Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 266

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 260

←

→

how do i request that an article be undeleted?

I recently had an article for being accused of advertising, but how do I request that it be undeleted? The information I provided detailed who a person was and the work he has done. I don't understand how could convey this information any other way. How this was advertising?DerrinRogers (talk) 16:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

@DerrinRogers: Hi Derrin The page cannot be undeleted as it was full of copyright violations by your copying and pasting previously written text marketing his publications into the page, as well as material from his MarketersMedia press release. A big part of the reason it read as advertising was because it contained all that advertizing copy, but frankly, pretty much all of the text after the first two sentences establishing basic details about the subject read as written for a sales brochure, intended to convince just how wonderful the person and his products are and was full of detail about what he believes, rather than simple facts about him. An encyclopedia article is not written to convince and does not convey the writer's opinion about the subject or read as if written by someone who knows the person. To give an example, a statement like his "passion is that the Holy Spirit of God, by the mercy of Jesus will lead the way for individuals to understand and go forth in life, being a blessing to others" has no place in an encyclopedia article. Another problem is that, as far as I can tell, the article did not contain any reliable secondary sources discussing the subject, so there was no evidence the subject is notable, as we use that word here to indicate that the world has taken note of the subject by publishing such substantive material about them in reliable sources independent of them. That is true of most of the people in the world, by the way, including me. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:13, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

How do I edit using a mobile?

hi wiki,this is Jegan, fromIndia. i use wikipedia through mobile. i have trouble creating an account and editing.please suggest me something i can do with the mobile as i don't have any computer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.222.227.7 (talk) 17:20, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jegan. You have plenty of options for mobile access - see Help:Mobile access. Your access is a little restricted compared to registered users (see IP), but you can still edit a lot of Wikipedia pages. RockMagnetist(talk) 18:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

New question

hi there,do i really need an android powered mobile to create an account and do the editing?how could i contribute to wikipedia?please note that i don't own a computer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.222.246.179 (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

@101.222.246.179: Welcome to the Teahouse. I think there are other options besides Android for using Wikipedia, though I'm not personally familiar with mobile use. I believe only the official Wikipedia apps allow account creation and editing. Please refer to this page for mobile options. If you don't own a computer, you can try visiting a public library, where computer use is usually free. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 18:56, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

page about yourself

Hey. how do i create my own page and insert an info box?Aakash Yaduvanshi (talk) 20:07, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey Aakash Yaduvanshi welcome to the Teahouse. You can't create an autobiography if you don't have sources to prove your notability. Autobiographies are extremely rare in Wikipedia due to the fact that it causes conflict of interest. However you can insert content and/or infobox to your userpage but it won't act as a part of Wikipedia articles. Which means your page won't be displayed if you searched for it using the search box.--Chamith (talk) 21:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Aakash Yaduvanshi, I agree with Chamith. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and most people are not important enough to have articles about themselves in an encyclopedia. Even if you are notable, you are strongly discouraged from writing about yourself. If you are interested in working on Wikipedia other than writing about yourself, you can write about what you will do on Wikipedia on your user page, User:Aakash Yaduvanshi. But you shouldn’t put an infobox there because it would make it look like an article. See Wikipedia:User pages for guidelines. —teb728 t c 21:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Check reverts of individual user

Is there any way to filter contribution looks of an individual user to see which edits I have made that were reverted so I can find what contribution I made which I shouldn't have or should discuss? David Condrey ^{log talk} 18:41, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! If you know the username of the user, head over to tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/summary.py, fill in the user name of the desired user and add 'David Condrey' into the Search field and click Submit. It should list the reverts that the user has made only if he or she has indicated your username on the edit summary. ///EuroCarGT 20:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

@David Condrey: Additionally, though you might already be aware of this and are looking for a supplement to it, the notifications system will attempt to tell you about edits of yours that have been reverted. To make sure this is turned on, go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo and see if the box is ticked for "Edit revert". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I have an advise for Wikipedia

My advise

You should make property of Verified Member on site. So that Companies will introduce themselves better . And Wikipedia would have more and more healty information than now. Aytek29 (talk) 21:55, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Aytek29, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia takes the opposite point of view. We don’t want companies to introduce themselves here. Users are strongly discouraged from writing about the company’s they work for because they have a conflict of interet. And companies are not allowed to have accounts at all. —teb728 t c 22:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

And (in principle if not in practice) all information in Wikipedia is referenced to reliable published sources. Information known only to somebody connected to the subject (for example, an employee of a company) is forbidden in an article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:28, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Creating a wikipedia article

I'm very lost as to how I would submit my draft for review & also how to add references to my article

Onyx03080 (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Onyx03080. Assuming you were talking about Draft:Elijah Blake, I see you have found the answers to your questions. But at present, the review will not be successful, because the references are not adequate. Pretty well every piece of information in a Wikipedia article (and especially one about a living person) needs to be referenced to a reliable source; otherwise a reader has no way of telling whether the information is correct, or is a mistake, or is the result of vandalism. While you have inserted the two references correctly, they are not of high quality: the Defjam source simply shows that the EP exists, but doesn't say anything about it or him; and the Complex source says more about him, but the words "As told to Rob Kenner" at the end suggest that this is actually a disguised interview, so it is a primary source, which can only be used to support certain kinds of information. The article needs references to published reliable sources, independent of Blake (or his producer, label etc) which have talked about him at length. See Referencing for beginners if you haven't already looked at it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Onyx03080! If I could add some comments, I agree with ColinFine that the draft needs more references. About the submission, the draft says "Review waiting." so it has already been submitted. There is a backlog so it may take a while, but please be patient and eventually someone will review it.

About the references, the two that you have are formatted perfectly, so just keep doing more like that. For some ideas about what kind of references to add, maybe you could take a look at similar articles to see what they have. In general, it's better to have "third party" sources, which means that say a review by a music critic or an article on a general music site is better than material from his record label or a blog post by one of his fans. Looking up the artist's name on Google, it seems that there are articles about him on sites like allmusic and billboard. Those would be good sources for references. You could also cite an announcement of his Grammy award, and if you can find it especially a source for his biographical information (date of birth, etc.).

If you can add that kind of information I think this is looking good. Thanks for the contribution, and good luck. – Margin1522 (talk) 22:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Article not published (Wolfgang Victor Ruttkowski)

Hi there!

On Sep. 30th I tried to upload an article about the author Wolfgang Victor Ruttkowski. What is wrong with the article and what do I have to do in order to get it published on Wikipedia?

Thank you very much for your help! Rebecca Scardy Rebecca Scardy (talk) 15:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Rebecca Scardy Welcome to the teahouse. Look at the top of your draft article here: Draft:Wolfgang_Victor_Ruttkowski You will see a box that starts like this: "This submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability..." In that box you will see a bunch of Wikilinks that point you to articles that describe the requirements for wp:notability for a Wikipedia article. This one is especially important for your draft article: Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) As of now your article has no inline references. That is automatically a reason to not get published. All significant statements in any Wikipedia article are supposed to have references. You put the code for the reference after the relevant claim(s) it supports. Then at the bottom of the article you put this tag: {{reflist}} and it takes all the references, orders them, and leaves them at the bottom. There are other ways to do references as well, that's just how I usually do it. I think this article would also help you: wp:references for beginners Hope that made sense, feel free to ask follow up questions if it's still not clear. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answer, MadScientistX11. Unfortunately, I fear that I am not able to add the required references....

-(

Have a nice day anyway!

-)

Rebecca Scardy (talk) 21:24, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

@Rebecca Scardy: Sorry it didn't work out. You might try editing some existing pages rather than creating a new article. I think it's much easier to make a good edit to an existing page than to create a new article from scratch. Personally, I think we put too much emphasis on helping new editors create a new page when we should emphasize changing existing pages first. Once you have made a few edits to other pages I think people tend to get the idea of wikipedia better and can then have the knowledge required to create a new page. If you want to edit an existing page look here: Wikipedia:Community_portal Scroll down to where it says "Help Out" and you will see a bunch of categories of existing articles that need work. You can also get help for how to make those changes clicking on the "Learn How" link next to each category. Just a suggestion, in any case hope you have a nice day as well ;-) --MadScientistX11 (talk) 22:53, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't get involved on Wikipedia

On Wikipedia, I don't get involved what I've done in the encyclopedia. As regarding others, I'm still to know about what I contribute very perfect and hosts know why I don't get involved. --Allen ^{(talk to me! / ctrb / E-mail me)} 21:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Allen, good to see you! I think many of us feel the same way. I myself, as a Junior Wrangler at the Teahouse, often feel like that. Is there anything we can help you with? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

how do you create a group page?

I am pare to f I am part of a group of people who want to contribute to Wikipedia and we would like a page where we could post our individual activity and share our findings.22:27, 21 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SusanCummins (talk • contribs)

Hey, Susan, you could create the page User:SusanCummins/project page (this is called "in your own userspace"), and then the other people working with you could each create their own separate Wikipedia account and add their thoughts, activity and findings to that page. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:03, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse SusanCummins are you familiar with Wikipedia:Projects? I think that might be what you want. There are tons of projects already. My personal experience is that a lot more gets done by people working in an ad hoc manner rather than predefined groups but everyone has different ways they like to work. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:15, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

@MadScientistX11: A person does not yet know how to sign their posts and/or sign in, and you're suggesting they create a WikiProject? I think you may be a little bit ambitious, even for a mad scientist. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:17, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

So do I have to give everyone one in the group my user id and password?

173.11.100.217 (talk) 23:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

No, they should each create their own separate user id and password, just as you have your user id SusanCummins. They can all still edit the proposed page in your userspace. With their own personal user ids. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:15, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

You should NEVER give anyone your password on this or other sites. BTW, it's a good idea to remember to login before you ever make an edit or comment. That way rather than seeing an IP address as above people see your name and know who made what edits and comments. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:21, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Well I might be mad to be using this incredibly convoluted site you are right about that one for sure. But I am bringing a knowledge to Wikipedia about a part of the culture that you haven't covered and I know a number of others who want to join me in doing that .... do you want to discourage that? 173.11.100.217 (talk) 23:20, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what I or @Demiurge1000: said to give you that impression but no, we absolutely want to encourage new editors with new ideas. Sorry if the site seems convoluted. I guess it all depends what you are used to. If you have ever tried editing HTML for example Wiki markup is IMO much easier. But I realize for people who haven't edited HTML that isn't much of a comfort. There is a lot to learn at first but the basics aren't really all that hard, you just need to make a few edits and it starts to seem intuitive. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok thanks I think I understand how this can work with my User Page and it is very comforting to be able to communicate with someone who knows how to use the site. I am sure with some perseverance I will learn how to do it to. It just seems really hard and frustrating now. SusanCummins (talk) 23:32, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

User:SusanCummins is your user page and generally supposed to be made by yourself. If multiple people are going to edit the same page then user subpage like User:SusanCummins/project page sounds better. If you welcome participation from Wikipedia editors not directly invited (most "groups" should be like that and you risk cabal accusations otherwise), then there may be better options in the Wikipedia:Project namespace. We can say more if we know the goals of the group. User:SusanCummins says "She is working on a project to increase representation of American Contemporary jewelry on Wikipedia". That sounds like something for Wikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:39, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I second PrimeHunter's suggestion about the Wikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry project. Perhaps you could leave a message on the Talk page of the project and describe what you would like to do. Also you could contact some of the members of the project (leave messages on their user Talk pages) to say hello and describe what you have in mind.– Margin1522 (talk) 23:58, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you all for your suggestions. I am going to start with a project page and see if we need to do more. The kinds of jewelers we are adding are not using gems or other traditional materials which makes joining the existing group a bit problematic. 00:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SusanCummins (talk • contribs)

Any limits on article Category and Portal ?

Wondering why a few weeks back when I added a couple categories to some biography articles, the changes were 'Undo' with remarks of 'Category overkill'?

Yesterday and today, I added 2 or 3 more Portals to articles, and resulted in 'Undo' with reason of 'Portal overkill'.

Are there any limits as to how many Category or Portal for an article?

For example: if the article is a biography of someone who died in the 1880's and from Wisconsin; are Biography portal, History portal, Wisconsin portal all OK?

Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 23:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JoeHebda. There are guidelines at Overcategorization for how much categorization is appropriate; but to some extent it's a matter of judgement. You have edited several articles, so it would help if you provided links to the ones where this issue arose. RockMagnetist(talk) 02:56, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia's roll in the future.

Wikipedia today tries to catalog all notable knowledge and events on Earth. Is it possible that Wikipedia is just the beginning of a grand knowledge base of the future, like the "Encyclopedia Galactica" or something like the archives in Star Wars. It is logical to think that Humans will colonize a large portion of our galaxy and I think a great deal of people would like to catalog all this information of Human civilization and hopefully other intelligent species. Lightspeed2012 03:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't Panic. But I think Hari Seldon would like to have a word with you. --Jayron32 03:08, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to speculate about the distant future as much as you want, Lightspeed2012. But we have an immediate task here in October, 2014: improve and expand this free encyclopedia for the benefit of the current generation of humanity here on planet Earth. Questions about those immediate steps are what we deal with here at the Teahouse. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:38, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Adding to existing article.

HI, I am part of a class and it was recommended that I add my proposed article to the Parks article. Not sure how to do that, or where I should add my article. Urban walker (talk) 01:48, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello @Urban walker: and welcome. I'm unclear on what you are trying to do. Are you trying to add new additional information to a Wikipedia article that already exists, or are you trying to add an entirely new article to Wikipedia? If it's an existing article, what exact article are you adding to? If it is a new article, what is the specific subject of the new article? You can create links to articles in Wikipedia by encasing the exact title in double brackets. For example, [[Abraham Lincoln]] would link to Abraham Lincoln as a blue or red link. That may help us find what you are looking for help with. --Jayron32 02:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for responding. I went ahead and added what I wrote to the existing Parks article (decided to be bold). I added a paragraph under Design, then added a subcategory on Safety. A previous author had written a paragraph on it, so couple of paragraphs under safety and then on women's safety in parks. It has become the new marker for how safe a park is considered in design now.

My references looked fine on my user page, but didn't turn out quite right when I submitted it. Also, not all of my references made it for some reason (I had a rather lengthy list.) Urban walker (talk) 03:01, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Urban walker. Your references in the Park article are scrambled up pretty badly. Please read Referencing for beginners, and reformat your references properly. Also, when another editor asks you to link to the article in question, please do so by adding double square brackets before and after the article name. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Urban walker welcome to the teahouse. I see you have gone ahead and made some additions to this article: Parks However, I reverted your edits. For one thing you included your signature (the thing we sign at the end of these comments) in the wikicode for the article itself. So in the article there was the following " Urban walker (talk) 02:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)" Also, the references didn't seem to support the text and also have some odd formatting. I think you should get a bit more familiar with how to write encyclopedic content before making major edits. Here are some articles to help: wp:42 wp:getting started wp:referencing for beginners --MadScientistX11 (talk) 04:30, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

teahouse

what is teahouse beacause i don't know and plesee block Materialscientist and Bilcat cause they Vandalism everithing Addinqaisara (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

@Addinqaisara: It's a place to ask questions about Wikipedia! Hope you enjoy it here! --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 16:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Addinqaisara Welcome to the Teahouse, Teahouse is a place where you can get help from other editors. Teahouse is made up of volunteered contributors known as hosts. You can ask questions on Teahouse and other experienced editors will respond to your question as soon as possible. And they will do their best to answer your questions. --Chamith (talk) 16:39, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

can you show me how it works Addinqaisara (talk) 16:44, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I just did

. I just answered your question.--Chamith (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

thanks Addinqaisara (talk) 08:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcoming new comers

Come do you welcome someone and send invitations to the teahouse? (In new comers' talk pages) -- Annonymus User 1000 (talk) 02:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

To invite a user to the Teahouse, insert {{subst:Teahouse invitation}} ~~~~ into his/her talk page. Iaritmioawp (talk) 10:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Uploading an image

Hello! My group is currently working on updating the neurotransmitter page as part of an assignment and research project that our professor is working on. There are currently 2 relevant images on the page, but we have been asked to place a third. I am a bit confused on how to go about doing this. Any help, tips, pointer are greatly appreciated. Thanks! --IDidThisForSchool (talk) 15:04, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings IDidThisForSchool First of all keep in mind that copyright restrictions are a much bigger deal on Wikipedia than on most sites such as Facebook. The first rule is that most images you find on the Internet are NOT allowable for use on Wikipedia due to copyright restrictions. There are forms you can use to upload images and to get copyright approval from the owner of an image. However, the good news and what I recommend you try first is the Wikimedia commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org This is a companion site to Wikipedia. It has all kinds of images that can be used anywhere in Wikipedia. If you find it in the commons you know you can use it. Here is the page in the commons for neurotransmitters: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neurotransmitter You can also try other searches in the commons for terms related to neurotransmitters. If you don't find what you need in the commons here are some articles about images and how to get copyright permission: Wikipedia:Images Wikipedia:Image_use_policy Wikipedia:Uploading_images --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:19, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the info, MadScientistX11! I will give this a try.--IDidThisForSchool (talk) 16:59, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello IDidThisForSchool

I will also suggest to read the article here.

You will find it very easy to upload and place at right position your pictures in the said article.

But please remember Wikki is very sensitive about copy right.

Best wishes

Aftab Banoori ^(Talk) 15:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, Aftabbanoori!--IDidThisForSchool (talk) 16:59, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, IDidThisForSchool. I'd like to add to what MadScientistX11 said. Once you find an image on Wikimedia Commons, you can use it by adding this code near where you want the article to appear (usually right before or after the paragraph): [[File:Image name here, including extension.png|thumb|Your caption here]]. If you want to upload a picture from somewhere else, I also suggest Wikipedia:Introduction to uploading images, a brief tutorial. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 15:24, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Anon126! I will give this a try soon. Hopefully I can find something good in the 'commons.' Thank you!--IDidThisForSchool (talk) 16:59, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

My draft article keeps being declined at Articles for Creation - HELP!

Hi,

I have created an article to be published but it has been declined twice in Articles for Creation. Can you help me improve the article so that it goes live?

Thanks.

48 Months (talk) 14:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi 48 Months. The main issue are evidence of notability and verification of information. If the world has not taken note of 48 by substantively publishing information about about it in third-party reliable sources (that are entirely independent of 48 itself), that can be cited to verify the article's information content and show the subject is notable, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. I tried searching some major Irish newspapers without luck but you might try searching a whole bunch through this list of links to Irish newspaper sites. It's a difficult search topic because the name alone will of course turn up huge numbers of unrelated things, so you must use delimiters. Maybe <48 mobile> or if that's still too wide <48 "mobile network">. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:06, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

maybe somebody could help to create the article??

Marchioness8 (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2014 (UTC)Inga Borga Hedvik is a writer, song writer, painter, composer, art filmmaker. She is German English French. Inga lives between London, Paris and Vilnius. She has been writing since the age of ten. , Writing is my existence, I could not live without it, Inga Borga Hedvik.

In April of 2013 she signed the contract with Xlibris Corporation . And two books were published worldwide Endless prism and Red roses. Wisdom and Enlightenment bear Readers in Inga Borga Hedvik’s book Endless prism, by Xlibris.

Red roses: clouds and there could be some birds but no no birds today the cynn nest though everything is sinking through these noises and because it is a wid wind beran creating that different sound and gif the night will come the stars alive is bright will shine beside the moon the same one will make the fire to warm up the night and gif someone dyde sing as gif awake sleeping birds as gif will pass above us tremble in your eyes alle as gif alive

Inga also has written book of philosophy Capturelizm, novel Cheval, You are my dead bird. At the moment she is writing two books Writer you were and Scorpion tale and wine.

http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-0306522003/red-roses.aspx

http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-0306520003/endless-prism.aspx

http://ingaborgahedvik.weebly.com/

http://www.cyclopaedia.nl/wiki/Borga

http://www.cyclopaedia.de/wiki/Calling-Dead-Red-Roses

http://www.cyclopaedia.info/wiki/65-Redroses

https://myspace.com/ingaborgahedvik Marchioness8 (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@Marchioness8: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL is your place to start. Your web links do not verify notability. PLease see WP:42 for a simple explanation of what is required. Fiddle Faddle 15:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I see you have started at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Inga Borga Hedvik. Fiddle Faddle 15:50, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

iMarchioness8 (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC) did but i am not sure what i am doing Marchioness8 (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Marchioness8 (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC) when you google inga borga hedvik there few good photos but from wiki nono...why is that? Marchioness8 (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

they say what i can do is Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject. but what citations? thanks Marchioness8 (talk) 18:04, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Marchioness8 (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC) when you google inga borga hedvik there few good photos but from wiki nono...why is that? Marchioness8 (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Marchioness8 Regarding the images check out the question and answers right below your question, the one titled "Uploading an image". Copyright is much different and more rigorous on Wikipedia than on most web sites. Wikipedia can't allow the kind of copy and pasting of random images from the Internet that a blog or site like Facebook can allow. Regarding the citations, those need to be examples where Ms. Hedvik is mentioned in good Wikipedia:Objective Sources Keep in mind that just because someone has published does not mean they are notable. It's not enough to have published books you also need to have those books commented on in things like newspapers, magazines, etc. I'm not saying Ms. Hedvik is not notable, I haven't looked carefully enough to determine it either way, just that it's possible she may not be yet because she hasn't been discussed enough in the media. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 18:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Video as a Reference

Hi,

I have question about video cite.

I found this video which is uploaded on youtube but It is actually news from abc6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvZ-s5Jewys

When I ask this to wikipedia help desk, they told me I can not give youtube video as cite. But this video is not made by company itself, the video is actually abc6 news video. I checked first abc6 website but I guess they removed the a part of news. here is the removed article link http://6abc.com/archive/7617910/

Can you help me about it? editted by bky (talk) 19:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I hope we can be more helpful than the helpdesk, which is, after all, a somewhat foul-smelling place.

One does not cite the YouTube video (though one might link to it as part of the citation if one is sure that it is uploaded by ABC6 themselves and thus is not a copyright violation). Instead, one cites the news report TV programme itself.

For example, here is me citing a random TV programme ... the citation would still be valid even if I had not included the URL (link) which happened to link to an uploaded version of the TV programme. And here is another one, again it would still be a valid reference even if I had not included the URL to the online version of the video;

{{cite episode | title = A failing school fights back | episodelink = | url = http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2012-05-08/exclusive-failing-school-fights-back/ | credits = Presenter: Ian McBride | network = [[Meridian Tonight]] | station = [[ITV Meridian]] |location= Ramsgate | airdate = 8 May 2012 | minutes = | ref = {{harvid|ITV Meridian|8 May 2012}} }}

Try something like that. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:29, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

soil development

why does 95% of aerobic life live in the top 5 inches of the soil ? (96.18.101.53 (talk) 20:17, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Do you think it has anything to do with it being aerobic? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:30, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, aerobic means that you're using air. That's why aerobic exercises cause you the need to breathe so much. So aerobic life forms need air. And where is air found? Above or in the top 5 inches of soil!Amanda Smalls 20:58, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Also, for future reference, the Teahouse is reserved for questions about Wikipedia. The reference desk is the place for questions about science, etc. :) --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 21:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Anyway to edit a draft

I have to do some editing and have never done so in your site. So, I was just wondering, while I'm pretty good at just sticking to facts, do you have a feature that allows me to put what I've edited into sort-of a "draft" mode where perhaps I could request an editor there look at it and alert me to anything I wrote that can't be used so I don't submit it as final? Thank you. Plese let me know.

Christine216.49.218.2 (talk) 21:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@216.49.218.2: hello and welcome to The Teahouse. I think you have to create an account to do this, and there are many reasons why you might want to. You appear to have lots of contributions here but maybe someone else had your IP or you are at a library or school.

Let's say your username is Christine. You could have a page called User:Christine/Michael Gerst. I'm using a draft page in my userspace as an example. More can be found at WP:HUD. Or you could create Draft:Michael Gerst. There is more about this at Wikipedia:Drafts.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Another option is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael Gerst. See WP:AFC. You would, of course, substitute the name of the article you want to write for "Michael Gerst".

If you are talking about edits to an existing article, I don't think there's a way to do what you want.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Vchimpanzee's answer is excellent if you're looking to create a new article. If you wish to add something to an existing article, one solution is to bring up what you wish to change on the article's talk page to see what other editors think. This usually works on active talk pages of big articles; more "isolated" articles that don't get much traffic typically don't have active talk pages, which might make that effort moot. If that's the case, here's my thoughts: be bold and go for it! Take the initiative to make your edit, and explain your edit in your edit summary. We love to see editors taking thoughtful initiative to improve articles and learn from the process. In the worst case, someone won't like it and might undo it. But that can always be figured out through discussion.

You're also always free to ask for suggestions or input here at the Teahouse, too, particularly if you're unsure about a particular guideline or preference regarding an edit you wish to make. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:32, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Why is there a problem with my page? I am not using it to advertise

Excuse me, my name is Tracey and I want to know why there is a problem with the page I have just spent hours on uploading? ArtizianCatering (talk) 22:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ArtizianCatering. It is a good thing to want to share information about something that you think is important. Unfortunately, you chose a username that indicates that there may be a conflict of interest. Also another editor left a message on the talk page of the article that you created suggesting it that it should be moved to your sandbox. Do you know how to do this yourself, or do you need some help moving it? In addition, you should create your user page. And then you should probably request a change in your username to something more neutral. I can help you do this also, if you need help. But you need to move your article into your sandbox to prevent its deletion.

Bfpage |leave a message 23:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Tracy, your Wikipedia article has been 'rescued' and placed into my sandbox to be edited. But for your article to be put back onto Wikipedia, it's very important that you change your username. The instructions for changing your username are posted on your talk page. Your article will not appear on Wikipedia unless you change your username into something that looks like it's NOT affiliated with the business. Please let me know if you need help doing this. I certainly can guide you in the process of changing your username. I think there's a good chance that your article can be edited into something useful for people who are looking for information on your topic.

Bfpage |leave a message 23:40, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. Thank you so much for your advice. This is very new to me. I have never posted on Wikipedia before, so thank you for rescuing my Wikipedia article and placing into a 'sandbox' to be edited. Yes I would like my article to be put back onto Wikipedia and, as requested, I've changed my username. Please can you reinstate my article. I have followed advice so my own name is used to be more credible. Have I done things correctly? I do believe that, now we have introduced Foodology into our industry sector (thus logycreating a new approach to catering), there might be a great many future contributors, which is the future value of the thought process of Foodology. I have every confidence that it will shape a continuously evolving approach to a new way of thinking we've created and be a useful source of reference for anyone looking for information on a topic I was responsible for introducing. ArtizianCatering (talk) 08:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

It is nice to see you again Tracy. I have some good news and some bad news about your article. I'll give you the bad news first. The foodology article has been proposed for deletion even after I edited it by removing the promotional and advertising language. The good news is that it is not deleted yet. To keep this article on Wikipedia it will need to be expanded to include other usages of the word foodology. I understand your sincere and good intentions to provide Wikipedia readers with the information that you want to share. I also acknowledge that the term foodology is trademarked in the UK. The same term is used in other places around the globe and it means other things. You will not be able to have an article that focuses primarily upon the catering business provided by your company. To keep the foodology article alive, it will be heavily edited and it will be a broad treatment of the subject 'Foodology'. I just want to remind you one more time that Wikipedia is really not the place to promote your company or business. But at least you started an article and can keep this in mind when you write a new article. Best regards and keep on editing.

Bfpage |leave a message 00:01, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright question

Copyright: > 2012 Miller et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

The above appears in a journal article I want to cite. Is this the correct copyright that allows more flexibility in using direct quotes? Cutting and pasting is still bad, right?

Bfpage |leave a message 00:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bfpage. From the legal point of view, yes, such a license allows you to quote more extensively, as long as you use quotation marks and cite the article properly. From the standpoint of proper encyclopedic writing, I urge restraint. Do not over-rely on one specific source, just because of its Creative Commons licensing. The article should summarize what the full range of reliable sources say about the topic, without regard to the licensing and copyright status of any given source. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:57, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Can I submit a draft for review and comment?

I have a draft of an article. It is not yet finished and not ready for inclusion in Wikipedia. Can I submit it for review and comment before it is finished? N142pb (talk) 03:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, N142pb. The short answer is you should not submit the article at this point. If you submit the article in your sandbox as it is, it will be deleted for lack of any references, which establish notability. All facts need to be supported by references in an encyclopedic article. It may help you to see referencing for beginners. I would also suggest more formal tone, especially refraining from using first person plural. The Articles for Creation process is rigorous, so check out the WP:Five Pillars and give it your best effort before you submit. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 05:54, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings N142pb I agree with Grand'mere Eugene the article isn't ready for formal review yet but absolutely you can post a request here to have other editors take a look and give you feedback. I looked at your sandbox and it looks like a very good start. The thing that really stands out right now is you need in-line references. Here is a good place to start for that: wp:references for beginners Also, Wikipedia articles should have a certain tone that I don't think you quite have yet. Here is an article that describes good wiki writing style: Wikipedia:Writing better articles So for example, in the draft article you say "It was clear from the start that, if we were to be successful in providing a System/7 based environment for laboratory automation in the SJRL, we needed to develop a real-time, sensor-based, multitasking and multiprogramming operating system.." That sounds as if you are writing a document for internal IBM use or from the standpoint of a certain community. It should be more general, for example perhaps start "It was clear from the start that, if the new system was to be successful..." Also, those kinds of claims are the kind of thing that should be referenced with a source. Otherwise it counts as wp:original research which is not what Wikipedia is for. Another example is the sentence: "The result was MS/DOS which would not achieve the level of power and sophistication of EDX for many years" The tone there may be somewhat wp:POV Advocating that this OS was "more sophisticated" than DOS. (BTW, I actually AGREE with your POV here but that's not relevant. What individual editors think doesn't count, it's what good Wikipedia:Objective Sources say that count). Hope that helps. Feel free to leave follow up questions or if you want someone to take another look at a second draft feel free to leave a comment here in the tea house or on my talk page. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you all for your comments. That is exactly what I was looking for. N142pb (talk) 05:02, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Assistance needed with an article for deletion

Hi everyone, I've not been editing for long and I've run into a spot of trouble I was hoping someone could give me a hand with. I've been trying to submit the article Agrius and Oreius as a candidate for deletion. I seem to have managed to get a banner up on the page itself. I've also managed to open a specific article discussing the issue here - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agrius and Oreius. However on the deletion log - [[1]] - I can't seem to get the formatting right and for some reason its joined onto a discussion about "Our Lady's Primary School"! Any help would be greatly appreciated! Nyctimene (talk) 19:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@Nyctimene: Hi Nyctimene. All fixed. For future reference, follow the steps at WP:AFDHOWTO. The deletion page actually takes the template {{Afd2}}, which places a whole bunch of formatting on the page when you save. It is in the form:

{{subst:afd2
  |pg=Name of article
  |cat=fill in from category list at Template:AfD categories
  |text=Nomination text. ~~~~
}}

See step II at the AFDHOWTO page. What happened here was that you placed just the nomination text in the discussion page, rather than placing that text next to |text=, so the nomination had no header or other needed accoutrements of a nomination. Thus, when you looked at it at today's AfD log, it just flowed into the nomination before it. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Might I suggest that for future ease in this area, simply go to your preferences and enable Twinkle? It automates the whole mess! John from Idegon (talk) 05:19, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Importing diagrams and equations

Hi, I'm new and have prepared an article on the Rollett Stability Factor, but it's in Word and I can't find a way of cutting and pasting the few diagrams and equations into the sandbox. Does anybody know how to do this as the word2wiki macro couldn't do it, that or I was somehow getting it wrong. Would really appreciate some help.Jonhuwmac (talk) 09:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jonhuwmac, welcome to the Teahouse. For formulas you can use LaTeX; see Help:Displaying a formula for how to do it. For figures you probably will have to upload them as images; see Help:Files for an overview of how to upload and use images. —teb728 t c Let me add that uploading images is slightly complicated by the requirement that images be licensed under a free license. If you created the figures by yourself without copying them, you can license them under your choice of a free license. —teb728 t c 09:40, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license

Hello Teahouse! Why does Wikipedia accept images with a CC Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 (CC BY-SA 2.0) license but the Wikimedia Commons upload interface does not list the 2.0 version among those that can be selected? Does it mean that the only way to use in an article an image covered by (CC BY-SA 2.0) is to upload it through the Wikipedia upload tool? LowLevel73^(talk) 21:54, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, LowLevel73. In brief, the 2.0 license is an earlier version which is fine in most cases. But the licensing language has been updated to better reflect copyright law worldwide. So, Wikimedia Commons prefers newer versions of the license. If you have found an image off of the Wikimedia websites with the older 2.0 license, you will have to check at Wikimedia Commons whether or not there is a way to upload it there. You may also want to ask the copyright holder if they would be willing to upgrade the licensing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Cullen328. After a better inspection of the Wikimedia Commons upload tool, I've found that there is a way to specify that older 2.0 CC license. The photo was found on Flickr and the upload tool has a specific option for the licenses used in that website. Thanks for your answer! LowLevel73^(talk) 11:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

New Article

I created an article on Wikipedia, and through email I have been told my page has been linked, I have read wikipedia's policy that those who create an article do not own it so what does it mean? Zafiraman (talk) 08:21, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Zafiraman and welcome to the Teahouse. It is quite correct that you do not own the article, however, you created it and contributed to it and if someone else links another article to it there will be an automatic confirmation of this to you if you have that box checked in your "Preferences" along with the e-mail option (see top of the page). It just means that you have made a good contribution since someone thought it might be a good idea to mention that article/subject/thing in another article. Keep writing nice articles and you will get plenty of those notifications. :) Happy editing, w.carter-Talk 08:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Zafiraman. What we mean when we say that nobody "owns" an article is that unlike some other websites, Wikipedia does not let the creator of a page control the content of the page. See Wikipedia:Ownership of articles for more on the policy. Keep up the good work! —teb728 t c 09:19, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

It means that even though you are the one who created you can't claim ownership of the article. Wikipedia is a community of editors who are helping each other to build an encyclopedia. So everyone is free to make changes to the article unless it's protected.--Chamith (talk) 14:10, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

complicated footnotes

I want 2 footnotes to support a single sentence. Both sources will be used again, so I use <ref name=X>before {{cite book}}. Second source is article in edited book. 2 questions:

Do I list second source author of article as author of book? Do I call him author 2, following author of first source? How get title of article inserted before title of book?

I got a number for second footnote, but am told author is messed up. Why doesn't }}><ref name= end first footnote and allow second?

Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 14:02, October 23, 2014 (UTC)

‎*@TBR-qed: Try using the |chapter= parameter for the title of the article, and the |title= parameter for the title of the book. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 14:38, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

@TBR-qed: For your second footnote, the name of the author of the article should be in the "first" and "last" parameters, and the name of the book's editor should be in "editor-first" and "editor-last" parameters. The form to follow is at Template:Cite book#Examples under "Citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor". I'm not sure exactly how to interpret your other question, but are you remembering to close the first citation with </ref> before starting the second citation? Deor (talk) 15:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Academics and Notability

Hi, I'm editing William Nericcio's entry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Nericcio). There's a "Notability" warning on it from 2009. I added a section on awards, and plan on fleshing out the section reviewing his work.

At what point and by whom can a warning banner be removed? I can get this up to scratch, can I remove it?

Thanks! FaulkTest (talk) 17:26, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello FaulkTest, I don't think it's time to remove it yet. What's mentioned in the banner seems correct. There are hardly any reference to prove the notability of the article. But I suggest you to start a discussion on the article's talk page and seek others opinions--Chamith (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Let's remember, User:ChamithN, that it's the notability of the subject that needs to be evidenced, not the notability of the article. Off-hand, I can't think of any Wikipedia articles that are notable, unless you count ones like John Seigenthaler.

Nericcio's notability seems unlikely to be in doubt, so I have removed that template and instead added some more relevant ones. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:09, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the help! I'd like to work some more on it, and will also start on the Talk page FaulkTest (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Capital letters in the title?

Dear Wiki-Editors, Any clue where I can change the title of the page ? The name should have capital letters. Thank you for your help. Best regards, Ilona M Ilona1203 (talk) 17:22, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ilona1203 Welcome to the Teahouse. To change the name of an article you have to change/add the syntax related to it. The syntax for DISPLAYTITLE is {{DISPLAYTITLE:Desired Title}}. However it is often applied through a template. It's strongly recommended to discuss the matter on talk page before changing the article's displaytitle.--Chamith (talk) 18:29, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Ilona1203, are you talking about the article at Keira shepherd? In this case, the way to change the title is to move the article to a new name. Click the "Move" option at the top-right of the article (it may be hidden in a "More" menu). Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 18:34, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I have moved the article into the user's draft space as the article is a BLP with no references, to avoid the work being deleted altogether. Once references are in place the article can be moved back to the main space.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

help with editing

I just had my first article accepted but it is stub class. Could someone help me edit? I'd like to submit more articles in the future and would appreciate someone helping me learn the ropes.Obrienboone (talk) 18:26, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I've done some clean up on the article to bring it into compliance. If you need help put a note on my user talk page. The main thing is to find more sources for this person. At present their notability is questionable and could result in the article being nominated for deletion. So see what you can find. I looked on High Beam and there were not any articles. Let's keep looking.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

"Did you know" problem

I created an article on notable potter Carol McNicoll and attempted to nominate it for the "Did you know" page here [2] I don't seem to have been successful though can anyone see what I did wrong? Theroadislong (talk) 12:57, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

There were two errors. If you're referring to this page in its current state, the error is that you misspelled the article name, so an administrator moved it to its proper place, which is here. However, there was another error there because the nomination was placed in brackets. I have fixed this. ([3]]).

That said, you'll need to expand the article to more than 1500 characters before it will pass the DYK review process. It is currently only at 691. I hope that is useful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:37, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

That's great thank you very much, I'll get expanding! Theroadislong (talk) 13:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

(e/c) @Theroadislong: Hey Theroadislong. After moving the template to the corrected title I wasn't sure what was still causing the error but 78.26 fixed the remaining issue and has told you here pretty much everything I had written here when I edit conflicted. I was also going to tell you about the length issue. You can check the character count using this tool (my calculation was that you has only 702 characters using it) and please note that having a bit more text than the minimum is recommended. Start writing! You might want to wait until you've written a bit more before transcluding the template at DYK, so it is not rejected on length grounds before you've had a chance to address the issue. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: Here's three sources you might use: [4], [5] and [6].--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:10, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: Thank you kindly for your help I've added more referenced content, so my next question is how does one transclude the template at DYK...phew this is complicated stuff!Theroadislong (talk) 19:56, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Go to Template talk:Did you know and click on "October 22" in the table of contents. Click "edit" on that section, and insert "{{Did you know nominations/Carol McNicoll}}" at the top of the section. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:38, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help I've gone and done it. Theroadislong (talk) 20:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)