Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

Welcome to the Teahouse...                        

A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Shortcuts

• WP:TEA
• WP:TH
• WP:THQ

Click here to
ask a question

Nick Moyes, a Teahouse host

Question forum

Host profiles

Guest profiles

Experienced editor? Become a host!

Learn more about the Teahouse

Articles to improve

Question archive

Guest archive

On Franklin High_School (Portland, Oregon) a student population is listed, and a pdf is cited with no context to how the pdf was found, so in order to update the information I had to do a completely new search. Is there any way that I can add on to my citation a index style page, specifically this one, for future editors to use to find updated information? The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 23:35, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello The Editor's Apprentice and welcome to the Teahouse.

While there is no formal parameter from the citation template that would be suitable for this additional URL, you could certainly add an HTML comment <!-- index page is at https://www.pps.net/site/Default.aspx?PageID=942 --> to the citation. This will be visible only to someone who opens the editing view of the page. That website, to me, seems improperly built, since it uses opaque internal page numbers in places where meaningful names could be supplied, but perhaps there is some technical explanation for why it is done this way - perhaps that's the only way the web developer could satisfy the requirement to support multiple languages. But one consequence of building the website this way is that there is no apparent commitment to the current structure that can be relied on by external sites when they link to its pages. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:15, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response! The idea that you presented seems like a very good one, so I'll soon implement it as well as keep it in my back pocket for my future editing travels.

The structure is defiantly a mess, and continues be a mess throughout the website/domain. My best guess, just personal use is that the number is some sequential identifier which marks how many pages have come before it, though I may be wrong.

On a side note, when it comes to the Teahouse, are non-hosts allowed to respond to questions, or is that forbidden because of how it would completely destroy the purpose of having the host role? The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 04:47, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@The Editor's Apprentice: The "host" role is pretty notional. A lot of the people providing answers here (including me) never formally signed on as hosts. If someone provides poor quality answers, they'll usually be quickly corrected and asked to stop until they have learned more.

The site we're complaining about is built with Centricity, now owned by BlackBoard, and the overall operation looks like something that I suspect is built on top of SharePoint, but I may just not have seen enough of these content delivery systems to recognize the right earmarks. Page-number-based addressing allows you to separate content from structure, to a certain extent, so I can see it being justified on that basis. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sounds good. The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 22:33, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although this is a more

invisible comment like explained above with the additional benefit for anyone with the code added to their common.css. Either solution works and you will almost definitely just be using hidden comments most to all the time, as may be most appropriate in this situation; what matters is that such data are included, which is more than many editors do. Thank you for such consideration and for your contributions! —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 01:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

The Editor's Apprentice, statistics for schools should come from a reliable independent source such as NCES or the state DOE. John from Idegon (talk) 06:53, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, John from Idegon! I checked NCES and found this, DOE didn't seem to have anything. I'm reluctant to use NCES as the main source for 3 reasons. 1, they have outdated data, the current stuff being 2 years behind the stuff on the districts website. 2, the website notes that "Data provided ... [is] from the official school level data for 2015-2016, implying that their data is no less reliable or independent then that of the districts. 3, I don't expect them to maintain high quality and up to date information when the can't even get the school and district websites correct, instead there link is redirected to the current one.

You should probably read

WP:TRUTH. NCES is always behind, but this is an encyclopedia article. The most current information is not the highest priority. Simply remove the text about the info coming from the school. Secondary sources should always be used, even if the data lags behind a primary source. Your assumption about the school district and their reporting of information to NCES (which is the data distribution department of the US Department of Education) is incorrect. They could fail to report the mandatory figures to the DOE, but to do so would endanger their receipt of federal education and school lunch funds, so it's fairly certain they won't do that. Can't say for sure in Washington, but in most states, schools are not mandated to report enrollment figures to the public. John from Idegon (talk) 00:25, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Any article created under the same title will show the original editor as the creator. It really does not matter who is listed as having first created the title. It will be obvious from the edit history who contributed content to the article. By the way, Wikipedia is probably not the right place for you if you are interested in getting credit for your contributions.. I believe there is an essay on this subject, but I can't find it, if anyone else knows the link... Meters (talk) 06:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

Hello HandsomeBoy and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid I don't see, from comparison with your sandbox draft, why you think the redirect target is not appropriate. But that's a matter that can be worked out later if anyone is concerned about your replacment....

• Undue concern about whether you will be credited with the creation, rather than just the improvement, of an article is unlikely to seen favorably by your fellow editors.
• When you are ready to MOVE your sandbox draft into the
  histmerge
  by an admin. They would much rather delete the redirect in advance of your move.
• Please ask for a review of your article before you move it, even if you don't want to use the articles for creation process. If you are participating in a contest, I expect the people running the contest to be offering competent content reviews. Your current draft has some distance to cover before it would be considered ready. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:13, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's technically possible to do what yHandsomeBoy wants, but I doubt any admin is going to think it is worth bothering to delete a viable redirect just because there is a more general topic and someone wants to get his name on the first edit.. Meters (talk) 06:16, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why I didn't get a notification on these replies. Thanks for your reply Meters, but I think some of your interpretation of my comment does not represent my reasoning. There is a reason Wikipedia:Barnstars exists, and for the record I really love being appreciated by wikipedians. Aside from the personal joy I get from bridging content gap for my country, that is the next greatest motivation for me here. I don't think that is a sign of WP:NOTHERE as you suggested. I have contributed significantly to numerous articles that I didn't create, and I do not have any history of COI in any of my created articles. There is a Wikipedia page that talks about proper attribution of content to their creators, which was what I intended this post to be about.

The reason I felt the redirect was not appropriate was because the subject, which is about a person was redirecting to a town, whose only link to the subject is that it is a Yoruba town, a not-so-important one at that, lacking the historical richness of Iyalodes in other towns. If this was a redirect to Egba, Lagos, Ibadan, etc it would have been better suited. The redirect seem to me like making "King" link redirect to one not-so-important village in Somalia (no disrespect to the country). But if there is nothing I can do to change that, I am definitely 100% fine with it, I just said I should get an opinion here first. It does not mean It would not change my contribution to the article.

I agree with you that the sandbox needs work, as I stated in my inital post, it is not a finished job. I even made some improvements this morning. But I was led by completely by the sources I could find. And I didn't want to generalize viewpoints that could be contradicted. For a moment i thought I was writing an academic project. Anyone is free to make the article better , because it is going to mainspace very soon. I created a similar article last month,

Iyaloja

, which had better tone and structure, which was due to the manner of sources I could get.

The reason why I stated "copy/paste" is because the way I use my sandbox, there are so many articles in its history. HandsomeBoy (talk) 12:50, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say anything at all about

WP:NOTHERE. Neither did user:jmcgnh

. Both of us simply pointed out that trying to get credit for your contributions is not what Wikipedia is about. As I said, the edit history of the article will clearly show who contributed the content, regardless of who first created the article. And this has nothing to do with Barnstars.

As for your suggestion that the current redirect is inappropriate, both jmcgnh and I seem to agree that it is a valid redirect. It may not be the best target for it, but it is not an inappropriate target. And it is not redirecting to a town as you claim. It is redirecting to a an article about traditional chiefs in Ota, and more specifically, to the section of the article discussing the Iyalode position.in Ota. That's a reasonable redirect. Meters (talk) 02:14, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

user:Meters, maybe we both misunderstood some aspects of our points. Thanks for the reply anyways, at least, one thing I've learnt is that the redirect will not be deleted. Cheers. HandsomeBoy (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP endorses the use of an IP address as a form of identification on WP. I have basically been threatened by another editor that appears to be a senior editor about my use of an IP address: "I have also advised you three times now to register." What do i get to do to address this matter formally? Just how is it that my editing skills are to improve because I register a user name instead of using what WP endorsres--anIP address? I think that this editor has over stepped the bounds of community spirit with this alluded threat?2605:E000:9149:A600:34D8:EC05:8EC2:B095 (talk) 10:50, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging

disruptive editing. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 12:10, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

And to both of you be

WP:CIVIL David notMD (talk) 14:47, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Anonymous IP, doesn't Wikipedia endorse creating an account? CoolSkittle (talk) 17:13, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse not same as require. David notMD (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In no way was a threat made or intended. The ANON-IP made several edits that came up on my watch list, those edits were evaluated by me and reverted. Another User also reverted one of the questionable edits by the IP.

With regards to the “threat” specifically. The correct context (which has been left out by the complainant) can be found on my talk page. I was responding to the IP’s assumed question (or rant, but I assumed it was a question about me suggesting the IP NOT register an account). As far as I am aware, and for atleast the past 11 years I’ve been on here, WP endorses people creating an account.

Every User here will agree with me when I say that it’s easier to use WP with an account, having the tools at our disposal. Also some articles can only be edited by confirmed users. The IP user has already identified as bring a 17 year ‘veteran’ editor of WP. Wether the IP chooses to create an account is neither here or there for me.

From the start the IP user was on the offensive, making it difficult, but I certainly kept it civil, even after the IP user attempted to bait me. The welcome message for disruptive editing was used first, then after more disruptive edits were made, I used the level 3 warning for disruptive editing (see IP Users talk page). Both templates include an element suggesting the IP User creates an account. Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 21:21, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So far as I know, there is just one editor out there who both chooses to edit without registering an account and gets upset whenever someone suggests that editing with an account might have some benefits, whether it's a direct suggestion or indirectly via some warning script. For the record, they object to being addressed "anonymous user" or "IP user". And it's true that edits by users editing without an account or while logged out often come under a little extra scrutiny, so their claim of being discriminated against is partially valid. All I can suggest is that we ignore these intemperate rants when we see them, just as the supposedly veteran editor should by now be able to ignore the small indignities, if we can call them that, that the community imposes. No editor in good faith reverts edits merely because they were made by an IP address editor. Suggesting that as a motivation, as opposed to recognizing a difference in opinion about the appropriateness of particular edit, is also a violation of

AGF. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:07, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Nford24? No, not every participant here agrees with you. Remember if you can, I am part of this discussion and to say that everyone does agree with your statement says that you are speaking for me and you are not. Not everyone participating in WP wants to do so with the intensity that do you. I do not ask you to participate using your IP address therefore why should you take it upon yourself on behalf of WP to then tell me to do so in regards to the IP issue? You and no one else with WP are here to tell spmeone just how is it that as long as they function in regards to identification just what is it that they can use in accordance with the WP endorsement. Those of you (see, i did not say everyone with WP, or even here) that seem to have some issue with IP identification users need to understand that when you ask someone that is not required of WP even if it is merely on a "naive" whim to do so is being rude. Now the way that you have been raised it may not seem rude but you have to remember that you are not the center of the universe. There are standards that people have that you just do not cross. I do not know your weltanschauung but maybe you need to learn about that of others. What concerns me about the "all" statement is that by saying so it automatically shuts down the discussion because you are making a judgment for the whole group; not just yourself--THE WHOLE GROUP. That is not the point of discussion. That is not the point of the tea house. You taut yourself as a senior participant at WP yet you seem to have underlying tentacles that counter WP tenets.Again, i have to remind the situation that my statements are not an act of hostility but that is what i see happen time and again in discussions on the board when it seems that the influences at WP cannot handle reflection. "disruptive" seems to be a very universal and wonderfully inclusive way to shut down discussion. If your statements are so pristine concerning WP tenets then just when was it necessary to register a user name to take part in the tea house? I am not making this up. Okay, I understand your explanation as yet not given that you did not intend this point--but do you realise the intent of what was expressed? If that is not possible then the discussion shut down a long time ago, I am a disruptive contributor and someone takes the situation to the boards. It does not take much review of the boards or the archives to show this out. The use of the term disruptive has already been disclosed and many of you already know this because it really is very common considering the "community" aspect of WP. It can almost be said (well, if it is done here then it is said) that the mere mention of it is of and unto itself uneasy for the WP environment. And despite the use of "registered" user names and what people post to the non-article talk pages the internet is a wonderful environment for aninimity.

When did I say i was a 17 year veteran? You have to understand that what you call something just may be an unfortunate summation. WP today is not what WP was when it foirst started. My "participation" with WP is not the same today as it was years ago. I would find it unfortunate to characterise what was "participation" years ago with an occasional read and an occasional edit the same as what I may do on occasion now? You have to pay attention to the details and not what are prejudices. That statement to some is being disruptive. I do not have aspirations of being an administrator. OH! he doesn't have aspirations ....... This is how i characterise some things. I do not go to the same type of "cocktail" parties as you might. SThis statement to some will cause them to think that some this person is not WP material. I have already said that i do not have the same administrative aspirations as so many others.I am not on a witch hunt.2605:E000:9149:A600:7D56:CC3:EA51:5FBF (talk) 00:48, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP users

WP:AGF however. We're here to work together and build an encyclopedia. Best wishes. Coryphantha Talk 03:04, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I hate to point it out but when another editor writes a message that in effect could be interpreted as a threat because you did not follow their advice then that is a threat. This is from a person that wants to characterise themselves at not having any fault in the situation when it can be shown by their actions that at best they misdirected another editor about just how can the tea house be used? You want to characterise a situation with absolutes when they have contributed to not following WP tenets? What it amounts to is bullying. And the except was to, despite WP endorsement, registering a user name which is the problem with that template. But if you advocate the use of registered user names and despise the use of IP addresses as WP participation identifiers then I do not expect for you to understand the impact of someone with the authority to send out "welcomes" that also in the same breath talks about registered user names. You do understand the cookie cutter rule? Not everyone is the same. Not everyone at WP is as invested in what WP has in options as what you might. The problem presents that if the other party is not of the same interest then they just may not be the right sort for WP. I am not talking about those IP users that pop on the site and create obvious vandalism to an article. But if you apply this attitude to those IP user s that have a bit more seriousness to their participation that is not the problem of that user. And to point this out is not an action of hostility although this "disruptive" tone seems to be a panacea so readily jolted at what seems to be an attempt to do away with the participant that is serious yet perceived offensive, maybe solely because they use an IP address user name that is unregistered. These attitudes come out on the boards where they seem to be populated by a preponderance of senior WP participants because they have the same skills set. Well, when your selection is the same then you have just set up your system to have the potential for the same mind set. The anonymity of the internet can just add to it. Someone with authority that has given what is wrong information is not an innocent. Let me point out a potential characterisation of your writing. When you address a registered user name do you qualify that communication with "registered user name ......"? Because it is in all likelihood, especially here in this discussion, to qualify, to whom you are addressing by saying, "Hello IP users 2605:E000:9149:A600:34D8:EC05:8EC2:B095 and 2605:E000:9149:A600:7D56:CC3:EA51:5FBF" because they are not likely to be confused with others? I use my IP as my identifier not as a means of telling people my IP address. And again, let me point out that this is not an act of hostility but merely pointing out what is happening with some in what may not be so a subconscious way of red flagging others. When I address registered name users I do not say, "Hello registered name user 'Disruptive Editor'." I just say, "Hello, Disruptive Editor" then go on with my message.2605:E000:9149:A600:6891:3BC3:1FEC:41B4 (talk) 18:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday, I made a few pages/ articles that were pre

There is no valid reason to split seasons like List of My Hero Academia episodes into separate pages, especially when there is strong continuity between the seasons, unless there is to be a substantial increase in content. I recommend against the split. Ozflashman (talk) 03:59, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh? Well, that's a lot if its to undo that. It was if the info kept adding, the list looks like I'm scrolling down and down. Tainted-wingsz (talk) 04:43, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then next, I was going to add a dvd/ blue ray for the home release; on seasons 1, 2, and maybe 3. When the available info comes up. And if I add that, on the main page/ article it would be already bigger. Tainted-wingsz (talk) 13:03, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are the steps to begin working reviewing articles? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lu Brito (talk • contribs) 18:10, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lu Brito Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm guessing you are asking how you can get started reviewing articles since you haven't created any articles yet. A lot goes into article review, first of all a user has to be gain some experience. You have to have had a WP account for at least 90, which you've achieved, and have at least 500 uncontested edits. At this writing, you have 13 live edits, 60% of which are on your user pages and 15% have been at the Teahouse. After you've gained some experience, then you can apply for new page reviewer rights which you can read about here: here.

Incidentally, what was the reason you added the code <includeonly> on your talk page? I left you a welcome template and it didn't show up, I had to use "edit page" and post the template above your code. That makes it very difficult for WP users to communicate with you. It might be more helpful if you removed it.

When posting on talk pages and at the Teahouse, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~. I signed your post for you. Coryphantha Talk 02:37, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coryphantha Hello! Hello world! Thanks for the answers! I'm sure I have so much to learn. And yes, I was asking how you can I get started reviewing articles since I haven't created any articles yet. Thanks for your answer, I'm a Science Computer student and I did need this information for my thesis' research :) (I'm trying to understand how Wikipedia works)Lu Brito (talk) 22:43, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article on San Francisco History has NOTHING on the Presidio. The Presidio was a post in the Spanish-American War and the Philippine American War. It was home to Buffalo Soldiers.^[1]

I edited the article and the source cited was a government website.

This is verifiable.

Whomever is the Editorial Police around here perhaps should brush up on their San Francisco history. It's a gross oversight to have nothing on the Presido and its involvement as a Post during war.

The post referenced the National Park Service information on the Presidio.

As someone who volunteered an hour today to update this, I don't appreciate it being deleted.

Here's the link: https://www.nps.gov/prsf/learn/historyculture/spanish-american-war-a-splendid-little-war.htm

Writercal (talk) 23:04, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Writercal and welcome to the Teahouse.

You and another editor have a content dispute. This is very common on Wikipedia. Your work is not lost, it is not entirely deleted, it is retained in the history of the article.

For content disputes, the first step is to open a discussion on the talk page of the article in question. The Teahouse will not help solve content disputes. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:17, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

WP:FREECOPYING for more information. If the source content is not in the Public Domain, you should never copypaste it into Wikipedia (aside from short quotations in relevant context), but should re-phrase the information in your own words. I'll revert your second edit (the given date is disputed among different sources in the article, and would need a more detailed explanation and possibly additional sources). Please make sure to read the linked guideline about this aspect. Thank you for your consideration. GermanJoe (talk) 23:34, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

At History of San Francisco, clicking on View history at top, then Prev next to your edit will show your addition. Clicking on the date next to your edit will show a past version of the article, with your edit. David notMD (talk) 01:20, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has to be understood that the communication skills of editors throughout WP differ and maybe on the route to garner the most some editors are in retrospect in haste when it comes to content they do not accept either for care for on face or source (or lack thereof) very scant about explanation or advice when they revert. There are some editors that all they do is revert; some not even providing an edit summary. This counts for them a an edit as would be if you wrote an entire article. Some do not realize just how by this hasty interaction are perceived or the impact it has on how people perceive WP. There may even be a situation where they do not care and let their level of influence prevail. If someone reverts you and you do not understand decide what page best would assist you in getting a response as to why was the action taken. If you get back a response in WP short hand then you know that it is all rout for them instead of pointing out some particular facts as to why. They may feign lack of time, etc but again the WP community is not from a cookie cutter. So in a way, I understand how taking the personal affront to an action is exhibited but it probably has nothing personal against you--just the other person's style or inability to let the other person understand just what they have done by reverting.2605:E000:9149:A600:6891:3BC3:1FEC:41B4 (talk) 17:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes after I get notified of an edit to a page on my watchlist and I visit the page, I don’t receive subsequent notifications even though the page remains on my watchlist. What might cause that? Thx, Humanengr (talk) 00:00, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

eight specific situations

. You'll always be notified when someone edits your talk page, but you're getting the notification because talk page messages are one of the eight situations, not because your talk page is in your watchlist.

You'll also get notifications when someone mentions you in a discussion (like I'm doing now), regardless of whether the edited page is on your watchlist. You can configure these notifications in your preferences.

Right now, the only way to check for changes to other pages in your watchlist is to do it manually. Please consider filing a feature request if you'd like the ability to get notifications from these other pages. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!​ — Newslinger talk 15:03, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Newslinger is referring to a notification feature at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo. I guess Humanengr is not talking about that but has enabled "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal. Maybe you were not logged in when you visited the page. You didn't give an example but maybe subsequent edits were marked as minor edits and you have not enabled "Email me also for minor edits of pages and files". Maybe a notification mail did not arrive or was placed in a spam folder where you didn't see it. Per Help:Email notification#Watched pages, when a mail has been sent, no more mails are sent until you visit the page while logged in. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:47, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thx for following up. I had checked the "email me" and not the "minor pages" checkboxes. What's puzzling is that I regularly carefully check my spam folder; and I was/am almost always logged in. The only other thing I've observed is that there will be from a few to a dozen or more real (non-minor) edits over a period of days/weeks that I don't get notified of and then I'll get notification of the next one. One page where this has happened is Cogito, ergo sum. Is there a log where users can see which notifications have been sent to them? Humanengr (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, I just joined hoping to fight vandalism on my spare time but I haven’t seen any vandalism in my favorite areas (I am an art professor). Can someone direct me towards how to find and fix vandalism? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FeArtProf (talk • contribs) 22:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FeArtProf, welcome to the Teahouse, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you created your account today and the above edit is your first edit. I would recommend having some more edits under your belt before your begin the daunting talk of reverting vandalism, as there are many steps to learn. I suggest you read through the links that were left on your talk page in your welcome section to become more familiar with editing. After that you could check out the Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy and check to see if there are any available trainers who can mentor you. At this writing there are no slots open, but that may change. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages and at the Teahouse with four tildes: ~~~~. Coryphantha Talk 03:27, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Coryphantha (did I do that right?). I checked out recent change and I noticed that another editor reverting vandalism, CataracticPlanets. It seems like CataracticPlanets has a natural talent for patrolling recent changes and other things - the first thing they did was make a blank user page and talk page and didn’t edit for several months. Then in one day they started reverting vandalism and even working on deleting pages. Looks like this is the person to go to for advice. FeArtProf (talk) 03:55, 5 August 2018 (UTC) did that work?[reply]

Hi

Wikipedia's vandalism policy. You can start by cleaning up vandalism manually, and then move on to other tools later. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! — Newslinger talk 14:29, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:Adventure course, that's a great place to start. Let's take this step by step, no need to rush things. Best wishes. Coryphantha Talk 16:21, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

It is always a great thing when someone with your background and enthusiasm and energy wants to help Wikipedia become even better! I left a longer message on your talk page. Best Regards, Barbara ✐  ✉ 18:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you search for the Dayton Art Institute, the Wikipedia search engine returns this single sentence description: “Art museum in Columbus, Ohio”. That is incorrect. It should read “Art museum in Dayton, Ohio.” How can this be corrected? I do not see any editing options listed on the search returns page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabrhs (talk • contribs) 16:25, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

short description, which can be edited at Wikidata. Fortunately, your Wikipedia account works with Wikidata, so you don't have to sign up again. To correct this error, just go to the article's Wikidata entry and make the change. (Unfortunately, Wikidata doesn't have an app yet, so you'll need to do this in a web browser.) Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! — Newslinger talk 17:00, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you! I was able to correct the description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabrhs (talk • contribs) 17:27, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! In the future, be sure to sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~) so others can see that the messages are from you. If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask.​ — Newslinger talk 17:38, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tabrhs, didn't the search engine return our actual article about the museum? It's here: Dayton Art Institute. Bishonen | talk 20:43, 5 August 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, the article itself is fine. The error was only present in the short description. Using Newslinger’s tip, I was able to correct that. Everything is working well now. Tabrhs (talk) 22:04, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although this is no excuse for not correcting data at Wikidata, a recent initiative to help localize short descriptions used on Wikipedia is through the addition of {{Short description}} within an article, typically at the very top above everything else. It takes a single unnamed parameter (though |1= can also work), which is the short description. Usually, the short description used at the Wikidata entry can be copied and used within the template, or the new short description here can be added to the Wikidata one there, but the point of localizing it is to bring it within the scope of Wikipedia for internal monitoring and control. For example, this error you noticed might have been caught quicker if it was in a short description template here, since there are many more editors here who might notice.

If you are interested in contributing to the initiative, feel free to add {{Short description}}s to the top of pages, as well. Regardless, thanks for your help catching these errors. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 02:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think i need to question this to someone can help me for this. I know im new but i did try my best to create Article for my Bias in South Korean Girl Group name Twice ♥♥ I love them so much because of their cute mv and songs btw if i did my best can you help me more so i can create some article for others :) thank you Strangenature (talk) 19:40, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: my Article or Wiki about Chaeyoung has not been public yet because wiki need to accept it before i can share it :)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Strangenature (talk • contribs)

@

WP:BLP

for more info.

Some information is generally discouraged even if there are sources -- signatures of living persons are discouraged because of concerns over privacy and relevancy.

I'm also seeing some possible issues with

neutral

phrasing. Phrases like "she also excels at" are not neutral. "she is known for" would be better -- assuming the information is sourced.

My usual advice if you're going to write an article about anyone or anything:

1) Choose a topic whose

notability

is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.

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)

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)

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) 19:50, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If ever wiki will accept it i will sure to make it better and gather more infos about her so i can make more article :)

PS:How many working days before they will accept it? or maybe not :( but still im trying to publish article so yeah its okay if ever they dont accept it Strangenature (talk) 20:17, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Son Chae-young has not been submitted, if you do submit, it will be declined as it only has one source, Twitter which is unreliable. Theroadislong (talk) 20:23, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

i have many source like i did go to twice main page and main website thats why I include all and i did watch their performance in Sixteen Reality Show in korea before they debut so yea I know some of info like JYP Praises Her because of her ability to sing, dance, rap, drawing and more Strangenature (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

We delete articles about living people if they do not have sources

.

You need independent sources, too. That is, sources that are not affiliated with Son Chae-Young or Twice. You need something like newspaper or magazine articles about them. You have to do more than just say you have sources, you need to

cite the sources in the draft. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

BTW i added more sources so you can check it i did my best to find more about her and soon i'll add more if ever there is thank you for helping me for this I appreciate it :) Strangenature (talk) 21:20, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The wording is VERY promotional (not allowed), some the proposed refs are about the band (Twice) not her. Your mention that you will add more sources (citations) if more are created is telling, as it suggests now is too soon for an article about her. One of the band's other members

Chou Tzu-yu has a Wikipedia article about her, so you may want to look at that for a model of the article you want to create. David notMD (talk) 01:09, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

posidonia capital of atlantis they worshiped many eldar gods and goddess the upper class wore gold and blue lower class wore white and bronze and soldiers wore gold and aqua with sliver sea shells and the golden dolphin were their holy symbols in the empire. each summer they would celebrate neptunailia the festavial of water and its blessings and if you where rich you could sacrfice an baby bull and if you were poor you wold sacifice watermelons or wine depending on what you could affored only on this day. the eldar gods and goddesses would previde for the people. outher holidays in clueded the fest of oceananus and the night oF the 6 sea shells when the 3 sisters children of posidon's eldarest sister cast 3 sea shells into the sea and created atlantis, its people and the 1st of 2 dolpins, the starfish, fish, clams and turtels & octapus. over the years there stories have been deluted by other races and there stories where given to the kemetic people's then given to a greek traveler that made it famous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AtlanteanPaganism2018 (talk • contribs)

• I’m not seeing a question in there anywhere. Did you need help with something?
  talk) 19:54, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Hello! I am desperate for help with my user page. Why is the text to the side? Is it the userboxes? Much Thanks, Huff slush7264 20:10, 5 August 2018 (UTC) Huff slush7264[reply]

Hi @Huff slush7264: and welcome to the teahouse! A great start to a design on your user page! I see a couple of potential causes for the formatting errors you're seeing. Firstly, a wikitable is being created at the top, but isn't closed. (To close templates like that, you want to use the a closing |}). Additionally, the use of the align: center template conflicts with some of the style parameters set in the <div code just before it. To fix it, I recommend removing the wikitable and center templates, and instead placing your userboxes in a formatted box in the middle of your div area with some margin padding. Additionally, we can change the div's "text-align" parameter to 'center' to achieve the same thing as the previous center template. I've gone ahead and put together what this would look like on a subpage to my userpage, here. Feel free to copy and paste the source code! Let me know if I can help more, HunterM267 ^talk 20:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm planning to add an article about Dan Waldschmidt's book. What's the book infobox code? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshuaReen (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JoshuaReen. Please see Template:Infobox book for full documentation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have been accused of being a single purpose account because I have been trying to add information to Sarah Jeong, which has been an extremely contentious page. I think it's ridiculous that someone has accused me of this, but now I am afraid that my account is going to get banned. If you look at my edit history, of course I have made many many edits to the talk page because it is a contentious issue and people are discussing what the content should look like; many of the comments are me supporting or opposing other suggestions to the page, and the number of those can rack up quite quickly apparently. I have worked much harder on other articles such as Utilis Coquinario, Meristem, Trophic state index, and Hănești. Particularly I have spent hours and hours working on Utilis Coquinario, which I created from scratch!

Am I supposed to stop working on Sarah Jeong now because someone has accused me of this? Is there a rule about having more than "1/3" of my edits coming from one page as one user referenced on the admin noticeboard? Why would someone think I have a "single purpose account", and how can I avoid that? Ikjbagl (talk) 22:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ikjbagl and welcome to the Teahouse.

The "single purpose account" is an observation about behavior, which sometimes calls for added scrutiny because it is also a common co-attribute of paid or COI editors. All by itself, it is not a reason why your account would be blocked. Blocking would only occur if the edits that you make add up to a disruptive behavior.

Because the Sarah Jeong page is under discretionary sanctions, you need to be very careful about how you interact with other editors contributions there - but you are by no means unable to continue to contribute. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:24, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI, this issue is currently under discussion at

ANI. John from Idegon (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@John from Idegon: ah, now I see it. I looked to Ikjbagl's talk page to see which admin noticeboard they had been mentioned on. Seeing none, I stopped looking, thinking that the Jeong talk page was where I should look. But Ikjbagl started the ANI thread, so that's why I found no notice on their talk page.

So my advice above was somewhat under-informed. The SPA was a misplaced accusation and POV editing is sometimes in the eye of the beholder. Taking the issue to ANI looks like it was a mistake, Ikjbagl is learning some lessons. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:44, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I want to create an article on an artist who is a US citizen and spent a good bit of time in early life in NYC and environs. After moving permanently to Germany and continuing her career there, the German Wikipedia has a stand alone article. I would like to edit and contribute to it and put it on English Wikipedia. I would like to continue what is started in German because I am less familiar with the references and notability that exists there. I would like to take their (German's) word for what is happening in Germany and contribute from sources exclusively in the US. I know a good bit of German but not enough to translate myself. Is this done? Nudgol (talk) 23:10, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Drat; @

WP:TRANSLATETOHERE and Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment/Visual arts

. The problem with these is, a notice there only works if someone reads it who is both competent and interested. Biographies of living artists, alas, are a fairly narrow interest (as compared, for example, to models or politicians) but still, there’s no knowing until you try.

Minor matters of form for a post here, better to make a shorter header such as “Translate German article to English” and to give the proposed name of the article in the first sentence. Ideally, also an interwiki link to the German article, but of course new editors aren’t expected to have the slightest idea what that is, so no problem. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:32, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nudgol Who is the artist? I might be able to help. Vexations (talk) 17:48, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vexztions Jim.henderson thank you both for your concern and help. The artist is Andrea Scrima. I am told that she is on German Wiki, as an author and visual artist. I confess that I don't know how to access other language Wikipedias, otherwise I would give you a link. If you find it maybe you could give it to me or tell me how to access. If you could translate it would be great, I can be helpful since I do some German, know the career and could carry on from there. Any suggestions otherwise very welcome. Nudgol (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So, Vexations Nudgol we are perhaps getting somewhere. No shame that you don't know how to link to de:Andrea Scrima as it's a little trick that old-timers use to show how cool we are. The article is short, but has vitals and other matters that could go into Wikidata. The greater priority is to translate the prose; I'm hoping someone will chime in to save us from wrestling with Google Translate. Jim.henderson (talk) 23:51, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:MACHINETRANSLATION before trying to use Google translate. Machine translations have improved over the years, but it's probably still not a good idea to put too much faith in them. Try asking some of the editors listed in Category:Translators de-en; you might find someone willing to help out. You might also try checking on German Wikipedia as well (see de:Kategorie:Benutzer:Übersetzer en-de and de:Kategorie:Benutzer:Übersetzer de-en). -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:10, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I'll do the translation. My German is pretty decent. Please stay away from google translate. A machine translation is worse than no article. Vexations (talk) 00:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Splendid. I was improperly vague; the difficult wrestling comes not in activating the machine translation, but in turning its output into something readable and reasonably accurate. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:18, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The translation is at

Draft:Andrea Scrima. It needs work; it does not currently meet our sourcing requirements, but I think the first version should resemble the source article as much as possible. Please help by adding independent, reliable sources. --Vexations (talk) 02:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I want report an annoying user (58.108.17.20). This user make some non sense comment on my user talk page like said me b*st*rd etc. Where i can report this annoying user? Thanks before and sorry for my bad English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelelijahtanuwijaya (talk • contribs) 23:39, August 5, 2018 (UTC)

WP:AIV but not after just one incident. I have warned the IP. If he keeps it up eventually he will be blocked. Meters (talk) 23:56, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I've added your talk page to my watch list so I'll catch any more of this. If you wan tot leave warnings yourself you can find them at

Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace Meters (talk) 23:59, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks a lot for your help bro :) Michaelelijahtanuwijaya 01:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys! Was just wondering if anyone could please help me with these two articles Kota Banks and Kinder (band). A friend and I are trying to list more artists on Wikipedia for Australian musicians who we think are quite known in the country. We are only new to Wikipedia. Both of these articles have been nominated for deletion and I would love peoples help in adding to the articles to help improve them, suggesting improvements I should make or helping on the discussion page. Other articles we have made have been approved with similar to the same information, so just a little bit confused. Thank you so much. (Jonnycraig888 (talk) 03:06, 6 August 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Hello Jonnycraig888 and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please see

WP:CANVASSING

. You are not allowed to do that here at the Teahouse.

Borderline notability articles sometimes are accepted and sometimes challenged. You only find out for sure by doing the

AfD discussion. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:16, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

jmcgnh Canvassing is attempting to sway the outcome of a discussion or !vote inappropriately. Asking for help improving an article is perfectly acceptable and frequently happens here at the Teahouse. Rojomoke (talk) 04:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Had it not been posted under a section title "Contested deletion" I would not have suspected it was canvassing. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:25, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Guys! Thanks for the help. I'm just trying to ask for help and wanted to learn how to improve. Not trying to sway the outcome:) ( Jonnycraig888 (talk) 07:35, 6 August 2018 (UTC) )[reply]

Hello I’m new to Wikipedia. I am interested in psychology, sociology and other social sciences plus I’m quite and accomplished in coding (CSS and JavaScript) any advice on what to edit. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingedspy (talk • contribs) 03:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

WikiProject Computer Science

has more, and other editors also have many other articles to suggest.

In the future, be sure to sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~) to let people know that your message is from you. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! — Newslinger talk 04:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How does one go about asking for someone with the proper authority to do a mass spelling change? "lieutenat" 15 hits, all in text.2605:E000:9149:A600:6891:3BC3:1FEC:41B4 (talk) 05:11, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 2605:E000:9149:A600:6891:3BC3:1FEC:41B4 and welcome to the Teahouse.

This seems like the sort of thing you could ask at WP:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks. People with AWB should be able to take care of it in short order. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to what

insource:. There is also an initiative, called the Typo Team, whose focus is to address all typos and whose moss project tracks and documents typos (among other issues). Thanks for your contributions! —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 14:51, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello Judith and welcome to the Teahouse.

You have already posted a message to Talk:Donald Yamamoto, so you've done what's necessary. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:04, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, yes I felt a bit silly for posting here after I figured that out on my own. Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.212.163.34 (talk) 14:43, 6 August 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I was wondering if we can recreate the article which was deleted long back.Some user has created it and due to inefficient source, it was deleted .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhilash_kumar . I have checked the log and remark that only administrators can create it. Kindly advise if it can be created again by normal user like me or need admin only. May I request any of the administrator to help recreating it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkits23 (talk • contribs)

Thanks

It can only be created by administrators. You can draft it first then wait for any administrator's approval. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 07:31, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for quick reply. so after drafting ,how can i approach administrators? or by normal process i should send for review ? Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkits23 (talk • contribs)

You may create it in your own sandbox. You can ask any users in this list. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 08:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kkits23 I would also note that accounts cannot be shared- who is "we"? Please sign your talk page posts with ~~~~. Thanks 331dot (talk) 08:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: Ah I missed that. Thanks for the note. Btw I templated them about the signing post thing. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 08:42, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have made an article about

Hey @Jeromi Mikhael! I gave you some grammar help-if you ever need more help with grammar, check out the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language MadameButterflyKnife talk 23:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I edit my draft as per feedback, save it and resubmit it. Next time I check it, it shows the previous version and the date it was last declined. Even hitting edit again only brings up the previous version and all my changes have been deleted. This has happened twice now. It's like Wikipedia is stuck there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobietta (talk • contribs) 14:07, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

copyright violation

, a serious issue and prohibited on Wikipedia as it may have major legal implications. All content that you submit to Wikipedia must be of your own original creation with very few exceptions, such as short attributed quotes, and content that is in the public domain, usually because it is from very old publication.

Additionally, your draft is highly unlikely to be accepted if it does not include coverage in published sources that are independent of the subject. Official websites may be used to source fairly uncontroversial facts, but it does not contribute to demonstrating that the subject meets our

standards for notability, which is what ultimately determines whether a subject qualifies for an article on Wikipedia. GMG^talk 14:19, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

The text is my own and I've referenced the sources but not copied and pasted. I think the issue is because the page was originally "RAVENOL" but it was changed to "Ravenol" at the request of one of the moderators. I had to get a Wikipedia person to help me, and since then I've had continued problems. And now it flags up as identical to the RAVENOL page - because it's the same article with a sentence case title. There's no mention about Sphilbrick's changes or I would have contacted them. What can I do please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobietta (talk • contribs) 14:40, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well

Wikipedia's standards for reliability

and summarize those sources in your own words. It looks like the issue with the title was fixed a couple weeks ago, but without coverage in these types of independent published sources, the draft is not likely to be accepted.

Besides that, content closely following the format of the company's website should often be removed anyway, even if it is not a copy/paste copyright violation, because official content from an official website is likely to be promotional in nature, and to therefore not comply with

Wikipedia's standards for neutrality. GMG^talk 14:48, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

If you click on the link (the link attached to the word "reverted") you'll come to this edit:

Sphilbrick edit.

@Tobietta: You'll see that I added an edit summary explaining why the material was reverted, as well as identifying the source of the material that appears to match the material you are adding.

If you go to the history of the draft:

History

You will see all of the recent edits including each of my reversions and including an explanation in the edit summary. Each entry also contains a link to my talk page so that you can discuss it with me.

I'm happy to discuss this further here or on my talk page.

Can we start by having you explain why the text which you say you wrote is identical to the text at this site? If you happen to write the text for the company it is virtually certain that you did so under contract which gave them the copyright but let's start by a discussion of how these two sets of text match.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:54, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Sphilbrick, the last comments I could see on the page were from AmericanAir88. Thanks for showing me the history, it makes much more sense now. I'll edit the article again. I only wanted to add something as it mentions Ravenol on the Force India page, but seeing as they're going bust maybe there's no point...

@

WP:COI per the message I left on your talk page. I believe this policy and guideline applies to you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 00:36, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

First citation, including a quote from the study: [1]

Second citation to the same study, but with a different quote: ^[2]

(The reason I would like to include quotes from the study is that when you look at any good Wiki article, statements are made, and then a citation(s) is supplied next to each statement which (hopefully) supports the statement. But if the reader wants to check that the cited study does indeed back up the statement made in the article, that can be a little tedious, because the reader has to scan the whole study (which can be many pages) for the relevant bit which supports the statement. But if you provide a single sentence quote from the study, the reader can then use that to find the right section in the study.)

Thanks very much for any help with this. 91.125.89.101 (talk) 14:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey anon. One option is to use the citation as normal, but include the quote in an extended footnote using Template:Efn. For example:

Here is the first sentence.<ref name="one">Reference 1</ref> Here is the second sentence.<ref name="one/>{{efn|According to Reference 1, "quote quote quote quote quote."<ref name="one/>}}
===Notes===
{{notelist}}
===References===
{{reflist}}


Which gives you this:

Here is the first sentence.^[1] Here is the second sentence.^[1][a]

Notes

1. ^ According to Reference 1, "quote quote quote quote quote."^[1]

References

References

1. ^ ^{a b c} Reference 1

Hope that helps. GMG^talk 15:00, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, GMG, that is an interesting option you suggested. 91.125.89.101 (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I often experience this issue you described, as well, especially since I use the |quote= parameter often. Please keep in mind that such quotes are not necessary; their function is to provide some context and clarify what exactly is being referenced, which readers can then

accessibility concerns. Fortunately, discussions have recently occurred about potentially solving this problem. Unfortunately, similar discussions have occurred in the past without any extension of MediaWiki to show for it. We'll see if this intractable problem is fixed soon. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 11:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Article Additions

If anyone is looking for music articles to improve/tidy up, here are 2 stubs that need work:) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_(Australian_musician) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_(singer) (Jonnycraig888 (talk) 14:57, 6 August 2018 (UTC))[reply]

As Nana222222 created both of those stubs today, how about you leave a message at N's Talk, suggesting the work needed. Also, Nana222222 appears to be prolific in creating stub or short articles of questionable notability:

Party In The Paddock and Confidence Man (band) all within the past week. David notMD (talk) 19:21, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

A necessary request

I would like to edit a article which is in dire need of some changes, but it is Semi-protected and even though I am a member I cant edit. What can I do to solve this issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnumb22 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Magnumb22. Your account will be granted autoconfirmed status after four days and 10 edits. You will then be able to edit semi-protected pages. Alternatively, you can request that an edit be made by another user who is already autoconfirmed, by starting a new section on the article's talk page and including {{request edit}} along with your comment. That will add your comment to a queue of requested edits to be answered by experienced volunteers. GMG^talk 15:22, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kent School

This page was just moved from

Kent School, USA so that Kent School could be made into a DAB. The other Kent School that was just added is a stub article that is a defunct school, and IMHO should have been added as a hat to the original Kent School article, or even merged with Windsor School, Germany as the new article does not even seem notable as a standalone article. Is it possible to get some help to move the Kent School, USA back to Kent School? This is a long established article in Wikipedia. Thanks. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 15:56, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@Bermicourt: GMG^talk 15:58, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Kent School, Hostert, is just a stub doesn't make it non-notable; that's how articles start. It's certainly notable enough to warrant a full article, especially when you look at the history of the place, its alumni, etc, the architecture, as well as it's coverage in the press, National Archives and online - it's way more notable that many schools on Wikipedia. If Kent School, USA (I wanted to move it to Kent School, Connecticut, but that's already a redirect), were moved back to "Kent School", that would suggest it's the primary topic and IMHO that's pretty hard to justify. Nor does its longevity on Wikipedia make it 'more primary' than newer articles. Bermicourt (talk) 16:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please move Kent School, Connecticut back to Kent School until a discussion can be complete. That's the appropriate way to handle this situation. There are other ways to add a new article without changing the name of a well established one. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 16:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I should add, I'm not questioning the notability of Kent School, Connecticut. I'm just arguing that normal Wiki policy is to disambiguate articles with the same basic name unless it can be demonstrated that one is clearly the primary topic. Both of these schools are notable in their own right and well attested in the sources. However, neither can claim to be the primary topic in the English-speaking world. Only the Etons, Harrows, Yales and Harvards get the level of notability that justifies primacy. The length of time an article has been on Wikipedia is not relevant, nor is its maturity. Kent School, Hostert, will be expanded into a full article given time. Meanwhile, totally agree they can both have hatnotes as well as being disambiguated. Bermicourt (talk) 17:32, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question Regarding Verifibality

Hello

My name is Slainthayer and I'm new to Wikipedia editing. I just want you guys to check PERMATApintar National Gifted Center and see if the contents in the article is verifiable. I have a dispute with Bahasa Melayu (User:Yosri) supervisor regarding the issue of non-verifiability. I have cited numerous sources stating that it exist and notable but he didn't believe me and want me to go a step too far until asking me to contant the government for the school code which is not publically available just to comply with Wikipedia verifiability policy.

FYI: PERMATApintar is under its own sector in the School Division of Malaysian Education Ministry. It is also an institute of National University of Malaysia.

Is it verifiable? Any comments to improve or fix this dispute is highly appreciated.

Thank you. Slainthayer (talk) 17:28, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Slainthayer: I'm not sure what you mean by "verifiable". Two problems with the article are that most of the references are to non-independent sources; and that most of the sources that are independent don't mention "PERMATApintar". Maproom (talk) 20:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa deleted content that was under copyright, but I see no evidence that User:Yosri has ever edited the article or commented at article talk. And I see from your User page that you are a student at the school, which may interfere with your ability to edit an article with a neutral point of view. David notMD (talk) 20:55, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This page is not the right place to come with a content dispute, Slainthayer. If you cannot resolve a dispute on the article's talk page, dispute resolution will tell you the next steps to take. --ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mixing short footnote references with full footnote references

I hope there is a short answer to this question. Is suitable to mix "short footnotes" (ones using the sfnp-like templates with a separate list of sources) and "full footnotes"? I thought these were two different styles until I encountered an example in Wikipedia:Citing sources/Example edits for different methods#Rendering for footnote full references that uses short footnote linked to a full footnote. I have encountered many articles/pages that use both short footnotes (with a separate list of references) and full footnotes. User-duck (talk) 17:46, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How does clean start work?

I'm not sure the Teahouse is the best place for a question of this nature, but asking here certainly seems less heavy-duty than opening a request for clarification from the arbitration committee. I was looking at one of their remedies in passing because someone linked it in an unrelated discussion, and I noticed they used specific language to restrict the sanctioned user to one account. I've also happened to follow some of the debate about eligibility for and ramifications of a clean start, and I can't help wondering if Arbcom's language here specifically rules out a clean start. What do you all think? Airbornemihir (talk) 20:14, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Users who are under sanctions from ArbCom are required to notify ArbCom in case they make a clean start. In this way, for a user under sanctions, ArbCom can enforce a one account restriction by blocking that clear start account once they are notified, as an enforcement of their decision. If the user fails to notify ArbCom of their restrictions or sanctions, then the alternate account is an illegitimate sock, and not a clean start. GMG^talk 20:20, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@GreenMeansGo: I think you're right, the clean start page does mention this. You put it as "[if] the user fails to notify ArbCom [...]" but in this case I think ArbCom has unconditionally ruled out any clean start for them. (I should note I don't have an animus against the sanctioned user - I've never come across them AFAICT. I'm just curious about policies.) Airbornemihir (talk) 21:19, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well Airbornemihir, in the sense that such sanctions need to be publicly logged, and sanctions apply to the person, and not to the account, yes, they have ruled out a clean start, at least temporarily. The user can always appeal the sanction, and once lifted, then have a clean start. If the user were to ever apply for advanced permissions, they would still be expected to disclose the previous account, and if they failed to, it would likely call into question the community consensus, given that the community was not fully informed per policy. GMG^talk 21:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding pictures

I have a question. I like to edit pages related to meteorology and I've noticed that the picture for Hector of 2018 hasn't been updated for 12 hours despite serious changes in its intensity and overall appearance. I'd like to know how to add a picture from NASA which isn't copyrighted, but I don't know how? Can anyone help? Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 21:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Cyclone of Foxes. You can upload the image to Commons using the Upload Wizard. When you are asked about the permissions, select "This file is not my own work", provide the source for the image, and under "Another reason not mentioned above" (almost at the bottom of the list) enter {{NASA}}. GMG^talk 21:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

reliable sources; it's not really to provide people with up-to-the-moment information about the storm as is develops. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:01, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

That's not what I mean, in the 2018 Pacific hurricane season article there can only be one picture in the section that covers the storm. The old picture showed Hector at it's initial peak intensity of 130mph, I was wanted to add the picture of it's new peak intensity of 155mph. I think it is best to have the picture be the storm at or near peak intensity. The old picture wouldn't count either as it showed Hector 72 hours before peak intensity. Near peak intensity is usually 6-12 hours before/ after peak intensity. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:CONSENSUS to change the image. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:22, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Okay, thanks! 21:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

International copyright tags

Hello, how do you add international copyright tags to images on Wikipedia articles? Skyes(BYU) (talk) 22:47, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

non-free content rules. In such a case the copyright information will be found on the File:Image name page. No such information is ever mentioned in the article where the image is used. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:56, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Sikhareswar Jena

Esteemed sir, I have submitted a write-up on Sikhareswar Jena under Talk which is not yet uploaded.How much time it takes to upload the same.Will be highly obliged,if the same is considered for uploading. Warm regards, A K Jena Jena Amiya Kumar (talk) 06:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

help build Wikipedia is to create new articles. Content creation is of course very important, but there are many other ways to contribute to Wikipedia as well. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia fpr some ideas onother ways yo can help out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Sir,

I have gone through guideposts of esteemed wikipedia.Draft article on Sikhareswar Jena,a notable personality in Fire Engineering,a first Presidential awardee,a pioneer in rural Fire Stations in Odisha in eighties etc,is edited for kind consideration for upgrading to a proper article on wikipedia.

Warm regards,

Jena Amiya Kumar (talk) 22:10, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft really has no chance of being approved as an article in its current form. The formatting and layout errors, etc. are things which can be fixed, but it's still not clear (at least to me) whether the subject of your article staisfies

Wikipedia's notability guideline for a stand-alone article to be written. You might try asking for help at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics because the editors belonging to Wikipedia:WikiProject India might be able to provide some more specific advice. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

PLEASE ADVISE me

Please advise me about the necessary revision of the article below to be the main space article. From my understanding, it meets the three rules Wikipedia:Notability Neutral point of view, Verifiability.

Draft:Peace Treaty on Korean Peninsula

I hope this subject is suitable to one of the articles on Wikipedia as soon as practicable as per the poor and weak North Korean children. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 06:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's unclear to me what the draft is meant to be about. Is it about a particular peace treaty, or just the general idea that there might be one? Maproom (talk) 06:59, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article creation on "Perry Schmidt-Leukel"

I have created an article on Perry Schmidt-Leukel who is an internationally renowned scholar of religious stdies and theology. His reputation can be seen from the fact that he was invited for the Gifford Lecture in 2015 which is one of the highest distinction in the field (see Wikipedia on Gifford Lectures). I have complied with all the demands for further editing by the various reviewers and the article is still rejected - this time with the statement that it would be merely a CV which is obviously wrong. So what can I do? By the way, an entry on "Perry Schmidt-leukel" exists on the German Wikipedia for many years.

Thomas Schmitz— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas Schmitz 2 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Convenience link: Draft:Perry Schmidt-Leukel. Maproom (talk) 07:02, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thomas Schmitz 2. It looks like you asking about Draft:Perry Schmidt-Leukel (for future reference, it's helpful to provide a link when your discussing a specific page). Different language Wikipedias have different policies and guidelines; so, just because an article about Schmidt-Leukel has existed on German Wikipedia for years, that doesn't mean there should be an article on English Wikipedia about him. For what its worth, English Wikpedia's policies and guidelines tend to be a little more stringent than some other Wikipedias and the standards here tend to be generally higher, so some of the things considered OK on German Wikipedia might not be OK on English Wikipedia.

A quick glance at the draft does give me the impression that it's a bit CV-ish due to the long list of publications; it's also not clear from the sources you cite as to whether this person satisfies

WP:NONENG to figure what if any of the content and sources in the German Wikiepdia article can be used in English Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Taking a quick look at the draft,

original research (i.e. content not supported by sources). For example, it states "In this he is inspired by Wilfred Cantwell Smith's concept of a 'World Theology'", but the source cited for that is Cantwell Smith himself. Such a claim would require a third-party source that establishes that Cantwell Smith's work inspired Schmidt-Leukel. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I've done a bit to improve the formatting. It still looks more like a CV than an encyclopedia article – you could improve that by greatly shortening his lists of publications, and adding some neutral material about him, not just what he believes and how people have praised him. Maproom (talk) 07:24, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Who is copying who???

I am working on bringing Luna moth to GA status. Midway through my work I ran a copyright violation program just to check if material originally in the article had been copied or lightly paraphrased. Came up negative. I have almost tripled length of article. Ran the copyright vio again, and now 64.5% likely there is a violation! What I discovered is that a website http://animalia-life.club/other/luna-moth-scientific-illustration.html copied my Description section near-verbatim. It does identify the source as "Wiki info" which links to the Wikipedia article. Is this a common occurrence? David notMD (talk) 10:33, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. There were even a series of books sold that did nothing but reprint Wikipedia articles. According to

our license

, anyone is free to reuse or remix content as long as they reasonably attribute it, which this website seems to do okay by linking back to the article. Not the ideal form of attribution, but enough to probably satisfy the license. Although their disclaimer on their home page is shady, since people are in fact free to reuse anything from their website that's taken from Wikipedia.

It may seem nefarious, but from our end, it's a feature and not a bug. Consider that in an world without Wikipedia, people like this might be spreading outright wrong information taken from sources that don't actually care at all about accuracy and neutrality. In this way, having such an expansive source for free knowledge percolates into lots of other areas, and increases the overall quality of the information available to the public. That's why sites like YouTube are starting to copy our content in order to balance the spread of unreliable information on science and conspiracy theories. GMG^talk 10:52, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's a talkpage template for these situations, something like "This bit is not a copyvio on our end". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Backwards copy could be used for such clarifications on the article talkpage. GermanJoe (talk) 10:59, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I remove 'This article contains content that is written like an advertisement' once I have addressed the issue

Editing my company entry for the first time and had the content flagged as being written like an advertisement. Read the guidance and made the necessary changes. Now I would like to remove the template flagging the issue, but am not clear on what code to delete?

Hello

WP:MAINTENANCEDISAGREEMENT, you should not remove it. Try to start a discussion on the talkpage, perhaps pinging the editors who added the tag. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

How to search for when a particular change was made?

What tools/methods are suggested for most quickly determining when a specific phrase was added/deleted from an article? Thx, Humanengr (talk) 12:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's something called Wikipedia:WikiBlame that I've never used, but it might be what you're after. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:36, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thx — that looks like it does the job, Humanengr (talk) 12:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Like Gråbergs Gråa Sång noted (and suggested before my edit published!), WikiBlame is the tool for that. A similar "blame" tool used to have been hosted at the Toolforge by WMCS, but has since been removed. (Hopefully, it returns.) At each history page, WikiBlame is actually linked with the article field predefined at the "External tools" section, right below the revision search box and above the legend specifying what each symbol and abbreviation means. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 12:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thx! Somehow I never noticed that. I wonder if a contributing factor is the length of the 'Revision history statistics' and 'Revision history search' labels. 'Revision history' is redundant with the page title and therefore unnecessary — they should just be 'Statistics' and 'Search'. I imagine many overlook those links. Publication guidelines always argue against unnecessary text/graphics. Might warrant a change. Humanengr (talk) 13:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. It may also be the placement of the links and location of the "External tools" section. I have no particular comment on that, nor am I sure where to go with that matter, but the Village pump may be a good place to start if you want to discuss it. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 13:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, will do. Also, I see now WikiBlame is not working properly for searching for "removal of text". (It seems to start backwards from March 2016 instead of the current date.) Others have noted problems with this, but Flominator hasn't responded. Is there another tool? Humanengr (talk) 13:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware, no. The old Toolforge one used to have been located here, as stated at Wikipedia:WikiBlame § External links (permanent link), and a (non-functional) copy of how it looked in February 2017 can be found here. If I recall correctly (and that is definitely not a guarantee), that alternative tool had replaced the link on the history page, too, until it was removed due to some problems with it effectively finding revisions. I have experienced some issues with WikiBlame myself, including timeouts and 503 errors, and continue to find it disappointing that the tool is not hosted on an HTTPS page; however, it seems to be the best available at this time and generally works as an effective revision blamer.

Given these circumstances, the best suggestions I can provide would be to ask about when and whether a revival of the Toolforge blame tool will occur, to hope that someone else develops a different tool (if you are skilled at programming, maybe you can be our savior?), or directly talk with those who developed these tools. Sorry about that. Perhaps someone else can provide better help. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 14:18, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thx — My bad on that last ‘problem’ — turns out it’s just the way the binary search works. </confirm brain turned back on> Humanengr (talk) 18:17, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Humanengr! Yes, WikiBlame is a very precise tool and misconfiguring the search, or even being off by a single character, can yield results you aren't looking for (if you get any at all!). If you need any further help, you know where to go. Thanks for your contributions! —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 22:25, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Change the language of a draft

Hello everyone, I have made a draft for an new page of an artist, Jowee Omicil. My article is in french but in the english version. How can i change the default language to english in french ? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saipdigital (talk • contribs) 13:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Saipdigital. You can't really "switch" the default language. The way the software works, each of the language versions of Wikipedia are stand-alone copies, that are only linked together using another third Wikimedia project called Wikidata. In order to transfer your draft to the French language project, you will need to go to https://fr.wikipedia.org and recreate it there. GMG^talk 13:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add though, that there is a proper process for moving pages across wikis detailed at m:Help:Transwiki. It's unnecessary here since you're the only editor adding content to the draft, so you don't need to worry about copyright/attribution.— Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:04, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

reliable. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:34, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Biased and Unbalanced content - UDC

I'm experiencing what is clear bias on a page I am trying to edit, even thought I have been following the rules on proper sourcing. How do I address this and submit a complaint?historicaljohnny (talk) 13:58, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

request for comment to seek input from additional uninvolved editors. However, it should probably be noted that if you continue to employ a generally combative, rather than a collaborative approach, you are unlikely to reach a satisfactory outcome. Accusing others of bias is unlikely to change anyone's mind. Producing high-quality sources that support the changes you would like made on the article however may. GMG^talk 14:07, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

GreensMeansGo, I appreciate the quick response. That is just it however, as we have attempted to provide high-quality secondary sourcing/ primary sourcing. We have followed their explicit instructions to present our editorial input, in the proper way and format, yet they continue to dance around and contradict their own instructions for one sole purpose: they don't agree with our unbiased attempt to correct some very derogatory commentary about the UDC and rather old and one-sided sources. Believe me, I don't throw around the word "bias" unless I see clear evidence of it. This is absolute bias not only what their version of truth is, but their rapid willingness to silence a dissenting viewpoint. I will try yet again, and let you know how it goes. Thank you.historicaljohnny (talk) 14:19, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well historicaljohnny, using an organizations own homepage is not exactly what we mean when we talk about high quality sources. The hierarchy of sources oversimplified kindof goes: scholarly meta-analyses/textbooks -> scholarly publications -> books by reputable publishers authors -> news -> popular publications (magazines) -> generic websites and press releases. We also would (or should) generally never take the self description of a person or group as uncritical fact. Obviously anyone has an incentive to present themselves in the best light possible, which is why we prefer independent published sources. We would certainly never use language like "patriotic" in Wikipedia's voice, because...well...mostly because its an essentially meaningless descriptor. No person or group would probably ever describe themselves as un-patriotic...even anarchist groups that openly advocate the overthrow of the government.

So again, what you need are independent published sources that meet

Wikipedia's standards for reliability. If all you have to argue with is the official website, you're probably not going to get very far. GMG^talk 14:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm not focused on the term "patrotic" as I don't disagree its not pertinent, but I disagree its meaningless. In the context we used "patriotic" in the sentence, it was describing verbatim the UDC's stated objectives. The point is to describe the UDC's objectives, that was the simple aim here. Therefore, we did that in two ways - 1) via a legit secondary news source (Newsweek) I suppose Newsweek is a reputable secondary source and 2) a primary source, the UDC website, as you point out. So what am I doing wrong? All I'm trying to do is describe the other point of view on the subject matter, nothing more nothing less. I'm compiling some alternative secondary sources and will provide them when I get back to you. Thank you for engaging me, as the point here is to get this done fairly and correctly.historicaljohnny (talk) 14:53, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that when someone uses a word like patriotic to describe something, it means little more than "I like that". That's why the list of "patriotic things" includes kneeling at football games, walking out of games where people kneel, worshiping God, not believing in God, supporting the president, not supporting the president, buying Jeeps, protecting the environment...literally anything you can think of to search for, there's somebody out there who likes it and thinks it patriotic. That's why Wikipedia tends to avoid this kind of colorful, value laden, but ultimately meaningless language: it says more about the writer than it does about the subject, and in this case, the writer is the group itself, so of course they feel fairly positively about themselves.

I know I'm just picking on this one example at the moment, but I'm trying to illustrate in-depth at least one reason why other editors may have viewed some of the additions as having apparent non-neutral language. GMG^talk 15:21, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

historicaljohnny: You keep using "we." Wikipedia User names are supposed to represent individuals, not in any way groups. Please clarify. David notMD (talk) 16:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I took that to refer to the multiple new users who have been trying to make edits to the article of late, David notMD, rather than as an implication of shared account use. It seems likely that there is some co-ordination going on between members or supporters of the organisation. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And for those as mystified as I was, UDC = United Daughters of the Confederacy. There is ongoing 'hot' debate there and at various Users' Talk pages, so in my own opinion, not worth Teahouse time. David notMD (talk) 16:11, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm baffled. This is one of the stated objectives of the UDC that: "it's a patriotic organization". That is subjective. That is not me interjecting "color" or my "values". And again, I can't emphasize enough, by your own example, that "there's somebody out there who likes it"... well there's always someone out there who "dislikes it". Which is my point. David noMD To clarify at your request, I don't represent a group. The UDC doesn't endorse me and I am no not apart of them (besides, they only take females). These are my contibutions and my sourcing. They are freely available in the public domain. I was invited here to share my question in this teahouse, which I believe has still not been answered. I will take the discussion elsewhere.historicaljohnny (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where to start?

Sorry if I am being a little irritating, I just am a bit overwhelmed with what to do! I have done that interactive tour thing which I have forgotten the name of (sorry) and that does explain the concept and gives me a basic idea of what to do but I'm not sure where to start. What would any of you recommend that I do as my first 'proper' edit on Wikipedia?

Aesthetic Sunset (talk) 16:14, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pick an article about a topic you know well. See if it can in any way be improved. Could be as little as a spelling or grammar error. If you believe a statement is wrong, consider changing it, but first look at the citation that supposedly supports the statement. Generally, be progressive in your additions and deletions. If reverted (reversed) treat that as a learning experience. Good luck. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:Your First Article.— Alpha3031 (t • c) 16:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Davide notMD and Alpha3031 Thank you both for your suggestions, I think I wi change spelling and grammar mistakes as it *is* my thing :D Thanks for all the links too :) Aesthetic Sunset (talk) 16:42, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If so,

taking special care with quotes. Thanks for your interest in helping Wikipedia! —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 21:42, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Pictures

How do you add a new picture onto an article? Thanks. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 16:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC) Like how do you add a new picture into an article from scratch? Anyone?Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 17:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Cyclone of Foxes. The first step is to determine whether the picture you want to use is allowed on Wikipedia, which usually means whether the picture is licensed for free public use. It would probably be helpful if you indicated what type of image you were interested in using and where. GMG^talk 17:52, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The picture shows 4 tropical cyclones simaultaneously in the Pacific on August 7 using satellite imagery from NASA in the 2018 Pacific hurricane season article.Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 17:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC) FYI, the systems are Hector, Kristy, John, and Ileana from left to rightCyclone of Foxes (talk) 18:06, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my bad Cyclone of Foxes. This is related to the thread above from yesterday. I see you are probably referring to this image. Well there are a couple of ways you can go about it. See below for the wiki markup and the result it gives you in the article.

Right aligned, default size
[[File:Four Tropical Cyclones in the Pacific on August 7.jpg|thumb|Caption goes here describing the picture]]

Right aligned, larger size
[[File:Four Tropical Cyclones in the Pacific on August 7.jpg|thumb|upright=2.0|Caption goes here describing the picture]]

Centered, very large
[[File:Four Tropical Cyclones in the Pacific on August 7.jpg|thumb|500px|center|Caption goes here describing the picture]]

Hope this answers your question alright. GMG^talk 18:07, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I really appreaciate it!Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 18:11, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Michigan Chicken Wing Festival - Lansing, MI

How can I add the Michigan Chicken Wing Festival - this festival takes place Labor Day Weekend in Lansing, MI— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:405:4800:636d:289a:8ebc:22d0:40a8 (talk) 01:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You could make an article about it (longer and harder), or you could go to the Labor Day article and add a segment about using == Section name== Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 17:22, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, make sure to sign your posts with four tildes (~) Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 18:08, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP 2601:405:4800:636d:289a:8ebc:22d0:40a8. Wikipedia's role is

beyond its local area

.

As for adding information about the event to another article, that might be possible, but you're going to have be able to provide

encyclopedically relevant to whatever article you add it too. It might be possible to add such content to Lansing, Michigan#Cultural celebrations, but you probably would be best seeing what others think by proposing the addition on Talk:Lansing, Michigan first. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I'd also add that it probably wouldn't be a good addition to Labor Day, and unless the festival is long-standing (think 10+ years) and has had coverage from distant sources (national magazines or newspapers from at least as far away as Chicago), it probably won't fly in the article on Lansing, either. Wikipedia is the last stop on the publicity train. John from Idegon (talk) 00:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

Updating a Brand Logo

Hi, the logo for the Options Clearing Corporation is outdated. I work for the OCC and would like to update the page with the current logo. How do I do that?

@

WP:PAID for more information, including how to do so. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Or since this is just a logo change and this is meant to be a friendly place for newbies. Astarace I uploaded the new logo for you. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My Page was disapproved due to tone issues please help!

Hello, I am trying to create a Wikipedia page for my brands business it has been around for a little less than a year. This is my first attempt and it was disapproved due to tone issues and reading like promotional material. Could you please offer me suggestions on what to improve, every other brand out there has a page on Wiki and that is all I am aiming to achieve here as well. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. See below.

draft content

Edgy Couture is a urban clothing clubwear along with swimwear, costumes, intimates, shoes, handbags and accessories. == History == Edgy Couture was started by Ryan E. Donovan in November, 2017 in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts. Edgy Couture embraces their urban roots as well as their love for rhinestones, studs, spikes, skulls, and all thinks pink! Edgy Couture’s logo consists of a jagged backwards “e” and a forward facing jagged “c” encased in a circle representing the edgy glamor unity that the brand strives to represent. Their mission is: “To Inspire Fashion Without Limits, On A Global Scale.” – Ryan Donovan, Founder CEO In May 2018 the brand relocated to Phoenix, AZ to focus more on networking, development, and brand recognition. In July 2018 the brand reached out to the Art Institute of Phoenix and selected prospective design interns to showcase their creativity. Their trademark was approved and finalized on June 9th 2018.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by EdgyCouture (talk • contribs) 07:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)‎[reply]

EdgyCouture Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is. It is an encyclopedia and not a forum for companies to tell the world about themselves. As an encyclopedia, we are only interested in what independent reliable sources state about a subject. Wikipedia has very little interest in what a company wants to say about itself. As you state your brand is new, I suspect it has not been independently written about enough to merit inclusion here. Not every company merits an article here. It simply is not true that "every brand has a page on wiki".

Your text is a blatant advertisement and is not suitable for Wikipedia. If you just want to tell the world about your brand, you should use social media or a personal website to do that. I'm sorry this is probably not good to hear, but this is the way things are. 331dot (talk) 23:30, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse is not the place to try drafting an article (that is what your sandbox is for). And as already answered, this brand is too unknown to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Since it is your brand, you also have

WP:PAID issues to address. Best advice - abandon any attempt to create an article about your brand. David notMD (talk) 00:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

New to Wikipedia

I am a big fan of wikipedia and often do see where corrections and clarifications can be added. So I look forward to learning <to edit. My first attempt was yesterday and I think I made an elementary mistake in the <ref> and link entries. Also I wanted to state my interest in the subject matter as Wikipedia suggests. I am happy to wait for professional editor to examine the document, but should I be asking someone in the meantime where I went wrong on what should be simple things? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LowrieJohn (talk • contribs) 02:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to add image to existing article?

Hello, I am trying to add the profile image for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zain_Imam but looks like it is created with Template:Infobox. I am getting Warning: Zain Imam is calling Template:Infobox person with more than one value for the "image" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used. So does that means once created with no option set earlier, I can't add image?Is there anyway to add? Kindly advise. Thanks Kkits23 02:18, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kkits23. Can you please provide the precise image filename that you are trying to add to this article? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:27, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. Well I am trying to insert --->Zain Imam On Sajid Shahid's Photoshoot (43183849194).jpg.Thanks Kkits23 02:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Kkits23. It's techinically fairly simple to add an image to the template; all you need to do is add the file to the |image= parameter in the template; for example; the syntax would look something like this: image=File:Zain Imam On Sajid Shahid's Photoshoot (43183849194).jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:43, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I tried couple of times as per provided help.I tried omitting the prefix File also. Still I am getting warning and the image and caption is not getting updated.

| image = Zain Imam On Sajid Shahid's Photoshoot (43183849194).jpg

| caption = Zain Imam On Sajid Shahid's Photoshoot

Warning: Zain Imam is calling Template:Infobox person with more than one value for the "image" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used. (Help)

Warning: Zain Imam is calling Template:Infobox person with more than one value for the "caption" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used. (Help)

Thanks Kkits23 02:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Not sure why you were having a problem. I've added the image and I didn't notice any warning message. The warning you got is usually given when there are two of the same parameter within the same template, so the software is telling you that it can only use one. I don't see two "image" or "caption" parameters in the template, so I don't know why you got that warning. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:56, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the assistance. I can see the image is updated and the caption is also displayed well. Once again thanks, Highly appreciate your help. Kkits23 03:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Glad to help. And now for something completely different, there appears to be something wrong with your signature. All signatures should have at least one link to your user page, user talk page, or your contributions page per

WP:TILDE? —- Marchjuly (talk) 03:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Strange..i guess i am following the process correctly.Let me try using the sign option from edit toolbar now.--Kkits23 04:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

number of peer review

On the instruction page it says to close out a peer review, replace the peer review template at the top of the talk page with one that says "old peer review" then "archive=N", and N=the number of the peer review discussion. The question I have is exactly which number are they referring to as N? At the top of the page it says archive one, but on the main page that lists all the peer reviews mine is listed at 9.2--so which number is N? The one or the 9.2? Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Jenhawk777. N is the number of times the article has been up for peer review. Leave it at archive=1 since this the first review and is already located at Wikipedia:Peer review/Biblical criticism/archive1. The instructions may be a bit out of date, reviews may have had a different location before being archived. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:03, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Hope you are well! Thank you. I will make the attempt to close that review now. May I ask a second question while I have you here? What is the process for nominating an article for FA? Where does one go to do that? Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:06, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

password theft

someone is constantly trying to enter my wikipedia account from a new device and also succeeded in cracking password at few times though I have changed it but the notifications of successfull or failed attempts keep coming ! Crispgatoglitz (talk) 04:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you are logging in from a place of work, or have used a computer which stores passwords by default, then someone may be logging into your account from that device unintentionally. In any case you should change your password to a strong password. When you do this, use a device to which others do not have access. This will in most cases prevent password theft.

If you want your account to be more secure see the information contained in this link on how to add two factor authentication. This will allow you to receive a one time six digit password, which you can receive from an app on your smart phone.

If you cannot regain sole control of your account you will need to talk to an administrator and it is possible you will be asked to create a new account. Wikipedia policy is that only one person should have control of one account, and in cases where it is not possible to ensure this condition, accounts may be closed. Edaham (talk) 05:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]