Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 944

Archive 940

←

Archive 942

Archive 943

Archive 944

Archive 945

Archive 946

→

Archive 950

Amendments needed to entries on Desmond Patrick Costello and Ian Milner

I have recently replaced earlier versions of these two entries. The new entry on Costello needs some tidying up. The new entry on Milner attracted a warning about a self-publishing house called iUniverse, from which I quoted a book by Peter Hruby (who is not me and whom I do not know). The book contains many references and sources and I am satisfied that it is genuine. That entry too could do with some tidying-up, which is beyond my limited skills. Even getting the new entries on was a minor miracle! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mertonabbbey (talk • contribs) 16:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for your contribution. I'm sorry but your edit on the Costello article is not very good--"some tidying up" is an understatement. It doesn't have proper formatting and, worse, I can't tell what source is supposed to verify what piece of information. I wish you had made smaller edits. Drmies (talk) 16:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Help please!

I just created an article for Judith Schwarz but intended to create a draft article. Can you help me to move this article into a draft please! Sorry, still new and made a mistake....LorriBrown (talk) 16:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

 Done - I think you should have been able to move it yourself, see WP:move. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay David Biddulph & thank you for moving it! I'll read up on that. :-) LorriBrown (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Entries on Desmond Patrick Costello and Ian Milner

Sorry I failed to sign my name on the previous entry: Mertonabbbey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mertonabbbey (talk • contribs) 16:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Mertonabbbey, to sign your posts, type four tildes like this: ~~~~ at the end; it will produce this: valereee (talk) 17:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

How do you move a picture from Wikimedia or Wikicommons or whatever it’s called to Wikipedia?

Wikipedia - sit down with a cuppa, and be prepared to read the help pages.

So yah, that’s my question — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hee hee hooooo (talk • contribs) 12:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Hee hee hooooo: Welcome to the Teahouse. We don't move images into Wikipedia from Wikimedia Commons, as such, but we can go to Commons, click the relevant 'W' icon just above the image to use the file on Wikipedia, and then copy & paste the offered text into an article or user page -just as I've done here. See WP:Wikimedia Commons for more help and guidance on this topic. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Hee hee hooooo. A picture at Wikimedia Commons can be used in Wikipedia with exactly the same syntax so there is rarely reason to move it unless it's about to be deleted at Commons for copyright reasons but can be allowed as fair use in a Wikipedia article. The usual method is to just upload it like a new file. Which picture do you have in mind? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

How do you respond to something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hee hee hooooo (talk • contribs) 13:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Hee hee hooooo: Like what you just did, but use colons (:::::::::::::::::::::: <- these) to indent as Nick and I have done. Add one colon to the amount the last person used. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 18:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

adding a photo to a personal profile

This is about a wikipedia page on myself. While the contents are accurate, I think it is necessary to add a current photograph.. Reason is that Google gives photo of another person with the same name when you do a general search and this leads to many other websites also using the incorrect photo. If we can add the correct photo to the wikipedia profile this problem should get sorted out to a large extent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arvind2015 (talk • contribs) 10:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Arvind2015: Welcome to the Teahouse. I can appreciate your concerns. Although you are already aware of your Conflict of Interest in editing an article about yourself, you may certainly upload a photo of yourself, providing you definitely own the copyright and are happy for it to be licenced for use here and elsewhere. So avoid using any official photos that a government photographer might have taken of you as you will probably not have the right to release it for use. (A picture you have taken using a tripod and self-timer is ideal). Here is a link to help you upload and release your photo to Wikimedia Commons, which may then be inserted into the article about you. I would ask, please, that you do declare your connection to the article - and you do this on your userpage, as explained at WP:COI. Do come back and let us know how you get on, or if you need further help. Regards from very soggy Spain, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:54, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Shantavira, Arvind2015's post indicates that they already understand this. --ColinFine (talk) 20:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

revising and resubmitting a draft

Hi! I recently drafted my first Wikipedia entry and it was rejected so I revised according to the suggestions and I think I resubmitted it, but it does not look the same (the page did not have the same confirmation that it was under review) as when I submitted the first draft. Would someone be able to confirm that "Draft: Duncan Ryuken Williams" is in line to be reviewed? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janehisa (talk • contribs) 2019-04-22T18:34:55 (UTC)

Hello, Janehisa. You had not submitted Draft:Duncan Ryūken Williams for review. I have added a header so that you can do so when you think it is ready. I don't advise you to do so yet: the section headings are not properly formatted, and (more seriously) nor are the citations. Please read Referencing for beginners.

I can't work out how you created the draft: your edit summary, and the comment above, indicate that you changed it from a previous draft, but both its history and your own contribution history show that there has only been a single edit to create it (before mine). I guess you must have saved the text of the deleted draft, and created a new draft with it; but if that was deleted because it was a copyright infringement, then it is going to take more than "revising" to avoid that problem.

According to PAID, you should put disclosures on the (draft) article's talk page, and on your own user page: at present you have done so on your own user talk page, which is not the right place.

Finally, in talk and discussion pages (such as this one) please sign any contributions with four tildes (~~~~): I had to go looking in the history of this page to find who you were. It's also helpful to Wikilink the page you are referring to: if you had said [[Draft:Duncan Ryūken Williams]], it would display as Draft:Duncan Ryūken Williams, and I could have gone straight to it. In fact, you need to Wikilink some appropriate words in the draft as well. --ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

"Edit War" Help

I was editing Chinese Red Army, and I removed irrelevant clutter and redundant information. (It was two tables listing Organization and the Many Armies of CRA. [| See Here]

The 'copy editing' tag was removed (not by me) after I removed the tables and redid the paragraphs, and I was happy with my work.

Unfortunately, an IP address reverted my changes back to the previous edits with the redundant information. I was agitated by this, and undid his revisions. A few days later, a user "Kdl-sunday" reverted my changes again. I undid his reversions and looked up what I could do. I found the term "Edit Warring," and thought I might've been in the wrong.

However, when looking in the history, it appears that Kdl-Sunday was the one who created the Organization table and Many Armies table. He went back and redid my revisions, which I think means that he started the Edit War. What can I do, and am I in the wrong?

(I'd like it to be kept in mind that I did start open a discussion regarding my deleting of the tables, and it was never discussed on the talk page, nor was it discussed in the 'Edit Summary.)

Thanks! Chinese Red Army

TheTeaDrinker (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

@TheTeaDrinker: I'm what could be called a "flyby" editor with no dog in this fight. It is a lot of work creating tables and your wholesale deletion of them, because you think they are clutter, is going to cause some hard feelings. There is a feature that you can add to any table to hide or show them and this seems to be a much more tenable solution. I have to go look up an article before I could do it -- I just posted a tables question myself because of my inexperience. But unless you can demonstrate that the information in the tables is wrong, I don't think that you should delete them. GeeBee60 (talk) 15:00, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

@TheTeaDrinker: here it is I will also post in the talk part of the article.

GeeBee60 (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

@GeeBee60: Thank you! I'll do that instead, because it's a much better solution. TheTeaDrinker (talk) 00:28, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

@TheTeaDrinker: Forgive me for jumping in I waited a couple of days and then cut and pasted this into the article that existed before your revisions. I didn't compare with your version to see if you'd made any text changes. I explain it on the talk page. Cheers, GeeBee60 (talk) 21:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@GeeBee60: It's quite alright. I was dreading fixing the article, so I was putting it off. Thank you.

Resolving language links for templates

I was looking at the template Template:Infobox ski area when I found that the most recent edit was one that added a link to the corresponding template on the Slovene Wikipedia (and that template also includes a link to the English template). This confused me, as I'd never seen this done before, but checking the Wikidata item for the template, it doesn't list the Slovene version in the list of language versions. When I tried to add this Slovene version to it, it errored and said that the Slovene version is already linked to another, unrelated, Wikidata item. What should be done to fix this? I've never dealt with language linking before, and I'd like to know how to fix this. Gary600playsmc (talk) 18:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Gary600playsmc. I've fixed it. I simply removed the link from d:Q1013176 to sl:Predloga:Infopolje_Smučišče, since it was obviously wrong, and then I could add the Slovenian template into d:Q7391497. I've then removed the explicit link in Template:Infobox ski area. (I thought this was going to be a pervasive and troubling problem with Wikidata, where articles in different languages have a different scope, so there are two or more articles in one language which correspond to one in another language. Wikidata doesn't have a solution to this. But it turned out to be easier). --ColinFine (talk) 21:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Kung Fu styles

Hello, I have an idea for Kung Fu style article. What is the rules or the notability guidelines criteria for such articles.

Thanks. 154.188.128.162 (talk) 21:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may want to try seeing if the Chinese martial arts article(where Kung Fu redirects to) either has the information you want to add or not before attempting to write a separate article about it, and maybe what you want to add could go there. Either way, I think the general notability guideline would be what you are looking for; in short, you need to have significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 21:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Should I delete my draft and post the article myself?

I submitted an article a few weeks ago and it's still under review, which I totally understand given how many drafts there are to be reviewed and everything. But should I just remove my draft article and then submit it as an article without being reviewed, now that my account is old enough? Or just wait it out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apathyash (talk • contribs) 17:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Apathyash: no, don't do that: what we don't want is the same material in two places in Wikipedia. You may, if you choose, simply move the draft to main space, and remove the {{subst:AFC submission}} template from the top. If you do that, you are taking responsibility for it being acceptable, and if somebody thinks it is not, they may return it, or even nominate it for deletion.

I'm not sure which draft you mean: if it is Draft:We Are The Tigers, then you haven't submitted it for review. You can do that by pasting {{subst:submit}} at the top (including the double curly brackets). --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

hi ColinFine, as David mentioned, I have had the submit yellow box on the page for two weeks, it was just at the bottom before. Is that alright? Should I move the page to the main space myself or is it wiser to wait?Apathyash (talk) 21:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Submit template added, but at bottom. I suggest waiting for the AfC process to take place. IMO needs work. Better a decline, with advice, than you move it to main space and someone starts a deletion action. David notMD (talk) 21:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Good day

Good day, sir, i want to know how to improve editing skill? Actually i just try to edit one for wiki, i just followed the code and it turned out fine, but i want to learn more editing and how to make page in encyclopedia.

Thank you and regards. Hope you will help me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kayekrim (talk • contribs)

@Kayekrim: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A good way to learn more about editing is to use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Concern?

Should I be concerned ive had this message from Wikipedia, to my knowledge ive never edited and don't even think I have an account?

"Hello, I'm Shellwood. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to 888casino— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Shellwood (talk) 00:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC) If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to List of feminists. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Shellwood (talk) 00:21, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

I did try to find a way to contact Shellwood but don't know how — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.48.23.58 (talk) 17:53, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

You should be able to post on Shellwood's talk page. However, I will inform you that you're not going to have much luck contesting that, in fact if you continue editing as you have you may very likely be blocked. This policy might be a nive bedtime read for you. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 18:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

The important part of the message from Shellwood is that back in May 2018, the IP address you have recently edited from was used to vandalize articles. No need to contact Shellwood. Best advice is to register an account. This will give you a clean history. David notMD (talk) 18:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the date. Thanks for that. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 23:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I have no intention of ever editing nor have I ever edited, so I take it someone has used my IP address at least twice once in 2018 and once recently to match the adresses — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:751F:6500:5091:44D2:29CE:85CA (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not a matter of "someone has used my IP address": depending on how your ISP allocates them, your IP address may change from time to time, and another customer may get given your old one. See the box at the bottom of User talk:31.48.23.58 --ColinFine (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Advice on my first draft article?

Hi all!

Just wanted to pop in to see if anyone can give me advice on my first draft article? I created the article for Draft:Dropout TV recently, for a new subscription media service. I tried to follow the same style as Netflix and Hulu, and put in information on the history of the service as well as original media. Could someone else take a look and let me know if this is appropriate? ChunyangD (talk) 04:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Bkissin moved the draft to Dropout (streaming platform), thanks. –84.46.53.123 (talk) 01:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, the same situation for me here, I just created a page for my company at Draft:Autospix. How long until this page showed up and published? RichardBravoBoss (talk) 17:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

You haven't submitted it for approval, RichardBravoBoss, but it would be pointless to do so as you have not demonstrated the notability (in Wikipedia's terms) of the subject. Please read the advice at WP:Your first article. You say it is for your company, so you need to read about conflict of interest and also make the mandatory declaration of paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you David Biddulph, I'll take a look for your reference suggestions. RichardBravoBoss (talk) 17:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Recommend

Is there a page that recommends pages that need fixing? I need some pages to be recommended to me to fix. LonelyHorse9 (talk) 04:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@LonelyHorse9: There are many ways to find such pages. For example, if you're interested in video games, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games. Here they have an extensive listing of pages that need fixing: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Backlog. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:58, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Lots of places @LonelyHorse9:! there is also WP:COM the community portal (its also linked on the list, left side of your screen, under "Interaction") which has lists of things that need fixing, from adding wikilinks, fixing spelling and grammar, to adding references and updating articles. Curdle (talk) 05:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

First time considering submitting an article for deletion

I have run across, from a link on another article, the article Elise Matthesen. It looks to me that this is a non-notable person, as there is no coverage of her in reliable sources. The references in the article are mostly her own work, plus a mention of her in someone else's obituary, a self-published blog-type source, and a source that doesn't appear to mention her at all. I think that deleting this article is the right thing to do, but I've never gone through a deletion process before (the page on nominating an article is a bit intimidating) and I didn't want to be 100% wrong on my first try. I would appreciate if someone could take a quick look and advise me. I also would not be against someone else deleting it, just so that I can follow the process and see how to do it right. Thank you! SteamboatPhilly (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

SteamboatPhilly, You could always use Twinkle to make the nomination. It's a piece of cake :). Adam9007 (talk) 18:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Wow that is the best advice I've gotten yet on anything. Thank you! I'm trying it out. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 18:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

You could also try a "PROposed Deletion" with {{PROD}}, it's simpler than an AfD, and folks might miss that it is related to some content dispute about John M. Ford‎ discussed above. To get a 3rd opinion I'd try WP:3O or ask on a noticeboard (WP:RS/N, WP:BLP/N, …). –84.46.53.123 (talk) 03:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

The Twinkle page, which took me about 45 seconds to read, seems to make deletion nomination about as simple as it could possibly be. When I look at "PROposed Deletion" I get the same feeling I got when I looked at the main articles for deletion page - no thanks. I'll stick with Twinkle. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 04:00, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

The freaking rules always look convoluted on enwiki, but it boils down to type {{subst:PROD|reason}} at the top of the page, an edit summary mentioning "delete", and a courtesy info on the talk page of the creator. Okay, you have to know that PROD isn't allowed after an older PROD or AfD.
I'd bet that your tool cheats and "forgets" the required courtesy info. IIRC you also have to pick a category for the deletion, Ceethekreator managed all those project info messages on the AfD page. –84.46.53.123 (talk) 06:41, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

An article for a services company

Hello there,

Greetings community

I wanted to inquire about having an article for a profit organization, from the KYC and identity services industry. I have read many of the community guidelines, specially notability and many other crucial ones. Is the right way to draft an article myself or request an article at companies and economics page. In my short research, I found the company to be fairly new but expanded quite rapidly and developed decent services. The organization seems to be recognized for it's AI use and services. Can references, referring to such collaborations and services come under notability and an article be made for the time being, keeping in mind information present in these references? The article which can later be updated, as more referenceable information becomes available about the company.

thank you for considering and feedback much required! (Grevision (talk) 07:01, 23 April 2019 (UTC))

Hello Grevision, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you have read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and Wikipedia:Your first article and concluded that you have good sources per this guidance, go ahead, you may or may not succeed. I get the feeling that WP:COIEDIT is relevant here, if so, follow it rigorously. I suggest the "make a draft yourself" path, then submit it for approval.

One more thing. Your username is the name of a company, and that is not allowed under WP-policy, though something like "Kim at Grevision" or "Grevision employee 7" is fine. So you need to WP:Change username. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Up and coming next big thing may be relevant. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: for the prompt response and valuable feedback. I have gone through the COI guidelines, in my case, it is more of an SME or Subject Matter Expert intention that I seek to implement from. Additional guidance if there is a combo of COI and SME existing would be much appreciated. I bare no inclination towards any one company and seek for the improvement of content concerning this industry and the inclusion of such companies under wikiproject: Companies to the benefit of the Wikipedia community at large voluntarily.

thank you for pointing out the user name, I shall update it accordingly. (Grevision (talk) 07:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC))

Grevision, Wikipedia:Expert editors could have some of what you want. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Understanding Notability

Hello everyone. I am having an issue understanding the notability in Wikipedia.

I am trying to submit a standalone article of a person who has around 700K followers on Instagram, 200K followers on Youtube, etc ... and is famous in a region for instance. How do I use this material to support the notability? Thanks Wissam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wabdelbaki (talk • contribs) 07:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Wabdelbaki. Per WP:BASIC, you don't. Number of followers on YT etc doesn't (directly) matter. If the number of followers have resulted in coverage in reliable sources (WP:RS), then you can use that coverage. If there is no such coverage, then you can't create a (surviving) article at this point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wabdelbaki,and welcome to the Teahouse. Many new editors confuse being famous with being notable. People who are well-known will often be notable in the Wikipedia sense, but being famous for a short time or in a limited area might or might not result in the subject being written about in newspapers and other independent sources. Dbfirs 10:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Should summaries for TV/Movies/Plays/Books contain plot spoilers?

What I mean is, when entering a piece of media as a new article, should the synopsis actually outline the entire plot? Or should it be a more basic summary? Some movie articles on Wikipedia have the entire plot scene by scene, while others have just the little summary from the back of the dvd kind of thing. Is one better than the other? Should I avoid entering spoilers in an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apathyash (talk • contribs) 13:59, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Apathyash, Spoilers are included, there is no reason not to. I believe it falls under "Wikipedia is not censored". Hope that helps! WelpThatWorked (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Apathyash, you'll find a bit of additional information about this aspect at Wikipedia:Spoiler (we do not omit "spoiler" information as long as it is relevant and encyclopedic). Advice about how to write encyclopedic plot summaries is available at MOS:PLOT and WP:FILMPLOT. Generally speaking, plot summaries should be succinct and focus on a brief description of the overall plot, not on describing every secondary detail. But please feel free to ask here anytime, if you have additional questions about these aspects. GermanJoe (talk) 14:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Why was my edit removed?

Good afternoon,

I signed up to Wikipedia today as I often see football players not being credited for certain awards they have achieved and would like to update these when possible. This morning I made an edit to the page of "Billy Sharp" to add his EFL League One Top Goalscorer awards to his page and this was removed. I understand that this may be due to the fact I couldn't figure out how to Hyperlink the specific seasons, player name, etc... Was this the only reason? What should I do to make updates that will not be removed? Was the source not adequate? The comment was removed rather than being fixed and his accolades are not on his page which I find strange. Any feedback, especially from the user who removed the comment, would be appreciated.

Best, Ryan — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanFrog11 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Top scorer is a fact (see EFL League One for list, including three listings for Billy Sharp), but not an honour or award per se. The existing articles on other players who have been top scorers in one or more seasons do not list 'Top Scorer' as an honour. David notMD (talk) 15:04, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

2019 Kerry County Council election

I have just made this page for an election in a few weeks but there are 3000 other articles under review before it. How long will it take to publish? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ElectionHack2019 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@ElectionHack2019: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As you are aware, there are thousands of drafts awaiting review; there is no guaranteed time frame for review, as they are done in no particular order by volunteers who do what they can when they can. It could be reviewed in ten minutes, or in three months. There is no way to know, you will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

ElectionHack2019 I think you need to expand the draft a bit more. The draft is full of tables but has few informations as text except in lead. Keep improving the draft and someone will publish it for you. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 07:54, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Ummm - someone will review it, and decide to accept or decline. May be the latter, as you have created an article intending to report on an election that has not yet taken place. David notMD (talk) 13:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I followed the same outline as that of the already published page of [2019 Dublin City Council election] so I assume it should be dealt with quickly as I would love to create all or at least some of the other pages related to the election but I wont be doing that if it turns out not to be published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ElectionHack2019 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Other option, I suppose, is remove the AfC submittal and just move the draft to main space yourself. David notMD (talk) 01:04, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

I tried doing the above but it didnt work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ElectionHack2019 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Fix a issue tag

Hello, Please I would like that a volunteer or contributor can fix issues in my page. Weeks ago had been tagged but not one fixed. Thanks --Wiki-marshall (talk) 14:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

The article Delmi Álvarez appears to be an autobiographical article, and has been tagged as such. It was created in 2006, but User Delmi has been a major contributor since 2014, as the length of the article increased from 6,000 t0 82,000 bytes. Much of the content is without references, and appears to be based on recollections of the subject of the article. IMO the autobio tag should stay until other editors have made major changes to the article. David notMD (talk) 15:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Delmi, I have left you a message at the article talk page. --valereee (talk) 16:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

How add photos to an article, specifically "The Epic of American Civilization".

I have photos I took as an undergard, about 1951 of Orozco frescos at Dartmouth discussed in The Epic of American Civilization. Can they (should be?) added to article? How? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.142.30.104 (talk) 00:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Adding images to an article is done in two stages: first, upload the images (to Wikimedia Commons if possible, or otherwise to Wikipedia itself), and then add the image to the article. See Help:Files.

Normally, if you took the photos yourself, you hold the copyright, and you have complete right to release them (if you choose) under a license suitable for Wikimedia Commons. However, if your photos are of a work of art, I'm not sure you have that right: I think it may be a derivative work, in which the original artist also holds copyright. Please see commons:commons:Derivative works for more information.

If an image cannot be licensed appropriately, it is sometimes possible to upload it Wikipedia under a "fair use" rule, but it would need to satisfy all the criteria in Non-free content criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Can I add my Amazon Prime TV series to Wikipedia?

Gooday everyone - complete Wikipedia (editing) newbie here. This is a question that I'm sure gets asked rather frequently, so please, be gentle.

I have my own TV series on Amazon Prime, called Travels by Narrowboat. Originally the early seasons aired on YouTube but are now available exclusively on both the Pay Per View platform, Vimeo On Demand (VOD) and now also Amazon Prime (currently season one).

At the moment the series stands at 5 seasons and 34 episodes (on VOD), and it's popularity is expanding daily. The series has also just received it's own verified Google Knowledge Panel (which is a little garbled at the moment).

Simple question then, is this series suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia (like The Grand Tour for example) and if so, am I permitted to write this page myself please, (or how does one go about getting it created)?

Cheers in anticipation, Kevin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinshelley (talk • contribs) 00:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Check out Entourage (U.S. TV series), Durch die Nacht mit ..., or the Web series James Gunn's PG Porn as examples. If your series has similar independent reliable sources, e.g., NYT articles or Emmy awards, it would be notable. Also see WP:COI, you have an obvious Conflict Of Interest. "On demand" reduces your chances to below 0° C. –84.46.53.123 (talk) 04:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for replying. I'd never heard of Entourage but I have now, thank you. Looks very interesting - sounds rather like the 'journey' I've been on. Perhaps it'll be best to wait until all the hard work and seasons are completed, and then attempt a Wikipedia page 'after' I've done the same amount of work promoting it? Cheers for your help, Kevin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinshelley (talk • contribs) 12:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Kevinshelley. Please note that promotion of any kind is forbidden on Wikipedia. If you are thinking about a Wikipedia article for any reason that might be thought of as promotional - as part of your online presence, for example, or to tell the world about your series - then you are fundamentally at odds with the purpose of Wikipedia, and likely to have a rough ride. Wikipedia is only interested in things that the world has already been told about. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Wiki page "reads like advertisement"...

Can someone help me edit my draft so my page doesn't read like an advertisement. There are plenty of wiki pages about sports teams (pro through amateur) and I am just trying to add another. I have all the information and references to the club and such, but I still get reviewer notes that it reads like an advertisement.

Is anyone able to help me get this edited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allusivereaper7 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Allusivereaper7 and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume the question is about Draft:New Hampshire Wolves Hurling Club which was rejected for reading like an advert and for not having sufficient WP:Reliable sources. Youtube is not considered reliable since anyone can put anything there. Can you find independent sources where the club has been written about, perhaps in newspapers? When you have improved the article a little further, just click the submit button for another review. In particular, who says that the club "has seen continued growth and success", and who says that "the documentary remains popular with military and hurling enthusiasts"? Dbfirs 15:15, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Dbfirs, the youtube references are for the videos mentioned, and are from reliable sources that also posted them on youtube as well as being broadcast on TV and military networks. And there are other independent sources and articles about the club that are noted in the references so I didn't think those were issues. I've added another reference textbook and removed the phrases I can't track a source down, but its all essentially the same text with articles from reliable sources.

Yes, Youtube is OK for certain things, but reviewers don't like a whole list of Youtube refs. I see you have now submitted the draft for review. I hope it is accepted this time. Dbfirs 17:46, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Re: Meaning of "esp." signifying beginning of partnership

I just now noticed that Tim Templeton wrote in his previous reply to my question about "esp.": "If they [Julian Assange and Sarah Harrison, in the infobox of the article on Assange] aren't married, it shouldn't say esp." He may have edited that in after I first saw the reply, but in any case the question then becomes what should appear to indicate the beginning of a non-marriage partnership. Also, does this mean that both "m." and "esp." are used for the beginnings of marriages? I assume in any event that if "esp." is incorrect or inappropriate in the Assange article, it should be changed to something else. Thanks. Roy McCoy (talk) 19:58, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Pinging Timtempleton, who might want to respond. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes:. Could you please explain "u" as opposed to ping or Reply to or Talkback. I'm confused about these options and wish there were fewer of them so I wouldn't have to be. –Roy McCoy (talk) 02:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Roy McCoy: Yes, there are a lot of them, and many repeat what others do. 're' and 'ping' place an '@' sign in front of one or more users' names, whereas 'u' just displays the user's name. All, however, result in a message notification displaying on those users' pages, providing the post has been 'signed' at the same time. See WP:NOTIFICATIONS for a fuller explanation, and do check the 'See also' links to the various other templates, including 'Talkback' which allows you to direct one user to a conversational thread on another page. In essence, find just the reply and reply at templates that work for you; stick to them and don't worry about the rest. Regards from a very soggy Spain. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:30, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Roy McCoy: @Nick Moyes: I couldn't find any proof that they were married - only that they dated. So I updated her article and put in a request for his protected article at Talk:Julian_Assange#Protected_edit_request_on_22_April_2019 TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes: and @Timtempleton: ping seems to be most common, so I'll try sticking with that for the time being. As for Assange, I don't think anybody said he and Harrison were ever married, and as far as I can see my question about "esp." or "m." is still unanswered. My guess would be that "m." is far more established than "esp." and should thus be preferred and even strongly. Tim's "dated" seems an improvement to "esp.", but it raises the question of whether people who have only dated someone should be listed as a partner in an infobox rather than simply mentioned within an article's chief text. –Roy McCoy (talk) 17:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Deleting a subpage of my user page

How do I do this? Jmar67 (talk) 17:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jmar67: Add the {{db-u1}} template to the subpage you wish to have deleted and it will be processed by an admin according to WP:CSD#U1. Regards SoWhy 18:00, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

If a content is sourced to a personal, self-published blog (written by a non-notable writer), should that content be removed from the article?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

When I read WP:RSSELF, about self-published sources, it seems clear to me that those can't be used as sources. This makes sense to me, as anyone can write something about any topic and put it on their blog and call it a source, and that would be disastrous. So I think I understand that policy. Nevertheless, when I removed content from John M. Ford that was sourced to exactly that, a self-published source by a non-notable, I have been reverted, more than once. So I thought I would ask here, as I've gotten help here before. Thank you. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 17:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Please note that the article in question is not a BLP, and that StramboatPhilly's attention has been drawn to WP:SPS, specifically "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications". The source in question, www.websnark.com, follows these specifications and is explicitly discussed (in relation to an adjacent field) here. Yet SteamboatPhilly continues to pursue an edit war in contravention of BRD norms. Newimpartial (talk) 18:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Actually, it does not say that they can't be used as sources. It says that they need to be used correctly, and lists several places where self-published sources could be used. It depends on the context of the citation. That being said, when there is a dispute, the correct course of action is to 1) remove the disputed text (the burden of proof is on a person who wishes to include some bit of information) and 2) Discuss the matter on the article talk page to reach consensus. --Jayron32 18:07, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Jayron32, I especially appreciate the part where you mentioned that "the burden of proof is on a person who wishes to include some bit of information", I was not aware of that page till now. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Not exactly. Since this is not a BLP, per BRD we revert to the stable version while the discussion takes place. Newimpartial (talk) 18:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

That's not what WP:BURDEN says. It says "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source." and does not carve out a special exception for non-BLPs. --Jayron32 18:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

But the material in question is directly cited to a reliable source per WP:SPS. Since the additional restrictions placed on BLPs do not apply, the stable version should remain. In any event, there was no excuse for SteamboatPhilly to exceed 3RR on this non-BLP article. Newimpartial (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It's only a "stable version" because you're a fan of the subject of the article, you added the content from a self-published, and no one else is paying attention to the article until I saw it. That doesn't mean that it's okay to keep content sourced to a self-published source in the article. And now another fan has re-added the content from a self-published source. Jayron32, is that how this works? If two people keep re-adding unreliable content, does it get to stay, even if it clearly violates the rules on reliable sources? SteamboatPhilly (talk) 22:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

SteamboatPhilly, whom I assume to be an inexperienced editor, is making incorrect assertions. Even a casual perusal of the page history for John M. Ford will show that I did not add the content in question, nor is there any evidence that I am a "fan" of the subject. All I have done is revert the removal of sourced content, objected to misleading edit summaries, started a Talk page discussion on the issue, and supported BRD while objecting to EW. I actually think there would be an UNDUE argument to the content in question - I don't have a horse in that race - but the sourcing is a complete red herring. Newimpartial (talk) 23:11, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It. Is. A. Self. Published. Source. You keep saying "sourced content" but you ignore the fact that the source is self-published. You pointed to some page that says the writer of that content is considered reliable - but that page says he's reliable on the topic of web comics. Nothing more. John M. Ford is not a web comic. John M. Ford did not write web comics. You've ignored all of that in your quest to be "right", but you're not. This is really clear to me and I wish someone with some authority would weigh in on it, because after reading the policies, I can't see how any reasonable impartial person would disagree. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 03:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Invert the chronological order of a Songwriting and Production Credits list

Hello everyone,

I'm trying to invert the chronological order of a Songwriting and Production Credits list, so the most recent tracks can be show at the beginning of the list.

Could you give me a hand with that?

Thanks xx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inca28a (talk • contribs) 12:09, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

@Inca28a: First, please use four tildes (~ ~ ~ ~, but no spaces) after your comment- it signs it. Second, depending on the table type, there's little arrows up by the top of the table. If you click the set of arrows in the box where it says "year" it should flip. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 13:07, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Inca28a (talk) 13:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi A lad insane‬, and thank you for your response. As you can see, I'm new in here and not sure how to respond on the same lead.

How do I modified the table then? Because at the moment, it has those tiles to flip the years over, but what I would like, is that straight away, when you're in the Wiki page without having to flip, you can see the latest tracks to the first one.

Thanks Inca28a (talk) 13:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

@Inca28a: Depending on the table this might be as simple as replacing a class="wikitable" by class="wikitable sortable", folks could then sort the table by its date column or similar. Otherwise oldest first is usual, your idea would be unusual. –84.46.52.110 (talk) 20:44, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

@Inca28a: On Wikipedia historical events are presented in chronological order. Putting the "latest news" at the top is how promotional publications do it, here we record history, we do not present news. You are welcome to make the table sortable, but the default order is the normal chronology, not reversed. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Roger. Now I have a bigger problem. People is removing the whole content from the page. They're actually deleting facts: a list of songwriting credits and discography with verified sources. I don't know want to do. So much work and time invested to have the info up to date and available to the world and now, has been removed. Inca28a (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Ted Kaehler

Ted Kaehler is mentioned at least 20 times in various articles about programming languages, but there is no page for him. Consider this a request. Keith Henson (talk) 18:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Keith Henson, this request will probably be forgotten if you only put it here; you should add it here. Eman235/talk 18:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Hkhenson: Also, per WP:REDYES, it's not only allowed but encouraged to red link any instances of the name in other articles if the subject is notable but has no article yet. The more articles link to a non-existing page, the likelier it is that someone will create it. Regards SoWhy 19:11, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Messages about Editing that I did not do

I got a message that said my IP address was used to update pages, should I be concerned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.209.14.71 (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

If you have a nonstatic/floating IP, you shouldn't be concerned as who the IP is assigned to can change. If you have a static IP, you should only be concerned if someone is using your computer or network without your knowledge or permission(are you sure a family member or authorized friend did not edit Wikipedia?) 331dot (talk) 19:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

If you create a user account, then when you log in you'll only get messages targeted to you. I'm not aware of any crackdowns in editing at the University of St. Thomas that would necessitate the privacy of an anonymous IP address. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

How to Gwt Fully Protection for a Page?

Someone (an actor named Rangga Dj0ned) asking me to handle & conplete his Wikipedia page. He gave me his CV file & some picture,but the page is always gettin' edited by another user. I feel so inresponsibility for that to happen. So,I want to fet full protection for Rangga Djoned english wikipedia page I create yesterday. Can anyone help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arieflongbottom91 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Arieflongbottom91: Pages are only protected to prevent vandalism. You don't control the page. Please read WP:OWN and WP:PAID. RudolfRed (talk) 18:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Arieflongbottom91: (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You seem to be referring to a subpage of your user page, which is not article space. It won't be seen by the general public by search engines; they would have to come here and know where to find it. According to the edit history, no one else has edited it except to move it off your user talk page(a page meant for communication with you) to its current location and to remove inappropriate categories, so I'm not sure what you are concerned about. Pages are not protected just because the primary author does not want others to edit them.

I would further add that any page about this person is not "their page", but a page about them. They have no special rights to it or control over it, and cannot dictate what appears there on their own. You cannot prevent others from editing it just because you don't want them to. This is not social media where you can say what you want about yourself and keep others from editing about you. This is a collaborative project to write an encyclopedia. If this person just wants to tell the world about themselves and indeed control what appears on their page, they should use Facebook or social media. A Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable, as well.

Furthermore, if this person asked or hired you to represent them here, you must comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. If you are employed by this actor, the latter policy is a Terms of Use requirement and not negotiable. 331dot (talk) 18:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Arie has since declared paid relationship on User page. John from Idegon blanked the entire draft because of no references and undeclared paid. The article can be rescued as a draft and references added. As a draft, you can work on improving it, but there is no rule to stop other editors from making changes. This can happen because editors are trying to help the draft come into compliance with what is allowed in a Wikipedia article. If the draft is submitted and accepted, it can continue to be edited by other editors, as long as content is supported by valid references. There is no ownership. David notMD (talk) 20:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Question

So what do you mean Hi Rosey sanchez! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Masumrezarock100 (talk). Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 21:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC) form Rosey Sanchez. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosey sanchez (talk • contribs)

Hello, Rosey sanchez. The message you received on your talk page was an automated one, sent to very new editors who have just joined Wikipedia. We like them to know that if they get stuck, or need help with editing the encyclopaedia, that we have a group of volunteers here who can assist them. We call it the 'Teahouse', and we like to make it as supportive and friendly as we can. So, welcome!

We ask everyone to sign their posts by typing four keyboard tilde characters (like this: ~~~~). By doing so, the system automatically adds their username and a timestamp to their post. That way, we know who has written each message, and when, so that we can reply to them as best we can.

I should point out that we expect users not to create content or write short essays on their main userpage, as you have done. Please use that page just for saying a few words about yourself and your editing interests. See WP:USERPAGE for more help on that. Your talk page is for messages between editors, whilst your sandbox is one of the places to work on creating new content before it gets moved into the main part of the encyclopaedia. To learn more, why not try out interactive tour called The Wikipedia Adventure. I'll drop by your talk page in a moment a leave another welcome message for you, stuffed full of other useful links to get you started. Just pop back here if you need to know anything else about contributing to this encyclopaedia. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:01, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Categories in sandboxes

If I copy an article into my sandbox to play with, does it matter if I also have the category labels? I see that makes my sandbox show up on the category pages, which isn't ideal. But will anyone mind? (Use case: copy article source to sandbox, do a series of edits that makes it worse and then better, check that the article hasn't been edited since, copy sandbox to article) Iamnotabunny (talk) 06:01, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Just comment that out, i.e., add <!--  before the categories in your sandbox, and add  --> after the categories. Alternatively disable the categories with a leading :, e.g., replace [[Category:FooBar]] by [[:Category:FooBar]]. User pages (incl. sandboxes) popping up in categories not designed for user pages are seriously disruptive, it's about the only reason when I'd edit user pages of other users to fix this. –84.46.53.123 (talk) 06:15, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Overwriting an article by copying from your sandbox can be tricky if there have been several other edits since you copied it. The method might be OK for articles that are seldom edited, but it would be better to make incremental changes to the live article if others are also editing it. Dbfirs 06:22, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm mostly doing this for articles that have hardly been edited for years. Ok, will fix. Iamnotabunny (talk) 23:56, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Waddle On

So.. I was trying to create a page for Club Penguin Rewritten, a Club Penguin Private Server created in favour of Club Penguin's closing, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Since it was a redirect to Club Penguin, I removed that and started to work on a page of its own.

So I was creating the page and everything was going smoothly, I put in an MMO stub so hopefully other people could contribute to my minute's worth of info. So then I wait for a few hours.

Hours passed, so I check in, go to my watchlist (the page was on it) and someone had edited it, I was thrilled, thinking that they contributed to the page. So I clicked on it, only to see, they removed everything and put back the redirect.

My question is, how do I edit a page, and make sure people don't re-direct it or delete it. It's a question I need answered. ;-;

Thanks. (^o^)

TheAnonymousWikedian (talk) 22:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@TheAnonymousWikedian: Welcome to the Teahouse. What you had written (before it was redirected) was this short uncited page. If you can demonstrate that a completely new article is merited (and you would do that by finding reliable independent sources that show this particular version meets our Wikipedia:Notability (video games) criteria, then the best way for you to proceed is via Articles for Creation. You would work on creating a draft and submitting it for review which, if approved (and I'm afraid I suspect it would not), then the finished draft would be put in place of the current redirect. My view is that you would be far better expanding the section within Club Penguin, and that a separate article is not necessary. I'm sorry this probably isn't what you really want to hear. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@TheAnonymousWikedian: Club Penguin (franchise) might be an even better place to add the info - seems a bit disjointed now. Maybe even a Club Penguin (disambiguation) page for ease of navigation and simplicity? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:28, 24 April 2019 (UTC)