Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

Contents

Most recent archives
796, 797, 798, 799, 800, 801, 802, 803, 804, 805, 806, 807, 808, 809, 810, 811, 812, 813, 814, 815

'H.L.A. Hart' Biography Entry - Article 'Law and Fact'[edit]

A team called 'Hartteam' edited the wiki page on H.L.A Hart, and added some information to his biography. There they added four articles he published during his early time. 3 of them I can find, but the 4th, titled 'Law and Fact', I cannot find mentioned anywhere. Is there a possibility to contact the person who made the addition to the wiki page, to ask for a citation or the article itself?

Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1c01:2f07:3f00:48e9:a2b7:46ac:2e29 (talk) 17:23, 7 August 2018‎ (UTC)

Hello 2001:1c01:2f07:3f00:48e9:a2b7:46ac:2e29 and welcome to the Teahouse. A belated welcome, it seems.
The way to contact a Wikipedia editor is to leave a message on their talk page, in this case User talk:Hartteam. The editor may have email notifications set and will see your message in a short time - or, they may not see your message until the next time they log in. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 09:14, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Need advice to improve Performance fabrics[edit]

Hello, Teahouse Greetings of the day! I am here to seek your help once again for suggestions and your kind advice forPerformance fabrics, copying here some recently exchanged messages for your immediate understanding of the concern.

Hi Roxy, appreciate your observations.i have added the required references to the chart, The basic difference between Fabric and Performance fabric is performance.which is enhanced in these fabrics. Don't hesitate to ask me again ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 17:44, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

I have moved this reply to Rajiv's talk page, where I opened the discussion. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 19:45, 11 August 2018 (UTC)Roxy, the dog. hello, I will add more sources, and for your queries 1. You asked ..So exactly what performance do you mean...and enhanced from what state? @@Performance, it is about the attributes of the fabrics totally opposite in a manner to achieve added functionalities (Interestingly these added attributes enhance the scope of use of those fabrics) @@enhance from what state....The added properties/performances do not belong originally to those fabrics but they are enhanced by different things see the definition.And properties of fabrics basically belongs to their origin and their polymers and polymer structure etc. But in this case, these properties are engineered to achieve added advantages. Examples of Polyester which is hydrophobic becomes water-loving(makes it useful for sportswear) and cotton is possible to behave water repel(You must have seen types of denim claiming rain guard, stain repel ) I tried to answer everything but you are welcome any time, don't stop asking, One last thing should we improve the definition part, please advise thanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 01:57, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

User:RAJIVVASUDEV, you have used a lot of words to say almost nothing. The only meaningful remark is that these fabrics purportedly make polyester hydrophilic, and cotton hydrophobic. Please address Roxy's concerns in a more direct way. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:02, 12 August 2018 (UTC)Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk)Hi let me elaborate it little more without repeating what is performance and enhancement, Performance fabrics they are purposefully manufactured to meet the conditions(sometimes extreme) with a predetermined objective. The originally owned properties of those fabrics also remain important in the whole consideration. Allow me to redefine and add some more relevant sources,Drift from Nike is a more convincing example anyway thanks, Please advise me about definition part which is revised now.Thanks again. Rajiv Sharma (talk) 02:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

I give up. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:49, 12 August 2018 (UTC)— Preceding text originally posted on User talk:Roxy the dog#Performance fabrics

I know my explanations are technical and not understandable easily,need your help and Roxy to improve the things,that is why we are here.I have added sources,hopefully more convincing and reliable.Please comment .ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 06:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello RAJIVVASUDEV and welcome to the Teahouse.
I think you need to go back to the talk page of the article, at Talk:Performance fabrics and work out with other editors what sort of references should be added to the article. As best I can tell, you are inserting references that, at best, relate only tangentially to the statements that you are intending to support. If you want to improve the definition, and are finding some resistance, the talk page is also the place to put forward your suggested improvement and justify it. If you are not getting enough participation on the talk page, you may need to start an RfC or other steps to get more widespread input. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 06:55, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
RAJIVVASUDEV: the problem with your explanations of the term performance fabric is not that they're "technical and not understandable easily". It's that they're vacuous, they don't say anything.
If someone writes of a "performance car", he's probably referring to its acceleration and top speed, and not its capacity or comfort. But I've no idea what you mean by "performance fabric". Maproom (talk) 08:02, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
@RAJIVVASUDEV: I was looking to find an article named Engineered fabrics for contrast but such a page does not yet exist. A Google search indicates that this term is frequently used for fabrics that have been treated with chemical coatings to alter their characteristics. I realize that you started the Performance fabrics page a couple of years ago, but it remains problematic. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 08:58, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Well noted all,Thanks for your adviceRajiv Sharma (talk) 09:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

— jmcgnh @jmcgnh you are right! actually there are few things which are recently introduced in textiles like wearable technology,e-textile, And Perfomance fabrics is one of them.henceforth information,knowledge and sources are limited, and the available information is very much confusing and misleading.I sincerely want wikipedia as an authentic source of knowledge for the concerned readers.Hopefully you got my point.ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 10:08, 12 August 2018 (UTC)Maproom (talk)@Maproom got your point but primarily fabrics are for comfort and protection only.Please identify and inform what are the other areas to be improved except definition?ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 09:58, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

R - please, no bold text. What I see at the article is that you worked on it a lot in 2015, and recently (August) lengthened it significantly. I expected to see more discussion at the Talk of the article rather than individuals' Talk pages and here at Teahouse. Please be civil. Writing "I know my explanations are technical and not understandable easily" is condescending toward the people who are/were trying to help. David notMD (talk) 11:19, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

David notMD (talk) Got it,Bold was unintentional.correcting the same and for technical and all..I was never meant like that. ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 12:03, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I just discovered this. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 11:43, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rajiv, How are Performance Fabrics different from Technical textile, which is a page detailing various forms of clothing that are not worn for aesthetic purposes, but for a function? Kindly go over that page and revert with comments. If your content improves that page, then that's better, yeah?ModerationIsTheKey (talk) 06:16, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Is there a template to mark trivial corrections per MOS:SIC?[edit]

Like Template:Typo or Template:Text, it would have no visible effect, but would notify other editors that the discrepancy between the quotation and the source is a deliberate correction. Does such a thing exist? 209.209.238.189 (talk) 13:56, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

{{Sic}} in itself is not what you are looking for? Sam Sailor 14:03, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) According to {{sic}}'s documentation page (permanent link), the template has a |hide=y parameter, which hides the [sic] when piping content. For example, "{{sic|tyop|hide=y}}" renders as "tyop" rather than "tyop [sic]". It also has an |expected= parameter for documenting the problem and its expected correction. Is that sufficient? Beyond that, I am not really aware of one. {{sic}} was developed for this specific purpose. I personally see little reason to hide the template, though, so I have yet to use that parameter. A more basic alternative would be to add an invisible comment documenting the issue for editors, but |expected= already covers that. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 14:13, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
@Sam Sailor and Nøkkenbuer: {{sic}} is the opposite of what I'm looking for. [sic] means "this is an exact quotation of an incorrect (or heterodox) original". I want the opposite: "this is an inexact quotation because a trivial error in the original has been corrected. This correction is not an flaw in Wikipedia, but justified by MOS:SIC."
The warning is not addressed to readers, but to editors who might notice the discrepancy and "fix" it. It might be nice if a hidden parameter let me include the exact original text so a later editor can see and judge the correction.
To give a concrete example, the press release at https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=5174 is titled "Mcnamee Chosen to Head NASA's Outer Planets/Solar Probe Projects". Within the body of the press release, the name is consistently spelled McNamee. The lack of a capital N in the title is clearly an oversight, and not contextually important, so per MOS:SIC, "should simply be corrected without comment". 209.209.238.189 (talk) 01:15, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for the misunderstanding; the original question was somewhat confusing, admittedly, since I have never seen anyone request what you have, so I assumed that interpretation (which turned out to be the intended one) was mistaken on my part. What you meant is unambiguous now. To the point: {{sic}} is not used in CS1 and CS2 templates due to COinS metadata pollution, anyway, so that alone precludes using the template if you are using it in a CS1 or CS2 citation. In such circumstances, I usually leave the original capitalization and add an invisible comment specifying as much, such as:
Mcnamee<!--Should be "McNamee", but original text retained--> Chosen to Head NASA's Outer Planets/Solar Probe Projects
If you wish to correct it, then you can do the same, only change the note to something like:
McNamee<!--Miscapitalized as "Mcnamee" in original text--> Chosen to Head NASA's Outer Planets/Solar Probe Projects
Either work and if someone else changes it later on, that's their decision. As for the applicability of {{sic}}, it is indeed not appropriate for post-correction annotation. There is usually no need to note anything in such circumstances, though, so anyone who does uses an invisible comment. Hopefully, this helps. As for whether a template exists for this, I'm aware of none. You can request for one to be made to add to the {{Not a typo}} suite, but I honestly doubt it will have much use, even compared to the others in that suite. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 11:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC); last two sentences added at 11:20, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
@Nøkkenbuer: Thank you very much. My one concern has been whether an HTML-level comment would also pollute COinS (since presumably it gets copied through MediaWiki's expansion and ignored by the rendering browser) and whether {{^}} would be better.
Yes, I've been thinking of asking for an alias (redirect), but wasn't sure of a good name. ({{Correction}} or {{Corr}} are possible. {{Corrected}} is already in use for something else. Or maybe {{Trivial}}?) I note in passing that {{Not a typo}} expands to {{Sic|hide=y|{{{1|}}}|{{{2|}}}}}; perhaps I should redirect to Template:text instead. 209.209.238.189 (talk) 10:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
When I check the rendered source of pages which include HTML comments in the page, the HTML comments do not show up. You can check yourself at any page where you know there are HTML comments, including the Manual of Style itself. Unless I'm missing something obvious here, those invisible comments are strictly for editors within the edit window; the MediaWiki software, or at least its implementation here, does not even transfer it to the rendered page source. Consequently, I seriously doubt such notes can even pollute the COinS metadata; in the CS1 templates I have personally encoded with invisible comments (usually something like ...|author=<!--None listed.-->|...), that has not occurred. I will note that Help:Citation Style 1 § Authors explicitly suggests using invisible comments in such circumstances, too, as best practice. So, on that matter, I don't think you need to worry at all. Feel free to make prolific use of invisible comments in any and all text and templates where due; {{void}} need not apply.
On the matter of the new template or redirect, that is something probably better requested and discussed at Template talk:Not a typo or perhaps Template talk:Sic. An alternative venue is the Village pump. I'm not very familiar with template code, though I can probably code something simple like this; redirects are cheap. It is probably better to establish consensus first, though, especially if a new template is introduced, since it may not be seen as marginally useful enough and thus may just be subject to deletion and removal from documentation. If you do decide to initiate such discussions, feel free to ping me or mention it here in case I want to participate. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 12:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC); edited 12:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Actually, given this is getting beyond my scope of competence and I don't want to mislead anyone, I'm pinging Trappist the monk, who is one of the elder gods on these matters. I hope they don't mind the unsolicited summons and apologies in advance if they do. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 12:56, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
html comments are stripped from the wikisource before MediaWiki processes templates and modules so, from the template perspective, html comments are ok. On the other hand, scripts and bots that operate on the raw wikisource can have problems with html comments and have been known to modify those comments; of course, templates within templates are also problematic for these tools. This is also true of html comments in template source.
Some consider titles in citations to be 'quotation-like' (MOS:QUOTE) and as such should be handled as quotations are handled so simple things like 'Mcnamee' → 'McNamee' are handled silently. There are others who believe that titles in citations must be rendered as they are in the source, warts and all. I don't think that MOS has much to say about that so how citation titles are treated in any particular article becomes a matter of consensus best determined with involved editors at the article's talk page. cs1|2 has some guidance with regard to titles.
Trappist the monk (talk) 13:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Private Spaceflight, 1971 early "Project Harvest Moon" NEED A MENTOR.[edit]

I am 87 years old, was the instigator of this project, and feel it should be recorded on Wikipedia. There is a Wall Street Journal article verifying its existence, but I don't know how to upload it.

Any assistance would be appreciated.

Thanks, George Van Valkenburg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quickscan1 (talkcontribs) 22:15, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello User:Quickscan1 and welcome to the Teahouse.
I found a couple of mentions, including this one Lost in Space: The Fall of NASA and the Dream of a New Space Age By Greg Klerkx p175 which could be the starting point for an article. This other mention, at CollectSpace.com probably can't be used. Someone with access to a newspaper database could probably track down the WSJ articles you remember. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:43, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, George. I did not find the Wall Street Journal article, but I found one that mentions you,[1] a syndicated article that was picked up by many small newspapers,[2], an AP release, also widely distributed,[3] several by LaMont,[4] and a status report in November[5]. Hope these help. [LATER] All the references ended at the bottom of the Teahouse page. Sorry about that. I don't know how to move them. Someone else may help.Anobium625 (talk) 16:49, 15 August 2018 (UTC) Someone did. Thanks.Anobium625 (talk) 18:21, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

This might actually be enough for a stub article. If further sources can be found, including perhaps this elusive Wall Street Journal article, this might very well be a worthwhile article to create. Anobium625, do you have external links to any of the sources you cited? Or are they all offline? —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 08:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I happen to have a couple newspaper accounts (NY Times and another), so I looked for "Harvest Moon Project" in 1971 and found these articles. Anyone with a US newspaper account ought to be able to find the syndicated articles. I didn't have access to the Wall Street Journal, and I didn't look at 1972. Anobium625 (talk) 14:57, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Nugent, Tom. "Civilians Want a Spaceship." Detroit Free Press. July 6, 1971. 1-2.
  2. ^ E.g. Considine, Bob. "Proposed Lunar Voyage for Public." Post Star (Glens Falls, NY). August 14, 1971. 4.
  3. ^ E.g. Benedict, Howard. "Rover May Receive New Life Someday." Corpus Christi Caller Times. August 7, 1971. 6A.
  4. ^ LaMont, Sanders. "Harvest Moon a Serious Plan." Florida Today (Cocoa, FL). September 19, 1971. 3E.
  5. ^ Goldwyn, Ron. "Harvest Moon Trip Backed." Dayton (OH) Daily News. November 17, 1971. 10.

How to Proceed with Mediation[edit]

Recently, I submitted a mediation request that seems to have "vaporized". In following up on this, I was advised by a Wikipedia volunteer to: "I like to urge you to try asking for help with the tea house before resorting to the more formal approach of mediation. (One of the challenges of mediation is that all parties have to agree to participate and that's not always the case.)" Consequently, I am here.

The mediation concern pertains to this Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/wiki/Talk:The_Handmaid%27s_Tale_(TV_series)#References_to_Trump_and_Pence_need_to_be_deleted.

My user ID is TheBlackMark.

I believe that references to Trump/Pence should be deleted as empty facts. The editor who is the originator of this text does not appear to be willing to modify his text. I do not wish to become involved in a revert war. Therefor I am seeking mediation for resolving this concern.

TheBlackMark (talk) 17:49, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I looked at the content disagreement and the current text and think it's a good compromise.
There was much debate on whether parallels could be drawn between the series (and by extension, the book it is based on) and American society during the Presidency of Donald Trump.
There are numerous sources that point out the timing of the program and the current administration. The reader can read the sources that are listed for more background. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:06, 13 August 2018 (UTC)


I guess that I am "swimming against the tide". This is an "empty fact", in that this controversy is simply being manufactured by a political group to generate controversy to push their agenda. It is not is not a a controversy (discussion) between two groups that have a differing opinion concerning how to interpret the meaning of The Handmaid's Tail. Jdavi333 noted, "The fact that some opinion writers are reading more into this than mere coincidence just does not fit in to the encyclopedic purpose of Wikipedia.". My edits were proposed to further the "encyclopedic purpose of Wikipedia". Well thank-you for responding.
TheBlackMark (talk) 01:44, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Regarding, this apparent political agenda-pushing, even if what you say is true, that does not matter much because Wikipedia's purpose is to summarize the reliable sources according to their notability and noteworthiness to provide a compendium of all current human knowledge. That information appears to be within the latter scope and furthers that purpose, however infinitesimally. Maybe some cabal is gaming the system to get these "empty facts" inserted through (unwitting) editors, but that is beyond the scope of this project and the mere fact that they are biased sources is not grounds for exclusion, especially since the Neutral point of view policy applies to you, not the content (essay). Moreover, given that social commentary and analysis using the series is generally within the scope of that article, your claim that it is an "empty fact" is unclear. In principle, everything on Wikipedia is so; it's the context and sourcing that gives it meaning and veracity—and determines its inclusion.
With that said, TheBlackMark, the strongest rule-based rationale you can probably provide in these circumstances are along the lines of due weight, particularly on the point that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. After cursorily reviewing the issue and the article as of this revision, however, I personally suspect that would not be a persuasive argument. It does not persuade me. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 09:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC); edited 09:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
As I stated before, I am "swimming against the tide". Based on the comments that I have received, not much point in continuing to advocate for the removal pointless references to Trump/Pence. Thank-you for responding. TheBlackMark (talk) 19:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Footnotes[edit]

My article (Draft:Boris Rotman)has been rejected because it needs footnotes. However, the article has 10 footnotes (listed at the end with superscripts 1, 2, 3, etc. Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autoctono~enwiki (talkcontribs) 20:45, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@Autoctono~enwiki: you may want to ask the reviewer who looked at your draft - Catrìona - on their talk page. I suspect the issue is the Education section, which has no references so far. › Mortee talk 21:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Autoctono~enwiki, the draft Draft: Boris Rotman has references, but they are almost all to works by Rotman and his collaborators. Wikipedia is basically uninterested in anything said, done or published by the subject of the article or their associates except as discussed in reliably published sources by people unconnected with them. An article on Rotman must be 90% based on sources that are not by Rotman or his associates, but are about him, by people unconnected with him. Once such an article has been written, then a selected bibliography can be added; but the bulk of the content of the article must be based on independent sources about Rotman, not by him. --ColinFine (talk) 22:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
A quickie Google search yielded no articles ABOUT Rotman. In my opinion there are not grounds for a Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 22:49, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Borrowing this from a reply elsewhere: "Wikipedia articles have to meet some very strict criteria to be considered for inclusion, mostly the Wikipedia:Notability policy. Basically, your article needs to cite sources that are independent and reliable, such as a major news publication. To prove notability, there should be multiple citations (at least two), and the citations have to mention have to mention the subject of your article in detail (several paragraphs or a whole article, not just a passing mention)." Content BY the person, i.e., science journal articles authored by the person, do not count. David notMD (talk) 07:56, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Anna Landolt[edit]

I would appreciate if one or two other editors would look at Draft:Anna Landolt. It was submitted via Articles for Creation. The most obvious problem to a Wikipedia reviewer is that it has no references, but that can be remedied. A more serious problem is that the draft says that her dates of birth and death are not known, in which case she is not notable unless there is substantial coverage of the middle of her life (and there is none in the draft). The draft says that she is depicted playing the piano in a painting by Henry Fuseli called The Nightmare. We have articles on Fuseli and on The Nightmare. However, the painting does not depict a pianist; it depicts a sleeping woman and an incubus, and the sleeping woman is not wearing a necklace.

Maybe there was another painting by Fuseli in the same year which did depict the otherwise obscure Landolt as a goddess-musician. This seems the best good-faith assumption, but may or may not be correct.

I declined the draft and explained my concern. Will another editor look at it and advise on, first, whether I handled the draft reasonably, and, second, what they think is the explanation for this discrepancy. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:47, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

According to our article on The Nightmare, Fuseli did have an affair with an Anna Landholdt, but if she is the subject of the painting, she is not playing the piano. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:15, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
What a fascinating question, Robert McClenon! I think you were right to decline this, though probably a WP:REDIRECT to The Nightmare is justifiable. A quick look online (and I know nothing of this area, I should say) indicates that the painting of the Nightmare has, on its obverse side, a depiction of a woman thought by one art critic (Powell 1972) to be possibly Anna Landolt. (see here). I really don't think there is enough verifiable information available in the draft to justify a page on her, based on what seems like conjecture by one or more art specialists (see here and here, though I'm not suggesting these are WP:RS). I think there's enough detail in the page on the painting to warrant a redirect, and maybe the article creator (Sylviagindick) could invest time in researching reliable references which support or counter these interpretations, and I hope they will respond with some more information themselves. I also note there is a discrepancy in the spelling of her surname in online references and the Wikipedia page on The Nightmare. This also needs addressing. I certainly wouldn't want to put off a new editor who is interested in the history of art on Wikipedia, but we do need reliable sources and citations to support content. Does this help at all? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Nick Moyes - The drawing of a woman is on the reverse side (tails of a coin) of the picture. The obverse is the front (heads of a coin). However, the draft appears to refer to something more detailed than a sketch on the back of a painting. It seems to be describing a different painting, showing Anna at the piano wearing a sacred necklace. Based on the description in the draft, the artist may have represented his mistress as a goddess-musician, but that isn't what The Nightmare is about. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:20, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: Oops - my mistake in terminology (I meant the back of the picture). I agree it is unclear, and possibly describing the wrong picture. As such, I support your response in rejecting the review at this time. You'll have seen that I reached out to the user to encourage them and hopefully to elicit some better and verifiable content. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:42, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Creating a page about a manufacturing tech entity[edit]

Hello, I cam new to the community and tried to create a page that was denied. I am trying to make a page similar to that of "HRE Performance Wheels" and has the page denied for "Draft:Brixton Forged Wheels". Can someone please explain why "HRE Performance Wheels" can exist but recreating a similar page was denied, Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cody.williston (talkcontribs)

Hello, Cody.williston and welcome to our Teahouse. I've taken the liberty of adding links to the relevant pages in your post. We only take individual articles on their own merits, rather than say "well, that company has a page, so why can't this one?" But I tend to agree with you that the page for HRE Performance Wheels doesn't demonstrate notability, just as your draft doesn't at this time. I also note that another editor has recommended that page for a speedy deletion because of that lack of notability. (I might have gone about deletion via a different route myself, but I doubt it will stay on Wikipedia unless is is dramatically improved.) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:35, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
@Cody.williston: Oh, and by the way, if you're the same Cody Williston who is Director of Business at Brixton Forged, please be aware that you are obligated to declare your Conflict of Interest when trying to write about your own company, and should declare this according to the policy I have just hyperlinked to, and especially to WP:PAID. (Being an employee or CEO inevitably means you are being paid.) Those with such a conflict of interest are strongly advised not to attempt to promote their own company through Wikipedia, but to use traditional means that don't involve using the the time of keen volunteers to sort out their mess. All companies need to meet our notability criteria (you need to read WP:NCORP for this) and basically a company deemed 'notable' must have been written about (in detail) by independent, reliable sources. We ignore company press releases and insider business promo guff. So, best to leave it for others to write about your company, and don't do it yourself, please. Maybe you'd like to contribute to other areas with which you aren't so intimately involve? Wikipedia needs all the keen editors it can get! Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:50, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to the deletion of HRE Performance Wheels. David notMD (talk) 10:21, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

actor or actress??[edit]

I created a page where I labelled the woman (actor) to differentiate her from the other woman with the same name. Someone moved it to (actress). Is there a guide for this? Was (actor) wrong or do we not gender unnecessarily? I thought the term actor for everyone was generally accepted these days? Just want guidance for the future. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 01:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Antiqueight. This is an interesting and difficult question. General guidance can be found at Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language and the various links there. That deprecates the use of rare and outdated gendered job titles such as "aviatrix". Personally, I agree with you that the word "actor" should be applied to all such performers. The problem is that word "actress" is still common and is used, for example, in the Academy Awards, probably the most prestigious awards for films. I suggest that you use "actor" but avoid arguing if another editor prefers "actress", at least until there is a community consensus to avoid "actress". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
It is certainly an interesting question, Antiqueight, and I agree with Cullen328 that it is a difficult one, too. I might take the opposite view from him, in that we do already use '(actress)' in a large number of article titles about female actors (over 1,500 uses in the first 5,000 page titles searched for with 'actress' anywhere in the title). IMHO 'actress' simply adds immediate clarity to an article name, and that clarity is preferable to any immediate confusion that a gender-neutral term might add. It's also not yet a defunct nor an offensive or discriminatory term in my view. I spent a while looking for an answer before a more experienced editor replied, and found very little to guide us. However, the page Cullen328 cites, does also state: Where the gender is known, gender-specific items are also appropriate ("Bill Gates is a businessman" or "Nancy Pelosi is a congresswoman"). I see a number of editors have already made changes to ensure categorisation and titling refers to the female form in one of the pages you've edited (Phyllis Ryan (actress)) that I guess you might be referring to. So, as Cullen328 wisely says, it is probably not worth arguing this within one article until such time as a community-wide consensus on the use of that term in page titles is achieved. That said, if all the references referred to her as an actor, and especially if she did herself, then maybe actor might then be the appropriate term to use. Otherwise, I'd prefer to keep it as it is right now. Sorry if this perspective seems a little old-fashioned and in contradiction of the earlier view expressed. But that's Wikipedia for you, and your contributions are valued, however they end up being titled. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)  
You are entirely correct, Nick Moyes, that the term "actress" is still common on Wikipedia and in reliable sources in general. That is why I recommended that the issue is not worth fighting about on a case by case basis. I would express my opinion thoughtfully in a broad community discussion on this question, and I expect that you would as well. And I would respect whatever consensus emerged. There is no consensus currently, so I consider it entirely reasonable for editors to call females "actors" in their routine editing, unless they become tendentious or disruptive in their behavior. Regards from the USA. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:27, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
I get 1904 articles with actress) in the title. Some former discussions not specific to titles: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 118#Actor vs Actress terminology, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 144#Actor/actress, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 48#"Actor" or "actress" for erm, actresses? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you all, Nick Moyes, Cullen328. Yes - I felt I shouldn't argue over it but wanted guidance on what to do if I hit the same issue going forward. It was indeed Phyllis Ryan (actress) - I wouldn't have changed it to actor from actress and I have no intention of putting it back. But it seemed like a learning opportunity. PrimeHunter Thank you for the manual of style discussions. I looked for such a one but failed to find it - but I was tired so my searching was limited. I only found one on Lesbian actors where the consensus was to leave the title alone. I appreciate your inputs here. It seems I was not wrong to put (actor) and can continue going forward to do the same BUT neither - for now - is (actress) incorrect and indeed the reverse. I don't feel up to starting a conversation on formally changing it but it's good to know. ☕ Antiqueight chatter 12:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Citing a source more than once[edit]

I note that on many pages a source is cited more than once and the reference number remains the same, but the reference list recognizes the subsequent citations with a, b, c… How is this done?Anobium625 (talk) 02:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Anobium625. There are a number of ways to cite the same source multiple times in an article, but the way you7re seeing it done is explained in WP:REFNAME. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt reply.Anobium625 (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Anobium625: there are a few ways to do this. Two ways I use are 1) giving the reference a name: "this is true<ref name="source">{{cite book|...}}</ref> and that is true<ref name="source" /> and 2) using {{sfn}} to give short references to a different page number within a reference I've already used. I'd be happy to help more if I can. You're welcome to ask a question on my talk page or at the teahouse. I've found referencing a surprisingly deep subject and the best way to learn it has been to look at the source of good articles. There are all kinds of tricks to pick up. › Mortee talk 02:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, too! If I'm not successful, I'll get back to you for more help.Anobium625 (talk) 03:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)Got it! Cf. Constance Savery, if interested.Anobium625 (talk) 14:56, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Stanford Men's Volleyball Players[edit]

Your list of former Stanford Volleyball players omitted the name of John B. Licata. Mr. Licata was the team captain from 1953 to 1955and the number one setter. He was chosen to play for the US Nationalteam in the 1955 Pan American Games in Mexico City.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.80.229.144 (talk) 12:56, 14 August 2018‎ (UTC)

We don't appear to have an article on Stanford University Men's Volleyball. We do have a category Category:Stanford Cardinal men's volleyball players. A category is a collection of existing articles, so someone would first have to write an article about John B. Licata. Rojomoke (talk) 05:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Performance fabrics[edit]

Need Help Hi! greetings of the day, Sir i have made few revisions and improvements,Please review the same, need help how to improve further.ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 04:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Rajiv Sharma I've moved your question from the Teahouse talk page to this page. The Teahouse talk page is for discussing things related to the running of the Teahouse; it's not really the place for posting questions such as this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
It appears that you are already discussing this at Talk:Performance fabrics#Performance fabrics with Roxy the dog. Article talk pages are usually the best places for such discussions because it makes it easier for other editors who might be interested in the subject matter to participate in the discussion. However, you need to be patient because editors occasionally get busy and might not immediately respond to your posts. Personally, although I think the changes you made were probably done in good faith, I don't think that huge image gallery you added to the article is really an improvement and actually makes the article worse than it would be without it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Good grief. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 11:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
The gallery of huge photos is gone, and the article is now being mulled over at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Performance fabrics. David notMD (talk) 20:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Creating a page[edit]

Hello ,

I want to create a page with our holy spiritual teacher from India , last I tried but it denied , why I can not create ??

regardsDave dharmendra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharmendra1311 (talkcontribs) 05:21:40 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Dharmendra1311. Wikipedia articles have to meet some very strict criteria to be considered for inclusion, mostly the Wikipedia:Notability policy. Basically, your article needs to cite sources that are independent and reliable, such as a major news publication. To prove notability, there should be multiple citations (at least two), and the citations have to mention have to mention the subject of your article in detail (several paragraphs or a whole article, not just a passing mention). Consider consulting the guide at Wikipedia:Your first article for more assistance and if you have more questions about article creation, you can ask the experts at the Articles for Creation Help Desk. If you have any more questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page or using one of the reply templates. Good luck. — Alpha3031 (tc) 06:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

How to improve article to get published[edit]

Hi,

I am working on my drafthttp://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/wiki/Draft:PlagiarismSearch

I have personally worked with grading students' papers and evaluating them through different plagiarism detection software.I am working on including various checkers in order to enrich Wikipedia, since I have seen a couple of them presented herelike Unicheck, Turnitin and others.

Could you please tell me how can I improve my article?I realize that more full coverages are needed rather than mentions.I have to extend my research.Anything else?

Thank you for your help.Regards,Kelsey.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Kelsey2848939 (talkcontribs) 16:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

In my opinion the article Plagiarism detection, which you link to in your draft, covers the topic adequately without naming any of the companies that make and market plagiarism detection software, so I see no need for an article about one brand. If you must, then the articles about the companies you mention - Turnitin and Unicheck - are good models. Just don't plagiarize. David notMD (talk) 08:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

infobox[edit]

how can i add the infobox to the article— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollback95 (talkcontribs) 16:35, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rollback95. An infobox is almost always a template which will display various bits of information depending upon how you fill in its parameters. There are variouse types of infobox templates which have been created by Wikipedia editors and you can find out more about how they are used at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes and Help:Infobox as well as what types there are at Wikipedia:List of infoboxes. The important thing to remember with templates is that they will only work as they have been set up to work; in other words, you need to use the parameters specifically designated for use with the template as they were intended to be used. If you try to add your own parameters to an infobox or use the designated ones incorrectly, the template will not work properly or at least not as you want it to. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Need help to correct info on my wiki page[edit]

Can Someone recommend who can assist in updating adding to my wiki page and photos PLEASE ASSIST warmly Robert — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:230F:F400:41D0:F22F:668E:8FC8 (talk) 09:06, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Robert, firstly it is not your article or page even if it is written about you. However if there is an article on Wikipedia about yourself, that you want updated, you can suggest changes on the talk page of the article. If you let us know the page then I'm happy to have a look. I would suggest reading WP:COI as well. As for a picture, if you have one of yourself that you have taken (not a professional photo), then you can upload that at our sister project Commons for it to also be added. NZFC(talk) 10:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Article and profile deleted[edit]

Hello,

I wrote a translation of a page about a Spanish philosopher, Marina Garces, the article was deleted as well as my user profile. I find it quite unfair that one man can go around deleting articles rather than trying to improve them. I have no doubt that the content was not completely in line with the English Wikipedia standards, however I think it would have been much more useful to improve the content rather than delete the whole thing. I also have no idea why my user profile was deleted.

How can I appeal against this?

Thanks a lot

Referring to my user page: 14:48, 13 August 2018 Jimfbleak (talk | contribs) deleted page User:Maryleblaireau (U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host) (thank)

Referring to article Marina Garces: Anambiguous advertising or promotion: Article largely consists of quoting her talking about herself, obvious promo/vanity page with few actual facts, sources not all WP:RS. Extent of quotation would justify deletion as copyright violation too. Spanish Wikipedia has different rules.) (thank) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryleblaireau (talkcontribs) 10:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I think Jimfbleak has already explained it quite well on your talk page why it was deleted but a couple of things, the code U5 implies that you stored your draft on your user page, this was probably in error while you worked on it but some people do that as a way to "publish" an article without going through normal review process. Secondly yes, different projects have different rules and what maybe ok on Spanish Wikipedia isn't here. I would suggest you start again in Draft, Jimfbleak has given you example articles to work from and you can use Spanish language articles as references on English Wikipedia also. NZFC(talk) 10:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Biography Page Deleted[edit]

I am Johnnie Cleveland and I am a music artist.My page Johnnie Cleveland was deleted. Kindly guide me what should I do to make It approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnnieCleveland (talkcontribs)

Hello JohnnieCleveland. Welcome to Wikipedia and to our Teahouse. I'm sorry your first efforts here have resulted in your userpage being deleted. By looking at your user talk page, it's clear that you have simply tried to use Wikipedia to promote yourself and your music. (I'm not an administrator, so cannot see any of the deleted content, but I can advise you that userpages are only to introduce yourself as a Wikipedia editor and to say a little about yourself and your interests in editing Wikipedia. It most definitely is not here to promote yourself as an artist, as you appear to have done there, and in the articles you appear to have tried to create about yourself.) You may recreate your userpage, providing you don't promote yourself there. It's OK to briefly say you sing and write music, but not to push your business interests. Just tell other users why you're here on Wikipedia and your interests in editing. See WP:USERPAGE for what you can and can't use that page for.
Also, Wikipedia is WP:NOTFACEBOOK - we only care about you if you meet our notability guidelines. Most humans on this planet don't. See WP:NMUSICIAN and assess whether you actually do. If you do - and if independent sources have written about you in depth - then maybe an uninvolved editor might feel you're worth creating an article about. If you don't, I'd advise you to get a private website and promote yourself there. It's never a good idea to try to write about yourself - see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, and the need to declare a Conflict of Interest. Of course, if you are on the music circuit and really want to help Wikipedia, why not take and upload some great close-up photos of fellow musicians for anyone to use? We have a page called WP:TOOSOON, and maybe one day the musicians you know - including yourself - will indeed meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, and the photos will be there and available to be used. Until then, regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Why have almost all the photos of paintings I've uploaded to wikipedia commons and used in my document been taken down?[edit]

The photos of paintings I have uploaded to wikipedia commons all have permissions emails sent by the holders of the copyrights. Some were held by me and sent from my email, some were held by others and were sent from their emails. Three were held by an elderly artist who does not have her own email, so I typed up a sheet and had her sign her approval. I scanned the sheet and attached it to an email from me.

Most of these have been taken down over the past few months, and I don't know why. Is there a quick and easy and correct way I can upload all these photos again so that they "stick"? The photo upload process is very very confusing, and I have no idea what I did wrong…or why they've only now been taken down.

The ones taken down were:

Red Tulips by Shirley Aley Campbell

Mary Rose Oakar by Shirley Aley Campbell

Vietnamese Family by Shirley Aley Campbell

Guarded Idealist by Judy Takács

Kim, the Keeper of time by Judy Takács

Tangible and Intangible by Marilyn Szalay

Timmy by Marilyn Szalay

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GuerillaGirl53 (talkcontribs) 14:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

This page is to advise on edits to the English Wikipedia. Wikimedia Commons is a separate project, so you ought to ask the questions there. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
@GuerillaGirl53: Please see your talk page at Commons:
C:User talk:GuerillaGirl53
for explanations given on files' deletion. --CiaPan (talk) 14:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

How can I be Auto Confirmed so i can create an article[edit]

Hello, Please, I'm having issues creating a Biography, I really need help as it is very urgent.Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valegal1 (talkcontribs) 14:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

The criteria are defined at WP:autoconfirmed. Prior to that you can submit a draft for review through the WP:AFC process; it would be unwise for you to try to create a new article directly in mainspace as a new editor. Please read the advice at WP:Your first article. I'm surprised that you say "it is very urgent" as there is no deadline. If you are trying to write about yourself, the advice is "don't"; see WP:autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you but there is a deadline for me cos it's about work. I'm trying to create a Biography for someone. So what would you advise? Do I post the draft of the Biography and send for review? Hopefully, it's approved and can I do that on my user page? David Biddulph (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valegal1 (talkcontribs) 15:22, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

If you are editing as part of your job, it is mandatory for you to read and comply with WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 15:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
NOT your User page. That is a place for brief description of who you are and what your intentions are as a Wikipedia editor. You have a Sandbox - that is a place to work on a draft. Of much greater importance, you must declare your PAID relationship. Paid work is not forbidden, but there are restrictions. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry, Valegal1, but nothing on Wikipedia is urgent, except removing certain things with legal implications. The fact that you think that this is urgent suggests that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is for. Promotion of any kind (which means "telling the world about something") is forbidden. --ColinFine (talk) 16:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Done --ColinFine (talk) Valegal1 (talk) 17:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you I'm new here so I didn't understand a lot of things, I'll be patient and I understand the process now. I just sent a draft article and it said it would take at least 8 weeks or more to eview. I'll be patient. Thank you. ColinFine (talk) David notMD (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valegal1 (talkcontribs) 16:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

@Valegal1: - you still have not declared a conflict of interest on your user page. As you referencing the fact that you are editing for work, you are not compliant with paid editing guidelines, and may be blocked or banned if you fail to remedy this with a declaration of your relationship to the subject of your draft; you must further divulge the fact you are being paid to edit (if this is the case) as soon as possible. Patience is appreciated, particularly at Articles for Creation, but failure to remedy these issues will dramatically impact the passage of your draft towards main-space, as alluded to by Theroadislong. Please manage your conflict of interest using these guidelines. Thanks, Stormy clouds (talk) 17:21, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Done --ColinFine (talk) Stormy clouds (talk) Valegal1 (talk) 17:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

If this is about Draft:Babatunde Irukera your User page does not have a PAID declaration and the Talk page for that draft does not have a declaration. So, not done. David notMD (talk) 20:56, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

New Wiki Page[edit]

Hi I wanted to create a wikipedia page, of someone whom I admire and he is extremely talented and unbelievably famous! But I wonder he doesnt have a wiki page. Also even his coworkers have their wiki pages and surprisingly none of their pages has his name mentioned even after doing shows together.

Unfortunately he is all over, but not here in the wikipedia.

Being a Genuine Admirer, I need your help and assistance to create his page.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.248.224.54 (talk) 14:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

  • If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything, here are the steps you should follow:
1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources. (His coworkers being notable does not matter).
2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.
3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.
4) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.
5) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.
6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.
7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.
8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).
Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up to Help me guys im poor but need a ghost typer[edit]

anyone able to write a Article about Icynexstar i have pictures and info all i need is someone who has the time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icynexstar (talkcontribs) 15:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @Icynexstar: - the original request is archived here, and was responded to by yours truly. The answer remains the same, so I will copy and paste it here in hopes (perhaps futile) of more comprehension and engagement on behalf of the OP - In relation to your query, I am afraid that you are likely out of luck. You appear to have a common misunderstanding of Wikipedia. We don't write "wikis" about people who ask for one. We write encyclopedic articles about subjects which satisfy the notability guidelines, using citations from reliable sources. A google search shows that you don't satisfy our threshold for notability, as your web presence is minimal beyond self-created Genius pages. Moreover, having you have a conflict of interest in editing matters related to yourself and your corpus of work, and shouldn't seek an autobiography. Besides, an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. As such, alas, an article about you is not a possibility in the foreseeable future. However, with improved penmanship and grammar, and perusal of our pillars, you could become a valuable contributor to Wikipedia, and I urge you to attempt to do so. Hope this helps, and don't hesitate to ask any further questions. The answer, similar to the question, is unchanged. Hopefully, you will need it this time. It is worth noting that editors are unpaid volunteers, and have no obligation to edit outside of topics which interest them. Thus, being poor won't coerce people to pen a promotional puff-piece on your behalf. Nonetheless, perhaps in can, I hope this helps, Stormy clouds (talk) 15:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
    If it's any consolation, Icynexstar, once you have made a name for yourself as a musician, perhaps some fan or other editor will create an article about you then. If you are indeed an upcoming rapper, then over time you may become notable enough to have an encyclopedic article written about you.
    With that said, be thankful you don't have an article about yourself yet; if you ever do, it will not be within your control and will serve as a place for documenting your public life. Many notable subjects do not like having articles about themselves, especially since certain personal information and controversies are often documented there, too. We occasionally find musicians and celebrities creating accounts to delete content from biographies about them, only for that content to be restored minutes later because the inclusion of that information is not their decision. Perhaps one day, you will be faced with that curse of fame, but until then, focus on your art and let it speak for itself. If it's good enough, others will notice it and write about you without you having to ask. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 14:01, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Bot deleted my sandbox[edit]

This appeared on my sandbox:

A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted.
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below.
00:58, 4 April 2018 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted page User talk:SheridanFord/sandbox (G8: Talk page of a deleted or non-existent page) (thank)

How can I retrieve my sandbox info? Is it in some graveyard somewhere I can retrieve? sheridanford (talk) 15:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

It wasn't a bot that deleted your abandoned sandbox, it was an administrator; see the deletion log. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
@SheridanFord: Yes check.svg Done – as a draft or Articles for creation submission deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. Drafts and Articles for creation are not for the indefinite hosting of material found to be unsuitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The old edits are now visible in the page history of User:SheridanFord/sandbox. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Councilman Curtis Jones Jr.[edit]

What happen Councilman Curtis Jones Jr. page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11Kenneth11 (talkcontribs) 16:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I suggest creating a new section. -A lainsane (Channel 2) 16:22, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
@11Kenneth11: Your answer is at WP:Articles for deletion/Curtis J. Jones Jr.

My publication of how to can see all the 61 elementary particles in one picture is now in "International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Vol 4, No.2, 2018, pp.42-49.[edit]

I did a lot of work that also a Nonmathematician could understand an see direct the system of the smallest particles of the matter of the Universe. Therefore I would be happy when the Fundamental Particles of the CERN brick box could be seen as 61 Particles connected with the important Higgs particle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hsch31 (talkcontribs)

@Hsch31:. That's nice. Do you have a question about Wikipedia? – Joe (talk) 17:35, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

RELATED TO CONTRIBUTION IN WIKIPEDIA[edit]

HOW TO PUBLISH MY CREATING PAGE AND WHAT ARE REQUIRED TIME IN PUBLISHING? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JANGVEER SINGH RAKESH (talkcontribs)

@JANGVEER SINGH RAKESH: Please don't shout! Typing in capital letters is considered rude and aggressive, though your username in capitals is fine. What page are you looking to publish? I can see no draft in your contributions of anything ready to publish. You might like to read Wikipedia:Your first article. Please also note that your userpage must not be in the form of an article about you, nor should it be in a non-English language, nor contain material similar to a Wikipedia main article, nor a self-promotional website. These are issues you need to address immediately. For guidance on this, please read WP:USERPAGE and WP:NOTWEBHOST.
  • I would advise you to speedily remove all that content on your userpage before someone proposes your userpage for deletion on the grounds of self-promotion.
  • I also advise you to remove all your poems from your talk page - that is not what it's for at all. Talk pages are only there to discuss issues about editing Wikipedia, and this should only be conducted in the English language.
That said, there's nothing to stop you saying a little bit about yourself and your interests in editing Wikipedia on your userpage - indeed that's what it's for ...just don't treat Wikipedia as a free webhosting service to promote your poetry and other works. Accounts like these quickly get blocked from editing. We are here to build an encyclopaedia, and of course we'd welcome your assistance with that. Should you eventually want to prepare a draft article for publication, you can submit it for review at Articles for Creation, and it can take up to a few weeks for a volunteer to review and give you feedback on it. In the meantime please remove the content I have referred to above before someone completely deletes both your userpage and your talk page for you. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Amalia, New Mexico compound[edit]

Should I turn the history section into a standalone article? There is so much media coverage ([1][2][3][4]). Would it be too WP:NOTNEWS? What could it be named? Is this already an article? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I wish someone could go to Seneca king, Barber and make edits. He is notable of not a Bezos. He has done a lot.[edit]

I have gone to the editing trainings. I look at your templates. I program and yet I find the editing on wikipedia very difficult. Even answering and communicating in Tea House is hard. Yet, I have good editing and writing skills.

1. I do not understand why the Seneca King , Barber page is not acceptable. There are many newspaper articles written about him. I wish someone could go to Seneca king, Barber and make edits. He is notable of not a Bezos, so I understand you don't think he is a notable entrepreneur. He has done a lot, however, and he is a notable barber. So, why is that rejected. Just delete what is not appropriate. Certainly the whole thing contains many good, referenced parts. If a reference is not allowed, take that citation out and request one. I will find another citation

2. I would like to make a page on the New Arthurian Economics. My experience with Seneca's page has discouraged me so much. Can I start that as a stub and have others edit it? How do I do that. There are articles published in European economics journals on this topic.

3. Can you simplify your instructions. For example...You say put 4 tildas when you sign out. (THe question is where...Before? After? Both?)Another example: The notification says I got an email but I do not know where to find it. I did not see it in my gmail account yet, I do not see emails on Wikipedia. Thank you for clarifications on these and all instructions for editors.

Thank you.

Jaeze (talk) 21:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)Jaeze Jaeze (talk) 21:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry this has been so frustrating. I Googled Seneca King and can't find enough sourcing to suggest an article will be successfully accepted. I'm also not sure that Arthur F. Shipman or New Arthurian Economics have enough coverage either. Please read WP:RS. If you can find sourcing, your best bet is to draft the article in your sandbox, and then come back and ask for help reviewing before you submit it. Click here to start it. Special:MyPage/sandbox TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Jaeze. Like many people who try editing Wikipedia for the first time, you are wanting to go straight into creating a new article: this is both one of the more difficult activities in Wikipedia, and also often one of the least helpful. Unless the subject is very obviously notable (in the special sense in which Wikipedia uses the word), even a successful article on it may be a less valuable return on the effort than improving some of our millions of sub-standard articles. I suggest you read WP:your first article.
Your other questions: please don't start a stub. In my opinion, there is no place for new stubs in Wikipedia in 2018: they were a symptom of an earlier state of the project, but today, the way to start is with a draft, which will only get moved to main article space when it is good enough to be accepted as an article.
Finally - you sign at the end of any post on a talk or discussion page (like this one) - not when editing articles! --ColinFine (talk) 23:53, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Help with references[edit]

I am FARRR too lazy to use refernces, so can you add some sort of auto ref system?Addust (talk) 21:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh dear, Addust. Maybe Wikipedia won't suit you then! References really are essential for Verifiability to support almost everything we add to this encyclopaedia, and simple opinions (and silly comments in articles) will swiftly get removed. Did you realise that many references to books, newspapers and websites can be automatically inserted using the Visual Editor. It's more WISYWIG than our source editor, though many long-term editors do tend to prefer the latter. If you need help with this, just let us know. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:30, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Even using the source editor, most references are straightforward when the "cite" templates are used. It's just a matter of filling in a few boxes in "cite web", "cite news", "cite book", or "cite journal" template. People who turn to Wikipedia for information deserve to know the sources of that information. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:01, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
You still have to use references, but Wikipedia:REFILL can be a help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

REPLY from Addust: You could just add it so if you add the name of an arcticle in an edit, it automatically becomes a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Addust (talkcontribs) 08:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:REFILL is a bit like that. You add the bare url between the reftags <ref></ref>, save the page and then use the refill tool. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Addust blocked. David notMD (talk) 10:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Oh well, one can only try. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:18, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

How do you change the photo in the bio box?[edit]

Hello,

Can anyone provide guidance on how to change the photo that appears in the profile box for an entry about a person? I'm a new editor.

Thanks,

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnwcote (talkcontribs) 23:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

The image used in the box is designated in the "image" line in the infobox template. Changing it requires substituting another image's file name. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:04, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Johnwcote. Changing an infobox image is fairly easy to do; you just need to replace the current image with another one as explained above. However, you can only use images which are already uploaded to either Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons; in other words, you cannot add images found on external websites, unless you upload them to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons first. Before you upload any images though, you should carefully look at Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Non-free content and c:Commons:Licensing because only certains types of content can be uploaded and used in Wikipedia articles and how such content can be used largely depends upon its copyright status. In addition to copyright matters, changing an infobox image can sometimes be a contentious thing to do and it's often a good idea to be cautious and propose such a change first on the article's talk page. You're not required to do so, and perhaps nobody will have a problem with the new image; if, however, someone does contest the change by reverting your edit, please follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and discuss things on the article talk page.
Finally, I'm curious about this edit sum for one of your edits to Dennis Herrera. All of the edits you've made with this account have been made to the Herrera artcle, so I'm assuming you question here at the Teahouse is also related to Herrera. Anyway, you refered to the article as "our page" in the aforementioned edit sum, so I'm wondering if that means you are connected in someway to Herrera. If you are connected to him, either personally or professionally, then you would most likely be considered to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest with respect to anything written about him on Wikipedia. Wikipedia doesn't explicitly prohibit conflict-of-interest editing, but it does highly discourage it because it can lead to some serious problems. So, if you do have such a conflict, please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and follow the guidelines listed on that page as closely as possible. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:56, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia's guidelines for vulgar language?[edit]

Hi everyone, I'm attempting to copy edit this page for tone: http://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/wiki/Gag_name The text has quite a bit of vulgar language (and I'm wondering if that isn't why it was flagged for editing). My question is, essentially, is that okay? I have no issue with strong language but I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia's standards for that kind of thing. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Citrivescence (talkcontribs) 01:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

@Citrivescence: Yes, it's OK for the purpose being used in that article, particularly since most examples are vulgar. See also the policy Wikipedia is not censored. It would not be OK to use vulgar language in article prose, but perfectly fine in quotations and relevant examples. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:12, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

infobox[edit]

someone help me enter the the template infobox bus accident to the article 2018 kiryandongo bus accident — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollback95 (talkcontribs) 05:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

@Rollback95: could you explain what help you need? There's an infobox on 2018 Kiryandongo Bus Accident already, which you added and another editor moved to the top of the article. What's the current problem? › Mortee talk 10:23, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

SEO tools list[edit]

Hi,I was just wondering why the page called "List of SEO tools" redirects to Search Engine optimization#Methods - there is no real mention of tools to use here. A list like this is a bit hard to find. Everyone is posting their preferences, but there is no definitive, informative list of everything on the market. And I do believe an informative list like this would be helpful to many people.So, since there are other lists on Wikipedia, my question is - why not this one?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorraNoire (talkcontribs) 09:19, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Such a list would be a magnet for promotional editors wanting to use Wikipedia as advertising for their SEO tool. See WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. IffyChat -- 10:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
CorraNoire We can only have such a page if independent reliable sources have published such lists. If not, it's not a notable topic. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Hello CorraNoire and welcome to the Teahouse.
If you examine the history of List of SEO Tools, you'll see that in 2010 or so, there was an attempt at an article. It was turned into a redirect because the article was unreferenced and too incomplete to be considered useful. And it is never Wikipedia's goal to have a list of "everything on the market". Opinions about SEO as an activity are quite varied and the Methods section mentions the distinction between "black hat" and "white hat" approaches. That sort of controversy is going to make creating a list on WP rather hard. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 10:34, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Advice sought for connecting references with the statements they support[edit]

I recently introduced an error into Wikipedia trying to add to the arcticle Scrabo Tower. I went to the local library, found some books talking about it, returned home and added some text to the article, then added in-line citations but got it wrong by mixing up my sources. Obviously, I must be more careful and take detailed notes when at the library. Nobody noticed and I found out later when I went back to the library to add a page number that I had forgotten to mention. I then added quotes in the citations, but that seems not to be often done in Wikipedia. I find that often, even when citing a page in a source, it does not really become clear which statement in the source substantiates which statement in the article. Do you have advice for me? With many thanks Johannes Schade (talk) 10:20, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Johannes Schade thank you for your diligence in correcting that mistake. Adding quotations in ordinary references is often unnecessary, since a reference is typically a news article or a couple of pages of a book, and it's reasonable to expect a reader to look over the whole thing if they're interested in following up a claim on Wikipedia. That said, it can be useful particularly if the statement in the source is oblique. It's really up to you how much you want to use them. My suggestion would be to generally not give quotes, but put them in where you feel they add value. I'm sorry not to be more specific. For what it's worth, I've looked over to your edits to Helen's Tower and I think you've improved that article greatly. Welcome to Wikipedia! › Mortee talk 22:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
As someone who often uses the |quote= parameter in CS1 templates, I maintain a somewhat different position. For me, brief quotes help provide immediate context and assists readers in finding that context in the original source. This is especially helpful for readers who are curious enough to check the citation, but not invested enough to follow it to the source.
With that said, the only times most editors will clamor for a quote is in the case of non-English sources (please translate it!), offline sources, and paywalled sources. In all cases, it's a matter of accessibility and verifiability. Beyond that, it's really a matter of editorial discretion and preference. I have occasionally had quotes I have included in citations removed or reverted, especially long paragraphic quotes from online news articles, but most stick. The only downsides I can see, beyond superfluity, is a bit of byte bloat and larger reference sections with bulkier citations. Other than that, it's basically a just another way some editors, such as myself, tend to cite sources. If you prefer to quote some context, go for it. If anyone finds it objectionable or excessive, I am confident they will let you know.
Alternative methods of adding quotes include using {{efn}}s, adding {{Quote}}s within the reference (but outside any CS1 or CS2 template!), and adding them in the main article text in various ways. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 11:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Absolutely. I agree with all of that, just tend to use quotes less often myself. Very good point that they're particularly helpful where the original source is not in English or is otherwise inaccessible. › Mortee talk 13:46, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Removal or renaming of content[edit]

There is a page on the Isle of Man Portal referring to "Manx Electricity Authority: http://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/w/index.php?title=Talk:Manx_Electricity_Authority&action=edit

This no longer exists.... the service is now called Manx Utilities as its both Water and Electricity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.10.102.252 (talk) 13:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

I've updated the article to note this. However in future, if you see things like this you should consider being bold and making the changes yourself. Everyone is welcome to make constructive changes to Wikipedia! Neiltonks (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Help reviewing potential article for creation[edit]

Hi, thanks in advance for taking time to read my question! I am working as a paid contributor to submit a page for eFax.com on behalf of j2 Global. I have ensured that the copy is factually, neutrally written and well sourced. My previous attempt to submit the page was nominated for Speedy Deletion for lack of notability and was indeed deleted quickly. I have worked to improve the article, and would like to resubmit, but I am hoping I can get someone to review the article first to provide any input and feedback. I have discussed this personally with other Wikipedia editors that I know to get some feedback, which I've incorporated, but I'm hoping to get some fresh eyes and input before I submit again. What is the best way to approach this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixedmediamaven (talkcontribs) 15:16, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Mixedmediamaven. Thank you for declaring your status. You don't seem to have created a draft since your previous draft was deleted, so there is nothing to review. If you mean that you are hoping to get somebody to review it outside of Wikipedia, then I for one would not be interested in doing so: that is not how we work here. Frankly, if you are asking for that, and also noting the number of your contributions to date, I don't understand how you can in conscience represent yourself as somebody who is competent to edit Wikipedia for pay. I'm sorry to be blunt, but I think that honesty is more useful in this context. If I am misreading the situation, I apologise. --ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine. Thank you so much for your reply, and I apologize for any confusion; I have not yet published the draft but do intend to do so in order to have it reviewed. To eliminate any further confusion, I have submitted the draft to my sandbox. I would certainly not ask or expect anyone to do so outside of Wikipedia. I was not sure if there was a better (more preferable to other editors) method for getting it looked at before actually submitting to AfC.

My contributions are indeed limited with this account as this will be my first paid contribution. I have contributed to Wikipedia as a volunteer in the past, but wanted to be sure to be completely by the book in terms of this entry. My uncertainty for this project is mainly centered in wanting to ensure that everything I do is aboveboard, transparent, and in keeping with Wikipedia's standards. I truly appreciate your honest and direct feedback, as it's exactly what I'm in search of. --Mixedmediamaven (talk) 02:18, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying, Mixedmediamaven. Submitting for review is exactly the way to do this: there is no point in trying to get a draft reviewed before it is reviewed. There is no opprobrium in submitting a draft for review several times, as long as it is clear that the submitter is taking note of the reasons why it was declined, and working to ameliorate them. --ColinFine (talk) 10:14, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Mixedmediamaven I don't know how you get from "Mark ran his own successful telecommunications business, efax.co.uk. A US company, efax.com, wanted to buy it and so when they made him a good offer Mark sold out." (source) to "The first service branded as eFax was created by British-born entrepreneur Mark Oglesby in early 1997, providing a service to integrate email with existing fax technology. Oglesby eventually sold his eFax.co.uk domain to eFax.com, which at the time was owned by JetFax" (your draft) without inserting unsourced information. It looks to me like you're trying to find sources to fit what the subject would like the article to say. That's a strategy that is doomed to fail. Vexations (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Does a college course offered as part of a graduate program at an accredited program qualify as a notable subject for an article??[edit]

I am a teaching assistant for a course being taught at a large public college in the US. My professor has asked me to research the possibility of creating a Wikipedia article for the class that could be used as a reference by the students in the class. I am wondering if this would qualify as a "notable" worthy topic for an article. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lhns 03 (talkcontribs) 17:21, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Lhns 03. The question I would ask is, which reliable published sources (such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers) have contained extended information about your course, not deriving from anybody connected with the course? If, as I expect, the answer is "None", then your course is not notable and not a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article.
I'm not quite clear what you're trying to achieve: I'd be very surprised if your professor accepted references to Wikipedia articles in assignments, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source, being edited by anybody. If your professor wants somewhere for you all to communicate among yourselves, a wiki might be a way of doing it, but not Wikipedia. You might want to take a look at WP:Educational program. --ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Lhns 03, the link ColinFine meant to give you is actually WP:Education program. I have created a redirect Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 00:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

how do i include a reference/link that backs up what i wrote and how does the corresponding number get added in the text, newbie here on wiki.ty[edit]

how do i include a reference in the list below a page and the number in the text that corresponds with it? a newbie here so i got little experience yet with wikipedia. thanks for any advice. bryan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dutchmzungu (talkcontribs) 17:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Dutchmzungu, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read referencing for beginners both for how to add references, and how to identify acceptable sources to reference. --ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
I also added a quick little something to his talk page, since it's something that I use. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:39, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

article's quality classification[edit]

Hi people! I'm just trying to find an article that describes the article's quality classification. Does anybody could help me? Thank you. Greetings Lu Brito (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Content assessment – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 17:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Inclusion of external link[edit]

I tried to include, in the article about John Michael Greer, a page which I maintain, listing his works. The article has a history of discussion about providing a list of his works; I decided that a good compromise would be to include a list maintained outside of Wikipedia. However, the inclusion was reverted by an automated system. Is there anything that can be done to make this external site compliant?

--Packshaud (talk) 18:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hey Packshaud. The link addition was reverted because wordpress is essentially just a blogging service, and blogs are generally not to be linked to according to policy except in a few circumstances, such as when the blog is written by a recognized authority on the subject. GMGtalk 19:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

how to publish[edit]

Hi there,I have been trying to publish this article since yesterday with no successI am also trying to upload a picture, I can't even see whereThis is so confusing. Who can help ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LongShotCandidate (talkcontribs) 19:39, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I recommend you read WP:Your first article and the instructions in the File Upload Wizard. — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 21:56, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
It looks like you are asking about User:LongShotCandidate/sandbox. Just click the "submit your draft for review" button I added. You should still read the pages above before submitting, to see if the page meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 21:59, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
By the way, if you intend to submit an article about "Jean-Philibert Mabaya Gizi Amine" then that should be the title, not LongShotCandidate. Really. David notMD (talk) 22:44, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
The draft article is unsourced, and the subject may have challenges meeting Wikipedia's notability standards, from what I can find about him. You might also want to read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Candidates. Unless he's elected, it would also be a case of WP:TOOSOON. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:00, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
timtempleton, the draft says that this person has been an elected Senator in the Democratic Republic of Congo since 2006. Accordingly, he meets the notability guideline for politicians if this can be verified. Obviously, the draft article needs to be referenced before it can be accepted. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:13, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Here is a French language Congolese news article that identifies him as a Senator and head of an opposition political movement. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

First, my apology for confusing your User name with the article name Draft:Jean-Philibert Mabaya Gizi Amine. Right now, no references, will not be approved. David notMD (talk) 21:08, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

spacing error in new article title?[edit]

I just posted another article about a member of the Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1868, who also served in the House of Delegates (and so meets the notability guideline). Though I changed the Virginia Constitutional Convention link associated with the Albemarle County delegate to reflect his first name rather than initial, the link doesn't go to the article I just added. Since this laptop has a spacebar problem, I suspect that I didn't actually add a space between his middle initial and surname, which would cause the broken link. However, I cannot see it, nor correct it. I would appreciate some help here. I know these 19th century politicians seem pretty trivial, but I have met historians who appreciate my work. Thanks.Jweaver28 (talk) 21:00, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Is this about Clifton L.Thompson? It would be more helpful to tell us what article the problem is in, rather than why you believe he's notable. Maproom (talk) 21:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Image editing[edit]

Gray1046.svg

I remember there is somewhere on this website where volunteers can do simple image editing. I want to request some editing of an image... could someone point me in the right direction? With thanks, --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Tom (LT) I think you're looking for the WP:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 23:59, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for :). --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:06, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

The Wrath of Vajra[edit]

Can you please add more reliable source and plot. Apollo C. Quiboloy fans (talk) 01:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Apollo C. Quiboloy fans. You can be WP:BOLD and try to improve the article yourself. Articles are pretty much exoected to be WP:IMPERFECT and improved over time through collaborative editing. Improve what you can, and then perhaps somebody will follow up what you started and make further improvements. If someone reverts/undos any changes you make, just follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and discuss things on the article talk page. You might find some helpful tips on writing plot summaries in Wikipedia:How to write a plot summary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Winnipeg Table Hockey League (WTHL) Nominate for deletion?[edit]

So I prod-ed this article as I thought it didn't meet WP:NSPORTS, WP:CLUB or WP:GNG requires, the person who created the article Scapizzi removed the nomination saying it met WP:CLUB due to their activities being National and significant coverage. I don't want to get into a deletion discussion here as I know its not the place but I'm not sure if I should be taking the next step and AFD the article. The National coverage Scapizzi talks about is just the fact that the sport is a National sport, not that this league played National league as far as I can tell. As for the significant coverage, most of it is local news and the organisation own websites. I'm happy if I'm wrong, but it feels more like an advert for the league and the game. NZFC(talk)(cont) 01:50, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I removed a bunch of unsourced stuff and also the logo which is a copyright violation to the organization's website. I'm not seeing notability, but I try not to get involved in sports related notability discussions. Thanks, NZFC. John from Idegon (talk) 05:00, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Changing User name[edit]

hey i am trying to change my user name can any one help me getting set up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitalvybzmusic (talkcontribs) 02:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@Digitalvybzmusic: see Wikipedia:Changing username. Since you haven't made many edits, you could just create a new account with the desired username. That way, you wouldn't have to go through the bureaucracy of changing your user name. If you did that, it would probably be a good idea to let people know by adding a note to your new account's user page. For example, you might write, "My previous account was Digitalvybzmusic." NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Pages created by trolls[edit]

I'm aware that if a troll/vandal creates a page, beneficial or not, it will have to be deleted in accordance with WP:DENY, however, what if the page is on an extremely notable subject? Would it still have to be deleted? I'm guessing that the loophole around this rule is for the page to be recreated by a good-faith contributor, but what if the page was discovered to have been created by a troll far too late? Would it just have to remain, with little regard to DENY? SimpsonsFan94 (talk) 05:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi SimpsonsFan94. The information you're probably looking for can be found in WP:EVADE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up to How do I make an image appear at the browser's width?[edit]

I am trying to display an image in the browser, not as a thumbnail, but at the browser's width.

The advice given so far was:

{{wide image|Helsinki z00.jpg|1800px|[[Helsinki]] panorama - based on example from Template:wide image|100%|center

Unfortunately, this makes the image full size, within the browser's window width, so there is a horizontal scroll bar. Not the image scaled to fit the browser window.

Can this be done?

Keybounce (talk) 05:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello again Keybounce and good to see you back at the Teahouse.
I noticed, as I moved from computer to computer, and that image was still on the Teahouse, that sometimes I got a scroll bar and sometimes I didn't. Different screen widths and OSes and browsers. How to force it to always scale rather than scroll, I'm afraid I don't know. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 06:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

article for creation[edit]

there is no article named catalogue market.it must be created as soon as possible because many people are waiting for that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snikitha raj (talkcontribs) 07:17, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Why must the article be created as soon as possible? In Wikipedia, there is no deadline. Who is waiting for it? Statements that an article must be created as soon as possible are deeply troublesome to me. They are usually an indication that the editor making that statement is being paid to get the article accepted. Are you being paid? Robert McClenon (talk) 13:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello Snikitha raj. If you want to request for an article to be created, you can do so at Wikipedia:Requested articles, but there are many topics there and not many people with the time to research it all. Since you are an autoconfirmed user, it might be quicker to create it yourself. There is a guide to article creation at Wikipedia:Your first article. If you would like help to create your article, feel free to contact me on my talk page or using a reply template, or one of the editors who participate at Wikipedia:Articles for creation, either using the Help Desk or by submitting your article for review as a draft. Good luck. — Alpha3031 (tc) 07:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@Snikitha raj: You created Draft:Catalogue Market and submitted it for review, but it was declined by Robert McClenon. Robert did leave a comment on the draft's page explaining why he declined the draft. Did you read the comment? Is there something about it you don't understand? -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Snikitha raj, we do have an article Catalog merchant. Maybe Catalog market could be a redirect to that? Rojomoke (talk) 11:14, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
The article at Catalog merchant is better than the draft and does contain the discussion that I said was needed for Draft:Catalogue Market to be encyclopedic. Is the Original Poster satisfied? Robert McClenon (talk) 13:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Adding a photo to a draft entry[edit]

Hi. Was asked to add a photo into an entry that was submitted by another user and is currently pending review. I'm not familiar with images and need assistance. Le Bijoux (talk) 09:39, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Le Bijoux. It's hard to give you a specific answer without knowing more about the photo in question. Only photos uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons can be added to pages, but whether such a photo can be added to a draft depends upon its file copyright tag. If the photo has been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, then most likely you can add it to the draft and it should be fine as long as the file was uploaded in accordance with c:Commons:Licensing. On the other hand, if the file was uploaded locally to Wikipedia, then you won't be able to use it if the file is licensed as non-free content because non-free files are not allowed to be used in drafts per non-free content criterion #9 and Wikipedia:Drafts#Preparing drafts. In such a case, you will need to wait until the file has been approved as an article before adding it, and then you will need to make sure that the particular use of the file satisfies Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. If you're not sure about this, you can always ask for help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions or Wikipedia talk:Non-free content.
Now, if the photo is something yet to be uploaded to either Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, then you should take a look at Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files and the aforementioned Commons licensing page. What file copyright tag the file may be uploaded and where it can be uploaded under depends on things such as its copyright status and whether permission from the original copyright holder is required, etc. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:31, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

ASK HELP: Draft:Peace Treaty on Korean Peninsula[edit]

Hi, PLEASE ADVISE ME the necessary revision of the contents to be updated.From my understanding, it meets the three rules Wikipedia:Notability Neutral point of view, Verifiability.

I created some articles, but I would like to get support this topic as it could be a hot topic this year. Regarding the potential issue- WP:CRYSTAL, I believe that it could be covered as per the current public statement of the leaders of the five major countries: US, China, Russia, DPRK and South Korea. All of them now support the ending the Korean war and establish the Peace Treaty on Korean Peninsula. Especially, it is now all documented officially on the two documents which are Joint Statement and Panmunjom Declaration. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 10:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Appreciation[edit]

How many edits does it take to become appreciated? 2hark (talk) 13:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@2hark: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It only takes one good edit to be "appreciated" for it- but I think you mean "autoconfirmed". To be autoconfirmed, your account must be at least four days old and have at least 10 edits- which yours meets on both counts. 331dot (talk) 12:09, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

how[edit]

Curious to know how to become a great editor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razio mikoshi (talkcontribs) 13:00, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Razio mikoshi and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to be a great editor, you must be familiar with our policies and guidelines. Then as you stay here longer, you will gain more experience about editing and problem-solving. Interaction and communication between editors are also important. You will be greater after sometime. Regards ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:18, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Engaging in activities which result in this is generally not characteristic of great editorship. Avoiding such behavior is a step toward becoming one. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 15:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:How to write a great article may have something of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Resubmitting an article which has been redirected[edit]

I have been working on a article which was online for about eight years and then deleted + redirected because of notability. The online article is Jon Doscher and I wish to resubmit an updated full bio which can be seen here http://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/wiki/User:Gibmul/sandbox_22. Should I just do a (subst:submit) or what? Gibmul (talk) 14:06, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @Gibmul: Yes, you can submit it ({{subst:submit}}); if it is accepted, the reviewer will take care of the pesky technical details. (The only limit is that you should not submit drafts similar to a recently-deleted articles because it loses everyone's time, but in eight years notability might have been gained.) I am not sure (either way) whether your draft shows notability, but I took less care perusing the refs than a reviewer should. TigraanClick here to contact me 15:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Eight years? WP:Articles for deletion/Jon Doscher was this year, or are you referring to some other discuusion? I would also suggest that if I were a client paying someone to create a Wikipedia article I would expect the editor to have read Wikipedia guidance on such things as capitals and external links. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Article creation[edit]

i have created three articles, but all are being considered for deletion, should i just retire coz its like iam doing nothing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollback95 (talkcontribs) 15:17, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@Rollback95: Retirement is up to you, but you don't need to. There's plenty more to do here besides write articles. And even then, you're better at writing articles than a lot of editors who have only been here for a week. I'm not even going to post my usual advice for writing articles, because the ones you've written are pretty close to what happens when you follow that advice.
As you can see at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soroti Secondary School, it looks like the article Soroti Secondary School will stay and not be deleted. Likewise if you look here, the article Allan Okello will probably stay. Although it's too early to say how Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 Kiryandongo bus accident will go, I've seen similar articles survive an AfD. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

what else can i do on wikipedia apart from editing and writing articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollback95 (talkcontribs) 15:34, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@Rollback95: You can work on existing articles instead of writing new ones. But again, you're actually pretty good at writing new articles. Two of the three articles you've should not have even been nominated for deletion, one of them will probably survive. Most editors who have only been here for a week generally get all of their articles deleted, and for good reason. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:39, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@Rollback95: I'd suggest you slow down with the article creation / edits; listen to people's comments and advice; and get help to edit. GiantSnowman 15:41, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Request for web ref privilages[edit]

Hello, how do I go about getting the refill tool added to my account, instead of manually having to keep going back to reFill, to type the name of the page to fill in bare references?

Regards L1amw90 (talk) 16:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hey, L1amw90, and thanks for your note. This kind of blanking is not helpful, and we kind of have a rule against it. Wikipedia:Citing sources is a "do your best" thing, and if someone's best isn't perfect, then we clean it up instead of blanking it. Bare URLs definitely aren't great, but they're a lot better than nothing, and on a page that's getting that many edits, people are usually trying to get in and out as fast as they can, to reduce the risk of edit conflicts for themselves and others. Formatting could happen next week with no real loss in the meantime.
As for your specific request, the instructions for reFill are at User:Zhaofeng_Li/reFill. As an alternative, you could switch to the visual editor (look for the pencil icon in your toolbar). It works like a word processor and has the mw:citoid service already built in. For that, you just paste the bare URL into the "automatic" tab of the cite box, and it will create the citation template for you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Confirming account[edit]

How do I confirm my account — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prosper omoregie (talkcontribs) 18:37, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Your account will be autoconfirmed after 4 days and 10 edits. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Photos[edit]

How do I upload a photo? There doesn’t seem to be any way of doing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nigel T Keer (talkcontribs) 20:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

It depends whether it is free of copyright (in which case you upload it to Wikimedia Commons) or being used as permitted non-free content (in which case you upload it here to enwiki). See Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

How is the process of deleting handled. It seems that some people's role is to ensure that good articles are deleted.[edit]

How is the process of deleting handled. It seems that some people's role is to ensure that good articles are deleted.--Chichi Chilufya (talk) 23:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)--Chichi Chilufya (talk) 23:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

This Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kapya John Kaoma would seem to be what the OP is asking about for those looking into this. MarnetteD|Talk 23:13, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Chichi Chilufya: The article has been proposed for deletion on the grounds that it does not cite sources to establish that Kaoma is notable. In the deletion discussion, those voting delete have pointed this out. Those voting keep have argued that he's a great guy (true but irrelevant), and that sources establishing his notability do exist (probably true, but irrelevant unless someone cites them). If you want the article kept, your best way to achieve this will be to find some reliable independent published sources with in-depth discussion of Kaoma, and cite them in the article. Not stuff he's written himself; not stuff based on press releases; not passing mentions; but real independent discussion. Maproom (talk) 07:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Galvarino[edit]

Hello,I couldn't help but notice the recent pages about the Mupache Galvarino. Would you please share the contact info for those contributors? I'm pretty sure we are the only Galvarino's in the world and don't know about this history so far! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambernotes (talkcontribs) 06:52, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

The contributors to the article over the years are listed on the article history page (accessible by clicking on the "History" tab at the top of the article itself). --David Biddulph (talk) 07:03, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Ambernotes. If you go to the article Galvarino, and click the "View history" tab at the top, you can find out who has contributed to that article. You can ask questions on those editor's talk pages, but I suggest that you find the editors who made major contributions. Please be aware that these are volunteers and some of them may no longer be active. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:09, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Neoteric Evolution[edit]

Can anyone tell me why there is a call to delete this page ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeQuinceyMalden (talkcontribs) 08:15, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

I could not find such a page with that title. Can you link to it? 331dot (talk) 08:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Neoteric evolutionary theory was deleted last month on an expired PROD. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:25, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Crosskeys Inn Edit Deleted[edit]

Hi,I am not to familiar with using Wikipedia.I had edited a page called Crosskeys Inn and the edit was deleted by

Special:Contributions/2A00:23C4:EC87:C300:4C3C:D2B1:E1F7:8B79

Can anyone advise me on how to have the information reinstated.

Thanks in advance. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.80.217.59 (talkcontribs) 10:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Which edits are you referring to? Your IP has never edited that page, and 2A00:23C4:EC87:C300:4C3C:D2B1:E1F7:8B79 did not delete anything from that page. If you mean that you were editing as 2A00:23C4:EC87:C300:4C3C:D2B1:E1F7:8B79, then no, your edits cannot be reinstated because they were deleted and WP:REVDELed as copyright violations. Meters (talk) 10:15, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
It cannot and will not be reinstated. It was a blatant copyright violation. The text was copied from another website. That activity is not allowed here. I haven't seen what was removed, but, given previous experience with this subject matter, Wikipedia is NOT here to promote businesses or to advertise features and/or facilities. It is only interested in what reliable third parties have to say about the subject. - X201 (talk) 10:16, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
See WP:COPVIO , and for an intro on linking to particular edits see WP:SDG Meters (talk) 10:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)