideas with likeminded editors.

Finally, please take a look at Wikipedia:Signatures for information on how to sigh posts you add to talk pages or noticeboards like the Tea House. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

A page needs editing, but is protected

Greetings

Recently was doing some research on a particular subject. I noticed the wikipedia page was inaccurate in making an unproven claim against someone. From an unbiased opinion, the page needs editing to reflect facts rather than political bias. The sources listed do not check out as well. How would I go about correcting a protected page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starcitizen2021 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

discuss it on the talkpage! Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

@Starcitizen2021: Article talk pages are really places for discussing specific ways to improve an article; they are not forums for a general free-for-all type of discussion about the subject of an article or places to try and right some great wrong. Moreover, Wikipedia is a website edited by people from all over the world, not just the United States, and the content is only intended to really reflect what reliable sources are saying about the subject.

Your post at Talk:Racial views of Donald Trump#You people are whats wrong with America, and this website seems to be making the same "unproven claim" against others that you're complaining about in your above post. If there's something particular about the article that you think is incorrect, then try and discuss it in terms of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines as explained in WP:POVFIGHTER and WP:USTHEM. Problems with article content can be fixed, but often that entails establishing a WP:CONSENSUS to do so. Establishing a consensus tends to be much easier if you focus on the problems with the article content instead of focusing on those who edit the article. To blunt, one of the reasons the article has been protected is probably because too many people were editing based upon their own opinions and beliefs instead of editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:01, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Change of picture for Rene Gilmartin (Footballer)

Hi!

I'm from Bristol City Football Club and I'm looking to change the images of one of our professional footballer's wikipedia pages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rene_Gilmartin) and I'm not able to do so! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bristolcitymedia (talk • contribs)

Hello. If you want to change the image of the player, you need to upload your own image (not protected by copyright) using the file upload wizard. Also, please sign your posts, like this one. LPS and MLP Fan (LittlestPetShop) (MyLittlePony) 17:09, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Bristolcitymedia - it is also important that you are aware of our policy on paid editing as you almost certainly fit that criteria. If you do not make the appropriate declaration you risk being blocked. You also need to change your username, but I see that someone has already notified you of that on your talk page. Hug^syrup 07:57, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Home Savings Bank

Hello What can I do to make the article that I am trying to publish better? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Home_Savings_Bank This is my first time doing this and would like to have the published. Any help or insight you can give would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim DeNunzio (talk • contribs)

Hi @Jim DeNunzio:. What is your relationship with Home Savings Bank? If you are employed by them, or are receiving any direct or indirect payment for reading the article, it is essential that you read the policy on paid editing and declare your conflict if one exists.

As to the article itself, the most important thing is just as the notice says that is placed at the top of the article by theroadislong, you need to find high quality, independent sources that cover Home Savings Bank in reasonable detail (not just trivial passing references) and add those to the article. If those sources exist, it is really down to you to find them, not editors here at the Teahouse. If they don't exist, then I'm afraid there isn't much I can offer. Hug^syrup 14:50, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the insight. I am not employed by the bank, I'm just a customer and I am not receiving any type of compensation from them. I will look for some type of independent source. Thank you for helping me understand what is really needed. This can be a little confusing trying to create a page.

Changing my new category words to lowercase

Today I created a new category named Historic House Museums of the Pennsylvania Germans. I now see that I should have used lowercase letters for "House Museums" instead of the uppercase letters, in order to follow the style of other categories. How can I correct that? Or will someone correct that for me? I added 20 pages to that category, and I would like to add more pages. But I thought I should correct that lowercase situation first. Thank you, Lee J. Stoltzfus — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeeJayStoltzfus (talk • contribs) 15:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

The category page can be moved. However, you should afterwards update the syntax in all articles in the old category so that they are in the renamed category, AFAIK MediaWiki doesn't resolve redirects when categorizing pages. Unbekannter z34-56r-ghf-aq2-d0r (talk) 15:20, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

A link: Category:Historic House Museums of the Pennsylvania Germans. --CiaPan (talk) 15:34, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Sensitive information on a wiki page, can it be removed permanently?

The is a page about an RAF station in the UK, and a small paragraph that details very sensitive information that should not be made public.

Is there any way to have the sensitive information removed permanently? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.13.50.176 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. If you are happy to post details here, I can look into removing the material from the article and its history. As an administrator, if appropriate, I can hide edits from regular editors, though they will still be visible to other administrators in the page history. If you think that even administrators shouldn't be able to see them, please e-mail the details of the material to be removed to the address listed at Wikipedia:Oversight. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:36, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Actually, consulting WP:CFRD, I think that the removal of private material is a job for the oversight team, rather than regular administrators, so if you haven't done so already, I would suggest sending the request to them. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

• Basically, if that "sensitive information that should not be made public" is protected by law, go through Wikimedia legal. If its publication is not illegal, but it falls afoul of local policies (such as "do not publish overly detailed personal information"), request oversight. If its publication is neither illegal, nor against local policy, I strongly suggest to let the matter drop; a similar case turned out very badly for the military. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Existing on Wikipedia

My name is Simone Merli, I am a producer for Soundwalk Collective. I recently noticed our wikipedia page has been taken down due to promotional language. One editor in particular took a strong stand against us existing on here. We have quite a large background of projects over the last two decades, and we have released 20+ records on various labels, and been a part of many exhibitions (I have come across artist pages with a lot less). I feel like we have the right to exist, what do you suggest? Thanks Simone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simone.Blackbirds (talk • contribs) 14:25, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Simone.Blackbirds:. First off, if you are going to work on the page for a company you work for, you need to carefully read our policy on paid editing and make sure you comply with it, particularly the bit on declaring your status as a paid editor.

Secondly, though, whether your company should have a page on Wikipedia is less to do with the number of projects or records you have worked on, and more to do with whether independent, reliable sources have written about you. Your first step would be to look for some high quality articles in reliable, independent publications that cover your company in a reasonable amount of detail. If you can find those, you will be much better equipped to convince editors that Soundwalk Collective should have an article. I suggest reading our notability guidelines and the specific guidelines on organisations as a start. Hug^syrup 14:42, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

And thirdly, Simone.Blackbirds, I recommend you reframe "our wikipedia page has been taken down" as "Wikipedia has deleted the article it had about us". It was not, and will never be, your article. Nobody questions your existence, or your right to exist; but a consensus of Wikipedia editors decides (according to Wikipedia's policies on notability] whether or not is appropriate to hold an article about you. --ColinFine (talk) 16:40, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Tenses for historical timelines and pages

Hi, What are the guidelines on tenses for historical timelines? And for consistencies sake, would this extend to the rest of the article if it is referring to historical events? Thanks!Sghk19 (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey Sghk19. Wikipedia articles generally use the past tense for historical events. For more information see MOS:TENSE. GMG^talk 16:56, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sghk19: Timeline entries, specifically, are conventionally worded in the present tense, although I'm not finding any Wikipedia guidelines on the matter at the moment. For examples, see Timeline of cosmological theories, Timeline of geology, and Timeline of the American Revolution. Deor (talk) 17:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

I’m trying to add an article. It seems to me to be completely up to Wikipedia’s standards. It was initially rejected, so I followed up with the (helpful) editor who reviewed it, called it “much improved,” and then… rejected it again and stopped responding to my questions!

Hello!

Honestly, I’m a bit perplexed here. I am trying to add an article about the writer Sarah M. Broom. Broom is a writer early in her career, whose book, which is forthcoming this month, has already been described as a notable or important book in a number of publications, including the New York Times, the New Yorker, etc. Broom herself has written for a number of publications including the New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, O Magazine, etc. And her book is being published by a major worldwide publisher. The article is amply sourced! I honestly cannot understand how the notability of such a person would fall into question, and with the editor not responding, I do not know what else I can do. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks!

Someseriousfun (talk) 16:42, 2 August 2019 (UTC) Someseriousfun

Hi Someseriousfun, it looks like you did get a reply on Theroadislong's talk page shortly after you posted this question. In case you haven't seen it yet (they didn't ping you), it says "I have not declined it again, you haven't re-submitted it". There's a blue "Resubmit" button on the decline notice at the top of your draft so I'd say, press that and wait for someone to re-review it fully. All the best, › Mortee _talk 18:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

For Teahouse hosts

Please see this post on the Teahouse talk page. Interstellarity (talk) 12:28, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, this rotates randomly through a list of the top hosts that is maintained here so all you should need to do is remove yourself from that list. I don't know if it overly matters if anyone replaces you right now, as there doesn't seem to be any reason why the list has to be exactly 30. Hug^syrup 12:38, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

@Hugsyrup: I have replaced my entry with Eman235. Hopefully he's OK with this. Interstellarity (talk) 14:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

I am. Eman235/talk 18:13, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

WorldCat holdings for notability

Could someone provide insight and, please, some links to where I can get an answer on whether WorldCat holdings help prove notability? It seems it could, especially for academics who wrote non-bestselling but highly regarded books, and I have used WorldCat a bit in researching academics. But when I successfully fought AfD for an article I created, I was told that WorldCat holdings didn't help with notability. Was that just because this time, it was a fiction author? Please link me to policies and past discussions if you can; I'd love to have Wikipedia's standard and/or precedence to site when need be. Thanks. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 14:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:NPROF and WP:NAUTHOR - they give guidelines that can be helpful for establishing notability in academics. I don't think a WorldCat listing would be helpful in this regard - it's essentially a directory listing, which would not be seen as significant coverage. With academics, the best thing to look for is published reviews of their work - if you can find a few detailed reviews of their highly-regarded books, you would probably be able to get them over the NAUTHOR bar on criterion 3. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 16:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. So should WorldCat never be consulted for notability? Someone deprodded and removed notability tag from Albert Carlos Bates based on his works having 2700 or so WorldCat holdings. I added the notability tag back as Bates' works are not entirely his own -- he collected muster rolls, church records, etc. and published them. Should or should not WorldCat be considered in his case? And if anyone would like to weigh in on Bates, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

DiamondRemley39 interesting question and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't remember seeing Worldcat discussed as basis for WP:N. My first reasoning goes: WP:N demands several decent sources. Per the definition at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Definition_of_a_source, Worldcat is not a source, so no. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

I'd be in agreement with Gråbergs Gråa Sång. I'd see a high WorldCat score as a useful indicator - it suggests that you could probably find sources to demonstrate notability if you look for them, but it wouldn't demonstrate notability on its own. A low score wouldn't indicate that someone isn't notable though - someone might easily be notable for various reasons aside from the popularity of their books with libraries. GirthSummit _(blether) 20:16, 2 August 2019 (UTC)