Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 620

This is an current talk page .

Hi, I've uploaded pictures and filled out all the mandatory criteria. However, a moderator demanded that I stop uploading pictures as the images had "incomplete rationales".

I don't understand what I'm doing wrong when I'm filling in all the mandatory fields on the pictures when I upload them. Thanks! Jmiclash (talk) 02:20, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jmiclash. Without knowing more specifics I am going to just give you some general comments. If the files you have uploaded are

WP:NFCCE

. In many cases discussion may be necessary to determine whether the particular use actually complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy.

In my experience, the hardest of the non-free content to meet is often

WP:FFD.-- Marchjuly (talk

) 03:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Marchjuly, I already notified the administrator (what Jmiclash called a moderator) on their talk page about Jmiclash's question. — Gestrid (talk) 03:44, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

The reasons for the "n.a." is actually an issue with the Upload Wizard tool. I just learned of it yesterday, but apparently it does that in some cases. That being said, Jmiclash, a lot of your uploads appear to far exceed what we allow nonfree content for, and the rate you're doing it at will make this a significant effort to clean up. We don't, for example, need one image per TV episode; one in the show article will generally suffice to illustrate what the show looks like. That's especially when the image is essentially a random screenshot and isn't really discussed in depth by the article sources. Some articles they're used in use multiple nonfree images (occasionally justifiable, but not often), and others are clearly replaceable (one, for example, was of a living person where your rationale was "difficult to get a shot of a person's face"; but difficult or not, that's still what needs doing). Before you upload any more images, I would strongly encourage you to become more familiar with the restrictions surrounding nonfree content. We use as little as possible of it, as use of any nonfree content by definition detracts from our free content mission, so we use it only when essential, not simply to decorate or "have an image in the article". Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:20, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

As the person who has tagged some of the images (that I am also an admin isn't relevant) for having incomplete rationales my concern was solely over the use of n.a. for compliance with NFCC#1 and NFCC#2. If this is to do with the upload wizard that is not Jmiclash's problem and I apologise to you for making you collateral damage in the middle of this. Nthep (talk)

Hi, I understand the issue being discussed. I'm updating the file attributes on each picture manually in the hopes this partially addresses the concerns.

This is the first time I've contributed pictures. I have to say I've found it a very discouraging exercise. I reasoned that someone went to the trouble to create a page for each episode (which I thought was fantastic) and I thought I'd enhance with a screenshot of a key moment in the episode which I've described. I spent the better part of a day in this exercise only to find it not appreciated and deleted.

No matter, as administrators you have a larger concern (the integrity of Wikipedia) to deal with. I'll stop contributing and I apologize.Jmiclash (talk) 11:31, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi again

WP:TVIMAGE for some general guidance on editing TV show related articles. If you have general questions on image licensing or non-free content use, then you can ask for help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions or Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 12:44, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

At the end of this article is a section entitled "Aftermath" which, among other things, discusses alternative rules under which the championship might be conducted. I added a paragraph that would balance the importance of slow games and fast games in a way that makes fast games more important than now. This paragraph was simply removed by someone on the same day. I don't know who removed it or why. What are my options? Thanks. John Michael Farmer John Michael Farmer (talk) 16:16, 29 May 2017 (UTC) 2606:A000:8AC9:9000:19D3:B765:EC6B:7A61 (talk) 16:12, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse

reliable, independent published sources say about the topic, if you can supply a source that supports your addition you are welcome to add it back. Any unreferenced content can be removed. Theroadislong (talk

) 16:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure this is entirely the right place to say this, but the bell icon on the login bar that appears on the top of the screen seems to be malfuctioning. I asked a question here yesterday, and today I logged on and saw two alert messages- one of which did not concern me. Someone else had commented on it and pinged another editor, but the software seemed to think they pinged me, showing my username in the sample text instead of the actual user's. The person who answered was the same person who answered mine. Does anyone know what happened? -A lad insane (Channel 2) 22:56, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

@A lad insane: Please click the "View changes" link in the alert and post the url here so we can see which edit it was. This is called a diff. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: [1] -A lad insane (Channel 2) 15:22, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

A lad insane: That post starts with a ping of you made with {{U|A lad insane}}. DESiegel intended to ping John from Idegon but pings are written manually and there is no sign of an alert malfunction. I can guess exactly how it happened. DESiegel still had your username in the clipboard (computing) from copying it in the previous section to ping you there. Later he marked "John from Idegon" and tried to press Ctrl+C to copy it to the clipboard, but only C registered. This overwrote the marked text with a "C" instead of copying it to the clipboard. He didn't notice this but inserted the clipboard content in an attempted ping of John from Idegon, accidentally pinging you instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:23, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

PrimeHunter Okay, that makes sense. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 16:27, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

My apologies for the inadvertent notification, A lad insane. PrimeHunter is quite correct about my mistaken edit. DES ^(talk) 18:22, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

DESiegel, it's totally fine, just caused me to be utterly confused there for a while... -A lad insane (Channel 2) 17:00, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

I added a movie title, By Dawn's Early Light, to the Powers Booth Film page. I tried to create a link to that movies page but but when I click on the title it says "Creating By Dawn's Early Light (1990 Film)". There is already a page for that movie. Can someone show me the correct way to create the link?

Thanks, Mike MurphyALF700 (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

ALF700, the page seems to be at By Dawn's Early Light, presumably because no other film has had the same title; the extra "(1990 film)" bit is only added when there's more than one film or whatever with the same name (see, e.g., Superman (disambiguation) for examples). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse ALF700 I've done that for you, if you look, it is just as User:Justlettersandnumbers says. Theroadislong (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

I am working on and article about contemporary artist Javier Martin. As he is still a living person I want to ensure that this revision is written in a neutral tone. Are there any rules and/or tips when describing an artist or his work. Especially since art is very subjective. I have numerous published sources ranging from print publications to well known online outlets (Forbes, Vice, Tatler). However, several are not US based will that present a problem in terms of the source being considered reliable. Also several of the articles are interviews with the artist or reviews of exhibtions. Would those be considered biased sources. Finally am I allowed to quote the artist directly, if the quote is being sourced from a published interview. Thealiengirl (talk) 18:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Wikipedia:Writing better articles also offers good advice. Cordless Larry (talk

) 18:38, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

In order to show Lisabela Zxywhiddm Marschild — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoTSN (talk • contribs) 18:51, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi MoTSN, welcome to the Teahouse. I confirmed the candidate in a reliable BBC source [2] and updated the article.[3] The Space Navies Party doesn't have an article or Wikipedia color so the entry looks a little different from the others. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi there,

I am still new the wiki. I would like to work on articles that have tags, by addressing the issues and removing the tag. Can someone explain to me how I can go about adding a COI tag?

I am looking at a page that has been edited numerous times since the COI tag. I myself am not seeing the COI anymore. Can i just remove the tag or should I speak with the user that initiated the tag first?

Bionaire (talk) 18:42, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Bionaire. Welcome to the Teahouse: it's great that you're planning to clean up some tagged articles. If you look at Template:COI, you'll find it has some guidance on when to add or remove the tag. There are very few places in Wikipedia where you are required to discuss an action with other people first; but it is often a good idea to do so, either out of politeness, or if you think the action may be controversial. --ColinFine (talk) 19:39, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

help! Have reference from NYT and SanFrancisco Chronicle and need to know the "style" thanksMentalhealthwriter (talk) 22:11, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Mentalhealthwriter, and welcome to the Teahouse. Take a look at Help:Referencing for beginners – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:24, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm new to Wikipedia here so could I get some tips about formatting and whatnot? I would really like to be able to make nice looking pages here in Wikipedia! TCAtrevor (talk) 22:39, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, TCAtrevor. Please take a look at Help:Cheatsheet, which explains the most common aspects of wikicode. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:47, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Is there any standard method of Japanese romanization on Wiktionary? There seem to be a lot of inconsistencies. For example, I added a romaji section to the "susi" (寿司) page. It was deleted about a day later. I've seen other talk over this, but no general consensus. Is Hepburn generally the way to go (i.e. isshou vs. issyou).

71.233.106.251 (talk) 23:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. This page is for the English Wikipedia (an encyclopedia). Wiktionary (a dictionary) is another wiki with their own rules and practices. You can try posting to wikt:Wiktionary:Information desk. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Starlineloo (talk) 01:11, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Edit for about a year, makes thousands of edits, learn the rules and you might be able to. ~ GB fan 01:21, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello everyone.. I'm just new editor.. I edit more than 5 profile picture there pages.. But my every edit is removed.. Why! was I doing a wrong method? I took a image upload it on wizard upload and choose the category "I found it on google or random website" because I didn't understand to choose any other option. Did I wrong? please tell me how can I upload image properly. I have images which I cut from video and then edit them. These mine own images. How can I upload. . Please help me.. Shivanu14 (talk) 03:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)Shivanu Singh (Shivanu14)

Hi

public domain. Please note that "free" in this context does not mean "free of charge" or "free to download from the Internet"; it means "free from copyright protection". In most cases, the person who takes a photo is considered to be the copyright holder and that person needs to clearly and explicitly agree to release the file under a free license for it to be accpeted on Commons. My suggestion to you is to read the messages left for you at c:User talk:Shivanu14. A Commons' adminsitrator named c:User:Jcb left a message for you describing the problem, so you can ask Jcb for clarification and what needs to be done for the images to be restored. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 04:30, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Would anyone be able to explain to me the standard for inline citation in GA articles? Is inline citation required? How thorough should the inline citations be to pass GA review? Should potentially controversial statements have direct inline citation? Seraphim System ^(talk) 02:06, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Have you tried taking a look at Wikipedia:Good article criteria? Since GA articles are typically held to a higher standard, it might also help for you to look at some existing or currently nominated articles which are similar to the article you're asking about so as to get a general feelield of what is expected. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:22, 30 May 2017 (UTC); [Post edited by Marchjuly to change "field" to "feel". -- 04:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)]

Welcome to the Teahouse,

WP:Inline citations, "Many Wikipedia articles contain inline citations: they are required for Featured Articles, Good Articles, and A-Class Articles." Personally, I would never consider writing or expanding an article without using inline citations. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

03:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I know most GA articles do use thorough inline citation but the policy User:Cullen328 highlighted is what I was looking for, I just want to be sure it is actually part of our policies and not just my personal preference. Seraphim System ^(talk) 03:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello there,

I'm new to Wikipedia. For the last 1 month, I've been trying to get my content approved for an education brand - 'Extramarks', but all in vain. Is there something that I've not been doing right? Please help! Bidisha91 (talk) 04:58, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

Referencing for beginners. Also read all the links left in the message declining the draft. In addition, external links in the body of an article are not allowed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

05:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Super ninja2. Sorry that your question hasn't already been answered. I think that the best approach would be to go with the nationality listed in the source (which appears to be a Forbes list). The best place to ask about this would be the article's talk page though, since it is essentially a content question rather than a how-to-edit question. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:48, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm busy trying to amend, update and improve the European Schools wiki page. I would like to use an infobox that actually reflects what they are. This is tricky because they are a suis generis entity. "The European Schools" is an international organisation created by an international treaty, which runs 14 "schools", which are under its authority, across the EU. It is not a government agency (so that template is out). It is not a "school", but an organisation responsible for running them. I would like the infobox to be both reflective of what it is, and to be simple and concise. I have tried to put together something on my . The "school jurisdiction" template is also not great for this use as it is designed for North America and doesn't seem to have the fields I need to express the information on the European Schools. I would like to embed the "international treaty" infobox into the "status" label on the "organisation" infobox, but this appears to be buggy as neither were intended for this feature. I guess I'm at a loss for how to present this information. Creating a custom infobox from scratch would be better, but I am new to wikipedia. Help?! EU explained (talk) 23:57, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

Template:infobox NGO, but as I guess you've found, that doesn't exist. Is there anything suitable in Category:Organization infobox templates? Failing that, you may find something helpful at Help:Designing infoboxes, or ask for help at WT:WikiProject Infoboxes. --ColinFine (talk

) 11:58, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I am not colour blind neither is any one of my family yet I feel my signature stands out in the page.i would like feeedback of other Wikipedians if my signature is okay or not ⭐FORCE RADICAL⭐ @ 05:21, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Forceradical and welcome to the teahouse. Your signature seems to shout "look at me!!!", but that's only my personal opinion. The characters at the beginning and end just display as boxes for me, but will display differently for others. Some other people have bright signatures, and there's no rule against this as long as it doesn't affect the subsequent formatting. It's your contribution to the project that people will judge you on. Dbfirs 05:58, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Forceradical on my screen it forces the spacing between the line it is on and the one above to be wider than normal. I also think it's a bit "shouty". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:24, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments

WP:SIGAPP⮘FORCE RADICAL

⮚ 07:22, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I think that one's worse, Forceradical, because there is less contrast between the colours. Why not just use plain text? Cordless Larry (talk) 12:01, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

The new one is worse, but neither one is easy to read. I am not colour blind or any real eye problems and both of them are hard to read. My problem is that the type face you are using is hard to read. ~ GB fan 12:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, the 12pt font size isn't really in line with

WP:ACCESSIBILITY). Yunshui ^雲_水

12:12, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Cheers,
Salem North Man Salem North Man (talk) 05:44, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Salem North Man, and welcome to the Teahouse. Don't panic! The article Christopher Jon Luke Dowgin is not currently up for deletion, and as far as I can see, it never has been. Somebody has added cleanup tags to it to say that it could do with improvements in a number of ways, but so far nobody has said "This article should be deleted" for whatever reason.

The problem pointed out in the tags is that huge sections of the text have no inline references, and many of the references that are there are not substantial writing about Dowgin, but simply to verify details. The thing to remember is that Wikipedia has no interest - at all - in what you know, or think (or what I know or think), and very little interest in what the subject of an article has said or published. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with the the subject have published about the subject, in reliable places. An article, especially an article about a

notable

: this does not have quite the same meaning as usual.

So what somebody needs to do to improve the article is to find some sources - articles in reliable organs such as major newspapers - that talk about Dowgin at some length, and write the article based only on what those sources say. Anything tht cannot be cited to a published source, or that is cited only to something that Dowgin or his associates have published, should be removed from the article. Some uncontroversial factual data can then be added from

Your first article

.

To your specific questions: don't worry too much about the note about disambiguation pages: this is a minor problem that can be fixed any time. It simply means that several of the wikilinks in the page point to disambiguation pages such as Gone with the Wind, rather than to the particular instance of that phrase which the link wants to direct the reader to.

As for user sandboxes: they (and the more recent alternative, Draft space) are a place where you can work on a draft article relatively protected from somebody coming along and proposing deletion. (There are still reasons why they can be deleted, but far fewer than an article in main space). They are entirely optional, but I would always advise using them. However, since you've got this far without your draft being challenged, I don't think there's any point in moving it now. If somebody does come along and nominate it for deletion (which would only be likely to happen if they thought that Dowgin does not meet the criteria for notability), then you could move it to a sandbox or draft space to give you time to find the sources that would be needed. You do this by simply

moving the article. --ColinFine (talk

) 12:49, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

How do i submit for review to publish please?MariaHuesca (talk) 06:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

WP:Golden rule. --ColinFine (talk

) 12:59, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I want to create a new page about Eureka Stadium, in Ballarat, but I am unsure of how to do so. Thanks!The Editer (talk) 08:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

Your first article. --ColinFine (talk

) 13:05, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I Whenever a user edits a article, red or green numbers appear with a negative or positive sign. What does that mean? Are those how many keystrokes a user increased or decreased the length of the article, up and down votes, or something else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barrythevet (talk • contribs) 18:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

That refers to the number of bytes added or removed. I think it roughly corresponds with keystrokes but some characters take up more bytes than others. 331dot (talk) 19:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Barrythevet and welcome to the Teahouse.

Let me add the clarification that the red or green number corresponds to a net change in the size of the page. If an editor makes a change that removes a paragraph containing 200 characters and adds a different paragraph containing 300 characters, what will be shown is an increase of just 100.

When looking at an article's history or at your watchlist, large changes in an article may be a reason to give that edit extra scrutiny. It's just a hint, though. Vandals will sometimes take extra pains to make the change number small and the edit summary innocuous. It's a jungle! — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:16, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

What can be done about vandals making nonsensical but "pseudo-justified" harmful changes to an article? I welcome rational peer-reviewing, corrections and even supported refutation of material. But what is the point of trying to make Wikipedia a good source of information if things just get broken? Vogel Era (talk) 08:49, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Tagging along on someone else's question, Vogel Era? That's certainly allowed, but your question changes the subject quite a bit. A lot of work goes into making sure that vandalism is kept at bay, so that - most of the time - what you read on Wikipedia is pretty good information. The judgment is that the damage vandals do is of smaller weight than the good we get from Wikipedia being open to editing by anyone. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:10, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

The answers so far are correct- it corresponds to whether the article was made 'bigger' or 'smaller' based on bytes. But anecdotally, for the longest time I believed that it was upvotes and downvotes as well! And every time I took something out of an article I thought people were mad at me. El cid, el campeador (talk) 13:32, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I have been trying to police vandalism via the recent changes page. And I have seen people revert multiple edits at once, and was wondering how this can be done, or if it is only available to admins or something like that. Thank you! El cid, el campeador (talk) 13:34, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi El cid, el campeador. There are several ways to revert multiple edits. The basic way is to find the most recent good version of the article (before the vandalism began) and then edit that without changing any content; this effectively overwrites the current version with the older version. If you're a confirmed user, you can enable

rollback rights (which allows you to do the same thing). Yunshui ^雲_水

13:45, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much! That answers my question perfectly. Have a great day. El cid, el campeador (talk) 13:46, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Could somebody find a translation word for constitutionalist in malayalam?I need it to use it in ml:മേഖലകളുടെ_അടിസ്ഥാനത്തിൽ_യുണൈറ്റഡ്_കിങ്ഡം_പാർലമെന്റ്_നിയോജകമണ്ഡലങ്ങളുടെ(1918-1945)_പട്ടിക page.Adithyak1997 (talk) 15:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Adithyak1997 I've taken the liberty of converting the very long and completely indecipherable %-coded url link in your post to a proper Malayalam interwiki link. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for the problem causedAdithyak1997 (talk) 15:35, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Adithyak1997 It's no problem at all. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Does ഭരണഘടനാ വിരുദ്ധത work? I simply put "constitutionalist" into Google Translate, but perhaps you've tried it already. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:52, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I checked that. The problem was that it was regarding the results of election. So I think it is the name of some party. I am not sure whether it will suit the context.Adithyak1997 (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I created a new page 2 days ago and I have edited it/corrected it. How long will it take for the page to be visible immediately it is googled/searched for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adewukehinloni (talk • contribs) 16:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Adewukehinloni and welcome to the Teahouse. A new page includes the "NOINDEX" keyword until it is 30 days old, or has been "patrolled" by an experienced editor. This asks google and other search engines not to index it. DES ^(talk) 16:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Adewukehinloni, the article Kehinde Olorunyomi needs more and better sources cited. and we here at Wikipedia never embed youtube or other videos. We only link to them. And Youtube is often not a reliable source, depending on who posted a video. DES ^(talk) 16:24, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello! I would like to asses pages translated from Romanian in English. However I'd like to know if there any Wikipedia Guidelines in this matter. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks, Justfun23 (talk) 10:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Justfun23. This page may help: Wikipedia:Translation. --S Philbrick(Talk) 16:48, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I am writing an article about an artist myself and several friends are fans of with no connection, but we have been accused that we are part of a connection to the artist because we have relatively new accounts. I'm not sure how I can go about verifying that I have no direct connection to the artist, but regardless the page I appear to have devised seems to meet all requirements - but if it does not, what am I missing? I don't see any blatant promotion for the artist, solely factual statements without biases about the artists career. The article is in my sandbox and I would kindly appreciate any constructive suggestions or editing help.

I have included a draft of the article in my talk page as well as in my sandbox. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cs7809 Thanks! Cs7809 (talk) 09:46, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse

Draft:Gabriel Garzón-Montano? I haven't seen the accusations you mentioned, but I definitely do not see them on the draft page, or on the talk page of the draft or an your talk page for that matter so just go ahead and work on that draft.--S Philbrick(Talk)

17:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Iridescent

17:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Iridescent Thanks for the context.--S Philbrick(Talk)

17:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

There has been a stub about me (David C. Bradley) for around 15 years. For most of these years there has been a message saying "Please help us update this stub." A colleague of mine, not a friend, was asked to update the page--not by me, but by our employer, Daniel Goldin.

His initial post was not dispassionate. An editor, MMarkowski I believe, made substantial and truly constructive changes. Around this time another editor, Theroadislong, began a rapid-fire series of edits, cutting material and citing reasons that often did not apply and have been, on the whole, aggressive.

The main issue seems to be the in the fact that someone I work with wrote the initial update a week or so ago. It's not hard to understand why Wikipedia must be cautious of this sort of thing. But this editor does not appear to have constructive intensions. The writer, Dh8, has responded to every request, but there is no feedback, no reply; just more cuts and summary judgments. Most of the article is now gone, but Theroadislong is still chipping away.

"No references so removed” is the justification this editor uses, over and over, to whittle this article down to nothing. How does one reference his brothers and sisters? The London Science Museum raised an exhibit illustrating my work around the year 2000. Theroadislong wanted references. Dh8 suggested uploading a scan of the invitation to the opening ceremony. No response. And of course that section, describing one of the most important honors received by any neuroscientist, was removed. Recently, my influences were removed--from the "Influences" section. The reason posted by Theroadislong: "NONE of these sources mention bradley so removing."

Where, specifically, did these people fail to mention me? And why were they required to mention me in the first place?

Any just-on-the-scene music act will usually be here on Wikipedia. Any young actress with one film under her belt. Any killer or professional athlete. Most billionaires. Almost none of the great scientists or mathematicians are here. Unless they’re dead; unless you can see a reference to some other publication saying “this person is famous.”

Theroadislong doesn’t think I should have a Wikipedia page. I don’t see how else one can explain this campaign against it. But scientists don’t go on TV; they don’t usually have awards and medals and a fan base. They only have what they’ve accomplished. The editors have removed most of the description of my scientific work, calling it “puffery.” They may not recognize the rarity of having several Nature and Science papers, an Annual Review, or 30 patent submissions. [Note: appcoll.com and justia.com are the references. You have to pay for this so I have them on my web site. Naturally, Theroadislong removed it.]

Dh8 was relieved when told to stop editing. He did everything he was told to do, but it wasn’t making a difference.

Before killing the page altogether, why not contact the few neuroscientists that are listed here. In terms of computational neuroscientists, I could only find Richard A. Andersen and Stephen Grossberg but there may be more. Ask them if I should have a page.

LanceDiamond78 (talk) 03:13, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

WP:COI and propose changes on the article's talk page. Other editors will review your proposed changes and the references you provide and decide if and how to make the changes. No one is going to contact anyone to verify anything. That is not how this works. John from Idegon (talk

) 03:46, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

John from Idegon I think that is a bit harsh. The Teahouse is a perfectly fine place to ask about how to get an article edited, as well as the technical mechanics of editing. True, LanceDiamond78 has a conflict of interest, and he hasn't understood all of Wikipedia's policies and customs. But he appears to be attempting in good faith to share legitimate information.

a few exceptions. However, sources need not be online, and often can be found with a bit of looking. For example, when an award is given, there is usually at least a brief mention in a local newspaper, or in some publication of the awarding body. It is true that we need more of what is written about you than by you, and this makes a problem when the subject is a creative professional, such as a scientist, a writer, a reporter, or an artist, who is well known in a field but does not get written about much. But papers that site your work can help demonstrate that it is significant, rather than the papers of people who influence you. I haven't yet looked at the actual article, or its past versions, so i am speaking in general here. You should know that Theroadislong is an experienced editor here, and has a generally good reputation. I doubt that these edits are in any way malicious. Have you engaged on User talk:Theroadislong or the talk page of the article? DES ^(talk) 05:27, 25 May 2017 (UTC) @John from Idegon: DES ^(talk)

05:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

@

WP:PAY issue now, as "A colleague of mine . . . was asked to update the page . . . by our employer". "Very strongly discouraged" is also not "prevented", but we're getting there :) . Bromley86 (talk

) 10:43, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes,

conflict ofintest, where any editing must be done very carefully, and where the conflict should be very clearly disclosed. Making requests on the talk page would probably be the better procedure in such a case. If no one responds to such requests after several days, attention should be drawn to them via the {{help me

}} template.

LanceDiamond78, I am sorry for the conflicting and possibly confusing advice. Wikipedia has its own policies and customs, and these can be quite complex. DES ^(talk) 18:12, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

If cites are needed and without conflict of interest, how does a page get created for a movie that will not enter the theaters for another week? There is no fan yet to be motivated to create a page for the movie he or she has not seen yet. There can not be that much online or offline information til the movie premieres. A plot description could not be created by someone who is not involved with the movie, for it has not entered the theater as of yet. Nor when a movie is well established, the author of the page who is summarizing the plot is not citing some other source, but giving a description of what he had seen. Sometimes things seem ambiguous here, not trying to be conflagrative but educated. When can you write without cite and when do you have to ? When you mention books an author has written, do you need to cite each book? For such citing can use Amazon.com for example to cite all the books; or should you mix it with Bowker, Library of Congress,Publishers web site, Google Books, etc...

06:01, 30 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salem North Man (talk • contribs)

@Salem North Man: The answer is simple. If the movie has no independent reliable sources it has no Wikipedia article. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

For books, I add links to WorldCat. which includes the Library of Congress and many other US & Canadian libraries, and some in Europe and Australia, and a few elsewhere. It's the most authoritative source, but like any data base, it does contain a small number of errors. Some other language WPs cite the general page for the author, but I cite the book page for every individual book. Amazon in a mail order service, and will include anything someone wants to list from which they can get a commission--I consider it a reliable source for nothing. Its "reviews" in particular are either written by the publisher, the general public, or press agents. (This is not saying anything negative about Amazon; I and everyone I know uses it for the proper purpose of comparing products and buying media and other stuff. Using it beyond its limits is like using WP beyond its limits.

For movies not yet released, see

WP:CRYSTAL--there are often reliable sources for major movies, including information about the production and casting--which in any case should be the basis of the article, rather than the plot. DGG ( talk

) 18:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

This page I created has the URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raktham_-_The_Blood The page does not appear on google searches though. Why is it so? Thanks much. Shepherdson7 (talk) 06:55, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Google simply doesn't know you've created it. Wait some time and let Google find out the new page appeared somewhere in the Internet mega-cloud... --CiaPan (talk) 07:01, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi

WP:Referencing for beginners, and find some WP:Reliable sources to add to the article, then it is more likely to be accepted when it is reviewed. In its present form, it is unlikely ever to appear in a Google search, or to remain in Wikipedia. Dbfirs

07:22, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Shepherdson7 I very strongly advise you to move the page to Draft-space immediately because in its current condition in Mainspace it is at risk of being deleted without notice. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:39, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of moving the page to Draft:Raktham - The Blood, in order to avoid its deletion. Once you have added references, Shepherdson7, you can use the button at the top of the page to submit it for review. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:05, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey guys,

I have a couple questions.

1) How do I know if my suggested edits have been approved?

2) I have been attempting to recode reference links for footnotes, but unless their is red indicating a dead link etc, I do not know how to identify them.

Thanks,

Thom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thom ryan (talk • contribs) 12:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Thom ryan and welcome to the Teahouse. Except on a few pages using "pending changes" protection, all edits are approved and visible at once. Or rather no "approval" is needed.

Could you explain a bit more what problem you are having with footnotes? DES ^(talk) 17:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me

Just in terms of locating what broken links to focus on and target.

20:38, 30 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thom ryan (talk • contribs)

Ah I see, Thom ryan. Unfortunately with external links (including those used in source citations) the only way to know if a link is currently broken is to try it. At least that is the only way that I know of. You can also look for citations where the bibliographic data (author, publisher, date, work, etc) is missing or incomplete, and add any missing data that can be determined. DES ^(talk) 21:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

by the way, please sign talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~). The software will convert this into a link to your user page, and a timestamp, or a customized signature if you have set one up. See

WP:SIG for details. DES ^(talk)

21:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Super ninja2. In that article and not necessarily others, World War I#Footnotes explains a detail while World War I#Notes gives sources (except notes 2 and 3 which should maybe be footnotes). You may have to click "[show]" in the infobox for the links on "^" at Footnotes to work. See more at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#Notes and references. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I created the article

Maybe you're just seeing a cached version of the page? On the category page for Hamburg U-Bahn stations, the station link is blue, and clicking it brings me to the article, not the edit page. Hope this helps. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 19:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, DraconicDark, and welcome to the Teahouse. It seems to be working for me now. Sometiems it takes some time for changes in tempaltes to propagate to all articles involved. DES ^(talk) 19:42, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. The issue seems to have fixed itself, although to me, the link still appears red. DraconicDark (talk) 19:49, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Buckhorn (Hamburg U-Bahn station) is bluise, as I see it. DES ^(talk)

21:43, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

DraconicDark, sometimes a takes a while for changes to filter through to templates and the like. One way to be sure that the change has actually happened is to purge the template page. Press Edit, then change the end of the url from action=edit to action=purge and hit return; click the blue "Yes" button on the next page, and you should get a fully updated view of the template. If the link is still red, there's probably a typo somewhere (in the template, in the page title …). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. The link no longer appears red. DraconicDark (talk) 00:52, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello! I was trying to create a page about myself. When I try to click "save" nothing happens. Any suggestions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mossboss254 (talk • contribs) 00:41, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

What was the page titled? Also, creating pages about yourself or something you're affiliated with is highly discouraged -- see

WP:COI. Ian.thomson (talk

) 00:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Let me re-word this: I was trying to create my user page and can't click "save." I tried on my tablet and my computer and nothing works. Mossboss254 (talk) 00:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)Mossboss254— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mossboss254 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Your user page is User:Mossboss254. Is that the page where you clicked save? Did you write something first? A page must have content to be created on the first click. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:44, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I wrote a few sentences just to start out. Nothing. Mossboss254 (talk) 00:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)Mossboss254

I have created User:Mossboss254. I don't know why it failed for you. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:51, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. I can edit it and save it now. Mossboss254 (talk) 00:54, 31 May 2017 (UTC)Mossboss254