Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Technical 13 (talk | contribs) at 12:28, 30 June 2013 (Tooltips: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Deletion

Hi,

Can I give an article which I have contributed to a keep vote at the deletion page? (See INES (TV service)

Thanks, Matty.007 08:44, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Matty.007 yes you can vote on an article you have contributed to. Flat Out let's discuss it 08:46, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Matty.007, welcome back to the Teahouse! You can write 'Keep' but it is not exactly a 'vote' because it's not based on a majority voting. A consensus must be established. ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 08:46, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We refer to this as a !vote. It simply means you register your opinion, but...always add a thoughtful reason for your !vote or it is likely to be set aside when a consensus is determined.--Amadscientist (talk) 08:59, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Movie/Game Ratings

Hi. I am curious, very few, if any Wikipedia articles include the rating (G, MA, R etc.) of a video game or movie. Has this been previously discussed and frowned upon? It seems like a logical thing to put into the info box. Thanks. Asked by User:Caboose221

Welcome Caboose. Ratings are not produced by the film and game companies. They are not a part of the subject. It is a government requirement and is not of any encyclopedic value. Ratings are also not anything that is written or discussed in any particular way to the average film or game unless there is a controversy over the rating itself. Since a rating is going to differ from one country or territory to another, it is also difficult to add the information in a manner that is neutral. Also, just having a rating is meaningless to Wikipedia unless it is mentioned in a reliable source, so...not much is going to be found.--Amadscientist (talk) 08:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Caboose221! See MOS:FILM#Ratings. The same is likely to apply for games. This has actually been discussed a lot in WikiProject Film and the general consensus is to leave it out. [1] [2] [3] [4] ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 08:43, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikiproject consensus is not really relevant to the actual MOS as the projects only control their own guidelines. The general consensus is actually through the community as a whole. The discussions at the project level cannot override the general consensus of the wider community. There are a few exceptions like BLP policy and guidelines but project film centers on project guides not the main MOS.--Amadscientist (talk) 08:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edits help

I'm new to Wiki, and I find the best to learn is by going through and making minor edits as I see necessary by imitating more experienced editor's methods. Could someone please check my recent edits to make sure they are valid because they are less commonly viewed pages. Thanks! Sonoflamont (talk) 21:36, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't check "Minor edit" unless you are adding a coma, period, fixing capitol letters or anything that is actually a "Minor edit" only. Never check that if you are adding or moving content.--Amadscientist (talk) 07:12, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sonoflamont and welcome to the Teahouse! Your edits look to be fine. (Note the proper use of minor edits!) Good to add in citations whenever possible, and leave an edit summary when you're doing something a little bolder like removing content. When reverting vandalism, you could also leave a warning on the user/IP address's talk page to hopefully prevent further vandalism. ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 07:51, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of places in...

Hi,

How do I get the list of places for the Channel Islands, as most of the Lists of places in... have toolserver links which redirect to Google maps. How do I change the place, to e.g. Sark?

Thanks, Matty.007 19:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to answer at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#List of places in... PrimeHunter (talk) 20:51, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How to find out if a picture is protected by copyright?

I would like to use a picture from the web in a wikipedia article but i don't know if its protected by copyright. How do i find out if it's protected by copyright?1WikiRitter (talk) 16:30, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 1WikiRitter, and welcome to the teahouse! All creative works (including photographs and other pictures) are automatically protected by copyright when created. If you want to find out whether a picture from the web can be used on Wikipedia, and the website does not specifically indicate under what conditions the picture can be re-used, then you could write to the website owner asking if they own the copyright to the picture and if they would be willing to license it according to the conditions described at WP:CONSENT. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:34, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, 1WikiRitter. Demiurge is correct: unless you have clear evidence that an image is not covered by copyright, you must assume that it is copyrighted.
There are important exceptions. If the image was originally published before 1923, the copyright has expired. If the image is a work of the United States federal government, it is copyright free unless labeled otherwise. The bottom line is to do your homework and be sure before uploading an image. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:51, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To check the copyright status of an image you must have some basic information. Photographer, date the image was taken and if it was indeed published anywhere (even on the internet) and when it was published. Some images dated from a period in the 1960s to the mid 1970s is also not protected id the copyright was not renewed (renewel is no longer a requirement but those images from before the change in law are still covered by the existing laws from the time they were created. The point is, there are many different issues that effect copyright. Could you provide a link to the image so that I could take a closer look at the image in question?--Amadscientist (talk) 19:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for rejection of changes at Wikipedia

I had made changes to the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_protection_movement

But changes i made were undid by user Mean as custard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mean_as_custard

Please tell how to have changed completed Ntu129 (talk) 10:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ntu129 and welcome. Your edits were mainly unsourced and not in the correct format which is most likely why they were reverted, but I see you have asked the editor to give a reason by leaving a message on their Talk page and they are certainly the best person to answer your question. You also received a good answer the Help desk where you asked the same questio. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:58, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Flat Out , i have noted the changed needed to be done and will complete them. Ntu129 (talk) 11:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ntu129 can I suggest you save after each source, or when you are moving on to another section and that you describe each edit with an edit summary. When you make many edits and only save once, good edits get lost when a revert is performed. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:15, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Flat Out , Does this mean filling all the fields within the editing section. Will this prevent edits from being lost ?

Ntu129 (talk) 11:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you are editing, at the bottom of the edit window is "Edit Summary" and a box to explain what you have done, before you click "Save Page."

If you have a look at this example you will see I have made a number of edits and there is a summary in italics each time. You will also see that I saved every edit, not just once. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:46, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Separate cropped version of image?

Is cropping of an image to a separate file on commons allowed? (I want to retain the original.) I'm thinking of cropping this to have only Macklemore, in the far right; and the original needs to be kept for Suzanna Choffel.

I know that some "Derivative works of this file" are allowed but I'm not sure I've ever seen it for cropping. cheers ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 04:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maine12329, I don't know the answer your question but I like the image as it is. I have edited the description and also the caption in its use at Macklemore. The context of him performing with others is better than just him alone IMHO. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:44, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you can. Cropping is very common as is photoshopping out some elements. The image is CC 3.0 so you may make a cropped version. Just use the same information from the original on the file page and add under "Other versions" a link to the original uncropped version and mention in the summary that it is a cropped version.--Amadscientist (talk) 04:58, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! Thank you for all the help! :) (edit: oh right! it could have been fixed with the words "far right". yup looks good!) ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 05:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was clear anyway, but now there's no issue. Over and out! Flat Out let's discuss it 05:19, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs more citations?

Hi,

I was adding some info to this article Laguna Beach, California and the whole first section on history is pretty much devoid of any citations, even though it's full of facts. I added a note to the talk page but would it also be appropriate for me to put a "citation needed" banner on the article somewhere? If I knew how to do that? Thank you! Merrilee (talk) 22:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Merrilee. The proper thing I think wouuld be to add the {{unreferenced section}} template to the section on the top line. Keep up the good work! Gtwfan52 (talk) 22:12, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I appreciate the advice! Merrilee (talk) 22:24, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merrilee---if you have the time and the resources, it would be great if you tried to add some references to it, too! happy editing! Gtwfan52 (talk) 04:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly will but am working gathering sources for a short new article. I figured if I called attention to it it might get done before I find time and sources. One thing I love about Wikipedia, if you start something someone might come along and finish it. I wish my dishes were the same way! Merrilee (talk) 13:58, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Need Help Understanding Inline Citations

I have created a bio for the U.S. CEO of a German multinational manufacturing conglomerate. It's been rejected for lack of incline citations. However, according to Wiki's guidelines on inline citations they are to be used in 4 instances:

  • Direct quotations
  • bAny statement that has been challenged
  • Any statement that you believe is likely to be challenged.
  • Contentious material, whether negative, positive, or neutral, about living persons

I've reviewed the talk page and the article and can't see what needs an inline citation. It's a pretty straightforward biography of this person and his eduction and work experience. I've included External Links and believe I've inlcuded them correctly. What am I doing wrong? CRHassettVA4 (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CRHassettVA4. Welcome to the Tea House. Pretty much everything in a Wikipedia article needs inline citations so we can see what is being sourced from where. This is particularly important for biographies of living persons.--Charles (talk) 17:32, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi & Welcome! To add to that, here's the key policy the original editor may have been referencing about Biographies of Living Persons: "Anyone may remove biographical material about living persons that is unsourced." So the concept of Contentious material in your 4th bullet takes on a perhaps new meaning here at WP, to include - age, schooling, parents, hometown... yep, pretty much any asserted fact. That's because BLP (as they are known) are subject to so many legal restrictions so caution is definitely a mindset. So punch in whatever reliable sources you have on any fact that is asserted in the article, and that should fix the issue. Good luck! EBY (talk) 20:48, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay -- that provides some clarity. Thanks very much. I'll go back and refine. Thx again.

173.66.235.176 (talk) 22:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Editors here will help with a review if you include a link next time. EBY (talk) 01:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another Cite Question

Hi' I just added a quote on the page "The Second Coming" by William Butler Yates. Basically, a character in the film uses the poem. I linked the actor's name and used a citation to wikiquotes. Is that enough of a citation?

(I couldn't find the exact time in the film the character uses it)

MWRugerMWRuger (talk) 22:09, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I found a different source for the Quote, TVTropes. I've seen t he series 3 times and I know it's there. Is TVtropes a sufficient source? If that won't work could I quote the time stamp for the scene in the DVD?

Not sure how anyone else would verify it though. mwrugerMWRuger (talk) 06:53, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MWRuger, any source that is user-edited (wikipedia is a good example) is unreliable. Have a look at the cite you have added and see if it can be edited by other users. I will see if I can find another source for you. Flat Out let's discuss it 07:03, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid it's no good either. The worst thing is I know it's there. I could slide the DVD in and get the exact time it's said. I could do a clip capture but that would probably violate copyright and I really don't have anywhere to host it anyway.

MWRugerMWRuger (talk) 07:07, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have suggested a source on your talk page, it's reliable but I don't know if its supports what you are saying. Flat Out let's discuss it 07:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

oops, need to split article

Yesterday, I came across an article that needed improvement, Benjamin Franklin Stringfellow. Today I realized, much to my chagrin, the additions I made actually concern a possibly more famous and certainly more interesting man (probably a relative). I quickly changed the first paragraph to reflect the problem, lest others in this Civil War anniversary year make the same mistake. Quite simply, the article needs to be split into Benjamin Franklin Stringfellow (lawyer) and Benjamin Franklin Stringfellow (spy). When I return to Virginia next week, I should be able to figure out the relationship between the two, since the Rappahannock area archive in Fredericksburg is open the first Saturday morning of the month. Any other suggestions? I could move the sandbox article I'm working on (delayed because of my absence from Virginia) to my computer, and start the new article there, but my day is full already with other matters.Jweaver28 (talk) 13:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jweaver, and welcome to The Teahouse. It's great to hear you've discovered new content that seemed to be a sidebar at first but turns out to be pretty notable in itself! As for getting started right away, the great thing about Wikipedia is that there are no deadlines. So don't worry about getting everything done right away. As for how to proceed, I'd recommend that you consider completing a draft of one of these articles in your sandbox first, then editing and renaming the current article to the other Stringfellow article you mentioned. Then you can move your sandbox article to the article mainspace. If you're having trouble with moving articles, feel free to ask us here for help! I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 15:29, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Jweaver! Just for reference, there's a whole Wikipedia article on such types of mistakes, Wikipedia:Don't build the Frankenstein. It's kind of a fun read. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edition/Addition derived from reference

I wish to give an example here A certain extremely reliable reference says "X" about a certain topic but it is in some other language. It can be translated two ways in English one is Y the other is Z Y is present in another reference which is reliable but it is not correct[assumption], and it is listed on wikipedia Z is not present in any "direct" reference [ a reference dedicated to that topic only] but I can find a reliable dictionary website for it along with some "indirect " references, and IT IS correct [please assume so] Now is it ok for me to edit that article and replace Y with Z? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NitroDex (talkcontribs) 12:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the question. You cannot draw the conclusion yourself that one of the sources is wrong as that would be original research/opinion. If other reliable sources say it's wrong, then the article cam say that, citing those other sources. If there are no sources saying that it is wrong, then you should cite both sources.--ukexpat (talk) 12:59, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello NitroDex, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your question is a bit ambiguous. If the English translation is in the reliable source, then you have to stick to what that source says, or find a better source, as Ukexpat says. But if the reliable source is in the other language, and the contested translation is work done by Wikipedia editors, then think carefully. If you are certain that your translation is the best, be bold and add it. I recommend adding a detailed explanation of the issue on the article's talk page. If other editors object, discuss it and don't fight about it. Consensus almost always produces the best result. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:21, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a this templateto article GSLV , but there is a problem. Please fix it immediately. Zince34' 09:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have undone your last edit. --LukeSurl t c 10:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Zince34. I have added the template {{launching}} to the article. Parameters for templates such as this should be filled out in the article where they are to be placed. Trying to fill them out in another space, then transcluding the filled-out version can lead to complications and problems. Cheers --LukeSurl t c 10:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page editing

I have received some conflicting opinion on talk page editing and would like some clarification. My understanding is that legitimate comments on a talk page should not be deleted, but archived if the Talk page is getting unwieldy. I also understand it is OK to delete warnings as a sign they have been read. My question, is editing like this allowed? Deleting talk page discussions because your page is too long or you don't like them doesn't looks to be covered in WP:DELTALK which is what I have been going on to date. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Flat Out! Welcome to the Teahouse :) The basic answer is that anyone can remove anything they want from their talkpages, with two main exceptions - active block notices/declined unblock requests (depending on who you ask, they may say one, the other, or both cannot be removed), and shared IP notices. Aside from that, the editor can remove whatever they want, whenever, for any reason (from their own talkpage, not from others). Hope this helps. Charmlet (talk) 02:46, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Charmlet I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Is there a guideline/policy you can point me to as I have seen this point debated ad nauseum. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OWNTALK is the relevant policy (links to a section of WP:TPG). Charmlet (talk) 03:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks that exactly answers my question. "Users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages, though archiving is preferred." Much appreciated, Flat Out let's discuss it 03:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, user talk pages. I initially thought you meant for Articles. Personally I find it the user's own right to delete messages as long as they are not vandalism warnings etc. Though it's still a little sad that other's messages are getting deleted. Perhaps a hidden template might be useful? ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 02:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I had suggested archiving however the editor is removing comments they don't like. I feel it makes things very difficult for other editors when they can't see previous conversations, afterall thats why talk pages exist - for communication. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:57, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User talk pages exist for communication with the user in question. If they don't want to preserve some particular conversation, they're allowed to delete them. If there's some other problems that need to be addressed, they can be addressed, but the community has pretty soundly come down one way on this, and that's people can remove any thread from their talk page they wish, for any reason they wish, and it's no big deal. --Jayron32 03:06, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, just needed a guideline to point to. Thanks for answering Flat Out let's discuss it 03:31, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever is deleted will remain in the history.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

just curious of the privileges of somebody

i dont really know who is this guy "Toddst1" his talk page says that he used to be an administrator, i really feel attacked by the non-sense warning he gave me [[5]], am i able to report him for biting or something? thanks for your time (Argento1985) 16:30, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Argento1985, and welcome to the Teahouse. Toddst1 was alerting you to the fact that vandalism has a specific and narrow meaning on Wikipedia. Vandalism is a deliberate attempt to damage the encyclopedia. Good faith edits are not vandalism, even if unreferenced. Content disputes are not vandalism. So, the good advice you are receiving is to be slow about accusing someone of vandalism. Why not have a cup of tea, relax, and assume that the advice was offered in good faith? I am sorry that you thought it was bitey. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
i just dont like to receive strikes and warnings when im helping, thats why im complaining, if you check carefully the contributions that the guy i reported gave, you'll understand why i reported him, about the ex-admin that striked me i have no words. thx for the response (Argento1985) 23:28, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Toddst1 is a current admin. The dispute you reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism looked like a content dispute between disagreeing editors and not what Wikipedia calls vandalism. That's what Toddst1 wrote about with {{uw-aiv}}. See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for other options in content disputes. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. That's one of the many things admins do here (evaluate reports of vandalism).
Perhaps you (Argento1985) should start talking with folks more on talk pages and stop running off to noticeboards [6] [7] [8] with bad reports every time you disagree with someone. None of them resulted in any administrative action. You'll find your time here is much more pleasant and productive when you engage with folks rather than resenting their communication, whether you like what they have to say or not. Toddst1 (talk) 03:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
comment: Contribute, let go ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 03:26, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Argento1985 you have received some good advice. Use talk pages to try and resolve issues and you will find things go more smoothly for you. Good luck Flat Out let's discuss it 10:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 (talkcontribs) 18:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

wikiFauna

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

A WikiBonobo, perhaps? Just a guess! Biosthmors (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Username! Biosthmors (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I may create an essay on WikiBonobos lol :) Thank you both Brambleberry and Biosthmors Ms.Bono(zootalk) 18:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

I'm sorry if I'm doing this wrong. Here is the evidence: [9]. 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)[reply]

You are doing just fine, SLBohrman. I did see that photo, do you have a second source? 12:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I'm definitely new! Please see my response above. SLBohrman (talk) 12:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 (talkcontribs) 13:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Infoboxes

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

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Citations

Bibliography

  • Einstein, Albert (1950). "On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation". Scientific American.
--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:04, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all for the advice.--Taiping Tulip (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
{{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)[reply]
Thanks for the needed clarification! I think we've squared the circle on this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Hi Jethrobot,
It doesn't always happen, but is irritating when it does.
Thanks, Matty.007 18:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

Videos on wikipedia

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

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⊿ talkswiki 11:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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⊿ talkswiki 12:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(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)[reply]
I just updated the talk page of Book:Shakira, as a WP:Shakira member myself. ⊾maine12329⊿ talkswiki 12:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#‎Takeover of NoomBot.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:08, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tooltips

Whenever you leave your mouse cursor over a link, not only does the regular mouse pointer (arrow) turn into a little hand, but a little yellow window pops up with text inside just below the little hand cursor. At least that's what happens while I am running Wikipedia under Windows. My question is, is the text that appears in the little yellow box something we have control over outside of as a link? I want to do something in an article where when you place your cursor over some text, you get the little yellow box with text in it, but it isn't a link. I just want to provide additional info in that yellow box. So I probably don't want the cursor to change into a hand either, since the hand cursor implies you can click on it to make something happen. Is that possible to do? If so, how? Here is an example of exactly what I want to do. When you move the cursor over the date June 30th, I want a time to pop-up in the little yellow window. But if I used the normal Wikipedia linking mechanism, it shows the time and then it adds "(page does not exist)" ---> June 30 <--- Obviously, I don't want to have "(page does not exist)" or anything except what I tell it to write. And also I don't want it go and try to create a new Wikipedia page when I click on it. Nejd (talk) 09:01, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome Nejd. This was a new one for me! LOL! But if you review Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups you should find what you are looking for, I believe.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:13, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
After reviewing that page I am certain that is not it. I am not certain this can be done, but on the other hand I can't help but think I have done this before at one point. Someone else is going to have to help out here unless I remember what it was I had done.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:21, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, the pop up is nothing but a navigation tool and not what you may have thought. I can find no way to add such a pop up that is not an article that is the link itself. What you are seeing is when a link to an article is placed within text. That much is very easy to do, but can only be done with a link to an article or page.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much Amadscientist for looking into this! I figured it was probably impossible, but I thought I would ask anyway just to be sure. Ah well, that's what I get for thinking outside of the box (or should I say "inside the pop up box") :-) -- Nejd (talk) 11:10, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nejd and welcome to the Teahouse. What you are looking for is "possible" of course, but sometimes it takes a great deal of magic and hacky tricks to make it work. you can make a link to one page read as something else, and you can make text have alternative popups using {{Abbr}} and you can combine the two LiTLtMTP. If you need anymore specific help, let me know exactly what you are trying to accomplish and I'll see what I can whip up for you. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 12:28, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]