Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 118

Archive 115

Archive 116

Archive 117

Archive 118

Archive 119

Archive 120

→

Archive 125

Discussion of proposed template

I have created a new version of the {{welcome}} template, so that it now includes a paragraph for users with non-Latin alphabet usernames to take a look at WP:SIG#Non-Latin and consider adding a latin translation of their username to their signature.

Would the Village Pump be a good place to discuss this? All the various talk pages for Templates are extremely quiet.

Cheers,

Feedthepope (talk) 21:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Feedthepope. I'm not sure what needs discussing but you might consider Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace. Seems like a useful template (I've done a copyedit). I would just boldly move it into the template namespace, make documentation cribbing from existing welcome templates, add it to the categories User warning templates and Welcome templates, add it to Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates#Specialized messages, Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates/Table, and the New User section of Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace, and possibly post to Wikipedia talk:Twinkle about adding it to the welcome options. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:58, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I'll go ahead and set it up as a functional template. I did have Twinkle in mind when I first thought of it but I wanted to see if there's a community consensus process first.

Cheers,

Feedthepope (talk) 01:22, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Moving a page

How do I move Ishbara Qaghan (Ashina Helu) to Ashina Helu? There is already a redirect for Ashina Helu. Could an administrator move it for me?--Taiping Tulip (talk) 18:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Next to the search bar at the top right, there is a down arrow. Click on this, and click move. Then input the name you feel is better. For redirects, type #REDIRECT [[]], with your article to redirect to in the square brackets. Hope I helped! Matty.007 19:54, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Taiping Tulip. What we need to do is get Ashina Helu deleted to make way for your move. The procedure to do this is as follows:

• Open Ashina Helu. You'll be redirected to Ishbara Qaghan (Ashina Helu)
• At the top of the page, you'll see (Redirected from Ashina Helu) If you click on the link there you'll instruct the server not to redirect you - your URL will contain a bit saying "redirect=no"
• Now you can nominate the page for speedy deletion. This is a process for avoiding lengthy deletion discussions where they aren't useful. What we want here is criterea G6 - Technical deletions. We have a template for that Template:Db-move. Edit the Ashina Helu page and place {{db-move|1=Ishbara Qaghan (Ashina Helu)|2=(a short justification why you think this move should happen)}} at the top of the page. Save the page.
• The page should be deleted in a few hours by an admin. They're quite quick with these things.
• You can then move your content (the admin who deletes the page will probably do this for you)

It's a bit complex, sorry! Hope what I said above helps. If you need any help, let me know. If you're completely stuck send me a message and we'll work through it together. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 20:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Or, make a request in the technical moves section of WP:Requested moves.--ukexpat (talk) 00:40, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

CAPTCHA not displaying

When I edit sometimes I click save and it asks for me to enter a CAPTCHA but sometimes the CAPTCHA does not display so I cannot save the edit.Bideforddevon (talk) 16:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bideforddevon, welcome to the Teahouse. There should be a "Refresh" link to get a new CAPTCHA. In three days your account will become autoconfirmed and then you don't have to enter CAPTCHA's to add external links. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I tried refreshing it and it still does not display, but it is only

sometimes it does it. I look forward to my account being auto confirmed. Thank you PrimeHunter!Bideforddevon (talk) 16:45, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

saving error message

When I add text to my page and then hit save it works. If I try to add a citation, using the correct ref tags or whatever they are called, and then try to save, it gives me an error message. What gives? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joliekarin (talk • contribs) 15:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. If you haven't already done so, I would suggest that you read WP:Referencing for beginners. If that doesn't give you the answer to your problem, then come back here & tell us the wording of the error message. One of the common causes of errors in referencing is including <ref> ... </ref> tags without a {{reflist}} template afterwards. Don't forget that the reference text (with its <ref> ... </ref> tags) goes immediately after the text which you are supporting, not in the "References" section of the article where the {{reflist}} template is. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

When you say "try" to save, do you mean the edit isn't saved at all? If it saved and you refer to the error message in [1] then the problem was that the reference ended with <ref> instead of </ref>. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Joliekarin. I noticed you're using the VisualEditor when editing. Might I recommend using "Edit source" instead of "Edit" when referencing? VisualEditor is still in beta and the references are not as easy to add as with the Reference toolbar that is used by default on Wikipedia. (The bug of referencing issues is already noted by developers.) cheers, ⊾maine12329⊿ talks✿wiki 15:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank You Jakob and Maine for responding so quickly and your advice was much appreciated.

Maine - thanks for the hyperlink to "bare URL citations. That is extremely helpful!!!! Jehrentraut (talk) 16:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Addressed flagged issues on article how or when are flags removed?

Hi Teahouse, Yesterday we had our page reviewed and flagged for lack of citations. We have cited all those marked. How or when are flags removed? Also how often are articles reviewed? Jehrentraut (talk) 15:01, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Jehrentraut and welcome to the Teahouse. You can add references (using links and <ref></ref> tags, see WP:REFB) within 10 days to stop the article from being deleted. In that case, you can remove the {{BLP unsourced|date=June 2013}} tag from the top of the page by editing it. BTW, what do you mean by "we had our page reviewed..."? Is this account being used my more than one person? ^King Jakob _C2 15:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jehrentraut! just to add on... Are you referring to Joseph G. Healey? It's not flagged for deletion, just a template to improve the references. The templates are really only removed manually by any Wikipedia user. I looked at the article and I feel the references are close to bare URL citations which could still use improvement before the template is removed. I would recommend filling in as many of the fields in the citation toolbar when adding references instead. cheers, ⊾maine12329⊿ talks✿wiki 15:20, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

New library needs a page - I think

Hi there,

The UK's National Institute of Health Research has recently launched a Journals Library -making full findings (including negative, or inconclusive ones) available online with proper search and download options. I work for the NIHR editorial team, so I realise that I can't legitimately post an article.

However, it does seem like a gap in the information about research resources and very relevant to the pages on publication bias and open access. I also note that the MRC, Wellcome Trust and BBSRC have good pages (on which I based a draft for the Journals Library before I realised it wouldn't be appropriate for me to post it).

I'd be grateful for guidance on how to provoke the development of a page about the journals library without compromising COI. Many thanks, JoannaJoanna at NIHR (talk) 13:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Joanna. First off, thanks for being upfront about your conflict of interest - we love it when editors do that. Whilst COI editing is generally discouraged, it's not absolutely forbidden - as long as you can comply with Wikipedia's requirements, there's no reason you can't write an article about a subject you're affiliated with. My suggestion would be for you to submit your draft via the Articles for Creation process, which will allow experienced editors to review it before it gets moved into the encyclopedia. There is some useful guidance at this page which is designed to help editors in your position.

If you'd rather recuse yourself from the writing process, you can post at Requested articles, although there's no guarantee anyone will pick up the request very promptly.

As a final note, the journals library sounds as though it would be very useful to Wikipedia as a resource - if you're interested in some sort of partnership, you might want to contact User:Ocaasi (talk to him here) or post at the Resource Exhange project. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Joanna! Given that this is a new library, it may be doubtful that enough reliable, third party source material (i.e. not things written by employees of the library, that is it's own website and press releases) has been written about the library to support a stand-alone article. However, information about the library would be a fine addition to the article which already exists at National Institute for Health Research. That is, that article is pretty short, and there's no reason why information on the library couldn't be added there. If you have links to some source material about the library, someone can add it to that article for you. Would that help? --Jayron32 13:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much, both of you, that's really helpful input. JoannaJoanna at NIHR (talk) 13:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

You may like to let Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine know about this, it would be helpful for them if you could list sources that would be useful for building the article. Cheers, 13:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, will doJoanna at NIHR (talk) 13:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

"This sandbox is in the Wikipedia talk namespace."

Recently submitted an article for review (which will take some time) but the article is now headed {{User sandbox}} . It then goes on to say that it"promotes the subject in a subjective manner".

I have two questions (!!)

I have made many changes to the article and I THINK I've covered everything but - how do I know what else is still causing a problem? Does the article need to have the User sandbox template removed at this stage, or does it stay where it is until the review has taken place? Ned1966 (talk) 12:39, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ned! The notice doesn't really need to be removed, since when the article is accepted it will go away anyway, but I personally find the large red letters distracting, and if you do too you are welcome to remove it. It's just letting you know that the article isn't in your sandbox any more. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ned1966 I'm glad to see you are still working on this article. Another editor has fixed the sandbox template, but I have had a quick look at the article and I can see a couple of issues. I will follow up on your talk page. Best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 12:50, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Flat Out. Any help is greatly appreciated. My apologies for what may seem to be such basic questions - but this is all very new to me!! Ned1966 (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

There are no bad questions. I have made some edits to the draft and left some discussion points at your Talk page. I am more than happy to be of help, best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 03:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Use of words

Is it against the MOS, or any other guidelines, to use words such as however and furthermore or additionally? Just curious. I just stumbled upon an article that used However (comma) and thought that it was kinda strange as I don't think I see it that often and wouldn't know the first place to start looking for something like that in the guidelines. Thanks TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 06:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC) −

Hello Tatooedwaitress, and welcome back to the Teahouse. These specific words aren't actively discouraged. When used properly, they can present various significant viewpoints on a notable topic in a balanced way. Used improperly, in my opinion, they can cast doubt on one point of view, and improperly emphasize another one. The use of such qualifying words is subject to editorial judgment, and if there is disagreement, there should be talk page discussion leading to consensus. I recommend reading WP:WTA for an in-depth discussion of encyclopedic wording in the context of how not to say things. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I think you meant to link to WP:WTA, Cullen. --ColinFine (talk) 12:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, ColinFine. I corrected my typo. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:35, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

The words you mention above aren't terrible, but we really try to avoid more interpretive/opinion expressions like "Interestingly enough, "Suprisingly,", "Fortunately,", etc. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Ahhh, thank you so much yes my thought was that it does sort of show a type of opinionism or like you said emphasize while de-emphasizing. So I understand what you all are saying. Thank you for the direction to "more reading" as it always helps to read the guidelines and suggestions that are posted. I do hope too that at some point I shall be knowledgeable enough to be able to answer questions and help others here at the teahouse. THANKS again!! TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 16:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Anti-Vandalism methods using Mac OS X

I'm hoping to pick your collective brains for a moment. Do you have any recommendations for RC patrolling on a Mac? STiki hasn't really been working out with me (too glitchy and too many accidental reverts), and I've been unable to download WikiGuard (most likely not supported anymore). Any thoughts/suggestions? Thank you! Signalizing (talk) 05:36, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Signalizing~ A warm welcome to the Teahouse! I don't really know if there's a good alternative to STiki as STiki's the one I use and I haven't faced any problems. I suggest checking if your version of STiki and your Java is up-to-date. If problems persist, leaving a message on Wikipedia talk:STiki would be very helpful and the dev responds really quickly. cheers ⊾maine12329⊿ talks✿wiki 12:06, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I've created the following article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Panchanan Bayam Samity and it got rejected because of referencing reasons. How can i make it acceptable for it to be published.

Anirudha2000 2000 (talk) 02:22, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Anirudha2000. I see two serious problems with the current version of your draft article, and some minor problems as well.

The biggest problem is that you make many claims, large and small, about this wrestling club, but you don't cite reliable sources that are about the wrestling club, and discuss its history in detail. A closely related problem is the issue of verifiability. How can the reader verify the accuracy of any given claim you make, unless they are properly referenced? It seems you know many details of the history of this club. How do you know these details? How can someone else verify that what you write is true?

The less important, though still significant issues, have to do with the wording and tone of the article. We don't praise, in Wikipedia's voice, the accomplishments of the subject. We describe the group from the neutral point of view. If reliable sources have praised (or criticized) the group, we quote and cite those opinions. I hope my comments are helpful. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:49, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Film Posters

Hello all.

I am working on adding a film title page to compliment one of the bio pages that I created and I was wondering where or how do you access or upload etc...the poster jpg that all the film title pages seem to have? The film has a poster on IMDb and its website but..?

Any help appreciated. Take-too (talk) 23:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The upload page for images is in the toolbox on the left side of the page. It is named Upload file. SL93 (talk) 01:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry.

I may not have made myself clear. I know how to upload a jpg, but I was wondering how do you get access to the posters when I don't own the copyright and the stipulations for uploading seem to be that you must own or have permission to use the file.Take-too (talk) 02:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia fair use policy applies here. Fair use applies in United States law allowing use of copyrighted works for critical or educational purposes. Since the copyright is owned by (presumably) the film company, you will have to apply a fair use rationale template to indicate why we can use the non-free, copyrighted image. {{Non-free use rationale poster}} is used here, just fill in the blanks as to what information is needed. You can use File:Lovestruck, The Musical.jpeg as an example for adding a fair use rationale. —Mikemoral♪♫ 03:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. That explains it.

Take-too (talk) 04:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Take-too. You have to be very careful about free use. You mention that this is a biography. A biography of whom? An image of a film poster can be used in an article about the film. But other uses of that poster would be problematic. I have used images of record album covers in a biography of the photographer who took the photos on those covers, but only in the context of critical commentary of those album covers and photos. Fair use exemptions to copyright law are very narrow, so I advise caution. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Cullen.

Thank you for the caution. I intend to use it on a page dedicated to one of the filmmaker's films. Not the biography page on the filmmaker.

Best.Take-too (talk) 08:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

If it is for that specific film as you state, you should be in the clear to upload it with the "Upload File" tool in the left margin of your screen. As you go through the form, make sure to check "Fair use", and then click the option for "movie poster" or however it's phrased. That will upload the file itself, and then just take the filename and code it into the top of the article. That Fair Use image, however, can only be used in the article about that movie specifically. Also it should not be a huge/high-def image, but the smallest size and resolution that works just for viewing on an article page. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

We need to be a little careful with our terms here. We are talking about Wikipedia's non-free content criteria which are in fact stricter than "fair use" under copyright law. In any event, when the image has been uploaded remember to add to the image info page (if it's not already there) a {{Non-free use rationale poster}} template, completing the compulsory parameters and to add a {{Non-free poster}} template too.--ukexpat (talk) 17:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

2nd Editorial Review

How do I seek a second editorial review? Each time I use the editorial review template, I end up getting text from the first one from way back. Help would be greatly appreciated!EnglishEfternamn_*t/c* 22:16, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello there EnglishEfternamn. Could you please link us to the page on which you are having problems? Cheers --LukeSurl ^{t c} 08:58, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Need to edit a rejected article on Millis Transfer

I got some feedback on an article I submitted on Millis Transfer that needed some editing and addition sources. How can I access that article to make the revisions? Or do I start with a new submission? Bringstaff (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bringstaff, and welcome to Wikipedia. You can find the draft article here: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Millis_Transfer,_Inc.. Please remember though, that to submit it to article space you will have to provide references to show that the subject is notable. Have a look at WP:GNG for guidance on this. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 21:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Bringstaff. Thanks for stopping by the teahouse. More specifically, the exact notability standard for companies will be found at WP:CORP. It's dinner time right now in Idaho, but I will take a look at it later and offer you a more specific critique on your talk page. Happy editing! Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:06, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Autoverified user

What does that mean?? Miss Bono ^(zootalk)☆ 20:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Miss Bono! I believe that "autoverified" is the exact same as "autoconfirmed", meaning that a bot confirmed you after you had ten edits and four days on Wikipedia. If you don't meet one of these criteria, which wouldn't apply to you anymore since you are autoconfirmed, you can ask to be confirmed, which would be the same as "verified". Happy editing! öBrambleberry of RiverClan 20:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: There's no bot involved. It's an automatic threshold that is passed. See WP:AUTOCONFIRM.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:16, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. My preferences say: Member of groups: Autoconfirmed users, Users Miss Bono ^(zootalk)☆ 11:59, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Blacklist

How is the "blacklist" determined and what are the determining factors? 67.164.129.255 (talk) 19:51, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Good day, 67.164.129.255. Wikipedia doesn't give out all of the details of the blacklist. However, one problem that new page creators come up across is that there can't be too many capital letters in a row when naming a new page. You might want to check out this article: Wikipedia:Spam blacklist. —Anne Delong (talk) 20:07, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Is this citation "notable"?

Wikipedia has a list of Science Fiction Conventions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_science_fiction_conventions

I would like to add Context to that list, which is a moderately small convention about written Science Fiction and Fantasy, with many writer's workshops. It's not a big con, but no smaller than others on the list. This is their 26th year.

Someone else made a wikipedia page for Context which was deleted, probably because they didn't include enough citations to show that the con is "notable". I've been trying to find suitable citations. (I'm sure there have been some, but no one has keep a list, and "context" is a difficult word to search for).

My question is, is this citation one that I can use? (It's not primarily about Context, but mentions a writer appearing at Context). http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/life_and_entertainment/2013/06/24/worthington.html

I have several references like these, but was told they were basically press releases, and didn't indicate notability.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/life_and_entertainment/2012/09/27/9a-5totry27-sep-art-g90jfn2s-1.html http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/life_and_entertainment/2010/08/22/2-this22-aug-art-gue9iald-1.html http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/weekender/2008/08/21/9A_LITERATURE21.ART_ART_08-21-08_T19_0CB2Q5N.html

Context's homepage is here: http://contextsf.org/ Ranvaig (talk) 19:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Dear Ranvaig: That first reference that you are asking about is also a press release - it says so to the left of the article. What you need to find are news reports written after the event, about what happened, rather than announcements of upcoming events. —Anne Delong (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Also, press releases are not independent of the subject, and so cannot be used to establish notability. --ColinFine (talk) 20:37, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't say that is a press release anywhere that I can see. I can see that it might be considered one, but it was not a press release about Context, but was about the author and the award.

The Bram Stroker awards have their own Wikipedia article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bram_Stoker_Award

I doubt that many of the conventions on the list have references that were written after the event. Even when there is good press coverage, it is usually BEFORE the event. Ranvaig (talk) 20:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Help with rejected article please

Hello, I have an article that I'm trying to have published: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Justin Smith (radio). It was rejected with the comment "This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability". In the month since the rejection I have tried, without success, to source additional supporting references and waited in case any new suitable articles appear about the subject.

I have included references that I believe are independent of the subject and in particular, details of very significant awards he has won in Australian radio. These Australian Commercial Radio Awards (ACRAs) are very prestigious awards in this country and I do believe they support the contention that Justin Smith is a notable person. I am wondering if sufficient weight has been given to these awards in judging his notability? Any comments/assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Melbourne3163 (talk) 19:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Melbourne3163 and welcome. I am in Melbourne and I know who Justin Smith is. I believe he is notable, but we need to provide supporting sources so that other editors will also conclude he meets the guidelines for notable people. I have had a quick look at your article and there are some unreliable sources. The format also needs some tweaking. I would be more than happy to work on this with you if you interested. I will follow up on your talk page. 02:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC) Flat Out let's discuss it 03:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, your offer is appreciated. I have responded further on my talk page.Melbourne3163 (talk) 02:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Notability question

Hey Teahouse! I never used it up until recently, and now this is my second question in...what, a week maybe? Anyway, I have a question on notability. I really want to make a page on I am Going to the Lordy, the poem that Charles J. Guiteau wrote right before his execution. It's achieved coverage in Destiny of the Republic by Candice Millard, Look, I Made a Hat by Stephen Sondheim, and University of Missouri-Kansas City's section on the Guiteau trial. It has also been featured in "The Ballad of Guiteau", in the musical Assassins. Is it notable enough for an article? There's no notability guideline for poems. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 18:27, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Brambleberry. I would go by WP:BKCRIT. So if you can find critical commentary about the poem, go for it! --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, NeilN, but the poem isn't really published or liable to critical commentary. It was recited right before Guiteau's hanging after he wrote it after dancing his way to the gallows. While I see that most poems, like Longfellow's, would fall under this category, it's a different animal entirely. However, as I said, it is featured in the musical Assassins. I don't know if BKCRIT applies, because it wasn't published in a book until over, I believe, a hundred years after his death. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 18:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

By the way, as the poem is public domain, I've added the full text to Wikisource [2]. I've added a link to this near the end of the Charles J. Guiteau article. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 18:55, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Keep poking around GoogleBooks and whatnot and see what else you find that examines the poem itself, its impacts and significance (literary or historical), etc. For example the Cambridge Companion to the Musical has some interesting commentary about Sondheim's treatment of it: [3]. Note also the Book of Assassins: [4]. That's just a quick look, and I'm seeing some promising material, so I'd suggest drafting it in your sandbox and then ping me (or any other willing volunteer) to take a look at it to make sure it's ready for launch. On a purely personal level I think it would make for an interesting article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Removing "Multiple Issues" message

We have been updating and editing our article (Winter of 2012 & June of 2013)and still have it flagged for multiple issues: 1. "This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. (November 2008)" 2. "This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. (December 2007)"

We think we have addressed the issues stated. How are the flags(issues)removed from the page and if we haven't addressed the changes how do we get more information to do so?

Jehrentraut (talk) 17:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I tagged areas that need citations. That includes 5 paragraphs in the Biography section. The way to solve the tag issue is to add citations to those areas. I removed the first tag because the article doesn't need expert attention. SL93 (talk) 17:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

As a general point, these flags are not automatically added/removed by any software, but are rather added and removed by manually by editors like you or I. LukeSurl ^{t c} 18:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank You for the Amazingly speedy response & Question - deletion tagged removed

Thank you for removing the "needs attention from an expert" flag! Also we have addressed all the "needs citation" areas noted and saved the page. Hopefully we have met all the guidelines of a wiki article. A message popped up reminding me that we are tagged for deletion how is that avoided - yikes ?! Jehrentraut (talk) 19:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

For the article that was tagged for deletion, you can stop it from happening by showing the person's notability. The deletion request will be on there for 7 days and then deleted if the issue isn't solved. I will see if I can find you some good sources during that time frame. SL93 (talk) 19:44, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Just a question about your use of "we" - are you editing on behalf of an organisation? If so, please take a look a the conflict of interest guidelines; and/or are you sharing a Wikipedia account - if so please note that sharing of accounts is not permitted.--ukexpat (talk) 19:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I didn't notice the "we". It is possible that citations wouldn't be the only issue now. SL93 (talk) 19:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Removing watermark from images

Hey! Where can I ask other Wikipedians to remove watermarks from certain images? Much obliged. Regards. —Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Avenue X. That may not be a good idea - if an image is watermarked, it's usually under non-free copyright. We can't use such images on Wikipedia, except in very specific circumstances. You'll need to check very carefully before making such a request, but assuming that the image checks out for use here, Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Photography workshop is the place to ask. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:19, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The Graphics Lab it was! Thank you. Although, yea, I did check the copyright permission of the file and it seems that the copyright tag is one of Creative Commons (with attribution) and thus usable. Thank you for your help again! :) —Regards. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 10:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Avenue X. I've removed the text from the image. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:42, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

In fairness, there are plenty of images online that are pre-1923 or otherwise out of copyright, but whoever posted them online has "defaced" them with a website name, personal watermark, etc. I'm of two minds about it, since I suppose one is free to do whatever with Free images, though it's kind of a jerk move to make it harder for others to use them. Rebuttal is that in some cases the person who photoed/scanned it for the Internet has put in the effort to dig in archives and find old photos, so understandably may not want the whole world to start pasting the photo everywhere. I guess ultimately I figure if someone wants to watermark or paste text on a Free image, that's their perogative, but it's equally legitimate for us to scrub off their defacement to restore the image if we can't find an original clean copy. Or am I wrong and adding a watermark makes an old image a whole new artistic product? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

::::I think this belongs in the next section below.--ukexpat (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC) Done, thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk)

Doubt about editing pages that are protected

A page about a film star has not mentioned a lot of things that happened recently in his career & i want to add that, but the page is semi-protected & i am not being able to edit Bloom Cheryl (talk) 07:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bloom Cheryl. That's not a problem - what you need to do is this:

• Go to the article's talkpage - the "Talk" tab at the top.
• Now choose "New section"
• Add the code {{Edit semi-protected}}
• Then write down the content that you want to add. Be sure to include sources.
• Assuming that the sources are sufficient and the text is appropriate, an admin or other experienced editor will make the changes for you.

Thanks for helping to improve Wikipedia's coverage! Yunshui 雲‍水 08:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Edit requests has useful information about the process. SL93 (talk) 08:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

• Hi Bloom Cheryl! As a demonstration, I've added sources (all Wikipedia content needs to be attributable to a reliable source) and the {{Edit semi-protected}} template to your request at Talk:Taylor_Lautner#Edit_request. By the way, users who make a few (I think the number is 10) of constructive edits to Wikipedia are automatically confirmed as good editors after four days. This would allow you to edit Taylor Lautner and other semi-protected pages directly. If you're looking for something to help with, Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement is a project that might interest you. Happy editing! --LukeSurl ^{t c} 09:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Attribution to the author/References

When should information be attributed in the text to the author, and where would this be found in the Wikipedia rules?

I have seen some cites in the reference section where after the reference the actual quote is indicated. (Specifically the Emotional Freedom Techniques page). When is this appropriate, and again, where in the Wikipedia rules can it be found?Petefter (talk) 03:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Petefter. There is quite a bit of information at Wikipedia:Quotations, and I think it covers your questions. I don't believe that having quotations in the references is common. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Petefter, and welcome to the Teahouse. Anne is correct that placing quotes within footnotes (also called references, or citations) is not common, but on the other hand, it is not unknown. I don't use the technique myself, but it seems to be supported by some citation templates. There was an arbitration case at least partially about this issue a few years back. You can read the gory details at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Footnoted_quotes. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:19, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

For a more general explanation, please read WP:CITE#Additional annotation. I hope this helps. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:37, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I frequently cover some really contentious issues of the Indian caste system, and pretty frequently use small quotes in footnotes. Content arguments on caste articles can be very meticulous, so it can save time to put precisely what the point is to save a dozen people trying to find the sentence in question. If I say "The Fooian caste generally worked in low-status positions such as marking village boundaries[footnote]" and then someone comes along and says "actually, marking boundaries is a mid-caste profession", then it helps enormously if I have the specific quote so we can see if Dr So-and-So specifically noted the Foos were low-class for doing boundary markings, or whether he just noted the boundary marking and I'm reading too much into it. Things like that. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Hello, how exactly do i make an infobox? it is for a mobile phone (Samsung GT-C3520) Thanks USER:NMFCFan113 NMFCFan113 (talk) 02:21, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

There is an example at Infobox, and more information at Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes. I looked at Category:Technology and applied science infobox templates, and found this one: Template:Infobox mobile phone. Wikfr (talk) 03:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

New article

I am writing about the life of a pioneer in experimental psychology in France, I wrote it in my sandbox, I tried referencing correctly and writing it in an acceptable way. Can more experienced individuals see it and edit it now:) ? I`m not exactly sure what the next step is. Teodora Research (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome and thanks for the question. I have added a template to the top of the draft article (and cleaned up the formatting a little). When you are ready to submit it for review, click the "Submit the page" link.--ukexpat (talk) 20:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Help with uploading pic!!

Hey, it's a very urgent assignment I'm working on. I need to attach a pic in the infobox. I used the 'Upload a file' option in the Toolbar menu on the left-hand side of the paper. I even have the OTRS number, therefore, I was able to upload it but the problem is, it is not there in the page where I started. It's been uploaded just as a picture in some other page but not included in the infobox, as desired. Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balmikiprasadsingh (talk • contribs) 18:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello there Balmikiprasadsingh. The filename specified in the infobox at Balmiki_Prasad_Singh didn't match the name of the file you had uploaded. I have fixed this. Regards --LukeSurl ^{t c} 19:25, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I understand, I should be using a different username but I have been doing so according to the directions given to me. I don't have any other username and this was a confirmed account so I would be able to upload pictures.

You have saved my day. Thanks again. Balmikiprasadsingh (talk) 19:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Balmiki, the article does still need some work, mostly in that it has a lot of information about living people which has no footnote. For the sake of not libeling anyone, Wikipedia is very strict about requiring proper footnoting for statements made about living people. I did some other format fixes for you though, including removing some of what we call "WP:Peacock" language: "renowned", "brilliant", and other such subjective terms. If you click the "History" tab of the article you can see what changes I made and why. There was also a large section called "Observations" that was simply an editorial of someone's personal opinion as to how great the subject was, so I removed that. It takes some getting used to to ensure that material fits into Wikipedia's style and guidelines, but I hope overall this advice is useful. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:51, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

wikiFauna

Is there any way to know what WikiAnimal am I?? Can someone tell me? Ms.Bono^(zootalk)☆ 17:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

A WikiBonobo, perhaps? Just a guess! Biosthmors (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Miss Bono! That's normally something that you decide for yourself based on looking at the different WikiFauna pages. I'd say that you exhibit some traits of a WikiPuma, but I may be partial. Happy editing! öBrambleberry of RiverClan 17:39, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, wikiPuma. Interesting. I will read the whole section. Good guess Biosthmors, do you say it for my username or for I am a fan of Bono?? Ms.Bono^(zootalk)☆ 17:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Username! Biosthmors (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I may create an essay on WikiBonobos lol :) Thank you both Brambleberry and Biosthmors Ms.Bono^(zootalk)☆ 18:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Unable to edit incorrect information on ETF Securities page

The current information on the ETF Securities page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETF_Securities) contains outdated and incorrect information. I have tried to update this information several times now and each edit has been rejected. I appreciate there is a conflict of interest issue, however all the information provided is non-promotional, factual and backed up by third party references. If you could offer me any help with this matter it would be greatly appreciated. 81.89.134.31 (talk) 13:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I appreciate that you want to make the above article factual and up-to-date, but it seems like some editors regard the added information as controversial. The behavioral guidelines for those with a conflict of interest suggest that it's best that you restrict your editing to ETF Securities to the following kinds of edits:

1. removing spam and revert unambiguous vandalism,
2. removing content that clearly violates the biography of living persons policy,
3. fixing spelling and grammatical errors,
4. reverting or remove their own COI edits,
5. making edits where there is clear consensus on the talk page (though it is better to let someone else do it), and
6. adding reliable sources, especially when another editor has requested them (but note the advice above about the importance of using independent sources).

In this case, I would suggest that instead of making substantial additions yourself, you make suggestions on the article's talk page located here for other editors to make. There are a number of editors watching the page, so I expect you will be able to get a prompt response. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

What is the procedure for correcting a misspelled word in a title?

In the article Joseph B. Adkinson, the name should be Adkison. How can this be corrected?SLBohrman (talk) 12:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi SLBohrman and welcome. This is solved by moving the article to a new location, the location being the correct title. Moving a page explains how this is done. I do note that both spellings are used interchangeably in many sources. Do you have a source that is definitive re: spelling of surname ? Flat Out let's discuss it 12:13, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Also, you can not currently needmove a page, as you need 10 edits, and your account needs to be 4 days old. Mdann52 (talk) 12:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I'm doing this wrong. Here is the evidence: [5]. The name is spelled incorrectly on this page also, but if you look at the tombstone, you can see the correct spelling. SLBohrman (talk) 12:42, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

You are doing just fine, SLBohrman. I did see that photo, do you have a second source? 12:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes I'm definitely new! Please see my response above. SLBohrman (talk) 12:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to be editing this page or joining the conversation. I can't see my responses when I Join the conversation. I could just be impatient. Here is the second source: Plaque in his honor as well as the name of the park — Preceding unsigned comment added by SLBohrman (talk • contribs) 13:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I also found a copy of his draft registration card, but I'm not sure if I should post it here. SLBohrman (talk) 13:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Flat Out! SLBohrman (talk) 17:30, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Rendering issue on subsections titles

Have a look at Anxiety_disorder#Treatment and the way the SSRIs subsection title is laid out. The html rendering inserts a small space after the first 'S'. Vincent Lextrait (talk) 07:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see this in my browser (Firefox 22.0, on Linux).... rendering belongs to the browser so should not be an effect of the page setup?? I wonder what others are seeing. Thanksfor the question, Regards Ariconte (talk) 10:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I saw it in Google Chrome 27.0.1453.116 m and also in Microsoft IE 8.0.601.18702. I assumed then that it was not a browser-related issue. Let me check with other browsers, including Firefox and come back to you. Vincent Lextrait (talk) 10:34, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I confirm I see it on Firefox 22.0 on Windows. To be specific, there is a non selectable html spacing between the first 'S' and the second. Are you sure you looked at the SSRIs subsection title? The effect varies depending on the size of the font. The smaller the font the more obvious the space. Vincent Lextrait (talk) 10:38, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I see it in all five tested browsers under Windows Vista: IE, Firefox, Google Chrome, Safari, Opera. For some reason extra space is added before a capital bold S. It also happens outside headings, for example here: SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ. It also happens for me in Microsoft Word 2010 with the text written and bolded in Word's normal way without use of HTML. If I zoom the browser to 125% then the space looks normal. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:43, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

For comparison, here are the same strings in capital unbolded, lower case bolded and lower case unbolded: SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ. ssris, miss, house, abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz. ssris, miss, house, abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz. I only see an unusual space in capital bolded. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I only see the space in Arial, the typical default sans-serif browser font.

Font	Example (dependent on installed fonts)
Antiqua	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Arial	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Avqest	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Blackletter	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Calibri	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Comic Sans	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Courier	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Decorative	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Fraktur	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Frosty	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Garamond	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Georgia	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Impact	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Minion	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Modern	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Monospace	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Palatino	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Roman	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Script	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Swiss	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Times New Roman	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Verdana	SSRIs, MISS, HOUSE, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

PrimeHunter (talk) 11:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I see it in Office too on Windows. So this is a Windows issue (more of an unfortunate character pixel-level rendering issue, as there is no extra space when you zoom in), nothing to do with Wikipedia. Vincent Lextrait (talk) 12:16, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Infoboxes

How do i make infoboxes? it is for a mobile phone. NMFCFan113 (talk) 03:58, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

You can use {{Infobox mobile phone}} for the infobox. The template documentation will tell you how to fill in your infobox. Hope that helps. :) —Mikemoral♪♫ 04:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Mikemoral provided just about the perfect template for a mobile phone. I just wanted to add that if you ever want to create an infobox, you can find documentation here. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 04:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

But before you do, check other articles on similar subjects to see which iboxes they use. My guess is that we have one for pretty much every possible type of subject matter.--ukexpat (talk) 20:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Bibliography

• Einstein, Albert (1950). "On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation". Scientific American.

--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:04, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you all for the advice.--Taiping Tulip (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

{{Refbegin}} and {{Refend}} aren't necessary, they only provide formatting for the bibliography section and their use is a matter of style, but what is needed is the use of the parameter |ref= with a value of harv in the citation. So to add to the above it would read

{{cite journal | last = Einstein | first = Albert | authorlink = Albert Einstein | year = 1950 | title = On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation | journal = Scientific American |ref = harv }}

This adds the link from the sfn to the citation. The exception to this is if the citation is defined using {{citation}} in which case |ref=harv is not required. NtheP (talk) 14:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the needed clarification! I think we've squared the circle on this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

New pages Feed

Hi,

Has anyone else who uses the New pages feed that if you scroll down, then sometimes the articles are simply a repetition of articles higher in the list? Matty.007 16:24, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Matty, and welcome to The Teahouse. I just tried scrolling pretty far through the New pages feed, but I couldn't see any repetition of articles that were placed initially on the last. Can anyone else reproduce this error or have an educated guess about why it might be happening? I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 21:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jethrobot,

It doesn't always happen, but is irritating when it does.

Thanks, Matty.007 18:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I see this too, which is why I use Special:NewPages instead. My best guess is that is a browser-dependent caching issue. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:41, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Videos on wikipedia

How can I add videos and extra images to my article on wikipedia Aftabali909 (talk) 10:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Aftabali909~ For images, there's a comprehensive guide here. The short answer, I find, is to upload a picture you've taken by and own yourself, or upload from Flickr when it has the correct licensing with this link. Videos are a little more complicated. You can see Wikipedia:Videos for a tutorial video. Generally the upload policy is the same as images, that you have to either have taken the video yourself, or it's under CC-BY, CC-BY-SA or public domain (example). Maybe you have something more specific we can help you with? cheers, ⊾maine12329⊿ talks✿wiki 11:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

thats, great thanks, all the photos and videos are my property, but how it can be verified by wikipedia that those are mineAftabali909 (talk) 12:07, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Book updates

Hi! I was wondering how much time does a bot take to update books. Book:Shakira shows 1 good article in its talk page, but after WP:Shakira was started we have got like 5 good articles now. I read that a bot updates these books. I just wanted to know when does it go about updating books. Thanks! WonderBoy1998 (talk) 05:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi WonderBoy1998~ The bot, User:NoomBot, seems to be inactive at the moment. You can edit the book talk page manually. Anyway, no matter what is displayed on the talk page, the Shakira book when downloaded has all 5 of the good articles as books are downloaded from scratch when the link is clicked on. ⊾maine12329⊿ talks✿wiki 12:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

(e/c) Hey WonderBoy1998. The bot that did this was shut down by its creator (see here), and that user went inactive the next day and hasn't made a single edit since April 22, 2013. It appears no one has stepped up to take over and if you want to update the talk page you will have to do so manually (the GA statistics are set out in {{book report end}} at the bottom of the page). I don't think of this as a critical task though, in the big picture of what needs doing on the encyclopedia. Meanwhile, I'll see if there's an appropriate place to post about the bot's takeover. Maybe Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I just updated the talk page of Book:Shakira, as a WP:Shakira member myself. ⊾maine12329⊿ talks✿wiki 12:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#‎Takeover of NoomBot.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:08, 27 June 2013 (UTC)