Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 455

This is an current talk page .

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am the Marketing Assistant at the British Motor Museum (formerly known as the Heritage Motor Centre). I have recently tried to amend our Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_Motor_Centre to change the details accordingly.

I have managed to change the copy within our page but cannot find where to change the title of the page. This is effecting our google pages as we are still appearing as Heritage Motor Centre as it is pulling the information from Wikipedia. Please can you let me know how I can go about making this change or if this needs to be done by yourself. If it the latter please can you let me know how long it will take to which the change.

We are now open to the public and therefore, need to make this change as soon as possible.

Many thanks

Jo Flowers Britishmotormuseum (talk) 09:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Now done, by Theroadislong. Maproom (talk) 10:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Guess again. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:28, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

It looks like the move did take place.Ian.thomson I do not understand.

Britishmotormuseum (I'm not sure if this works since the name is blocked) you say "need to make this change as soon as possible." Actually, we move pages based on our needs, not yours, and we do need to have the accurate name of your museum.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I think that Ian's point was that he moved the article, not Theroadislong. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Is there some way of finding a list of places that direct one TO a particular page? Thanks. Marentette (talk) 23:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi

redirects, for example, hit hide transclusions and hide links. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk

) 23:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Marentette (talk) 02:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

What is the generic name for the links at the bottom of a page that lead a reader to associated WP articles, like this one:

Hi

Wikipedia:Navigation templates. Mz7 (talk

) 04:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I reviewed Draft: After-school Programs and its Effect on Children, and declined it as reading like an essay, in support of after-school programs for children. Its author, User: Alma760 then wrote to my talk page:

Hi Robert McClenon, I wrote a draft on my sandbox and submitted for a review, but it was declined because it reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Should I erase everything I did or is there a way I can keep my information. I'm so used to writing in an essay format. I don't know exactly what kind of information goes into an encyclopedia article. My topic is after-school programs and its effect on children. This is my first time working on wikipedia; I would appreciate it if you could help me. Thanks.

I thank Alma760 for asking politely for advice. (Not all new editors do that. It is appreciated by the reviewers.) Can some other experienced editors share advice (and possibly help) with this editor? My first advice would be to research whether a separate article is needed, or whether reliable sources, such as papers published in peer-reviewed academic journals, about a positive effect of after-school programs on children can be added to

Alma760, I'm slightly confused about what the subject of the article is. You use the term "After-school Programs" (plural) but then "its" singular. Is the article about a set of related programmes, or a single programme? Cordless Larry (talk) 22:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Larry, I meant to say a single program I will continue to make changes and edit my wikipedia page. Will I still be able to make the changes for my subject or is it too late to change the title? if I am able to change it should it be After-school program and the effect on children? or leave it as after-school program? Thank you for the feedback. Alma760 (talk) 06:08, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

You can change the draft as you see fit,

moving the page. It will have to be moved the fix the capitalisation of the title anyway. I think the "its effect on children" part of the title lends itself to an essay-like article, so I would consider dropping that part, but if it is to become a general article on after-school programmes, then you need to consider whether this is already covered by an existing article such as After-school activity. If you think it is, consider working to help improve that article. Cordless Larry (talk

) 07:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Graean (talk) 09:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Graean. Copyright is a complex issue. You probably should ask the experts at the Wikipedia:Media copyright questions forum. —teb728 t c 10:39, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Graean, it can be a bit tricky, but not overwhelmingly so. Under UK law, copyright now lasts for the life of the author (artist) plus 70 years. So any work f an artist who died before 1946 would now be out of copyright. Works of artists who died later than that would still be protected by copyright in the UK.

However, in the US, under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, copyrights in foreign (to the US) works that were still in copyright in their home countries on 1 jan 1996 were restored to the full length of applicable US law. This means that all such works are protected for at least 95 years from their dates of creation. Therefore, it seems very likely that all the works of the East London Group would be considered still under copyright in US law.

Given that the best way to handle any such images would be to secure permission from the copyright holder, who would normally be the heir or heirs of the artist. Follow the procedures at

WP:DCM and Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission and have the copyright holder fill out and send in Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries

or something very similar.

Note that under UK (but not US) law, the photographer obtains an independent copyright when taking a picture of a flat work of art, such as a painting. It would be best if the photographer (or scanner) is identified and also releases any copyright under a free license, although this may not be strictly required under US law and the Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. decision.

I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 12:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your advice. I'll follow it up.

Yes, it's a complex issue!

Graean (talk) 12:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi

suitably-free copyright license or licenses (or a release into the public domain). That is what the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials, linked above, describe. I mention this because it is exceedingly rare for owners of the works of established, prominent and exhibited artists to want to, or to actually go ahead and give up their rights in this manner – for very good reason.

Understand that this would mean a release of almost all rights over the copyright, essentially but for attribution; use even for commercial purposes. The minimums of a compatible free copyright licenses would allow anyone to take the paintings/images and put them on mugs, t-shirts, placemats, sell posters bearing the image, etc. and the only limitation would be that sufficient attribution be provided to the author and the license for reuse be mentioned.

Assuming they are non-free copyrighted, the only other way these images could be used is under a claim of fair use, if a particular use met all ten of the non-free content criteria. That's a whole other conversation. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk

) 23:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

It might be possible to create a moderate-to-low resolution version, and release only that version, I suppose. DES ^(talk) 04:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks,Fuhghettaboutit, for the clarification. And DES for the moderate to low res idea.

I'll pass this on to the heirs and see what they think.

213.78.66.3 (talk) 08:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

I work in Marketing for Clifton Observatory and am looking to change the title of our Wiki page to Clifton Observatory as this is the correct name of the site. (www.cliftonobservatory.com)

Many thanks. 213.105.132.227 (talk) 11:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@

Observatory, Bristol

, some of the sources call it Clifton Observatory, whilst others call it the Bristol Observatory, or The Observatory.

To move the page, you would need to start a

requested move discussion

.

Also, note it is not your Wiki page, rather a page about your organisation on Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I have created a redirect from

Observatory, Bristol. This means that a reader who looks for "Clifton Observatory" will find it, and will automatically be redirected to the article at "Observatory, Bristol". I hope this helps.--Gronk Oz (talk

) 14:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Having taken a quick look, I think Clifton Observatory is actually the common name. Take a look at the Google results for "observatory bristol", for example. I'll make the move now. —me_and 09:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

1, 2 Are these two sources too bad to be used in an article in Wikipedia?

Hi @

WP:DAILYMAIL, which says "In general, tabloid-journalist newspapers, such as The Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail, equivalent television shows, or sites like The Register

, should not be used."

If the information in those sources is good, then it'll likely be published in another

more reliable source. Joseph2302 (talk

) 11:56, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@

Captain Spark: and @Joseph2302: – Recently I found template {{Friendly search suggestions}} which may be helpful looking for reliable sources. The template can be added to talk pages, under the banners. Regards,  JoeHebda (talk) 

13:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Judith_Donovan

Please guide me.

Hammadshk (talk) 14:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Hammadshk, and welcome to the Teahouse. Have you seen the notice at Draft:Judith Donovan that points you towards Help:Referencing for beginners? You have attempted to manually insert footnote references into the article, which is not how referencing works on Wikipedia. The software will sort the footnote system out for you, if you learn how to use the correct markup. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:33, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Aside from the technicalities of the references, I think you need to do more to demonstrate the subject's

articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic, so you could do with citing a few more sources that discuss Donovan in depth rather than just mentioning her in passing. Cordless Larry (talk

) 15:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I edited an article and someone deleted my edit without any proper explanation. What should I do in this matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SabbirHossen177 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

They provided an explanation on your talk page, but you deleted it with this edit, and insulted them on theirs. What you should do is read, and try to understand, the explanations and advice you are given. Maproom (talk) 16:17, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

How can I delete this account? I don't need it anymore because I have been blocked from editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SabbirHossen177 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@

reliable sources

to support what you are adding.

And Wikipedia accounts cannot be deleted, however if you no longer wish to edit then you can request a courtesy vanishing, or you can just leave your account. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:18, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

What is the generic name for a reference template like Template:LosAngelesCityAttorneys which you often find at the bottom of Wikipedia pages? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi BeenAroundAWhile. You appear to have asked this below, where your question has already been answered. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

The article appears to be quite inconsistent about the means of guidance of the missile. From what I know, it is semi-active radar homing throughout its flight. However, I cannot find any reliable sources myself to verify this. It is hoped that the forum linked below may serve as a starting point for a search for sources.

[1]

Obviously, it is not itself usable as a reliable source. I am not suggesting that we do so. It is hoped that my suggestion would not violate policy or guidelines.

Thanks,a CLoG? | unCLoG 05:30, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Talk:S-200 (missile). If you don't get any input after a few days and you feel that you need it to proceed, you could post a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Cordless Larry (talk

) 07:49, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: I am concerned that placing such a suggestion on the talk page will be met with strong responses relating to WP:reliable sources. See what has previously taken place on that talk page for an example of what I mean.a CLoG? | unCLoG 21:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

A Certain Lack of Grandeur, I would just go ahead and post. As long as you explain that you're not suggesting using the forum as a source, I think you should receive constructive input. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: Shoul I simply paste the text of my original post here into the talk page under a new heading? a CLoG? | unCLoG 21:10, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good, A Certain Lack of Grandeur. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:15, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

how can i rate an article. i am a member of wikiproject asia.but i doesn't no how to rate an article wiki tamil 100 09:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding

Hello,

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. I'm afraid I can't give you more information, as I've never rated articles. --ColinFine (talk

) 19:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi

Featured Article) need a formal review process, so you won't be able to rate them by yourself. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs

) 21:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Rex Hohaia125.238.134.95 (talk) 22:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Rex, and welcome to the Teahouse. Can I ask what the nature of the documentation is? If it consists of newspaper articles or other published materials, then we can certainly use it, but if the documents are of a more personal nature, we might not be able to. Material on Wikipedia needs to be

verifiable, which essentially means it needs to be based on published sources that a reader could reasonably expect to access in some way. Cordless Larry (talk

) 22:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

How do I create a new page on Wikipedia without having to refer to the Special Pages dialog page? I would like to create a page on an upcoming comic house known as RED Comics.Mcpemaestro (talk) 13:46, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

upcoming have simply not been written about enough yet to make a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk

) 13:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Due to

COI I suggest you wait for a non-affliated editor to create an article Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk

) 22:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Captain Spark, and welcome to the Teahouse. No they are not. However, when sources of equal quality, reliability, and relevance to the article are available, English-language sources are preferred. This because many readers will find them easier to use and more informative. When non-English-language sources are used, it is helpful to provide a translation of the title and of a relevant quote. DES ^(talk)

02:56, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Am I permitted to post a nude photo on Wikimedia commons? Another question: Isn't Indian National Congress a socially liberal political party? Senthoora poove (talk) 03:11, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Senthoora poove. Commons is not censored; so the requirements for a nude photo are the same as for any other photo, including free content and educational purpose. There are many nude photos on Commons.

Why do you ask about Indian National Congress? the article says several places the party's ideology is social liberalism (among other things). —teb728 t c 08:59, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedia representatives,

My name is Cameron Smith, and I represent Henley Enterprises, Inc. dba Valvoline Instant Oil Change. Our company Henley Enterprises, Inc. is the largest Valvoline Instant Oil Change franchisee in the country. We have 235 stores in 12 states. I created the username henleyenterprisesinc and recently requested approval to create a page—“Henley Enterprises, Inc dba Valvoline Instant Oil Change” that educates the Internet world about the company we are.

My recent request to construct a Wikipedia page for my father’s company was denied, and I was wondering if you could tell me why—and/or please advise me how to correctly set one up.

I would like to create a Wikipedia page similar to the one In-N-Out Burger has created on your site: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-N-Out_Burger. Just like In-N-Out, we are privately owned and started with only one store (25 years ago for us).

People constantly get our company information, history, products/services, store designs, advertising practices, mission statement, vision, and values mixed up with that of Ashland, Inc.—the public company that currently is the franchisor of Valvoline Instant Oil Change (they have 260 stores, we have 235 stores). Although we are mentioned on the Ashland, Inc page—their page comes up when users of the Internet search for our company on engines such as Google—and we are not currently separately represented on Wikipedia.

My father has tasked me to create a page just like the one you have on the site for In-N-Out. We are hoping to let the Internet world know about “Henley Enterprises, Inc.” on Wikipedia just like In-N-Out Burger has done.

Please advise! Thank you.

Cameron Smith

<Contact info redacted>

First of all, Henleyenterprisesinc, that user name is not acceptable, Wikipedia user accounts must be for individuals. They must not be shared, nor may they appear to represent or promote a group, company, or organization.

Secondly, Wikipedia articles must be

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS

is a poor argument, and you would be well advised to avoid it.'

You have a clear

Conflict of Interest and are considered a paid editor on this topic. You must disclose your connection to the firm in Uses of accord with our Terms of Use. DES ^(talk)

02:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

• Note: OP blocked as an advertising-only account. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I reviewed and declined Draft:Allumer Jewellery London, citing too few independent reliable sources. I then received this inquiry from User:Elvislondon on my talk page:

Hi Robert, I am new to creating a Wikipedia article and my first draft was recently rejected. Please could you give me some feedback on how I could create a successful article. I am a university student hoping to create a Wikipedia page for the brand I am studying 'Allumer'. Thank you. Elvislondon (talk) 11:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

On the one hand, if other experienced editors think that I should have accepted it, I will listen to their comments. On the other hand, if other experienced editors agree, do they have any advice for a new editor?

I am assuming that studying the brand does not constitute a

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

There's no conflict of interest as far as I see it, Robert. Elvislondon, the best thing I can suggest is simply to use Google and Google News to find more sources that discuss the company (preferably in depth rather than just in passing). It might be that you have access to other resources via your university's library that could be used to find sources, too. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both. I will find and add more sources Elvislondon (talk) 11:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

• Robert McClenon, I think it very unlikely the firm is notable. The charities are trivial, and the award minor.

Note

This article is now in main-space. R F, 12:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC).

How do I delete an AFC draft article, so as not to waste any more time on it when a reviewer doesn't care if the subject is notable, just wants to demand more work on the article?

"(Declining submission: bio - Submission is about a person who does not meet notability guidelines (AFCH 0.9)) (undo)"

This is false, she does meet notability guidelines, but there is no way to fight an established editor, so deletion is easier.

2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 (talk) 12:19, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

• Hi 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 you haven't even given SwisterTwister time to respond - you posted at 12:03 and had given up by 12:21. Looking at there edit patterns I would guess they are fast a sleep at the moment with 4-8AM being their busiest editing time (note all times are from GMT. Also why come asking for how to delete rather than asking for someone else to review? You also do not have to battle a single reviewer, I'm sure if you asked SwisterTwister to leave it for another reviewer they would have. As they have also only rejected it once I'm not sure why you already think you in a "fight" with "an established editor". KylieTastic (talk) 13:14, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
• You cannot get the draft deleted as it was created by 73.243.72.120 not this address (even though that may have been you) - also others may like to add the actual sources you claim exist in your post to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Biography/By profession.
• As for your question on SwisterTwister talk page "Please link to the policy page that gives the exact number of sources I should add" - there is no number of sources, it depends what they contain. For instance you nytimes ref only mentions her name in a list of names, and the srbwi ref also just mentions her in passing, but many of the other refs are good. However, after a quick look I would have thought that she is notable enough - so if you actually add a couple more of the other sources then hopefully it would be accepted. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 13:27, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
• Lastly I assume that Charles Eric Dawson was also your work and was accepted by SwisterTwister so its not like they have declines all your work. I know its sometimes hard not to take declines and reverts personally, but its just part of the way things work that hopefully get us to better articles. So don't give up your work and time are not wasted. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 13:36, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

"Submission is about a person who does not meet notability guidelines." I think this says it all, especially about any chance of adding sufficient sources once this editor decided Green is "a person who does not meet notability guidelines."

There is no rule that you have to write an article in order to get it deleted, if this were the case, then every hoax ever posted to Wikipedia would become enshrined.

I just need to know how I put it up for deletion. 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 (talk) 13:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

• Hi again 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 where does it say "Submission is about a person who does not meet notability guidelines" I cant find that anywhere? I can see "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability" that does not say a person is not notable just that it has not yet been shown. Also i meant you cant just get it quickly deleted as you could have if you had written it all, hoaxes etc would be deleted for policies that don't count here, but if you want to propose for deletion it would be Wikipedia:Proposed deletion that you are looking for. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 13:42, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

That's the edit comment when it was declined, "person does not meet notability," good-bye. With that battle mentality, it will not go anywhere. Proposed deletion says it is not for draft articles, only for mainspace. 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 (talk) 13:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

• Hi, I hadn't noticed that before and I use the same 'helper' script for AFC reviewing - it s just a bad choice of words that the script writer has used - please take note of the actual message posted and the policies as they are the ones that count. Also you may not have noticed that Theroadislong has been updating the draft and if you want to look at edit comments they said "clearly notable so doesn't require deleting". Regards KylieTastic (talk) 14:06, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

YES! Please don't request deletion the article is very close to being ready to publish, clearly she is notable, it's just that the sources weren't quite up to scratch, I'll have another look this evening. Theroadislong (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

• 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 I have posted to the AFC helper script talk page pointing out this edit summary wording not being inline with our actual notices, so hopefully it will be changed so others do not feel as bad as you appear to with this decline. Hopefully they will look at the others as well, or maybe I'll get around to looking at it myself. KylieTastic (talk) 14:20, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Every time I write an article about a woman, it gets this. I bet if I wrote an article with the same sources, but slightly less notable, a man not considered worthy by the NYT of heading the NAACP, it would wind up on the main page of Wikipedia, while the same sources for a woman would have editors requiring that an encyclopedia be written about her first.

Sometimes I let it get to me. Usually I do what everyone else does, not bother writing about women so as not to offend the gate keepers at Wikipedia and not to get my blood boiling about the absurdity of it all.

Someone else should write the article. Someone who doesn't see all the missing women in Wikipedia. 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I have reviewed and accepted the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

• 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 in this case it was declined once only, updated, and now accepted. What are all these articles about women being rejected? As you do not have an account and jump between ip addresses we can't really comment on the other articles. However every time I've looked into such claims I have found no evidence of sexism just judgements on policies (some good some bad) that people choose to assign a subtext to. You have read far too much into this single decline - any note that at the finally tally you had yourself, me, and two other editors who believed she was notable, and another who only declined that they thought it did not yet meet the guidelines as they added the comment "May be notable", so overall very positive and with a positive outcome. KylieTastic (talk) 15:00, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

About as viable as my statement. Back to writing about men. (Note that I edit on a cell phone, the carrier jumps, not me.) 2600:380:992B:448B:882F:F3AE:A6A2:87C9 (talk) 15:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Create an account. Create an account. If you have an established edit history, it might be easier to show systematic bias, if indeed there is systematic bias, rather than just a combative attitude. Also, if you do create an account, and then want to delete a draft article, it will clearly be associated with you, rather than having IPs shift. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert McClenon (talk • contribs) 16:22, 21 February 2016‎ (UTC)

Yes, create an account. (Not an accurate survey, but my personal observation is that the majority of biographies deleted for lack of notability are about men. See Confirmation bias.) Dbfirs 16:53, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Also if you have an account, you may find WP:WikiProject Women in Red useful. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC).

Our companies have recently performed a merge. You can see that referenced from our page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_Mission_Systems

General Dynamics C4 Systems was redirected correctly. However, we need General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_Advanced_Information_Systems) to do the same redirect as C4 Systems.

Please let me know how we can start the process of this. I started a Merger proposal back in January 14, 2016 and I am not sure what the next steps are.

137.100.97.30 (talk) 14:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

I wrote an article and it was denied to get published because of the references. I was wondering if anybody could help me to get it published by telling me what else I need to do.

Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rhino_Equipment_Group

You appear to have a

conflict of interest and should not be trying to use Wikipedia to publicize your company. Robert McClenon (talk

) 17:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

even there is gravitation force exists in whole world but why we can't attracted towards big building while we walk near them ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by B madan11 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

even there is gravitation force exists in whole world but why we can't attracted towards big building while we walk near them ?? its my question ..response please — Preceding unsigned comment added by B madan11 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Ask this question at

the Science Reference Desk. Robert McClenon (talk

) 17:34, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your friendly welcome User:WillKomen. I can't wait to start editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madbio (talk • contribs) 09:59, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Madbio (talk) 10:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC) "Thanks for the warm welcome".

the Wikipedia Adventure. -Liance^{talk/contribs}

18:19, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

FACT is if you didn't play you didn't win — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.229.137 (talk) 10:07, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Please discuss the content of an article at the article's talk page (where you will probably get read by editors who have heard of the subject). --ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I am trying to update our company logo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrackingPointbut it will not let me. The logo displayed on the page is not our logo and I am not sure who put it there.72.48.120.164 (talk) 14:45, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The article is TrackingPoint. The logo shown there was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TrackingPoint_logo.png, by "Factual1979", possibly without the right copyright procedure, and is being discussed here. The company's own web site uses a related but clearly different logo. Maproom (talk) 14:55, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

There shouldn't be a copyright issue as that image is clearly {{PD-simple}}.--ukexpat (talk) 20:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

I wrote an article in french and I would like to translate it. Do I need to have english references or can I keep my french references? Olivier.dilain (talk) 20:27, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

the original references will do, but English references in additional are highly desirable. (And you cannot copy over the French references templates as they are--they will give error messages in the English Wikipedia, but the data will need to be re-entered into our templates). Also, when you do use French references, it helps very much least to give a translation of the article title in parentheses). DGG ( talk ) 21:16, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

This inquiry is regarding the wiki article for a company named Eminata Group:

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

This article contains the following sentence. “Eminata is chaired by Peter Chung, a man convicted in 1993 in California for defrauding students at a computer school he ran.” This sentence contains a defamatory term "convicted" which is not applicable given that it was a civil injunction. As you may know, in civil law, a judgment/injunction may be made against the defendant but it is different from a conviction which is applicable to criminal cases only. This is a dangerous entry as it harms the individual noted, and misinforms the layperson who may not know the difference between civil lawsuits and criminal charges. Similarly, when Mcdonald’s was sued for injuring Liebeck with hot coffee, the company (defendant) was ordered to pay $2.7 million to Liebeck. Now, this does not mean that the CEO of Mcdonald’s was convicted. (Liebeck v. Mcdonald's).

As you can see in the history page, I (Amvan2002) have tried to make edits on the page as the page is filled with outdated and misinformed entries. However, it has been difficult due to the Conflict of Interest policy as I am an employee of the company. A particular user, Ronz, has been reverting my changes without willing to collaborate to rectify the situation.

Below are the links of his “talk” page that shows my attempts to work with him with no success.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ronz#Regarding_your_changes_on_the_Eminata_group
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ronz#Eminata_Group_page_edits

Despite my efforts, the only response I received was:

“The solution is to provide sources. I've tagged the article as possibly being out of date. --Ronz (talk) 19:10, 16 February 2016 (UTC)”

Although this was frustrating, I tried to accommodate his request by obtaining a clear criminal record check from Mr. Peter Chung, but I found out that “California Penal Code section 11142 prohibits you from giving your copy of your criminal record to an unauthorized third party. In addition, California Penal Code section 11125 prohibits an individual or agency from requiring you to provide him/her or the agency with a copy of your criminal record or proof that a record does or does not exist. Violation of either of these sections is a misdemeanor offense.” (reference: https://oag.ca.gov/fingerprints/security_faq)

Lastly, you will note that this particular user (Ronz) has been a subject of other Wikipedia users’ complaint for his disruptive behavior. See link below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents/Problem_on_BLP_noticeboard#User:Ronz

Thank youAmvan2002 (talk) 17:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Read

WP:ANI. No one sees them. Robert McClenon (talk

) 17:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

policy on biographies of living people states that "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." One mention in an Indian publication is not reliable sourcing for a supposed conviction in California. The burden is on whoever tries to add this "convicted" language back into the article to furnish an impeccable source. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

20:34, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I have two more comments. First, the heading of this thread is incorrect. The misuse of the word "convicted", while problematic, is not

vandalism, which has a specific meaning of malicious edits intended to harm Wikipedia. Not all incorrect edits are vandalism. Second, please discuss content disputes on article talk pages before seeking other forms of dispute resolution. While discussion on user talk pages is better than no discussion, it is even better to have the discussion on the article talk page. That is what the article talk page is for. Robert McClenon (talk

) 21:17, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I have submitted an article for review and it back rejected. I fixed my notability problem but now I am trying to find sources for the impact of the subject. I feel as if it has made an impact but I am not sure what to say about it. Here is my draft for my article. Does anyone have any advice for me that will be helpful for this and future edits to wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Subterfuge_(game). Also is there a way I can clear my sandbox to start on a new project? Thank you very much for dealing with my lack of experience and taking time out of your day to make everyone smarter.

Chariot Rider (talk) 22:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello again,

Draft:Subterfuge (game). If you want to reuse it, you can just delete the current markup in the sandbox or replace it with something different. Alternatively, you can start a new one with a different name (e.g. User:Chariot Rider/sandbox2). Cordless Larry (talk

) 23:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I misread your question. I see that the notability issue is resolved. The latest review comments state that the article needs more detail on the game's development, impact or historical significance. It doesn't have to all be about impact (though I imagine you could probably find sales figures somewhere) - could you find something on the game's development, for example? Are there more reviews that you could cite? Cordless Larry (talk) 23:15, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I should explain. I had submitted it twice. The first time it was struck down because of notability but not this time. I should have made that more clear. This is what the poster said was the reason why he rejected it" The proposed article is not suitable for Wikipedia. Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles on fictional subjects should cover their real-world context and contain sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance—not just a summary of the plot. You may wish to add this content to an existing article, such as Subterfuge (game). As anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are free to do so yourself." I don't think he was hitting for notability but for lack of significance? But thank you anyway. I didn't think of using google news. Chariot Rider (talk) 23:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Please do not create multiple copies of drafts on the same subject. Your sandbox is no longer a redirect but contains another copy of the draft of the game. You should work on the one at

Draft:Subterfuge (game) rather than creating another draft in your sandbox. Robert McClenon (talk

) 21:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=La_Rumeur&oldid=706707382#cite_note-2

Thanks Asmigelski (talk) 21:05, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed Hi @Asmigelski: and welcome to the Teahouse. I have fixed this reference, the issue was that the url had a . before the address. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Asmigelski (talk) 22:08, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

An article titled Ashutosh Kotwal initially was proposed for deletion becos I forgot to add a reference. I'ver added a reference and the proposed deletion notice went away. Now I'ver got the following tag added to the article ... “This article is an autobiography or has been extensively edited by the subject or by someone connected to the subject. It may need editing to conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. There may be relevant discussion on the talk page.” I looked through the Teahouse discussion bit was not clear what this really means. It was written by Ashutosh Kotwal about himself and so is subjectively oriented but is factually accurate. Can you explain how I can take care of this matter. Avatwiki (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

WP:ACADEMIC

as the holder of a "named chair" professorship in physics. However, the current version of the article is in very poor condition. Consider the unreferenced promotional words highlighted in this passage:

"Kotwal has performed repeatedly performed world's most precise measurements of the mass of the W boson, precise measurements of the top quark mass, led the most incisive searches for new forces mediated by a Zprime boson, and been instrumental in observing the Higgs boson in one of its crucial production modes. His research group is currently spearheading the analysis of data from the ATLAS experiment at the LHC to look for evidence of a second, heavier Higgs boson."

The lengthy article has only one source, his own faculty page. Every single assertion of importance or accomplishment needs to be properly referenced, and the article is in danger of deletion until it is properly sourced. The article must summarize what independent sources say about Kotwal, not what Kotwal says about himself. This is an encyclopedia, not Facebook or LinkedIn. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:07, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

(

autobiographies

In addition, you have a clear

conflict of interest as you know/are Ashutosh Kotwal. Joseph2302 (talk

) 21:08, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

This article presents something of a

autobiography of a person that does establish notability based on a well-defined notability guideline, such as an autobiography of a professor who holds a named chair (in this case) or of a state legislator. One approach might be to stubbify the page. Robert McClenon (talk

) 21:23, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@

neutral tone. Joseph2302 (talk

) 22:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

What is the meaning of to stubbily the page?22:23, 24 February 2016 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avatwiki (talk • contribs)