Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 236

This is an current talk page .

Hi there! My username in Wikipedia has been changed with assistance by a bureaucrat last week. Unfortunately, while the transition seems to have gone by smoothly, it also seems that some things are still redirecting to my old user name. For example, SineBot and other bots are automatically changing references to my new username with references to my old one. My signature is "corrected" to link to my old username, and this is getting annoying.

How do I solve this problem? Meşteşugarul - U 19:18, 28 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mestesugarul (talk • contribs)

Hi, Mleivagomez and welcome to The Teahouse. I would suggest

WP:VPT. Also, for the Sinebot problem, contact Slakr.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions

 • 21:43, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll have a look and see what I find there. I just noticed that SineBot is actually signing my username correctly. It's the signature that I place at the end of my comments that shows my old username. I'll have this looked at ASAP. Thank you again. Meşteşugarul - U 22:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mestesugarul (talk • contribs)

I'm such a dope! I just realized what the problem was. I didn't update my preferences correctly, so my custom signature kept reflecting my old user name. If someone could slap me across the web, this is what I need right now. Meşteşugarul - U 22:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

@Mestesugarul: Actually, it turns out we have a nifty tool that does that. —Mz7 (talk) 15:13, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Having just submitted a new Page, I cannot give any found source. My problem being I am the subjects official biographer, not working from research within newspapers but direct from the subject himself and his personal records.Therefore how am I able to get around this problem.Huey Luke (talk) 16:05, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

The short answer is that it is probably an insurmountable problem at the moment. Wikipedia requires

verify the subject's notability. If in the future, you, or someone else, write a biography of the subject that is published by a mainstream publisher, that could be used a reference for an article.--ukexpat (talk

) 16:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Huey Luke and welcome to the teahouse. To expand a bit on what ukexpat said, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia requirements for wp:notability Not every topic is appropriate for a Wikipedia article and by your description unfortunately you've pretty much said that the subject you are writing about is not yet notable and hence not currently appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Also, you should probably review the guidelines on wp:conflict of interest I'm not sure what the policy is on official biographers but if you are being paid by the subject to write the biography then I think you probably have a conflict of interest anyway, even if the subject was notable. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:40, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

If you do have a

vandalism, but otherwise it's best to ask for assistance and advice first). --k6ka (talk | contribs

) 16:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Contemporary newspaper reports are good sources for sporting events. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:09, 31 July 2014 (UTC).

How do you change a username? I attempted to just create a new account but the username was too similar to the existing username I created previously. Boulevard Recording 02:20, 29 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boulevardrecording (talk • contribs)

Boulevardrecording, welcome to the Teahouse. Head over to Wikipedia:Changing username, read the guidelines, and follow the process. If you find you need help, feel free to ask a question at this Teahouse again. Good luck, Mz7 (talk) 02:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

With only one edit there is no point doing that. The user should just abandon the existing account and create a new account that complies with policy. Much easier all round.--ukexpat (talk) 13:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot this is helpful! 75.85.18.95 (talk) 19:39, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, How do you handle a citation for a scholarly journal article when there are dozens of contributors? Listing them all seems a bit unwieldy. Thanks Savannah38 (talk) 17:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I would guess it's OK to list just the first two or three.--ukexpat (talk) 18:07, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

One option might be to list the first 2-3 and then ad an author as "et al." --MadScientistX11 (talk) 20:06, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks MadScientistX11. That's a good idea Savannah38 (talk) 20:39, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I looked at my companies Wikipedia page today and saw a few new negative edits have been made last week. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xero_(software)

I image these edits were made by a competing company. The accounts (two separate ones) were created the same day and have edited no other pages. It appears to be a coordinated effort.

These edits are malicious. One of the edits go as far as to say we are "faltering" in the U.S. and uses an op-ed article as the source.

I would like to revert these edits myself but understand it's a conflict of interest. I am curious what else can be done?Searchtem (talk) 18:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I've removed two of the claims referencing

unreliable sources, such as forums. The other two seem OK. Who adds the information is irrelevant, the important thing is whether or not it is neutral and verifiable. §FreeRangeFrog^croak

18:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the Businessday article seems very fair, though I think its analysis was misrepresented by the new editors. I've reworded it in a less 'tabloid' fashion. Sionk (talk) 19:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

It seems like you're putting a lot of stock in this one article, which contradicts the other news that came out of the annual meeting last week. Here are some more authoritative sources.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11298085

http://www.zdnet.com/us-listing-on-the-cards-at-xero-agm-7000031899/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/23/us-xero-results-idUSKBN0FS08A20140723

FreeRangeFrog - if it's irrelevant who edits an page, can I make edits my company's page? It's my understanding I cannot? Also, the edits made were not neutral and - as you noted - not verifiable. --Searchtem (talk) 21:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

bias. RockMagnetist (talk

) 21:36, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but realistically we cannot prove a COI exists without disclosure (in most cases) and so when we see edits like these by SPAs, we have to fall back to

WP:AGF and determine the validity of the edits based solely on the wording and the quality of the sources used. @Searchtem: You've already declared your COI (and you get all kinds of kudos for that from all of us) so no, we'd rather you not edit the article yourself. But this is the right way to do things. We want to fix whatever problems there are, and we're sensitive to your concerns, but at the same time we cannot keep negative information off your company's article solely because a couple of new editors added it. Now, those additional sources are good, let's find a way to balance things out and make the article as neutral as possible. That's how things should be. §FreeRangeFrog^croak

21:50, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I created an article but it was not approved and I wasn't told why. Could anyone help me by any chance, i'm very confused! This is a link to it: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alicecoy&action=edit. Thanks a lot! 81.132.1.22 (talk) 09:55, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Alicecoy and welcome. Please log in before editing. The reason is given as lack of inline citations on the draft article. You will find links there on how to correct this.Charles (talk) 10:08, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Alicecoy. I took a quick look at your draft article. Before you invest more time in it I suggest you look at the Wikipedia definition for

wp:promotional in that it was written the way someone's personal blog or a testimonial would be written rather than an objective encyclopedia article. Just to be clear, these comments don't contradict the other advise people have given you. Without inline citations pretty much nothing else matters, all Wikipedia articles are supposed to have those but I just wanted to give you a heads up that IMO there are other issues with your draft as well. --MadScientistX11 (talk

) 18:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

WP:MEDRS. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

06:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I have a situation where another editor is the "Manager - Media & Communications" for and organization, and he is reverting my edits to that organization's article because they don't show it in the light he wants. I know there is a process of escalating warnings to deal with situations like this, but I can't find it: would somebody be so kind as to point me to it? Gronk Oz (talk) 03:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi

WP:PSCOI will help them understand what they can and cannot do on Wikipedia. Just a suggestion. - Marchjuly (talk

) 05:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi again Gronk OZ. I see that you have tried to make your concerns known to this other person on both the

WP:SPA since that seems to apply in this case too. Sorry, I couldn't be of more help, perhaps some admin will be more willing to take direct action. -Marchjuly (talk

) 06:08, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the advice, Marchjuly - I think it is just the perspective I needed. The other editor is discussing some of the issues now, so it looks promising that we might be able to reach a consensus and build a better article as a result. --Gronk Oz (talk) 08:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

1. I was just wondering how I would crop a image as seen in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jacob_Zuma_2010_(cropped).jpg? 2. Regarding permissions for images, does money need permission, if it's only the money in the image, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SA_Bank_Note_2012_Specimen_image.png or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:5-za-rand.JPG?

1. Download the image and use the crop tool in an image editing program, like GIMP or Microsoft Paint. 2. Yes. Both of those images copyrighted. So when you upload your cropped image, you would need to provide a rationale explaining why this image is needed in the specific article where you plan to use it. Simply that the page would look better with an image isn't good enough. Normally you would have to explain why using this image advances the readers' understanding of the topic, for example if you were discussing the design of the money itself or someone shown on the money. -- Margin1522 (talk) 08:27, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

As our dialogue proceeded on the StarryGrandma talk page, she suggested we use email and said she just sent me one.(several days ago.) I responded on the talk page but there was no pickup. She is probably expecting an email response from me.Thank you.You are welcome to review our dialogue on her talk page dates July 16-28.Janvermont (talk) 14:20, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

@

talk

) 14:24, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Can someone help us get started on describing a band on a new band page?LibraryOfSandsBandFan (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Greetings

wp:42 provides a nice overview of life the universe and everything from the standpoint of what makes a good wikipedia article. My advice would be that before you try creating a new article on any topic you get some experience editing existing articles first. There are many articles that need editing from simple cleanup to better refs, etc. If you look here: Wikipedia:Community_portal and scroll down a bit to where it says "Help Out" there are many links to get you started editing. Hope that was helpful. --MadScientistX11 (talk

) 16:16, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Here is one reliable source from Uncut magazine: My Bloody Valentine, "m b v": second thoughts. Also, the article mentions that the band leader used to front

WikiProject Alternative Music. RockMagnetist (talk

) 16:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Clive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjuniora (talk • contribs) 16:24, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Clive. Wikipedia is not like other places on the web: it is an encyclopaedia, so it requires that all information be referenced to reliable published sources, especially in articles about living people. If you insert information without a source, there is no way a reader can tell whether it is correct, or has been added by mistake, or is vandalism (and, without being rude, we have no way of telling whether you are indeed Clive Atwell or somebody hoaxing). So we require that it be referenced to a published source. Further, we don't accept references to sites that are mostly user-generated, such as Facebook or most blogs, for the same reason. If there is a major newspaper, or a site which has a reputation for checking facts, that says something about a subject, then that information can go in the article, with a reference to that source.

There is another issue as well: we require that articles be written in a neutral tone, without either building the subject up or knocking them down. It can be hard for a person to write neutrally about themselves, their friends, their band, their company etc: we call this having a conflict of interest, and that link advises you how best to contribute to an article about yourself, which is by suggesting changes on the article's talk page.

I see that Materialscientist explained some of this on your talk page. Your offer to email information (on his talk page) is not helpful because, again, if the information has not been published, then a reader next week or next month or next year has no way of telling whether it is right. I hope this makes things clearer. --ColinFine (talk) 20:29, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I have conveniently placed the cleanup tag below for your reference:
{{

I have recently added a cleanup tag to an article, but the user who created it seems to be very defensive and said that if no one gave a valid explanation, then they would remove the tag. The sources in the article

I think the answer has to be "When you consider that the article warrants this banner, please use it."

I have made a tiny edit to your question so that this page does not show the banner itself, but links to the template.

Questions such as this are worthwhile. They create thoughts. Even had it remained unanswered, the asking of it was important. Fiddle Faddle 20:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi JHUbal27, welcome to the teahouse. I took a quick look at the article. On the talk page here: Talk:Frankie_Grande#Third_party_tag Ssilvers has made what seems to me to be a good argument why the tag isn't appropriate. I'm not saying I agree with the argument, I haven't looked at all the refs in enough detail to have an opinion either way, but as an argument it seems appropriate to me. I may be missing something but I didn't see that you had responded to their points. I think that would be the place to start. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 20:39, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

When someone hovers over, or clicks on, the "citation needed" mark, there has to be a description too, right? How do I input one?

Princeeternity (talk) 02:58, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi

inline citation. If a piece of information is challenged, but not so blatantly wrong to warrant its removal, then a {{citation needed}} template may be tacked on to the end of the statement. The presence of the citation needed template is enough to signify that this information's factual accuracy is challenged and a citation is needed to verify it. No further description is necessary. However, it is possible to add a description for the tag when you hover over it. To add one, use the following code: {{citation needed|reason= <reason goes here>}} replacing "<reason goes here>" with your description. I hope this helps. Regards, Mz7 (talk

) 03:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

@Princeeternity: (e/c) Hey Princeeternity. If you navigate to a template page, here Template:Citation needed (templates are placed by being surrounded in curly braces but the actual template's page will be at Template:SameName), it will usually have instructions there on usage and other information. Here, the template page explains that the full code is {{Citation needed|reason=Your explanation here|date=July 2014}}. If you use the |reason= parameter that will display as the hover over text. Or course, the template also provides a direct link to Wikipedia:Citation needed which may be all that is needed sometimes and as you might have noticed, the template provides a default hover over text message that states: "This claim needs references to reliable sources", which is suitable for many uses without further elaboration. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:19, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I use "citation needed" a lot but that's when I am adding information and I want to establish that the source I used does not include information that was already there. I usually don't have the time or knowledge to check out what appears unsourced, or perhaps I'm at home and I want to limit what sites I go to.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:27, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

To whom it may concern,

Our page, Christopher H. Martin has been flagged “this article appears to be written like an advertisement”. We have removed all product photos (paintings) and links to our website/addresses. Please advise, thank you!

2602:306:32AD:F280:1DEA:5322:1AF6:FDC2 (talk) 18:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for your contributions, though note that the article is still written in a promotional tone. The images and external links aren't the only thing that cause the article to be promotional - a lot of the article will need to be re-written. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:55, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I've done some basic cleaning up (enough to warrant removing the advert and external links tags, I think). The article still could use a bit of work in other areas, such as referencing. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:58, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

You say we. Each person who edits has to have his or her own account. And when you say "our" page, this may be a sign that you have a

conflict of interest.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions

 • 21:42, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

How can we post pictures to on page in wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shehrin (talk • contribs) 21:34, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey Shehrin, welcome to the Teahouse. For uploading pictures and other media, it's easiest to go to Wikimedia Commons (you can use your Wikipedia credentials if you're not logged in already) and visit the Upload Wizard. Wikimedia Commons can only accept files which anyone can use for any purpose. That means most content you find on the web is not acceptable. But for example, most photos that you've taken yourself are OK to upload.

Here's a screenshot of the Upload Wizard:

You start by selecting the files you want to upload, then you go step by step through the process. In the final step, you'll get some wiki markup that you can copy into a Wikipedia article. Let me know if I can help. :-) I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Why is TVTropes not considered to be a reliable source?

2602:306:C541:CC60:54AD:AAFB:88D3:24D (talk) 23:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Anyone can edit TV Tropes, if they get an account. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC).

Here is an article that gives a nice overview of what Wikipedia considers a reliable source: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources Sites that don't have some process to review the quality and authenticity of the information usually aren't considered reliable. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 00:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

My contributions list has a mystery item on it, apparently related to the new Flow extension. Although I did view that page, this question is the only edit I have made today, yet this item appears in my contributions list: "17:54, 29 July 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1)‎ . . N Topic:Rojlc5xnvwolwrkg ‎ (→‎Taken over by Flow) (current)". I would like to know if this is a bug, if there is a Bugzilla report, and whether the edit can be removed from my contributions list. This item makes it look like I have inserted nonsense or vandalism, so it would be great if it could be removed or at least properly attributed to whomever made it. Thanks! Eddymason (talk) 01:27, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

@Eddymason: Hi Eddy, thanks for your question. This is really puzzling to me, and I'm not exactly sure why a contribution was marked if you had just visited the page. I don't know a great deal about Flow or how it operates, so I can't advise you on why it happened. I'd recommend bringing this to the attention of the developers over at Wikipedia_talk:Flow. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I JethroBT: Okay, done. I simply copy-pasted it to that talk page. Thanks for the advice. Eddymason (talk) 01:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I was talking to another Wiki User and I saw a badge on her page for WikiMercenary I looked it up and found more like WikiCat and Wiki Gnome and my question is this. How do I figure out what I am??????? Pythonessofdelphi (talk) 01:08, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Ah, you'll want to take a look at WP:WikiFauna, then. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 01:29, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks to you I was able to identify what type of Wiki Creature I am!!!!!!! Pythonessofdelphi (talk) 01:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Greetings again, Teahousers. When using the "Compare Revisions" tool (from the "View history" tab), it displays the line number of the change. This is helpful for identifying changes which are not especially distinctive in themselves. However, when I go to the Edit tab, there don't appear to be line numbers anywhere, so I cannot match up what I saw in the Compare tool to what I see in the Edit page. Is there some way to do this? Gronk Oz (talk) 05:37, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Hey Gronk. When looking at the diff, copy a few words that are not going to format differently in edit mode (e.g., nothing with a wikilink) To do so: highlight then ctrl+c) (copy), then when in edit mode, find that text: ctrl+f then ctrl+v) (find then paste). It becomes so fast and automatic it's like breathing after a short time. Oh, if you're on a mac, use ⌘ instead of ctrl. You can do this through menu screen options and usually access these commands with right clicks and dropdown menus and so on but using commands is vastly faster. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, Fuhghettaboutit. That approach works fine when there is some distinctive wording in or near the change, but that isn't always the case. The situation which prompted me to ask this question was in the middle of a large table, which contained lots of numbers which were not distinctive at all. But from the Compare, I knew it was on line 263. I could always count the lines I suppose, but in this modern era of new-fangled computers I hoped there might be a better way... --Gronk Oz (talk) 16:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Ah. With that clarification, sorry, I have no idea of any way to find the line number. I can't imagine it would come up often though that the above method would not work – even in a vast table I would there to usually be some unique nearby listing to search for that would make it effective, but it just happens not to be the case here. Oh well. Maybe someone else knows of a way.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

If this is really necessary, I would just copy the entire code into a text editor on my computer that shows line numbers. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 03:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

It is possible to edit automatically using an external editor, but I don't know how.

Gronk Oz A quick and dirty fix is to install the gadget that allows regex editing, replace /(\n)/g with "</nowiki>$1#<nowiki>" (no quotes), put a "#<nowiki>" at the very beginning of the page then preview.. This will give you line numbers (except in some cases). All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC).

Thanks for the help, everybody. I used the external editor successfully, but it did help me psychologically to know I wasn't missing a more obvious solution. I just assumed that the reason Compare tells me the line number is so I can use that information somehow... --Gronk Oz (talk) 02:27, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi - Can someone please give me instructions for how to fix a typo in the title of an article? Changrutheliza (talk) 02:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

WP:MOVE for an explanation of how to do this. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

02:40, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I don't understand this template. A patroller added it on a lot of articles that I've recently created, eg. Camille Curti. 4 references for a stub of 2 phrases are not enough ? Should I add references in the infobox ? Pyb (talk) 12:40, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey

challenged or likely to be challenged should always be sourced. References in infoboxes can sometimes be helpful, but are not strictly necessary if the information is not controversial (and it usually is not because it summarizes info already in the article). The tag on Camille Curti was not appropriate in my opinion, and I have removed it, but I would revisit the other articles to see if any content could benefit from a more direct citation. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line}

21:40, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thx for the answer. Pyb (talk) 08:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Adam- The First Man page, the pictures of Adam and Eve are nude hiding themselves with leaves of a tree. This is correct they had to do so because they disobeyed the only order given by God. But pics only glamorizing that aspect while before attempting the sin they were fully covered with something(clothes or something else)but why no picture showed that?119.158.4.147 (talk) 08:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I'd recommend you bring this idea to the article

talk page that has the image issues to get views from editors who are more knowledgeable about the specific article. I'm guessing you mean Adam or Adam and Eve, and if that's the case, feel free to bring this to their attention at Talk:Adam or Talk:Adam and Eve. (As a side note, I always thought they were both nude the entire time before original sin, and only after did they realize it and became ashamed and hid.) I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line}

09:05, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Two days ago I added content to the article on the Irish composer John F. Larchet, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Francis_Larchet. There is a box at the top of the article demanding (quote) "This article needs more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia. Please help improve this article by adding links that are relevant to the context within the existing text. (May 2014)" (end of quote). I think I did what you asked for. Now, who will remove the box (I don't see how I can do it)? Thanks, Aklein62 (talk) 10:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aklein62. I reckon there's enough wikilinks in there now. All you need to do is edit the page and remove the {{Underlinked|date=May 2014}} code at the top of the edit window. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

hello! I want the image I uploaded to Ali Mohammad Pshtdar What I do. Many thanks.Iranmanesh53 (talk) 17:09, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi! If you have a

Wikipedia:Picture tutorial. Vanjagenije (talk

) 21:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you very much to help you.Iranmanesh53 (talk) 10:18, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I wonder how to upload pictures on articles?

talk

) 11:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReWalk

This has issues: A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (April 2014) This article appears to be written like an advertisement. (April 2014) This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. (April 2014) This article is outdated. (April 2014)

I edited it. Now I think at least two concerns, the ad one and close connection one, can be removed. But I'm new, so yeah I'm quite nervous of removing them myself... Maybe a senior editor or moderator can look at it? Also, is there a way to like "flag" some article for senior editor attention?

Princeeternity (talk) 10:37, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Good morning! Note that the tags reference discussion on the talk page. A quick visit to the talk page shows no current discussion. Therefore, I'd say it's okay to be

WP:BOLD and remove the tags. If you want, you can even leave a note on the talkpage yourself noting why you removed these tags (it's in good faith, as you believe the problem(s) are resolved). If another editor disagrees, don't worry, they'll let you know! Roberticus talk

11:02, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Princeeternity ! I find you did a good job. the article is sourced and does not look like a advertisement anymore. I would just talk a bit about the limitations of the product to definitely wipe out assumptions of promotional goals: This article gives some information on the battery, size/weight limitations and highlight the fact that the product is expensive and, for the time being, not covered by health insurance. This article quote the creator of the device, saying it is still "bulky" and not as fast as it could be.

That should make the article balanced. Then, I would delete those banners without hesitation. ;) RegardsKaptainIgloo (talk) 11:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay! I did that. Now please check again and tell me what else needs to be changed. Princeeternity (talk) 04:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi again Princeeternity. In my humble opinion, you can remove the banners ! Well done ! KaptainIgloo (talk) 06:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Whew! *feels like a Wikipedia editor* Princeeternity (talk) 12:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

If a wikipedia article's title is grammatically incorrect, for instance uncapitalised like 'james bond' instead of 'James Bond' is there any way to change this? Alexandertagg (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, a user can move the article to the correct title. If you tell me which one, I can move that for you. Valenciano (talk) 09:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

My guess is that it is Dangerous demos. It has more serious problems than the name -- it has been nominated for deletion and the discussion is here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dangerous demos.--ukexpat (talk) 14:11, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi again. Here User:Basicdesign/sandbox is an article more or less near-ready, but can't find appropriate title for it: the word doesn't exist in English. Any help? Mind: this article is not about "ironworks" but the resulting state after ironworks has been done and the prod ended. It is therefore not a smithy either, nor a bloomery or bloomsmithy. So what can it be called? Basicdesign (talk) 08:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Is Slag heap the phrase you want? - Arjayay (talk) 08:41, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

And the Wikipedia article at Slag. So better to improve that article with the material in your sandbox.--ukexpat (talk) 14:13, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Now that I updated the article ( in fact I've merged my draft and the article) and that I have added references is it possible to take off the 'multiple issues 'message ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hattha_Kaksekar_Limited

Lucie-boyer (talk) 01:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Tutelary did it already.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

It looks like someone has already taken off the template thanks to your work on that article. For future reference, though, it's perfectly fine to remove such messages if you feel they are no longer applicable or the issues have been addressed. Keihatsu ^talk 01:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeppers, and yes I did find the page by this, I tend to lurk and patrol and maybe help out (like in this one) though I'm sure other people could've handled it. Tutelary (talk) 01:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Note, that I have moved the article to

naming conventions for companies.--ukexpat (talk

) 14:17, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I want to create an article for the company, and it won't be marketing, just the facts. Am I allowed to do that? Omriyuval (talk) 11:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Finance. RockMagnetist (talk

) 15:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Zohaib Ashraf (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

The links in the article refer to it as "Aik Din Geo Ke Saath", with a double-a, so I'll move it to that for you. Rojomoke (talk) 16:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I am actually asking on behalf of someone I work for who is a self-published author with a pretty good following. She'd like to create a page about her as author. Is this permissible? Thanks for any and all direction! 2605:6000:F083:9500:44A:6CB6:A9A9:AC23 (talk) 19:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse IP. Even if she has a good following that does not automatically mean that she is notable. A good example to take on this is youtube. Several youtubers with over 100k followers do not have an article. This is because they have not been important in any notable media besides youtube. I suggest you read

WP:COI just in case. As it seems you might be close to her? NathanWubs (talk

) 20:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

The guideline on creating an article on yourself is:

don't because it is self-promotion. RockMagnetist (talk

) 20:58, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you both, very helpful. 2605:6000:F083:9500:486:73F3:E795:CD80 (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

How can i insert an image in the infobox of my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swarsadanand (talk • contribs) 14:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi again @Swarsadanand: You can find the details of how to use an infobox in the documentation of each infobox. For example, you will find instructions of how to use the Person Infobox at Template:Infobox person, specifically in the examples section.

I'm not sure if all infoboxes work this way, but most simply require you to put the file's title in the | image = parameter. For example, to user File:Example.jpg, you would use | image = Example.jpg, as is shown in the example I previously linked to. Hope this helps! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments below moved into the right section by ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

So just giving the name of image without destination path, the image will insert. How is this possible?

Reply soon because the thing you suggested is not working.Sadanand Brahmbhatt 19:11, 31 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swarsadanand (talk • contribs)

Hello, Swarsadanand. Just checking that you understand that in order to use an image in Wikipedia, you must first upload it to Wikimedia commons (or in special circumstances, to Wikipedia)? You can't link to an image that isn't on a Wikimedia server. --ColinFine (talk) 15:35, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

i've just written a piece about myself and my career as an actor. I need references. i worked for the BBC and S4.90.193.41.252 (talk) 17:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello IP address and welcome to the Teahouse, although you might be famous, you may not be notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. Please read

WP:COI. Cheers, TheQ Editor (Talk)

17:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

2602:306:32AD:F280:3404:6E7F:2FA9:7CE5 (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The article you're referring to is Christopher H. Martin. Notability needs to be established by finding sources, and the banner provides helpful links to search for them. What you need are reliable, independent sources sources that discuss Martin in detail; so far, there is just an article on one of his commissions. You could also try searching for sources on Kidz Creations and Hearts for Hounds. RockMagnetist (talk) 15:41, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. So I need to find articles that discuss him, then post a link to the article or the article itself?

2602:306:32AD:F280:3404:6E7F:2FA9:7CE5 (talk) 16:27, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

For example, on the commissions and exhibitions section, do I add text there then embed the links to the sources? Like done for the Formula One Track?

Also, what banner are you referring to that provides helpful links to search?

16:30, 31 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.42.223.40 (talk)

The banner I'm referring to is the one you quoted above: Find sources: "Christopher H. Martin" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Try clicking on the links and you'll get some search results. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:27, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by Formula One Track; there is no Wikipedia article on that. You embed citations, not links: see Citing sources for how to do that. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I have another question. In regards to Kidz Creations, if there are articles written to support the text, how should those articles be referenced in the section? Should a link be placed in the Kidz Creations section or just in the References section? Thank you.

2602:306:32AD:F280:3404:6E7F:2FA9:7CE5 (talk) 16:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Place a citation beside the text on Kidz Creations. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

If you are using <ref></ref> tags then the references section will be populated automatically with the citations you put in the text. By putting them in the text itself you make sure that ^[1] <-- These show up in the correct spots. Zell Faze (talk) 17:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Since I have merged my draft and an existing article, this message is written at the top of the page:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 (Redirected from Hattha Kaksekar Limited)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hattha_Kaksekar_Limited

Can I delete it ?

Thanks

Lucie-boyer (talk) 01:38, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Lucie-boyer, that text is called a header.

A header is on every page in Wikipedia, and it doesn't show in the editing tab so you cannot remove it.

The (Redirected from: …) means that the page linked redirects to your page. We use redirects for articles that are similar to each other and we make on redirect to the other. Thanks,

MLB, rather than taking you to an "MLB" article, the software redirects you to the article for Major League Baseball. Like you, I find the "Redirected from..." message slightly annoying. To clear it up, I habitually click the "Read" tab of the article, and that removes the text. Mz7 (talk

) 04:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

So, in this case, if you go to

Hattha Kaksekar Limited, it redirects there, so the page tells you that it is has been redirected. --ColinFine (talk

) 17:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Dheeerajdrjagarwal (talk) 20:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Before you embark upon that task, please read the guidance on the appropriate use of flags at

Wikipedia:MOSFLAG.--ukexpat (talk

) 20:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointerUkexpat. I did read through the section as well as the inappropriate usage of flags. Since the flag icons discussion in the mentioned article revolves around countries and my focus is on flag icons for a different entity classification, I am hopeful that my efforts will not lead to any policy violation. The intended improvements are directly relevant to the articles hence (again assuming) should be fine.

Any inputs on how to create flag icons for non-national purposes? Dheeerajdrjagarwal (talk) 18:34, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I wish to delete a file through the speedy deletion process, and I have found the templates that are specific to the criteria I wish. But I do not know how to use the templates. Any help would be much appreciated.Bahndosi (talk) 17:40, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

You can get more information here. [1] If you don't know how to insert a template into an article you may not be experienced enough to evaluate and place an SD tag on an article, which is generally performed by more experienced editors. You may be better off asking someone here for advice on a specific article and proposed deletion.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:35, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am new to editing Wikipedia pages and would like to make a small but significant edit to the page on Gertrude Stein. However, I don't want to just rush in there as a new user and make a change only to find it denied or changed back due to my lack of experience here so am looking for an experienced editor to guide me.

It seems that some facts have been whitewashed or glossed over by what I assume to be Stein apologists for her racist and Nazi sympathising views. For example, it mentions twice on her page that she was 'pro-immigration' which supports the page's general image of her being a progressive minded artist.

However, I have a direct quote from her taken from a 1934 interview from The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/05/03/specials/stein-views.html?_r=1/) stating:

"There is no reason why we should not select our immigrants with greater care, nor why we should not bar certain peoples and preserve the color line for instance."

Surely this information is crucial to the veracity of the page and should be included in some form to provide a more accurate view of the author in question. I was wondering how best to go about making this change rather than just making some potentially overzealous edits every time 'pro-immigration' is mentioned (I really just want to add the word 'white' after 'pro' while adding a disclaimer somewhere defining what her version of the word immigration means).

I feel that my intense dislike of this person will get in the way of adding a fair and unbiased edit and was wondering if someone could help advise one how best to (or not to) approach it?

Amir A

196.205.178.143 (talk) 20:09, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I think the best approach would be to propose a change at Talk:Gertrude Stein and see if you can get agreement on it. RockMagnetist (talk) 20:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Amir. I don't know much about Ms. Stein but I'm very into other people that were part of her circle, especially F. Scott Fitzgerald. I think you raise a good point, if anything I think you may be underplaying it a bit. The current article talks about her "pro immigration and democratic" political views but in those quotes in addition to the one you mentioned she says Hitler should have been given the Nobel peace prize. Although from what little I do know about Stein I think she tended to say very hyperbolic things and those quotes may not be as extreme as they sound in context. Anyway, hope you are OK if I take some initiative here, I'm going to raise the issue on Stein's talk page and see what people say. Please feel free to join in the discussion there. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 03:00, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I added a new section to the Stein talk page to raise the issue: Talk:Gertrude_Stein#Political_Views_Section_--_Does_this_need_to_be_balanced_out_with_more_of_her_controversial_statements.3F. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 04:24, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I took a first cut at an edit to the Stein page, the section on politics, but I haven't commited it to the actual article yet. I want to think about it a bit more and give others a chance to comment. If anyone wants to take a look, I would welcome feedback I usually work on more technical or academic topics, please check out my sandbox: User:MadScientistX11/sandbox and leave feedback on the section I linked to above on the Stein talk page. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I think if the Hitler quote is taken in context, it is actually an ironic statement and not supportive of Hitler: "I say that Hitler ought to have the peace prize," she says, "because he is removing all elements of contest and struggle from Germany. By driving out the Jews and the democratic and Left elements, he is driving out everything that conduces to activity. That means peace." RockMagnetist (talk) 18:08, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I more or less agree. Although keep in mind when that quote was made Hitler still hadn't invaded Poland and many people in the US actually did admire him. But when you look at the context she was essentially saying that by driving out all the interesting people he was making things "more peaceful". In any case the current article already has some stuff about her being mildly positive about fascists anyway so I focused on the immigration quote which I do think would be a worthwhile addition to the article. Thanks for the feedback. BTW, I think the appropriate place for further discussion of the topic is here: Gertrude Stein talk: Quotes from NY Times article --MadScientistX11 (talk) 18:40, 1 August 2014 (UTC)