Wikipedia:Teahouse

PrimeHunter, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2–3 days.

Help Wikipedia

Help Required On Stub pages

Hello, I have a question here, If you go visit Category:Pakistan_organisation_stubs you will see many pages doesn't fall in wikipedia notability guideline. They only have 1 Reference link and in 70% of the cases those references are from primary sources. What is the best approach to cater this type of stubs? Should they be recommended for deletion or leave as it is? Some of the pages were created back in 2010 or 2011. As these pages are from pakistan i advise other wikipedians to not edit them if they are not aware of the local language or newspapers etc. --Virgininfatuation (talk • contribs) 11:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Just To add some additional data, have a look at this wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AES_%E2%80%93_School_for_Girls , this possibly looks like an advert, the reference improve tag was added on april 2010, What actions do you guys recommend for this type of pages? Should we simply add notability notice? or does this fall under deletion criteria? Thanks --VIRGIN INFATUATION (talk) 13:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

A small point, but when (within Wikipedia) we want to link to another Wikipedia page, we use wikilinks like [[AES – School for Girls]] (giving AES – School for Girls), rather than internet URLs like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AES_%E2%80%93_School_for_Girls. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:16, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

The article that you have pointed out sure looks like an advertisement to me, and doesn't have any information about the school - not even it's whole name. It is likely a private school, but even that is not in the article. I would propose it for deletion. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Assisting in my areas of expertise.

I would like to begin helping wiki by editing, linking, etc. but would be of most help if it were in my areas of expertise. Advertising/Marketing. Or I would be happy to do easy busy-work, cleaning bad links, deleting copyrighted posts, ect. Summitgirl (talk) 06:10, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. There are some useful links in the welcome messages on your user talk page, so I would recommend that you read those to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's syntax and guidelines. For example, make sure that you don't delete the markers for section headings, and if you are adding references try to add not just a bare url but include extra information which can easily be added with the help of templates such as {{tl:cite web}}. It is possible that one of the reasons that you are having problem is that you are using the {{WP:Visual Editor]]. That is a piece of software at an early stage of development and ought not yet to have been released; I would recommend that you use the link marked [edit source] rather than the one labelled [edit^beta]. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Summitgirl! We certainly can use someone with your expertise. You may want to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, which may have a list of open tasks or problems to solve on their talk page. Also, your expertise may be useful in improving the referencing of articles about companies and prominent people. Often these have references to sources which turn out to be press releases rather than real articles by journalists. You may be better able than most to spot these, and either replace them with better references or at least point them out on the articles' talk pages. Also, if you like to work on linking, check out Category:Orphaned articles, which has articles which aren't linked to anything at all yet. Whew! it's not like you will run out of things to do! —Anne Delong (talk) 12:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I notice that the first page you edited was Summit Awards. One of the things which you could usefully do, when you have read WP:Referencing for beginners, is to find references to published reliable sources independent of the subject to support the text in that article, in order to satisfy Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability, and to demonstrate the subject's notability. Currently the article has no references, and without such evidence it might be subject to deletion. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

If, of course, you are connected with the subject in question (which your user name might imply), then you ought to read WP:COI, and rather than editing the article yourself you should suggest proposed changes (with supporting references) at the article talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:24, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

How do I remove the "User:" from an artist page I am trying to create?

I just want the title to say the Artist's name and not the "User:" and then the artist name. I'm just trying to turn the talk page into an artist page.

Farah Burns (talk) 03:17, 10 September 2013 (UTC)Travis Farah Burns (talk) 03:17, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Farah. You have submitted a draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Farah Burns, and that will be reviewed. You ought to read WP:Your first article and WP:Referencing for beginners, and I have provided further links on your user talk page. You have got confused on User:Farah Burns, as that is the user page designed to say something about you as a Wikipedia editor. Furthermore, if you are writing about yourself, you need to read WP:Autobiography and WP:COI. - David Biddulph (talk) 03:38, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Adding location data

Hi, I have been working on displaying Wikipedia Article on a map that I and my coding partner have been developing. Its a Wiki Mapping platform called Mapedia. The aim is to give a view onto locations, with a historical context. To get the ball rolling, we have pulled in Wikipedia's articles, within a location centric context (our map!). This will, I hope, allow users to learn about the world around them and we hope in time to build a reciprocal replationship with Wikipedia i.e. encouraging those that add data directly to our map, to also add it to Wikipedia.

To this end, I have been looking at Wikipedia's article location data. On the whole, pretty good and there are a lot of strong articles with location data supplied. Where it does have issues though is with people. Take Anglo-Saxon historical personalities, your Kings, Queens, Abbot, Saints and so on. There are a wealth of articles on these people, but none, or at least very very few have location data (lat long).

Now I know that location data for a person may seem odd, but I think adding this would allow them to be added to our map, and locate them within the sphere of their lifetimes influence. Usually figures have some form of location to which they can be assigned, and the lead from this can come from their title (King of Wessex) or some other location that their article outlines. Think of it this way, you'd have a map of forts, palaces, villages and so on, but no people, and of course this is not a true reflection of the history. We DO have this data for some periods of history, so it would be a real shame not for this to also make it to our map.

So. what do others think on this issue. I DO want to add location data for people, but I do not want to muddy the waters. What would be the best course here? I guess for many the location may not be of much interest or importance, but it would be of great importance to our project.

Viewpoints most welcome Mapedia (talk) 23:04, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Mapedia. You are asking a very broad question. My educated guess is that it would be very difficult to gain consensus for adding generalized location data to biographies. Notable people tend to move around a lot, and deciding which location is most representative would be entirely subjective in many cases. I have a "minimalist" and a "maximalist" idea for you. How about using the place of birth, and in the case of dead people, the place of death? These are two standardized locations that are included in the majority of our biographies.

For the subset of our Good Articles and Featured Articles which are biographies, one could assume that the location data contained in the wikilinks within that article to geographical locations would constitute a "map" of that person's geographical impact. This might be dozens or hundreds of locations, and it would be fascinating to see those plotted out on a map.

I recommend that you take a look at WP:USERNAME. The name associated with your account has a number of problems, as it implies that is a shared account rather than one for an individual person, and that it represents an organization. Please consider a name change. Thank you.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding my username, I am using Mapedia, as I represent that organisation. Is this bad protocol here? If so, I can create another user account for editing and so on. However, using this account, does mean that I, or other Mapedia team members can also perform edits, create posts etc and these can be easily traced to us.

Maybe I should create a hybrid user along those lines i.e. mapedia_chrisThomas ? That way, each editor has an specific profile, whilst also representing Mapedia?

In terms of adding locations to bio's. Yes, I think some form of standard approach would make sense. I mean, as a user, if there IS a location, then you have an expectation of what would mean. Would it be the persons Birth Place, place of death, or some other arbitrary point in their life. We could follow this principle, Birthplace or Deathplace (?!), or failing these, the location of the persons most notable actions.

Take Harold Godwinson (English King), killed at the Battle of Hastings. We would use his birthplace first, or his deathplace, or the location of the Battle of Hastings. In this case, the Battle of Hastings and his deathplace coincide...

Another example, Hitler. Obviously we have many many details of his movements, and actions. So in this case, its best to plumb for his Birthplace.

In many cases, as we go way back into history, bio detail tends to get fragmented. So the birthplace, deathplace may not be known. Indeed even major events in their lives locations may be unknown, or educated guesses. So we need a hierachy of location options to fall back on.

Another issue we have. Some Articles are very rich with location data, BUT they are presented as a list of locations within that Article. An example would be...

List of Iron Age hoards in Britain

This information is fine. But for our map to make use of it, we would need each location split out into its own Article, with the location data presented near its top, plus all the other imagery and info on each hoard. I guess these Articles would then be presented as stubs, inviting further detail, imagery and so on as Wikipedia evolves.

Again, all viewpoints welcome Mapedia (talk) 11:05, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

This type of "meta" information is probably best handled by Wikidata rather than trying to load articles directly with it. If it is on Wikidata it is also instantly available to all other Wikipedias, not only this English one. Unfortunately I'm not well versed in the ways of Wikidata but I'm sure someone who can help could be found quite easily. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:58, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Providing content to an author of a WP article to allow them to update

Hello, all.

During a recent web-surf of Wikipedia, I came across an entry for "Wharton Place", an old house on the Eastern Shore of Virginia.

The article appears to be part of an effort undertaken by the National Register for Historic Places to enter the information from the applications used for their registered historic places.

There has been considerable research undertaken on Wharton Place since it was added to the register 40+ years ago which corrects long-standing factual errors regarding the house, its builder, architect, etc.

Is there a way to provide the research to the contributer for the Wikipedia article for their consideration and use to update the page?

Thanks. JaypegErange44 (talk) 22:01, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! There are a few ways you can help to correct the article. One is to write a note on the article's talk page. Just click the Talk tab at the top of the page. When you get there, click the New Section button at the top and write a message explaining your concerns. Please note that articles should be based on information found in reliable sources. If you can, list pointers to news articles or books where updated information can be found. To flag down other editors to help fix the problem, you can add this text to the top of the article itself: "{{disputed}}". If there are specific incorrect statements within the article, you can also add "{{cn}}" after each disputed sentence. DPRoberts534 (talk) 22:18, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Very helpful. Will do! Thanks! Erange44 (talk) 23:10, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Erange44. What I recommend to you is that you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and then proceed to edit and improve the article yourself. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and you are included in "anyone".Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Help with my first page

Hi! So i started the Hermes Press wiki page, and it was suggested to me that i come here and ask how to improve it/make it good for others to see. So...advice? Thanks in advance!

LiluMultipass (talk) 20:22, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi LiluMultipass, do you have a link to the page so we can take a look? My Best, --FGuerino (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

It's Hermes Press

LiluMultipass (talk) 20:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I've turned what you had into a wikilink. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

LiluMultipass 20:39, 9 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LiluMultipass (talk • contribs)

How long does it take for the WP AFC process to work?

HI,

Has anyone successfully gone through the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process and, if so, how long does it take to work?

Was it worth it or is it better to just move an article into main space and let the community start to improve it?

I ask because I noticed a very large backlog that makes me wonder if it's successful or if it's failing.

My Best, --FGuerino (talk) 20:14, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Sure, articles get created through AfC all the time: see . I think the amount of time it takes will vary widely from article to article. If you are sure that your article's subject is notable (and since you've been here a while), you could bypass AfC and put it directly in mainspace (creating it in your sandbox or a user subpage first if needed). Just be aware that a article space article with problems will probably be nominated for deletion, not just declined. Howicus (talk) 23:18, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Howicus, thanks for the response. I appreciate it. Does anyone else have any experiences with the AFC process? -- My Best --FGuerino (talk) 00:30, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, FGuerino! The process varies for several reasons. (1) Sometimes there is a big backlog. (2) Long, complicated articles about specialized topics often have to wait for a particularly experienced reviewer. (3) Some articles are declined and have to be improved before going through a second time. (4) Obviously unsuitable articles are often declined quickly (so if you are waiting that's a good sign!)

There have been over 30,000 articles accepted through the Afc process, so, yes, lots of people have had experience with this. I was so impatient waiting for my first article to pass (9 days) that I started fixing up grammar and spelling in the articles that were near mine in the queue, and now it's been nine months and I'm still working on this project! —Anne Delong (talk) 01:11, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Anne, thanks for taking the time to respond. Wow! 30K is definitely a lot when you compare it to a backlog of about 1800. To be honest, I'm not so worried about the wait if I know the article is constructively being reviewed and improved, or if an article is rejected and it's passed back with very specific issues opportunities for correction. I guess I'm most worried about making sure that I've done as much as I can to get the draft into solid enough shape that I'm not wasting the time of any WP AFC reviewers. May I ask (just out of curiosity, because I personally intend to go through the AFC), do many people still promote directly to main space, anymore, or is it considered incorrect process to do so, as I don't see anything specific in the WP AFC about it being mandatory for all articles? -- My Best, --FGuerino (talk) 02:21, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello FGuerino and welcome back to the Teahouse. Yes, 30K is a lot, but on the other hand, it is less that 1% of the 4.3 million English language articles on Wikipedia. AfC is an excellent service for new editors unfamiliar with how to create an acceptable article, but by no means is it mandatory. Any editor who is conversant with our policies and procedures, and confident of their ability to write compliant articles, can simply write a draft in a sandbox, and then move it to main space. I have written over 60 articles (which I list on my user page) and have never gone through AfC. And none of my articles (knock on wood) has been deleted so far. AfC is an outstanding service for new editors, but it is also a process with internal problems. Discussion on improvements is ongoing.

An article moved directly to main space is subject to review by new page patrollers who may be harsh in their assessment, and in many cases will try to delete the article, or tag it for improvement. A thick skin is helpful. Good luck! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:23, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello again Cullen³²⁸,

Yes, you've mentioned that the AFC is a work in progress. I've been studying both paths just to get to know and understand how WP works. I'm not really concerned about how long it takes to publish as much as I'm interested in the least political path, where the people you're working with are always willing to teach and help you learn as you develop your articles so that, both, my articles and my writing abilities are constantly improving. I guess I'll see exactly how the AFC performs, once I go through it. Anyhow, thanks very much for your perspectives and experiences. All of it helps.

My Best, --FGuerino (talk) 14:00, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Images

Please can someone who knows about image copyright, and downloading images for a 1920s performing artist? The article in question is Clarence Chesterfield Howerton, and there are lots of photos out there, but I don't have enough experience in this area to feel happy uploading images. (Note: Howerton performed under the name of 'Major Mite', so there are also images under that heading.) Thanks, Matty.007 18:57, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I did a brief look and I didn't see anything that was verifiably in the Public Domain or released under an appropriate license. He was 9 at the time of the photo that is in the article, so if no free license can be found, we could make a fair use claim on a photo showing his height when he was older, especially if that photo did a good job showing height comparison with someone else. Before we can do that, we need to show that an exhaustive search was done for a free photo. Would you consider making a table or list with the URL's of all of the photos you can find? I can look through that list and see if any of them are free content. Ryan Vesey 21:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello Matty.007. Items published in the United States in 1923 or after are subject to copyright in most cases, unless we have good evidence to the contrary. The current image is dated 1922, so prospects for an unambiguously free image after that date are bleak, I think. But anything is possible. I hate to disagree with an experienced editor like Ryan Vesey but we already have a good copyright free image. I think that it is a stretch to claim fair use on another image when we already have this representative free image of him early in his performing career. Copyright is important, and fair use exceptions should be very narrowly requested. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:16, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Creating a Wiki page in another language

Hello! I recently created a Wikipedia page for Parsons Paris (2013). I would now like to create an article similar to this, or exactly this one, in French that will live on the French Wiki. I have posted this question on the English Parsons Paris Wikipedia page for the editors that know my history with that article personally. I would just like to know if there is any general advice I should know in regards to creating an existing article for another language Wiki page. Mickeyallen (talk) 15:50, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

The general advice is at Wikipedia:Translate us. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Are you folks aware of the "Wikistorming Project"

It seems like a concerted effort by several ideological institutions to tamper with the standards of objectivity on Wikipedia. We have projects on feminism which are fine, but this seems directed to pushing as much as possible of one set of viewpoints and recruiting students with bribes of grades to do it. It seems quite unethical to me both in-terms of editor participation and the policies of the schools in question. I'd like to get other peoples opinions on this.

http://femtechnet.newschool.edu/wikistorming/

Michalchik (talk) 09:15, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• To me this seems entirely a good thing. Women are hugely unrepresented in the editing population here. As a result there are many areas we are deficient in that these and other commentators have noted. I am particularly encouraged by how this project is trying to make sure its contributors engage with the Wikipedia community and its procedures. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 10:11, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to our attention, though. While it will be great to have a group of new female editors, it's good for the current editors to be aware of what's going on so that we can lead them into the ways of positive, neutral editing. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

The content of that article is a lot more encouraging than the rather confrontational title.

I expect all the project contributors will be indef-banned in no time though. This is exactly the sort of approach that the WP hive mind sees as a confrontational attack and closes ranks against. 8-( It's nearly as un-WP an idea to the ANI circle jerk as having subject competence in editors. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:35, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• Doing a little research, this project is being headed up by Wadewitz, an experienced editor in good standing. Some of the external press on this has been quite misleading; this is not the coordinated POV push that FOX news would want people to think it is. Some of these editors may find themselves here at the Teahouse, and we should be ready to help them as we would everybody else. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:57, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
• I'm fine with the goals and aims of the project as long as it doesn't spin out of control and become too POV and soapbox-like. Konveyor Belt ^{yell at me} 15:22, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

80% of Wikipedia editors are men, so I don't see a huge problem with this. They aren't coming to push a view, they are coming to make WP more objective by reducing bias. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Not only are the women on WP underrepresented in editors (from a man), the female sports, such as the female football teams still have lots of pages needing creating. Matty.007 18:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Twinkle and Watchlist

Sorry for all the questions.

I've been using Twinkle and every time I edit a page, it adds it to my watchlist. I've gone to my preferences and told it not to (everything is unchecked under the Watchlist tab), but it keeps doing it. Am I missing something? EvergreenFir (talk) 03:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey EvergreenFir. I have no input to offer on my own behalf, but this problem has come up before and those in the know have offered solutions. See Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 30#adding to watchlist, Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 20#Watchlist and Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 13#Watchlist problem. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:05, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. It only seems to happen when I rollback I noticed. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:18, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Does WP cater to personal requests?

Does WP remove information if the relatives of the subject of an article request it? In this case, the children of a person want their names removed from an article. See here. To me, it seems like it should not be removed. EvergreenFir (talk) 02:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Evergreen-- the answer to your question depends on a few factors. The Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons in regards to names states When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. So it depends on whether or not reporting their names is relevant based on what reliable sources have covered and whether removing their names is a loss of context. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 02:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello EvergreenFir. Each situation has to be considered on a case-by-case basis. There are many cases where the children of a notable person are discussed extensively in reliable sources, and are an integral part of their life story. This does not seem to be such a case.

In this particular case, the names and birth dates of the children were unreferenced in earlier versions of the article. The source of the information appears to be personal knowledge by the original writer of the article, as shown in edit summaries, and according to that person, these non-notable people want this unreferenced and therefore unverifiable information removed. As I read our policy on biographies of living people, there are several good reasons to keep this information out of the article, and no good ones to keep it in. As for whether we "cater to personal requests", in my opinion no more so than I am "catering" to you by answering your question. I prefer to think of it simply as being helpful. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:09, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both for your input! Trying to get my head around Wiki's policies. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Columns. That is all ;- )

Hey Jim and friendly Teahouse folks,

All I am looking for is the wiki markup for breaking a long list into 2 or 3 columns. I know I've seen it on other articles and I even remember seeing "col" markup but I've gone through Manuel of Style and associated Layout and Formatting and can't find this information anywhere.

I really only come here when I search and can't find the answer myself! Thanks for any answers you can provide. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello again, Liz. Though I don't use the technique myself, I hope that you will find Help:Columns to be helpful regarding columns. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Jim. Much appreciated. It's frustrating to do all kinds of searches on Wikipedia where you think something will be and come up empty (this happens to me all.of.the.time with Wikipedia-related pages). Then to find it's a Help Page? I never go to Help, I assumed it is mostly introductory information. The information on that page you directed me to wasn't what I needed but it led me to Templates that had a wide variety of markups to achieve columns. I don't think I would've stumbled on to them without that first Help page.

On my Talk Page, I was trying to explain how confusing Categories can be and came up with at least 20 categories that could be applied to an actor's WP article, depending on her/his career. It was just a long list and so it looks much better now that it's in three columns.

Thanks again! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Editing an Article to Correct 'Mixed Inline and End References'

Hello Fellow Editors,

I am working on a Wikipedia article about Toronto nightlife personality Mandy Goodhandy. On my most recent submission, I received this comment below the article's rejection notice:

Comment: Mixed inline and end references (including references after the reflist) make this a procedural fail. Please correct. Hasteur (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to go about correcting this. You can find the unapproved article here: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mandy Goodhandy

Any suggestions on how to fix this are much appreciated.

Josh.bentleyswan (talk) 12:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

When you want to cite a website other than wikipedia in the course of your article, they are supposed to have the reference tags <ref>, </ref> so that when you use the template 'reflist', it automatically creates a list of references used in the article. If you want to link to any webpage after the reflist template, it should be in a section like 'external links' or 'further reading'. -- signature lost with unterminated nowiki

(edit conflict) I have given you a number of links on your user talk page, including WP:Referencing for beginners which was a link provided on a number of the earlier responses to your AFC. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:32, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey Josh. I have done a copyedit. Among others, the main issues fixed were that you had duplicated the URLs of all of the cites that you used in the inline citations, below the reflist template. Although you used some inline citations, you also had naked links in the text pointing to external sites. Some other things to note are generally only the name of the topic in the first sentence of an article is boldfaced. Names of movies and similar matters are italicized. Generally, once the person's name is established, we only use their last name to refer to the them, not their full name. Anyway, I think now that the underbrush has been cleared away, the review is ready for a second pass. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Josh.bentleyswan! Just to clarify, it is okay to have both inline citations (with ref tags mentioned above) and general references, {listed with bullet points in the reference section) in the article. Just don't put the same reference in both places; this just clutters the page for no purpose. Both types of references should be written out properly with title, author, publication name, publisher and date, etc., depending on what type of publication it is. URL links in the body of the article are a no-no. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:39, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to all of you for your help and suggestions. Particularly Fuhghettaboutit for doing such a thorough editing job. That's very helpful, and will hopefully go some way to getting the article approved.

Just doing some final checks now before I resubmit.

Josh.bentleyswan (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

wikicommons

I recently came across an image uploaded in commons citing its been owned by the uploader. But the image has a digital watermark of an entertainment website. And since its in commons, I'm unable to add any 'digital watermark' tags to it. -- Sriram Vikram (talk) 07:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Sriram Vikram. In my opinion, the watermark is a strong indication of a possible copyright violation. See WP:WATERMARK. Wikimedia Commons is a separate project with its own administration. I suggest that you report the problem with the specific image there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thats what I thought. The uploader seems to be using a bogus account. Anyway, where should I report it? -- Sriram Vikram (talk) 07:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sriram, welcome to the Teahouse. To change the tags on this image, you must click the link to go to the description page on Commons. Before editing on Commons, you should log in there. Before you do this, you should enable unified login. Visit the page Special:MergeAccount and follow the instructions there. Then you can go to commons.wikimedia.org and log in using your Wikipedia username and password. Hope that helps! DPRoberts534 (talk) 07:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Okay. I also stumbled upon an article with so many 'free' images that seems to be taken from the subject's official website. -- Sriram Vikram (talk) 07:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Webcite not working

Hello hosts and parasites,

webcite archive page is unavailable but I need to archive an URL which is going to get deleted after 24 hours. What to do? Is there any other alternative available? Sohambanerjee1998 06:51, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sohambanerjee1998. I believe that the archiving service, which is unaffiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation, is having financial problems. I recommend that you cite the website as thoroughly as possible: site name, publisher, city, article or item name, author name, copyright date, and so on. Also include a two or three sentence quotation supporting its use in the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:30, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

retrieved saved article

I am a novice who created an article in my own Sandbox and saved it. Returning to Wikipedia and my sandbox, I can't find the article anywhere nor is it reported as deleted.

Where might I look for a saved article?

Alice1938 (talk) 02:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Alice. I'm stumped. I have looked at your contributions and deleted contributions (you have none), which means under *this account name* at *this project* it looks like the page was never created. I also looked at your global contributions, as people occasionally create pages at other projects by accident, but found none as well (though I can't look for deleted contributions outside of this project). Barring oversighting (which is very rare and unlikely here), or the scenario were you were using a different account name or not logged in when you made the edits (if so, tell us the name or identify the IP address), it looks like the page was never saved, despite that you think it was. Sometimes, if you take a long time before saving, even if you click the save page button, you will get a message not unlike ""Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data." In such cases you might think you saved but it never "took". It is incredibly frustrating when you lose material you've worked hard on and it's unretrievable. Wish I could give you a magic pill but it looks like it's gone. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Dear Alice: Welcome to Wikipedia! It looks like you forgot to log in before writing your article. It was saved under your IP address at User:24.12.186.51. I have moved it to your user page, since it's about you. The sandbox is more for working on articles or testing out how things will look. I think Fuhghettaboutit couldn't find it because I was moving it just then. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:29, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I looked at that, but didn't think that looked like an article draft, just an attempt at a userpage blurb. If that is it, all's well that ends well:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Is there a template for self-disclosing a relationship to a subject of an article?

I have over 4500+ edits on en.wikipedia.org, so I have been around for awhile. I often specialize in improving citations for articles. Occasionally I find myself editing an article for which I may have a connection. For example, I recently edited an BLP article whose subject was honored a couple of years ago by an organization that I recently joined. I also joined an art museum recently & hope to do some GLAM work with the museum. I like to view my edits as objective, but, nevertheless, I would like to self-disclose any connection, no matter how remote, with articles that I edit. I was wondering if anyone knew if there are any templates for this. Some of the templates that I have examined, such as Template:Connected contributor, seem to be be designed for identifying others, & not for self-disclosure.

If there is not such template, perhaps I can design my own. Before I did that, though, I thought I would check here first.

Peaceray (talk) 00:06, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey Peaceray! An admirable desire, though I think many would find the type of COI you are disclosing on the extreme mild end. Anyway, I have just searched high and low and found nothing, though I really thought such a template would exist. There is {{Request edit}} but it's not what you're after. If no one else turns one up I think creating such a template would be a good idea. I would be glad to help or give feedback if you post a draft. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

You don't need a template, Peaceray. Just mention this on your user page. That's what I do. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

You also might mention your connection on the article Talk Page. But really, if you are this conscious about a possible COI, you are likely to work hard to be objective. The harder cases are when people are not forthcoming about their participation in a project, company or event. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

What becomes of Wiki articles which have been superseded by subsequent articles?

What becomes of Wiki articles which have been superseded by subsequent articles? About a decade I submitted a poorly documented but accurate article about the life & TIMES of Pope Adrian IV, Nicholas Breakspeare. Does it still exist in cyperspace? Peter WilsonPmwilson84 (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Peter, welcome to the Teahouse. Unless the edit is oversighted (which rarely happens), every version of every Wikipedia page is kept and can be accessed. You can access your own submissions by clicking on the date links in Special:Contributions/Pmwilson84. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:34, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Pmwilson84. Our article on Pope Adrian IV goes back to September, 2001, and was originally created by Sjc. If that is an old account of yours, then the complete history is available at the article, back to the earliest edit. If you created an article with a different name, it may have been merged into the current article or deleted as redundant. In recent years, deleted articles are preserved and can be viewed by administrators. I am not sure whether that was the case in the earliest years of Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible you are thinking of your post to the talk page of the existing article on January 15, 2006, in which you suggested text? The page as you edited it can be seen here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

You win today's shiny new junior detective badge, Fuhghettaboutit. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:34, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

:-) I must admit I had help with this one.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:33, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Very cool! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi, I am not sure if I am able to request someone to do a peer review for me. If it turns out I can, thanks, I will ask here (but I don't want to make a mistake). Thanks, Matty.007 15:04, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I am enjoying a hot cup of Twinings English Breakfast at the moment. I, or someone else here, can take a look at your article, suggest directions for improvement, and answer any questions you have about it. If you would like a more detailed review, list it at WP:REVIEW. Before listing it, they recommend you read this Signpost article and address as many of the issues listed there as you can on your own. DPRoberts534 (talk) 16:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I have been to the Teahouse before, indeed, am a host, but thanks for the welcome. I have looked at those issues, and I think it is OK. I will put the article here, and apologise if it isn't OK: the article is Clarence Chesterfield Howerton. Thanks, Matty.007 16:19, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift response though. Twinings is a nice make of breakfast tea, I have to agree. Matty.007 16:33, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Twinings is my favorite. The real stuff, though, not the leftovers they sell in the USA. DPRoberts534 (talk) 16:44, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Rather nicely written. I have a few suggestions for improvement. The reliance on primary sources in certain sections is conspicuous. I would simply remove the grave and census content if the information was not published elsewhere. The image in the lead is fantastic and really gives a good sense of the subject. Since Howerton performed in the 1920s, you might be able to find more public domain images. I think adding more quality photos would make this article stand out. Finally, I would have liked to have seen more detail about his film roles. DPRoberts534 (talk) 16:42, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I will copy this to the page, and attempt to address the issues. Thanks, Matty.007 16:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Need to capitalise a title and can't

HI all.

I was curating Mani nouri, which needs it's title capitalised, but couldn't. I tried {{DISPLAYTITLE:Mani Nouri}}, but that didn't work.

What should I do? I didn't want to create a redirect. William Reid Boyd (talk) 11:02, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Someone else fixed it. See Help:move for information on how to move pages in the future. Adabow (talk) 11:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Cheers. Thanks, I'll take a look. William Reid Boyd (talk) 12:32, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.

My article about Frederick Bee has this message, "This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page." I could not find issues listed in the article. MC Potbelly 10:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcpotbelly (talk • contribs)

Hi Mcpotbelly, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). I have removed the multiple issues tag, and added a tag which says that the writing needs to be less like a list. Thanks, Matty.007 13:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Refrence Desk Questions

Last time you said my questions were fit for the Wikipedia:Reference Desk but how do you ask a question on there? IGotProof (talk) 13:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

It's very similar to asking a question here at the Teahouse. Go to the appropriate Reference Desk (for example, Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment for questions about sports, popular culture, movies, music, video games, and TV shows), click on the "Ask a new question" button, type in the subject line and the text of your question, sign with ~~~~, and click on "Save page". Gandalf61 (talk) 13:39, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) In accordance with the instructions at the top of that page, first you search to see whether an answer is already available on Wikipedia. If not, then where it says "For information on any topic, choose a category for your question:" you choose a category for your question. Having done that, when you have read the further instructions, you can use the button labelled "Ready? Ask a new question". - David Biddulph (talk) 13:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I just added a bit of new info on the page "Golem" in the section on popular culture 1991-2000 and am getting stopped with a "too many characters" error on one of my citations (added today, 9/7/13). I don't actually see my problem on the specific help page it links to. Could someone take a peek or otherwise help me out?Minissa (talk) 00:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I have corrected your edit. You had an incorrect syntax for your attempt at using the <ref> tag; I would recommend that you read WP:Referencing for beginners. You have supplied a bare URL, so I would recommend that you expand the information, most easily done by the use of the {{tl:cite web}} template. I also removed your attempt to sign with 4 tildes; we do that on talk pages & discussion pages like this, but not in articles. As a final point you seem to have added this question to a discussion from a few days ago an another topic, which is why your question wasn't noticed earlier; in future, if you have a new question, start a new section and then you will hopefully get a prompter answer. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you (to David Biddulph) for the clarification and for correcting. I will go and study the page you referred me to before I post again.Minissa (talk) 21:18, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Dealing with conspiracy theorists and racists (not mutually exclusive)

Any suggests on dealing with someone who believes and promotes racist propaganda? In this case, the user believes that Whites are being subjected to genocide in South Africa. So far, it's mostly contained to a talk page, but this user has tried to edit other pages with this info. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi EvergreenFir, you do seem to come across some interesting users. I would point them towards our Wikipedia is not a soapbox policy and reinforce what is a reliable source. If they persist in using Facebook then a block will almost certainly be forthcoming after a fourth-level warning. Discussion such as the one you've pointed to, if it occurs on article talk pages, can be reverted based on Wikipedia is not a forum and the user given escalating warnings as no improvements can be credibly discussed using Facebook as a source. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Lol, this is what I get for watching the new user creation log. Thanks for the info. I will keep an eye on their edits and be as civil as possible. The WP:NOTFORUM is a useful one that I didn't know about. Thanks! EvergreenFir (talk) 01:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

The folks at WP:WikiProject South Africa might also be able to help - and would in any event probably like to know about it if someone is causing trouble in "their patch", so please drop a note there too. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:03, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Imagemaps

How can I create one of those? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 19:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

You need to use an HTML editor. I used to use Dreamweaver, but there are cheaper and even free alternatives available now, such as [1]. Eric Corbett 19:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I mean like the banner of Theonesean or the image in Anna Frodesiak's userpage. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 19:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

So did I. It's called an image map because it maps images (or parts of images) to urls, not because it has anything to do with geographical maps. Eric Corbett 19:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks Eric. I guess I'll never had my own image map :'( Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 19:54, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

No reason why you shouldn't, it's very easy to do once you've created your image. Eric Corbett 19:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

See also mw:Extension:ImageMap#See also. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Eric Corbett, Miss Bono, who lives in Cuba, accesses Wikipedia through a limited intranet. She has no regular access to the broader internet, and can't use Google or Wikimedia Commons or any of the vast range of online tools most of us take for granted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Then one of the cheap HTML editors would serve. Eric Corbett 22:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

She can't download software, cheap or free, from the internet. She has no access. Wikipedia is the only external site she has access too. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:42, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

What a curious place Cuba must be if that's true. But how did she get hold of her browser then? From a state-owned PC dealership? Some friends of ours were recently on holiday in Cuba, and I don't recall them complaining about lack of access to the Internet. Maybe they had other things on their minds though. Eric Corbett 22:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Internet in Cuba may be helpful to refer to. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 23:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

"When buying computers was legalized in 2007 ..." Extraordinary, quite extraordinary. I wonder what Castro's legacy will be seen to have been by future generations. Eric Corbett 23:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Your friends who visited Cuba recently probably stayed in a tourist enclave, Eric. This is definitely not an appropriate venue to discuss Fidel Castro's legacy. Miss Bono has made it clear that she is uninterested in discussing politics. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Tourists have Internet access at Hotels (very expensive for us) Thanks, Cullen for your explanations and for covering my back. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Then stop discussing it. Simple. Eric Corbett 09:01, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

• Miss Bono welcome back to the Teahouse with another fantastic question! Special programs to do this are not "necessary", but do make it a lot simpler if you are actually making an image map. You could use PrimeHunter's suggestion of checking out Extension:ImageMap (which is what I personally use), or, if that is too advanced for you at this time (you seem to learn very quickly), you can try and do something more simple like create a table with no borders and mess around with (col|row)span and various transparent background images or whatnot, or you can do like Tito Dutta has done and set text (or images) on top of your background using css to manipulate placement of elements. Happy editing!!! Technical 13 (talk) 12:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Technical 13. I cannot access meta, though. I will have to learn to do it with tables and learn about those (col|row) and stuffs! :) Thank you very much! And thanks for the badge. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I had forgotten that you can't get to MediaWiki wiki... In the collapsed section below are the instructions for using that extension for you:

C&P "transclusion" of Extension:ImageMap's instructions for use.

ImageMap is an extension which allows clickable image maps. An image map is a list of coordinates in a specific image, which hyperlinks areas of the image to multiple destinations (in contrast to a normal image link, in which the entire area of the image links to a single destination). For example, a map of the world may have each country hyperlinked to further information about that country. The intention of an image map is to provide an easy way of linking various parts of an image without dividing the image into separate image files.

Examples

Simple example without caption

<imagemap>
Image:Example2.png|150px|alt=Alt text
default [[Main Page|Go to main page]]
</imagemap>

The above example always links to the Main Page, no matter where you click on it. To find out more about the image, click on the blue "i" icon .

Complex example with caption

<imagemap>
Image:JoshuaReynoldsParty.jpg|thumb|center|400px|alt=Dining room with nine men seated around a table. The dinner has been finished, and a large man at the head talks and gesticulates while the others eagerly listen. The men wear wigs and clothing of late 18th century Britain, and the furniture, hangings, and chandelier are of similar vintage. A liveried servant is entering with a tray bearing two high-shouldered decanters of wine.|Image map example. Clicking on a person in the picture causes the browser to load the appropriate article.

poly 133 343 124 287 159 224 189 228 195 291 222 311 209 343 209 354 243 362 292 466 250 463 [[w:Samuel Johnson|Dr Johnson - Dictionary writer]]
poly 76 224 84 255 43 302 62 400 123 423 121 361 137 344 122 290 111 234 96 225 [[w:James Boswell|Boswell - Biographer]]
poly 190 276 208 240 229 228 247 238 250 258 286 319 282 323 223 323 220 301 200 295 [[w:Joshua Reynolds|Sir Joshua Reynolds - Host]]
poly 308 317 311 270 328 261 316 246 320 228 343 227 357 240 377 274 366 284 352 311 319 324 [[w:David Garrick|David Garrick - actor]]
poly 252 406 313 343 341 343 366 280 383 273 372 251 378 222 409 228 414 280 420 292 390 300 374 360 359 437 306 418 313 391 272 415 [[w:Edmund Burke|Edmund Burke - statesman]]
rect 418 220 452 287 [[w:Pasquale Paoli|Pasqual Paoli - Corsican patriot]]
poly 455 238 484 253 505 303 495 363 501 377 491 443 429 439 423 375 466 352 [[w:Charles Burney|Charles Burney - music historian]]
poly 501 279 546 237 567 239 572 308 560 326 537 316 530 300 502 289 [[w:Thomas Warton|Thomas Warton - poet laureate]]
poly 572 453 591 446 572 373 603 351 562 325 592 288 573 260 573 248 591 243 615 254 637 280 655 334 705 396 656 419 625 382 609 391 613 453 [[w:Oliver Goldsmith|Oliver Goldsmith - writer]]
rect 450 86 584 188 [[w:Joshua Reynolds|prob.The Infant Academy 1782]]
rect 286 87 376 191 [[w:Joshua Reynolds|unknown painting]]
circle 100 141 20 [[w:Joshua Reynolds|An unknown portrait]]
poly 503 192 511 176 532 176 534 200 553 219 554 234 541 236 525 261 506 261 511 220 515 215 [[w:Francis Barber|servant - poss. Francis Barber]]
rect 12 10 702 500 [[w:The Club (Literary Club)|Use button to enlarge or use hyperlinks]]
</imagemap>

Image map example. Clicking on a person in the picture causes the browser to load the appropriate article.

The above example links to many different pages, depending on where you click it. To find out more about the image, click on the double-rectangle icon .

Syntax description

The contents of an <imagemap> tag consists of blank lines, comments (starting with #) and logical lines. The first logical line specifies the image to be displayed. This must be in the same format as an ordinary MediaWiki image link, except without the enclosing [[ and ]]. If the first line specifies a "thumb" or "frame" image, then the first line's caption and any |alt= parameter are treated as the image's caption and alt text in the usual way; otherwise, the first line's |alt= parameter (or, if absent, any caption) specifies the image's alt text. In neither case does the image itself have title text (often used for tooltips); any title text is taken from the regions described in later lines.

Further lines are split into tokens, separated by whitespace. The function of each line is determined by the first token in the line. All coordinates are according to the full-size image, not the visible image. They should be specified as distance from left edge (horizontal pixel count), distance from top (vertical pixel count).

desc

Specifies the location of a blue "i" icon , which links to the image description. Possible values: top-right, bottom-right (default), bottom-left, top-left, none. This parameter is ignored for "thumb" or "frame" images, which instead employ the usual double-rectangle icon .

Example:

<imagemap>

Image:PolierMartinWombwellZoffany.jpg|thumb|200px|Colonel Antoine Polier

rect 269 140 344 305 [[Claude Martin]]

rect 124 147 181 298 [[Antoine Polier|Antoine-Louis Polier]]

desc none

</imagemap>

poly

A polygon. The coordinates of the vertices are given, followed by a link in square brackets.

rect

A rectangle. The parameters are the coordinates of the top-left and bottom-right corners, followed by a title to link to in square brackets.

circle

A circle. The first two parameters are the coordinates of the center, the third is the radius. The coordinates are followed by a link in square brackets.

default

This gives the default link, where no other regions are specified.

All coordinates are specified relative to the source image. The image can be scaled using thumbnail syntax, in which case the image map coordinates will be automatically scaled as well.

All links are given in either the form [[Page title]] or [[Page title|description]]. In the latter case, the part after the pipe "|" becomes the title attribute of the link—in most browsers, it will pop up as a tooltip when the user hovers over it; the part after the pipe also becomes the alt text for the link. If no explicit link description is given, the page title is used.

Areas which overlap give precedence to the first link listed.

Good luck! Technical 13 (talk) 13:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thankss!!!! :D Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I can't see the right side. I can't even use the right arrow key.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:06, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Most browsers have a horizontal scrollbar at the bottom when the page is wide. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

And normally that works. But in this situation it's not happening.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:21, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Which browser? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Can someone explain to me how I know which numbers I have to use?? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 12:30, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

If you can't read the #Syntax description section above (for which you'll probably need to click the [show] alongside the heading "C&P "transclusion" of Extension:ImageMap's instructions for use."), among the most relevant parts about the numbers are the following:

• "

poly

A polygon. The coordinates of the vertices are given, followed by a link in square brackets.

rect

A rectangle. The parameters are the coordinates of the top-left and bottom-right corners, followed by a title to link to in square brackets.

circle

A circle. The first two parameters are the coordinates of the center, the third is the radius. The coordinates are followed by a link in square brackets. "

• "They should be specified as distance from left edge (horizontal pixel count), distance from top (vertical pixel count)."

- David Biddulph (talk) 12:49, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I have IE9. This is weird that I still can't see the text above that was collapsed unless I'm editing.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:45, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• Hey there Miss Bono, there are multiple ways to do it. You can use an online resource like http://www.image-maps.com/ or you can read one of many different documentation sites on how to do it ([2][3][4]) or you can save a copy of the image to your hard drive and just use a program like ms-paint or gimp to get the coordinates that you need. Based on the numbers you get from using that method (you will have to adjust and compensate for whatever modifications you make to image size on the page) you can get pretty close and use minimal fudging to make it work as you want. If you want some help, let me know what background image you want to use and what you want the size of the image to be on your page (may I recommend trying to keep it under 800px wide?) and I'll help you get your coords... Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 21:50, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Tech!. I am working on an image in Photoshop. I'll let you know as soon as I finish. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 15:03, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Great Miss Bono! I did a quick Google search for you and came up with an answer from Yahoo! answers that might help you:

• You can view the mouse position based on how you have your Preferences for Units and Rulers set up. However, it will not be displayed in the Status bar.

1. Go to Edit > Preferences
2. Select Units & Rulers and set Units > Rulers to 'Pixels'. Click 'OK'.
3. Go to the Window menu and click 'Info'.
4. The mouse position will be displayed in the bottom left quadrant of the Info window, under '+ X Y'.

Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 15:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Well done, Technical 13. There are however even more simplistic approaches , if it works, that is. One could create a table with the image as back ground and have a link associated with that cell in that table. Thats old html stuff and can be done in notepad, which is what I still ue to edit some of my web stuff. IMO, hex color declarations are far better than the palattes provided in higher end programs, IMO.

Coal town guy (talk) 02:54, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

for official responses send certified letter to wikimedia

I emailed wikimedia and explained my acting credits were attributed to another actress who shares my name and happens to have died before some of the productions or movie attributed to her were performed or filmed.. I want my own biography and my credits deleted from the dead actress's article and listed in mine. I have been awarded the Los Angeles Drama Critics circle award and was a Ny Drama Desk Award Nominee.and have appeared in many Original Broadway musicals and played one ol the mothers, Lucy in the movie Weird Science..I was notified in a Wikimedia email that - needed to send a certified letter to Wikimedia Org. Because th person who read my email was a volunteer and any reply wasnt necessarily OFFICIAL. THAT A LETTER THRU THE USPO CERTIFIED WAS THE WAY TOGO. Ironic..Anyway is there something important I should put in the letter..likecopies of contracts or play bills or should I just wait to hear what you need to create a bio.page for me . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.28.115.117 (talk) 04:26, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi! This is a forum for answering editing questions from new editors. It is staffed by volunteer editors that have no connection to WMF other than the fact that we are Wikipedia editors; unpaid volunteers with no clue as to the business workings of WMF. Also, from what you have written here, there is no way to tell who you are so we could possibly address your concerns with whatever article(s) you are concerned with. If you do not wish to disclose that, then your best option I would say is to respond to the letter you are talking about. For more information about the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), see their article here on Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation. We really don't have much to work with from what us unpaid volunteers have knowledge of and what you have told us, so I hope this is of some help. Gtwfan52 (talk) 04:41, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

If you want Teahouse volunteers to investigate the article in question, then you will have to tell us who you are. We have an essay on this type of situation called Don't build the Frankenstein, which cautions us against combining facts about two people with the same name into a single article. For more information on the process for verifying your identity, please read WP:OTRS carefully. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:41, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

68.28.115.117, has the Internet Movie Database got it sorted out right? Although they are typically not considered a reliable source, in your letter or email, you could list the different pages for the various people who share your name and identify which person is you. If IMDb doesn't have it straight, I'd work on changing that site as you can submit changes fairly directly (which is why it's not always considered a RS). But I know from experience that IMDb is used to having many people in the entire movie-making business sharing a name and work to keep the identities straight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:40, 8 September 2013 (UTC)