Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 894

This is an current talk page .

How can I get my draft to be accepted despite the fact there arent enough sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwpom (talk • contribs) 01:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Cwpom: I will assume the article in question is Draft:Chaleb Pommells. The first thing to do is to read the comments the reviewer (SamHolt6) left when it was declined. There were two main problems: the article does not establish that the subject is notable (in Wikipedia's special meaning of that term), and the tone of the article reads more like an advertisement. Read through the links provided by the reviewer to understand these issues, and if you have specific questions about how to address them after that then please come back here are ask. --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:31, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Can you define what specifically makes it seem like an ad because the intention is to be a bio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwpom (talk • contribs) 01:48, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps one thing that makes the draft seem like an ad is that it talks about a 14-year-old middle-schooler's "career." In four years he may be eligible to run for the legislature; if he is elected then, it will be time to start talking about a career. —teb728 t c 05:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@

notable enough for an article. —teb728 t c

04:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I hope what I have written above does not come across as harsh,

David Hogg

at 17 as a result of his activism following the MSD shooting.) Wikipedia is looking for the kind of subjects that they write whole articles about in newspapers and magazines. Have The Miami Herald or the Sun-Sentinel written articles about Chaleb? (They certainly have written about Malala and David.)

Your draft was nicely written for a first article: I hope you will accept that our standard of acceptance is significant coverage in independent reliable sources, and devote your talents to such subjects. —teb728 t c 09:39, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

There is an article in the sv.wikipedia (Swedish, right?) I would like to update and add to the English wikipedia. The Swedish version is at https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slator_Lake. About a month ago I searched for Slator Lake and was taken to the Swedish page. That search now fails.

Anyway, can I just start an English article with the same name as a Swedish article, or do I need permission?

Thanks brian.slator Brian.slator (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

WP:AFC process. --ColinFine (talk

) 23:30, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

@Brian.slator: You may wonder why the Swedish Wikipedia but not the English has an article about a small Canadian lake. Millions of Swedish articles were created by Lsjbot, an automated Wikipedia article-creating program by a Swedish editor. The article has never been edited by a human. The English Wikipedia has different policies and far less bot creations. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:58, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I have been seeing a lot of online references that use insecure http. So I was wondering if it's okay to edit the links from http to https. Thanks--

Hi SharabSalam. https is preferred per Help:Link#http: and https:. Check that it works before changing. Some sites only allow http. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!--

talk

) 09:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

let me know exact perpose of this page..? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Umeshkumar9540 (talk • contribs) 09:17, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@

new user tutorial(click those words to get there) to help you learn about Wikipedia. Again, welcome. 331dot (talk

) 09:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Also, you put "Aaradhya Enterprises, karad. FMCG Distributor firm in karad city." on your User page. The purpose of a User page is to explain a bit about yourself and your intentions as a Wikipedia editor. It is not a social media page for you or your business. See WP:User pages. David notMD (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

(R38R32R10MTAOTT (talk) 11:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC))

Please see

this help guide for more information. I will also post some info on your talk page. Can you provide us with more context? RhinosF1 (talk

) 12:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Upload Wizard may be what you're after. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I came across certain people that are famous in Sri Lanka. But there is no wikipedia page for them. How do I measure their notability? and why is notability not measured at all for certain people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luewia (talk • contribs) 15:51, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Luewia, and welcome to the Teahouse. Notability (as Wikipedia uses the word) is fairly well defined (though applying the definition isn't always clear-cut). Please see Notability. In most cases it depends on whether several people, unconnected with the subject, have chosen to write at some length about the subject and been published in reliable places (places which have a reputation for editorial control and fact checking). The sources do not have to be in English, or online, though it is easier for editors to check them if they are. Neither fame, popularity, importance, or influence, necessarily makes a subject notable in Wikipedia terms, though of course there is some correlation. --ColinFine (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I was wondering when creating a table on a page, how to center align the content. Also, how do you add coloring to the boxes and their text as well?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackhawks1998 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I tried to add a photo to a page, however, instead it was created as a solo link. I cannot find an undo, remove, delete button.. Help please — Preceding unsigned comment added by REA79 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

REA79, I added the image for you WelpThatWorked (talk) 01:44, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

CSD F11: "The mere fact fact it is a "publicity photo" does not imply it is in the public domain, and you have not provided the actual source you got this from, so no way to check whether the source actually provides a release into the public domain or licenses it as such (a TinEye search was not frutiful)". It may be that it is, in fact, in the public domain, but the information you provided at the image page was insufficent to check and implied a possible misunderstanding of what makes something public domain. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk

) 03:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I want to add the photo to the wiki profile. Instead, I somehow loaded it as an individual photo not on his page. I have no idea how to delete the photo and add it to his wiki profile.. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by REA79 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Dear all,

I created an article about an Austrian physician (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Harald_Stossier). When I submitted the draft for review it was declined with the note: "I'm inclined to think notable but sourcing needs to be improved vastly."

Since all statements are referenced by at least one source, and in my opinion all sources are reliable according to the wiki guidelines my question would be: Do I need to add more sources, or are the included sources questionable?

Thanks for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yet another IT guy (talk • contribs) 14:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

In general, it's better to take up such a question with the editor who declined the draft, Yet another IT guy, but looking at Draft:Harald Stossier, I can see that, while the sources are probably reliable, not a single one of them is independent of Stossier. Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the subject of an article says about themselves, or what their employer, organisation, or associates say about them: an article should be almost entirely based on what people who have no connection with the subject have written about them. --ColinFine (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Wikipedia:Identifying and using independent sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

18:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Wise to do so, as that confirms which date the ref has been confirmed as supporting the text. The access date gives a good guide as to where to look for an archive version if necessary. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:34, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Also,

Syntaxlord, "The date the article was published" is not very meaningful. A Wikipedia article is never finished: there's nothing special about the date when it was first created, and in any case, a particular reference might have been added much later. --ColinFine (talk

) 15:46, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Syntaxlord was referring to the date that the article used as a reliable source was first published, not the date the Wikipedia article was first published. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

18:04, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 18:48, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Got it. Sorry for my misunderstanding. --ColinFine (talk) 20:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

According to ShiroBrawl, the fever theme was also used on Puyopuyo Tetris, even though Sega owns Nintendo's intellectual properties/licensed rights. I DON'T KNOW WHY IF SEGA DID ON PURPOSE?

Hello,

Apollo C. Quiboloy fans. What is your question about editing Wikipedia? That is the only kind of question appropriate here. It's possible you might get somebody interested enough to answer you if you post your question at Reference desk/Entertainment. --ColinFine (talk

) 20:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Mark Stevens England, UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.252.73 (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you don't feel comfortable making such an edit yourself, you should post on the article talk page(Talk:Tom Kenny) so that editors that follow that article see it and may be able to help you. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

As an example, is it a case of self-published reference to use census data from the website of the Ministry of Municipal affairs, Regions and Land Management of Québec to reference the number of inhabitants of the towns of Rimouski, Matane and Rivière-du-Loup in the article Bas-Saint-Laurent? The guideline on this is confusing for me. Sadenar40000 (talk) 20:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@

WP:NPLACE. _signed, Rosguill ^talk

20:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guestofaguest (talk • contribs) 22:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Guestofaguest, click the pencil symbol in the editor and it should come up with a menu letting you switch to visual editing. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Guestofaguest. Adding to what Emir of Wikipedia has helpfully stated, if you go to your Preference settings, and then the 'Editing' Tab, you can change how the two different editing tools are offered to you. Personally, I think it's far better to always be offered both editor tabs, but you can choose whether it remembers (and offers you) your last-used editor. I hope you find this helpful. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I've been doing edits for a few months and have a question about an article that always bothers me.

Without getting too far into it, the wiki title of the article that follows is incorrect !

Catherine Middleton/Kate Middleton/Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine,_Duchess_of_Cambridge

The format of her title as "Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge" is the one that would be used if she was the divorced former wife of a Duke. (see Sarah, Duchess of York below). This rule is explained in section 3.3 of the wiki article "British Princess" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_princess . She is properly titled Her Royal Highness, The Duchess of Cambridge (having a The in one's name is very important in british royalty !) therefore the article should be titled "The Duchess of Cambridge". It would not matter so much if the style chosen for the title were not one that specifically suggests the woman is divorced.

For instance, the wiki article on the divorced wife of Prince Andrew of York is correctly titled "Sarah, Duchess of York" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah,_Duchess_of_York

Best source possible: the official website of the Royal Family have titled their page about her "The Duchess of Cambridge" ^[1]

I do see that there has been a good deal of discussion of this on the Talk page, but I'm unclear how to bring the topic back up on the Talk page, and on who has the power to unlock the article title. So - how do I make this change happen, or at least re-open the discussion? Who do I have to communicate with ? The page is semi-protected. LigaGila (talk) 23:18, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

Duchess of Cambridge which discusses the title and the three women known that way. Therefore, her first name is added to the biography of the current duchess, to disambiguate the person from the title. This was a very controversial article naming decision at the time of the marriage, and you really ought to read the entire lengthy discussion before trying to reopen the matter. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

23:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328 I did read the whole discussion there, but it just peters out with no clear decision, or even a clue as to who can make the decision (ie has access to editing the title field). Can you tell me who is the "owner" of the page (please excuse as I suspect that isn't the correct term to use)

LigaGila (talk) 23:38, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

You are correct that there is no "owner" and we have no such concept on Wikipedia. The article is semi-protected, which means it can only be edited by accounts over four days old and with over 20 edits. You have 19 edits so you are very close. The article is also move protected which means only an administrator can change the title. No sane adminstrator would change the title except to implement a clearcut consensus on the article talk page. You are welcome to start a new discussion on the talk page, but I have a very strong hunch that there will not be an agreement to change the article title. It was discussed extensively by many people in the talk page archives. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:53, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@

WP:AUTOCONFIRM with an appropriate reference? --David Biddulph (talk

) 02:38, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

David Biddulph, I will blame my upcoming 67th birthday for my memory lapse. You are correct. The standard is four days and ten edits. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:45, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

moving the article (but in the light of what Cullen says, nobody should move that one without achieving consensus on the move). --ColinFine (talk) 23:47, 20 January 2019 (UTC) --ColinFine (talk

) 23:48, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I understand now that consensus must be achieved, so I'll do some further research to make a convincing argument for such. Thanks for the advice Cullen328 and ColinFine! -- LigaGila (talk) 02:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

What can I do if nobody is going to add a pic for G. T. Bynum? Nobody has responded to that IP’s request and there is no pic for a famous mayor. Can you find one please? I don’t want to do copyright. Thanks! 2600:387:1:809:0:0:0:A3 (talk) 23:43, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

A photo is nice to have but not at all necessary. If you feel it is important, you could ask his office to provide a photo as described at

WP:COPYREQ, or you could go to Tulsa and take photo yourself. —teb728 t c

03:56, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Anyone up for doing an entry about this great garage band? facebook.com/pebbles.web/— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sambapaannex (talk • contribs) 20:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@

reliable sources, sources not associated with the band at all, for a band to merit an article. YouTube videos, which anyone can post, don't count. It doesn't matter if this band's videos have 10,000 views or 10 million views, if no independent sources write about them, they do not merit an article. 331dot (talk

) 20:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@Sambapaannex: There is actually an entire (humourous) essay on this topic - Wikipedia:No one cares about your garage band. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 23:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

WP:ELNEVER. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 06:23, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi I have twice removed an outdated table from the Perth College page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perth_College_(Western_Australia)), however, my amendment has been overridden by someone else. Perth College do not wish to highlight ATAR results in this way and hence we have not updated the table for the past couple of years. As a result, it is now very much out of date. Can you advise what our options are. Many thanks. Ctrlaltk (talk) 08:04, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

WP:Paid status? You need to be aware that the article belongs to Wikipedia, not to the College. Wikipedia would welcome an updated table, but it is other Wikipedia editors not involved with the College who will decide what content is appropriate for the article. It would be best if you express your concerns on the talk page of the article where you can discuss the changes with other editors. Dbfirs

08:13, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

• Amal International School
• Jennings International School
• Lexicon International School Kandy
• Regent International College, Gampaha
• Vision International School

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Luewia (talk • contribs) 09:13, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't know why you say "no one seems to have challenged". Each of them is tagged, as far as i can see. THere is advice at WP:Notability (high schools). --David Biddulph (talk) 09:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I've been working on the

Based on Special:WhatLinksHere every page except the following should change from Unisound --> Unisound Studios.

The ones that link correctly are:

• List of unicorn startup companies
• Unisound Studios

As there are over 50 album pages, what would be the best course of action to update (or request an update) to these links?

Thanks :)

Redwards21 (talk) 08:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Post the job on

WP:AWB/Tasks - X201 (talk

) 09:31, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Have posted there, thanks @X201. Redwards21 (talk) 10:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi I've just seen that this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormsley_Park refers to "Wormsley Park" but this should in fact be just "Wormsley" - how do you go about changing this? Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wormsley1086 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

It is shown as Wormsley Park on the Ordnance Survey maps. If you think that is wrong I suggest you start a discussion on the

reliable source.--Shantavira|^{feed me}

15:47, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia, can anyone please give me any ideas how to contribute? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thabiso Mabaso (talk • contribs) 10:14, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome,

The Wikipedia Adventure, which walks you through different editing tasks to familiarize you with editing on Wikipedia. Schazjmd (talk

) 15:57, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspneter (talk • contribs) 13:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

The companies which are allowed to have a Wikipedia article are those which meet the criteria at

promotional was your user page User:Aspneter, so you should read the purpose of a user page at WP:user pages. --David Biddulph (talk

) 13:33, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I see, OK the rules are there for a reason I believe. Thank you for clarifying — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspneter (talk • contribs) 13:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

... and just to clarify ... no company "has" a page here in the sense that they in any way own or control the page, but if the company is notable then there might be an article about them, preferably written by someone unconnected with the company and based on what other unconnected WP:Reliable sources have written. Dbfirs 17:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I edited a page on Jan. 11 and its not updated. Any ideas on why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:3C8:200:C3B:94EA:6E20:5394:6658 (talk) 16:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

What page? David notMD (talk) 16:38, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, IP user. We can't give you any definite answer without knowing what page, as David notMD says. But I can suggest some possible reasons. One is that you might not have saved your edit: many users have been confused that the button that used to be called "save" is now called "publish". Another is that your edit may have gone in, but been reverted by a bot or another editor, because it didn't appear constructive (a very common case is when people add information without citing a source). If you look at the History of the article, you should see whether anybody reverted your edit, and they should have left a summary explaining why.

If your edit did get reverted, and you still want to apply it, you should open a discussion about it on the article's Talk page before you try and edit again. --ColinFine (talk) 18:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I am creating my first page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ramon_Rivas_Musical_Artist_Audio_Engineer#External_links but I cannot find a good third party source for an indie album. I can only find it on sales sites like "spotify". Any suggestions would be welcome. Is there an "Allmusic" type site for Indie music? Wanderingfreeman (talk) 18:25, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

significant coverage in independent sources, which is the standard that needs to be met for an article to be published without risk of subsequent deletion. Are there any other newspaper or magazine profiles of him? Cordless Larry (talk

) 19:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hey I’ve written a post titled ‘Fredrikson stallard’ but it has neither been verified or reviewed - could someone please help? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paradise lost 90 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Paradise lost 90: You asked this a couple of days ago and received a response here, which still applies. (I don't see how that draft could realistically be accepted, I'm afraid - it is almost entirely promotional, and a lot of the information is unsourced. Some of the text that has a reference isn't actually supported by the source either, which is also problematic. But it will be up to the reviewing editor.) --bonadea contributions talk 18:58, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I have declined the draft again as it still reads like an advert, it is stuffed full of marketing trumpery….“pushed the boundaries of art and design”, “famous 'Momentum' collection”, “famous London gallerist being pivotal to their meteoric rise”, “exhibit inside the grand reception at The Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park”, “packaged in a weighty rock glass with a luxurious patinated brass”’ “driving a program of creative collaborations”, “often collaborate with leading commercial brands”, “most tangible expression of contemporary design”, “filled with the apparatus of a cutting-edge studio”, “starting a conversation between their work and the observer”, “industrially crafted and yet emotionally engaging” etc etc. none of which is the neutral tone which we expect to see in an encyclopedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 20:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Can someone please tell me how to start? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100D:B023:3231:F45A:F9CE:D0D9:4A74 (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:NOTABLE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk

) 20:58, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

My article submission can be found here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mark_Zunino

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakkarysmith (talk • contribs) 22:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@

WP:RS for information on what reliable sources are, but in short, reliable sources have a reputation for editorial control and fact checking. Those are usually media outlets like newspapers, but can be other forms of sources. IMDB is not a reliable source as it is user-editable. 331dot (talk

) 22:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello. How do I change the name of the wiki article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Author Kharisma (talk • contribs) 23:10, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse

WP:MOVE it for you. BTW, if you are thinking of moving your draft to article space, it is not ready for that yet. —teb728 t c

23:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Someone please change the info on the MLK Day page, its extremely inappropriate!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C52:7A00:1902:9122:13C2:76B7:6E81 (talk) 00:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello IP and welcome to the Teahouse. The image has been removed, and the user blocked. You can report vandalism quickly here:

Talk: Contribs

) 00:33, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't know where to read about it. I just received a message but I don't understand how read it. It says: There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. How do I view this? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F2C0:E006:34:1124:5606:3E04:189A (talk) 01:00, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

The Administrator's noticeboard is

here but Moxy removed the discussion. Schazjmd (talk

) 01:07, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I am creating an article about a celebrity in Africa. How can I improve the article and to make it appear on google. Vasiliades

Welcome to the Teahouse Vasiliades, your article was speedily deleted because it did not indicate why he is important enough to have an article in an encyclopedia. —teb728 t c 01:24, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Can someone help me with this Articalthat I have Created I dont understand whats wrong with it thanks God Bless--Amanda.useta (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse

notability of the school with reference significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Worse yet it said hardly anything about the school. —teb728 t c

01:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

after 1 or 2 edit it is not accepting another edit in any case of urgent how can we edit our wiki and how can we upload a picture of the particular Im not sure about WIKI — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chamakura raju (talk • contribs) 06:29, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm concerned about whether you're involved with the subject which would mean you need to read the

getting started guide. RhinosF1 (talk

) 06:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello Chamakura raju I'm sorry to say that you don't seem able to communicate well in English. Are you aware that there is a Telugu Wikipedia (and several other Indic Wikipedias). You might be more comfortable writing there. —teb728 t c 07:01, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I disagree with teb728's comment. People who want to write in the English language Wikipedia are expected to be competent, but not sent away. In this instance looks like the draft is at User:Chamakura raju/sandbox and may be autobiographical and is clearly not ready to be proposed for review. David notMD (talk) 11:03, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi David notMD, I didn't tell the OP they were unwelcome here: I just suggested another outlet they might not have been aware of. I checked their global contribuions, and they were only on en-wiki. Did you think they were competent in English? Their sandbox was not just unready for review: to me it was only about half-comprehensible. —teb728 t c 02:10, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm new to Wikipedia writing and am trying to understand what became of an article I submitted on 16 December 2018. Initially, there was a question raised about a photo that I included then the photo was reinstated after I sent additional information. However, I am wondering if I did something else incorrectly as I have not seen any followup. It may just be due to the huge backlog of submissions awaiting volunteer editors but if it is an issue relating to how the article was written or submitted I would like to fix it ASAP. The article concerns a gentleman who is now 95 and we were hoping to be able to post the information while he was still alive and could answer questions if needed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Shosh2/sandbox/Louis_Rosenblum

Thanks so much for any advice that can be offered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shosh2 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Articles for Creation. If you wish to do that, simply add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article and save your changes by clicking the big blue 'Publish changes' button. Unfortunately, this name tends to confuse new editors who sometimes think it means a page is put forward for inclusion in the main part of Wikipedia. (We are unable to do anything about this recent global name-change, sorry). There is a long backlog of articles awaiting review, so this can take some time. You are well-advised to remove anything from the article which cannot be verified from published sources. The "Early life" section, for example, is completely unreferenced, and this isn't OK. Maybe Mr Rosenblum can point you towards sources that talk about his early life. What we don't accept is Mr Rosenblum's own words about himself. Everything here has to be provable from sources that someone in a library or on the other side of the world can check out for themselves. "If in doubt, leave it out". You might also wish to reinsert the previously deleted image you referred to. Hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk

) 03:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I made a couple of suggestions for edits to pages that I figured should be discussed first. What is a reasonable amount of time to wait before I change the article? No one has responded to my comments, although it has only been 5 days. Thanks! CLPond (talk) 04:09, 22 January 2019 (UTC)CLPond

Hi

WikiProject talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 04:30, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Mennie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drycontext (talk • contribs) 23:26, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

notability of the subject, without copying the words used—and when you are finished, adding {{subst:submit}} to the draft to resubmit it for review. Be aware that the standards I referred to, citing sources and the like, are what's needed to write and article that will "stick". If the types of sources I mentioned don't exist, then no proper article will be possible. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk

) 23:51, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Drycontext, I took a look at the versions of your draft, and you did something in this edit that changed your article from "draft" to "submitted for review". So, a reviewer looked at it and declined it. You have to be very careful not to move or change anything in that template until you're ready to submit your article for review. You can check Preview to make sure the templated review message continues to show as "draft". Schazjmd (talk) 00:06, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: The AfC rejection template is a new feature, different from a decline, that is meant to discourage resubmissions. CoolSkittle (talk) 05:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

hi. can i start a page on a music artist with new info updates? ty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.88.108 (talk) 06:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi IP 60.241.88.108. If an article about the artist already exists, then you might be able to add this new information to that article yourself per

Wikipedia:Your first article for some general advice on how to write articles. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 07:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

[This Section] shows what I'm talking about. As I learn to use/edit Wikipedia, certain details become more important to me, and in this case it's about how to structure the text I've written so that it's beginning and end are clearly delineated.

I've learned to use the full colons to indent the beginning of the text to show that it's in response to the one immediately "out dented" above it, and so now the ending of the text I've posted is an issue. I don't like to "sign" (with the 4 tildes) at the very end of a line of text; particularly if that causes the signature to get hung at the right side of the page. So what I've learned to do is use two carriage returns and enough colons to throw the signature part one line below the text I've posted, and indented to the same "level" as what I've posted. I like this because it clearly shows the end of my text, which then implies that anything after that, is the beginning of someone else's, which I think is a good thing since sometimes people just throw their text in any old way and sometimes it's hard to see where one person's texts ends, and another person's begins.

I'm posting this here to make certain that this isn't going to be a problem. There's an extra line between the text and the signature, and it's blank. Maybe someone will have a problem with that, and then I'll hear all about it. Better to get ahead of this potential problem and ask the question. Also, in a more general sense are there any policies or conventions that regulate the syntax of posts/text in the "Discussions" that I (or anyone else) should know about?

Tym Whittier (talk) 01:15, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

WP:SIGAPP states not to add an extra line by means of the break command ( <br />). I would simply urge you to follow the convention that virtually all editors follow, irrespective of whether you like it. You have, yourself, also been prone to missing out the indent when you sign in that way, as you can see on this discussion

on your own Talk Page, and that is always going to cause confusion, especially in complex discussions.

I also note that in our "Missing Manual" we have this very clear advice: "Don't start a new line or paragraph when you sign your comments. At the end of the body of your comment, just add a space or two, or a dash or two, or both, for separation, and then add the four tildes. (Extra lines for your signature just take up space on a page, and adding them is the mark of an inexperienced user.)"

Regarding syntax and guidelines, I'd suggest you browse through: Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, Help:Talk pages and Wikipedia:Talk page layout. Does this give you the answer you sought? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:38, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

That's good advice, and the fact that I've messed up the formatting on some of the things I've posted is a primary reason why I'm paying attention to it now; trying to refine "the Method" I'm going to use.Tym Whittier (talk) 07:52, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello moderator and Wikipedia community,

I have used Wikipedia for most of my adult life. It is a wonderful resource and I love that it is a not-for-profit organization (and I have personally contributed many times over the years to keep it that way).

I am writing to ask about the appropriateness of building an article for myself. In addition to my day job as a banker for government and not-for-profit organizations, I am an independent author. I published my first book in 2017 - a sci-fi novel: Leadership, Heaven and Hell; and a Cybersentient Hero. Then, this past August, I decided to publish my memoir: The Inexplicable Survival of a Happily Fallible Child. (I had actually written the memoir before the sci-fi novel but published it after.)

The memoir has been picked up by a couple of major retailers: Barnes and Noble and Thriftbooks.com

I am happy these retailers found my book and are offering it for sale, but I'm unsure how they found it. (To my best knowledge, at this point, no retailer carries my sci-fi novel.)

I share this information because I believe it may be a contributing factor to my dilemma. I have been told by friends and family that they've found incorrect information on the internet about me and/or my book. For instance, if you search my book name under Google, you'll find on the right side of the page that one of my brothers and one of my sisters are listed as the author. If you click on the link, another sister is listed as a co-author. (I love all my siblings dearly and I couldn't have written the book without their input, but I am the one who wrote the book.) There are other, frankly, wacky, articles about my book out on the internet with all sorts of incorrect information.

A friend suggested I create my own Wikipedia page because that is where much of the information gathered within the internet is pulled from. I am asking if that would be appropriate.

For reference, if you search my Goodreads.com author profile. It is accurate about my books and who I am.

I attempted to include links for Barnes and Noble, Thriftbooks.com, Google search and Goodreads.com but I received error messages that one or more are listed on Wikipedia's blacklist, so I removed them all. I apologize.

I very much appreciate your time and look forward to hearing back from you.

Sincerely,

Gary C. Mele, Jr. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garycmelejr (talk • contribs) 15:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I would advise against it, you can request articles at

WP:COI. RhinosF1 (talk

) 15:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

You will find advice against, at WP:autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:39, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Garycmelejr. Just a tip about that Google information panel: there's a "Feedback" link beneath it that you can use to request corrections. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

hey everybody, I working now for more than a week on my first article to be published. Unfortunately it always gets rejected as it sounds apparently like an advertisement. Of course, I do not want it to sound like it. So I edited several times and orientated it to other similar articles. But it still hasn't been accepted yet. Therefore it would be great, if someone could have a look at it and give me some advises on how to improve the article. I have already looked at all the standardized wikipedia help sites and tried to implement their advises. The link is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eclipse_Theia Thanks in advance ChristinFrohne (talk) 07:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello

editorializing. What you should be aiming for is wording that both its supporters and its detractors would find accurate: neutral statements of documented facts about the software, not evaluative words and slanted claims. (I am not disputing the claims, just saying that they are inappropriate in an Encyclopaedia). --ColinFine (talk

) 09:57, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

ColinFine thank you very much for your feedback. Now I know how to edit the article. ChristinFrohne (talk) 10:25, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

ColinFine I have made some changes to the article. Could you have another look at it? Thanks in advance ChristinFrohne (talk) 08:49, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, ChristinFrohne, I think the tone is much improved. Be aware that I haven't done a formal review (I am not a regular reviewer for AFC), but I think it is worth your resubmitting it. --ColinFine (talk) 08:57, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi - I am trying to create my first Wikipedia entry for my department at The University of Sheffield - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:School_of_Health_and_Related_Research I'm aware of academic boostering and am trying to create an objective, informative page about our esteemed department and building as part of the wider university page. I have other information to add, including links to other Wikipedia entries relating to some of our previous academics. Before I went too far I thought I would start basic and see whether I could get it accepted before expanding too quickly. I got the message below and don't know how to act upon it - apologies for not understanding, I'm keen to learn and do this properly. Any advice would be greatly appreciated - thanks, Andy

Welcome to the Articles for creation help desk! If the white boxes below are empty, please complete the following, otherwise skip to 2. below: First, copy and paste the following code in the header bar: 17:23:56, 21 January 2019 review of submission by Scharrlib Then, copy and paste this code in the big input box below that:

• talk · contribs
  )
  • No draft specified!

Give it up.

WP:PAID. Jannik Schwaß (talk

) 20:30, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,

written about extensively in independent sources. Cordless Larry (talk

) 10:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Here is my page's link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ajeet_Kumar — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReelingMedia (talk • contribs) 10:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi ReelingMedia.

In regards to how long it takes for a Draft Page to become approved, that depends on how many articles are waiting the queue. To start the process, place {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article.

As for creating a new page, yes, that will count towards the edit count needed to become auto-confirmed.

However, I would like to ask a few questions about the article. First, it has a section at the top dating from 2010 asking for additional citations. Why did you include that? Second, I am not sure that Ajeet Kumar is sufficiently notable for inclusion on Wikipedia at the present time. While the article has a decent collection of sources, none of them include more than a passing reference to the subject, which is not sufficient for proving notability. Do you have additional sources that focus on the individual specifically?

Finally, I note that your name, ReelingMedia, has a tenuous link with the individual in question. If I am barking up the wrong tree, then I apologize, but you may wish to read

this

on detailing with any potential conflict of interest.

Before I go, I would just like to add - Welcome to Wikipedia!

--

(talk)

10:44, 22 January 2019 (UTC)