Help talk:Your first article/Archive 1

Guled
this is a rare diesease which is mainly situated in somalia there is no cure for this —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakhi1000 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over two million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the online free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If that is not fruitful, we have a reference desk, divided into various subjects areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. --——  Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  22:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit notice
Any objections to deleting the warning comments in the beginning of the page and creating an edit nocit per editnotice. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  18:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it sounds like a great idea. I even considered doing it right away when I saw your suggestion, lol, but I don't know the markup for making the giant red "STOP! READ THIS!" I'm picturing and I'm a bit busy with school work right now to play around with it. But if you know the markup and have time to do it, I think it would be a definite improvement. --Icarus (Hi!) 18:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Here is a sample notice done with editnotice:

--—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk*  -  12:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea. I navigated here to make sure I had the shortcut right and found this.  It took me about 5 minutes to realize i HAD found the right article (Rather than the sandbox) and it was just...well, being someone's first article.  Although I know for a fact that people ignore any color sign, red and obvious is a good start. Protonk (talk) 02:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the editnotice is a good idea, but I wouldn't suggest using it to to replace anything, just to supplement the existing warnings littered everywhere in the displayable and hidden text. Never underestimate people's capacity to ignore all signs. An alternative viewpoint is that under-warning here is actually a good thing - we take so much load off the new-page-patrollers! Until the devs finally release the MildElectricalShock extension, there will always be new articles created here. Yet another viewpoint is that rather than simply reverting the misguided additions here (which is what I do) - we should be seizing the initiative to guide new editors into their sandboxes. Franamax (talk) 04:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the edit notice is a good idea. This project page is attracting so many test edits. Could the name be adding to that? How about something like Wikipedia:Advice on writing your first article? /NewbyG (talk) 04:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - for reference, the origin of this page (Your first article) is this followup to this archived discussion on WT:CSD. Franamax (talk) 04:52, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Someone vandalized the page!
I was reading the page, learning how to create an article, at the bottom of the page were written the words "gay gay gay gay gay gay gay homosexual." This vandalism can not continue. It is imperative to the security of Wikipedia. Hieveryone13 (talk) 23:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This page is, unfortunately, a relatively common target for vandalism. Probably because it's so easy for newcomers to find, and a very visible minority of newcomers have less than noble intentions :-\ Many users such as myself, however, keep this page on our watchlists, so vandalism gets reverted very quickly. If you're interested in helping to fight vandalism, feel free to revert any blatant vandalism you encounter on this or any other page. --Icarus (Hi!) 07:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

#How to create a page section - list of sources
This section says that the first thing you should do in your new article is to write a list of sources. Agreed, absolutely, but for the naive user it doesn't seem clear.

The two examples (1) and (2) are correct, but they already show as blue-externals - the new user will be confused because they have no idea how to make things blue (they don't know yet that naked hyperlinks go blue automagically) and they don't know how to make that two-little-blue-square symbol. That's also automagic, but they don't know, so they'll be turned off.

I'd try putting in some  's, but they can't be inline with the examples, because the just-cluing-in new user will edit the section and copy the nowiki's too. Anyway, needs reformatting, for the new-page-makers who've read down that far - in fact, they're the ones we want, those with the patience to scroll down and read that far! [[User:Franamax|[ supra skytop] (talk) 06:32, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

How do I create a page with the same name but different subject?
I want to create a page about "Experience Unlimited" which is a statewide (California) government program helping people find jobs, but there is a page by that name already about an old musical group.

Here is some text about EU:

EDD's Job Service offices provide space, equipment, and a staff specialist for each EU chapter. This important service is a response to the needs of communities faced with an increase in corporate mergers, relocations, and downsizing, or an increased number of people forced to change jobs due to technological shifts.

The Experience Unlimited concept started in Berkeley in 1959 and expanded quickly throughout the state. In the late 1970's the number of chapters began to decline until only four cities retained chapters. In 1986 the concept was revived, and there are currently more than 23 chapters, each of which bears an unique name such as ProSearch, Marin Professionals, and OPEN.

66.102.205.27 (talk) 07:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * See Disambiguation for dealing with such situations. Basically, when two articles would share the same name, one or both will have their name modified with a paranthetical explanation. For example, Wings (band) and Wings (TV series). In that case, there is also a Wings (disambiguation) to help users find the articles they're looking for. Other times, the disambiguation page will have no "(disambiguation)" after it, if there is no article at the same name without a paranthetical explanation.
 * Your best bet in this situation is to create your article with a title like Experience Unlimited (California) and put a short disambig notice at the top of the Experience Unlimited article. Alternatively, you can move Experience Unlimited to Experience Unlimited (band) (be sure to learn how from Help:Moving a page – do not just copy and paste the contents to a new page!) and then make Experience Unlimited a disambiguation page with a link to both Experience Unlimited (band) and Experience Unlimited (California). Having a separate disambiguation page might be overkill, though, since there are only two pages to disambiguate between. I also don't recommend creating your article under the unmodified name, as that can lead to conflicts over which article should have the unmodified name and which ought to be modified. --Icarus (Hi!) 08:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

questions
When world first computer? How base in World first computer? Who create world first Computer (Team (or) personal)? How big it world first computer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csyein (talk • contribs) 05:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Try asking at Reference desk/Computing. Franamax (talk) 05:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Structuring
I have restructured this guideline slightly. First, the "drawing board" reference where it was seems to have been confusing some users, who have simultaneously opened drawing board sections & started new articles. I think we need to clarify that the drawing board is optional and also to note other options. I have also moved the note about gathering references up, as the majority of feedback we do provide at DB is precisely addressing that. I believe it needs to be more prominent here. I have also added as an alternative point for feedback the talk page of a wikiproject, where users may find more informed response depending on the specifics of the article they're creating. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Format wrong for printing
The section Search for an existing article:

When I print it, it seems to come as a table of sorts, or as the table of contents printing in/over the section text. Needs to be looked at and fixed? --Dumarest (talk) 17:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I just printed this on a laser printer and it looks OK. Click on "Printable version" on the left toolbox and preview it. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  17:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

restoring the content of this page
I hopefully have added back all that was erased(which was the whole page) I'm not sure if I should have but I didn't want people's discussions to be lost plus the disclaimer(or whatever it is called) was deleted to just thought I'd try and restore it for everybody Musicobsessed6 (talk) 21:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * See Help:Reverting for how to revert to an earlier version. I reverted to the version by Versus22, except keeping your additions at the end. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * thank you that actually came in handy soon after I saw that Musicobsessed6 (talk) 03:22, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

references/help
first off I'm a little hesitant on creating this on my own I'd rather someone else do it but no one seems to check the song page request page

about the references they are from the lead singer of the band's blog it is official and linked on the official The Academy Is... website aside from the videos that he tells the url of his blog

to better explain what I was referencing (and if that image could be used) I've copied what I put on that page "Winter Passing by The Academy Is... - single not from an album(it is unknown if it will be on an album in the future it is believed that it won't) some reference materials, from the lead singer, William Beckett's blog if that would help Album cover/release date, when it was recorded, video and information about where it was shot(I know it's a little hard to read on the video but it's directed by Jack (The Camera Guy) Edinger) (I'm horrible at phrasing things sometimes so I hope that made sense or I conveyed what I was meaning right) Musicobsessed6 (talk) 20:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I've done the first draft using my user page but I still have a question about using that album artwork, can I use it or can't use it under the copyright rules? and about the box at the bottom that lists the singles how does that get added there and from what I've heard His Girl Friday is not officially the next single but anyways how do those get changed? Musicobsessed6 (talk) 22:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * someone on the song project page helped me out and I have created the article and changed the things they advised I should Musicobsessed6 (talk) 23:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

My first article
this is too long, could you have a short one paragraph version. Talk to Magibon 15:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't recommend that. A lot of first articles get deleted, maybe most of them. If people don't take time to read more than one paragraph before creating their first article then it will probably be one of them. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation
What happens when you search for a topic, and there is already one or more pages with that name (particularly common if the title is also an acronym)? The obvious thing to do is to create the page and then add it to the disambiguation page, but if the article exists you don't get the option to create a new article. I'm new to this so might be missing the obvious! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danensis (talk • contribs) 09:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Let's say you are searching for the Scottish TV series "NB". If you enter NB in the search box and select GO, you get a disambiguation page. To create a new article, simply enter "NB (TV series)" and select GO; you will get a search that shows it does not exist, plus the option to create the article. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 13:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Typo in Wikipedia: Your First Article
Please correct the word "provides" to "provide" in the paragraph near the bottom beginning: "One of the first things you want to do after creating a new article is to provides links to it...." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sings.a.lot (talk • contribs)
 * Fixed in . PrimeHunter (talk) 13:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Cannot Create Article
My username has been blocked indefinately, and I can't create an article with my IP Address! That's some bullshit! What do I do now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.0.40.107 (talk) 16:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * What is your username? PrimeHunter (talk) 01:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You can ask to have your username unblocked using the template, but your request will not necessarily be granted, depending on the reason for which you were blocked and your behavior since then. Keep in mind that editing while you are blocked - even using an IP address as you are doing now - is a violation of Wikipedia policy. --Icarus (Hi!) 02:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

last.fm reliable reference?
is the webpage last.fm a good reference for writing on a band or artist? or will it just be deleted due to unreliability? Calethesneak (talk) 04:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably not: I would look for additional significant coverage in the press. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

end of the article help section
Would anyone object to finishing the article with something like:

==Still need help?== The best place to find help as a new contributor is at New contributors' help page. Alternately you can ask a question through the Wikipedia help channel on IRC chat!

I was just noticing how abruptly this article ends and everything. JoeSmack Talk 02:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Done. JoeSmack Talk 15:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I am new to writing wikipedia articles and I have a few questions...
Sorry for replacing the page, as I said I am new here and I tried to add a new section. It was an accident. I still have some questions regarding the same subject as last time. What if it is a new website that only a few people know about? The website that I want to write an article about is here: http://iamzelda-org.blogspot.com/

I want to write an article about it but I don't know how to cite it because there is no other source, trustworthy or not, which has information on the article. Sorry about the accident, PikaPower3.14

PikaPower3.14 (talk) 21:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)PikaPower3.14


 * Don't worry about it, it's no biggy. Now to your question. If there are no reliable sources about the website your are talking about, it is likely that your article will be deleted. Not having any sources about the subject would probably also mean that the website doesn't follow the notability guidelines for web content. This would also result in your article being deleted. Articles must have reliable third part references for inclusion, and they also must be notable. Also, an article can still have reliable references, yet not be notable, which could also result in deletion. Hope that helped, ~ Super  Hamster  Talk Contribs 21:19, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Redirect
I have restored this page. I don't see any consensus for a redirect, and I disagree with it. This page was intended to be more suitable for new users and has a function of its own. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:23, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with MRG. This page is meant for really new editors whose first intention is to create a new article. As such, it needs to be simple enough and short enough that there is a reasonable chance they will read the whole thing. The full splendour of "everything you need to know" can come later. Given the tendency for project pages to only ever grow in size and get more complex, it may be time though for another look to be sure we're still hitting the simple and short metrics. Franamax (talk) 19:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Creating articles in userspace
In section Resolving clashes, the page mentions creating articles in userspace and only moving them to mainspace later. I believe this course of action could be advertised a bit more prominently and generally, possibly in the section Gathering references or in Things to avoid under Non-notable topics, with an eye toward notability and avoiding unnecessary deletion discussions. I imagine something along the lines of:
 * Remember that Wikipedia is not paper and there are no publishing deadlines of any sort. If an article-to-be's qualification as a Wikipedia article might be challenged, e.g., on the grounds of missing sources, the recommended course of action is to create the article in your userspace first, and move it to article space only when it's ready to be included as a proper article, however basic.

My wording is probably way too determinate, but I'd like to hear your opinions on the general idea of providing this (imho useful) recommendation. --78.34.219.151 (talk) 11:02, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

BLPs
I've been bold and gone ahead and inserted some language about BLP's being potentially deleted if they're unsourced. While I realize that there on going RfC's on the subject, I think a clear consensus exists for not creating new BLP articles without references. I see no harm in alerting new editors that they need references, especially given that people have been running around and deleting unsourced BLP articles. (How such deletions should proceed in the future is probably somewhat clear for new articles, and less so for older ones.) -- B figura  (talk) 00:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The Best way to Create an Article
I think that the best way to see if your new article would be acceptable for article space, is: at the end of your article add a "Review" section so that other people would be able to tell you about your article. Maybe we should mention that in the project page. Boygirl22 (talk) 01:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't mix encyclopedic content (=articles) with commentary on those articles. If we did, this would become more like a chatroom and less like an encyclopedia. However, new articles are watched for general suitability by New Page patrollers, and any that fail initial standards will be nominated for deletion. If they pass that hurdle, comments may be made on each article's Talk page as regards improvements. Believe me, all this has already been thought out, and seems to work. Rodhull  andemu  01:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Big omission
The one part of creating my own article that I can find no hint of is a major one: How do I set up a blank page to create my article ON? All I can find is editing existing pages (mostly my own profile page) or the sandbox (which is expressly said to be not permanent), and I do not want to wipe something else out of existence. Help! --Tbrittreid (talk) 19:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * See Your first article. Anytime you search for a page and it is not found you are given an opportunity to create a page with the title that you searched for. Another way to create a page - especially if you want to make a private sandbox - is to edit your user page and insert a link to a new subpage, e.g. /my sandbox . That will show up on your user page as a WP:redlink. When you click that redlink, you can create a page called "my sandbox". Sbowers3 (talk) 13:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * What the hell drugs are you on? You tell me, "See..." and put up a link to this page! If any help to my point was here, I would not have posted the above, for pete's sake. As for the other, after negative search results one is simply given the go ahead to create such an article, but is not in any way given a means to launch a blank page to create one's article on; if it had, again I wouldn't have posted here. Anybody else? --Tbrittreid (talk) 20:16, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I beg your pardon most humbly. The tone of the post immediately above is most irrelevant and inappropriate. I had just had a completely unrelated problem with some one else, and my frustrations with that editor were still being felt when I encountered the above incompetent (sorry, but that is exactly what it is) response to my help request. I should have expressed the problems with it in a much more civil style. Frankly, I am surprised to not find a sternly phrased warning waiting for me today. Again, my apologies for the tone. I do still require reality-based help with the described situation, and await it. --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:23, 2 May 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem. I apologize for including a link to this talk page when I meant to link to the project page. (Now corrected.) When you search for a page and it is not found you will find in fine print - we should make it more obvious - a redlink to the page you are trying to create. When you click that redlink you have a new blank page where you can create your article. You will there see a suggestion that you first create it on your user page, which you do by clicking the link. I am also taking the liberty to create a blank page under your user page. You will see the link on your user page. After you have created your article you can then copy or move it to article space. Ask for help doing that if you need to. Sbowers3 (talk) 00:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Now I am not only ashamed for letting my anger at something completely unrelated get the better of me, but I also feel stupid about that red link. I am in business, thank you very much. --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:34, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Anonymous Users can't create non-discussion pages
Why is it that anonymous users can't create non-discussion pages? Is that due to excessive creation of inappropriate pages or something? 71.94.158.203 (talk) 04:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Added words removed from "Things to avoid"
I have removed the words in bold which had been added to the first sentence of "Things to avoid": "Articles about yourself (unless you are some notable person), your friends, your website, a band you're in (unless the band you are in is signed in some record company), your teacher, a word you made up, or a story you wrote" We have enough trouble with WP:Autobiography and WP:COI editing without encouraging it like this. JohnCD (talk) 15:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

"Your first article" is not yours
It's really wrong, in my opinion, to phrase this in this way. Just because I created a new article doesn't make it "mine". It should be called "Creating New Articles for the First Time" or some such. It's just asking for trouble to phrase it this way. Plus, you shouldn't be doing this on your own. You should just create an article with plenty for others to do, so that it's cooperative from the beginning. I have created several new articles just to fill a hole, with almost nothing in them, and then they evolved with help from others, each doing what they do best or like to do. I don't like this "your article, and how to make it perfect" type of attitude. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good and forsters a "my article" attitude. I'm going to be making some bold changes here if no one responds objecting soon. Chrisrus (talk) 23:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Please make proposals here on the talk page first, or if you plan a total rewrite make it in a user sub-page and invite comments. This guideline has been reasonably stable and generally accepted for some time. I understand your point, that articles don't have to be perfect first off; but if more newbies read this it would save a lot of disappointment and a lot of speedy deletions of "articles" which are not and never could be encyclopedic; and it is a very useful guide to point contributors to who have no idea what an encyclopedia is and just try to copy in chunks of promotional websites. If what a user plans is a stub on a notable subject, I don't think there is anything here to discourage them; but say how you think it could be improved. JohnCD (talk) 17:26, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Move to "Creating New Articles", "How to Create a New Article", A Beginner's Guide to Creating New Articles" or some such. And that the article be reviewed with an eye towards "our article", or better yet "the article" and not "your" article.  Chrisrus (talk) 00:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Question about a proposed new biographical article
Would it be appropriate to create a biographical WikiPedia page for a person who placed top-five in the Putnam math contest, as documented here: and who worked on building PCNET, published references listed here: and whose other research work has been published in: and who is currently building a new kind of economic system on the InterNet to attempt to end poverty worldwide?
 * en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lowell_Putnam_Mathematical_Competition#Putnam_Fellows
 * www.maa.org/awards/putnam.html
 * www.wish4humanity.org/index_files/Page289.htm
 * (1995) Computer-based advanced placement calculus for gifted students. Instructional Science, 22, 339-362
 * (1985) Natural-language interface for an instructable robot. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 22, 215-240
 * (1984) A note on discourse with an instructable robot. Theoretical Linguistics, 11, 5-20
 * (1978) Magnetic relaxation analysis of dynamic processes in macromolecules in the pico- to microsecond range. Biophysical Journal, Vol 24, 103-117

Would such a person be notable enough that a WikiPedia page would be acceptable? 198.144.192.45 (talk) 23:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC) Twitter.Com/CalRobert (Robert Maas)

Really i don't know what happened to egyptian people? many question on my mind about pepole what happened to them, i don't feel that i lived in security country i feel that any bad thing happen any time, i hope that all poeple change their mind and change their thinking. I love my country very much but i don't like the thinking of people here i want all people live in security,honestly,and in confortable life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nesoooo (talk • contribs) 19:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Your first article → Help:Writing an article — This really belongs in the "help" namespace, as it is a help page... --Mono (talk) 01:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - I'm hesitant about moving this. As per Help namespace, "there is a large amount of overlap between the Help namespace and the Project namespace", so there has to be a reason other than "it is a help page". While Help namespace says the Help namespace "contain information intended to help use Wikipedia", Project namespace says the Wikipedia namespace consists of pages "with information or discussion about Wikipedia". As I read this page, I'd lean toward the latter, because several sections also summarize several Wikipedia policies, not just how merely how to edit Wikipedia. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This page is more about how to write for Wikipedia, rather than how to use Wikipedia.  Powers T 14:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't move as the help namespace generally focuses on the technical aspects of how to make Wikipedia work while the Wikipedia section focuses on how to properly write an encyclopedia. D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  23:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I'm sorry I missed this. I would definately support it as it would deal with the contradition between WP:OWN and the implication that "your first article" is yours, as I discussed in the section a litte above. The distinction between helping users and authors is not clear between "HELP" pages and "WP" pages isn't nearly as important and the huge amount of WP:OWN trouble this article causes by telling people that the articles they write are theirs. Chrisrus (talk) 05:55, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes but once they read the content of this page I think the majority would understand that the 'your first' refers to their first 'experience' of writing an article. Plus, users don't own their userpages neither yet everywhere we see written "your user page" and "your talk page". Instead of renaming you could simply add a mention of WP:OWN and explain it in the lead somewhere. -- &oelig; &trade; 07:37, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Article section instead of standalone article
I don't see this anywhere, and I think it should be added.

"Consider whether or not your new article could be a section within an existing article."

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * It looks like the second paragraph in Your first article covers that scenario. I added the specific mention of 'section' though. -- &oelig; &trade; 13:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Your first article shouldn't also be your first edit!
I've come to realize that new users most often feel disillusioned with Wikipedia because they try to take on too much when they're just starting out. Wikipedia has a steep learning curve, and starting a new article that meets all our policies and guidelines and expectations as your first experience with Wikipedia is a LOT to take on. Maybe this isn't the best place to be posting this, but I feel like we should instead be nudging newbies away from starting new articles when they first join and pointing them towards easy maintenance tasks such as typo fixing and reading essays. That way they can learn gradually and once they have a better grasp on how things work around here they'll have a much more positive experience creating that first article. -- &oelig; &trade; 02:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

First impression
It would be nice if this page were shorter. Like OE above, I'm uneasy about the implicit encouragement to create new articles before editing existing articles. As much as the Foundation seems to equate the creation of new articles with progress and editor retention, it's a fallacy. Look at the zillions of one-line unreferenced stubs we have, created by anons or newbies who then walk away, as though it was a toy to tinker once with and say you've done it. Tony   (talk)  04:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

From the horses mouth
The article states about references that it is best to have it "from the horse's mouth". This seems to contradict the WP:RS and WP:Third-party_sources and other guides that say such things as Every article on Wikipedia must be based upon verifiable statements from multiple third-party reliable sources, and that emphasize secondary and tertiary sources should be used, such as Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources.

Hopefully, someone can clear things up.JBel (talk) 02:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I removed the sentence. It wasn't really necessary anyway. -- &oelig; &trade; 05:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Use of phrase "actual encyclopedia"
In the section "8.1 Read an actual encyclopedia", I think "traditional encyclopedia" or "non-electronic encyclopedia" would be more accurate, since Wikipedia is at least as large as any other encyclopedia and probably the first encyclopedia many people will use. (Just a thought.) Mjsteiner (talk) 21:24, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that you are right. That's why I've made the change from actual to traditional paper. --Brainmachine (talk) 09:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Passing comment
The history of this page is somewhat amusing, although a little disturbing. People are clicking on "edit this page", and then right next to the piece of text saying "PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE EDITING THIS PAGE" followed by "...NOT the correct place to start writing one." they do what? They start writing their first article!!! I mean, holy RTFM batman! I was previously advocating being nice to the newbies, I'm now standing in limbo for an attitude correction. Is there something more we can do, other than big flashing purple boxes? At the least, we're taking some load off the new page patrollers since the new pages aren't being created in mainspace, they're getting written here. Ideas are welcome :) Franamax (talk) 03:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * At one point, I put that invisible notice in several sections, though I don't know if it helped at all... Would it be possible to make the one visible on the page 24pt font and bright purple, lol? One thing that I just did on someone's talk page wouldn't stop it from happening, but might stop the repeat offenders (it's amazing how many people see their attempt at starting an article reverted, and then do it all over again!). I basically left a notice box, similar to the one at the top of the page but modified to not say "this page", on their talk page. Hopefully they'll at least see that one. Might it be worth making a template for that very purpose? or something of the sort? --Icarus (Hi!) 04:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That screwed it up for me. Is it monitor or browser that makes a diff? Phlegm Rooster (talk) 05:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like it's a browser thing. I have a dual boot, and it looks fine when I'm using IE on the Windows partition. Since IE is much more common than Safari, which was what I was using when it looked off, let's keep it the way that looks right on IE. --Icarus (Hi!) 10:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Especially among the non-tech-savvy. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 10:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahhh, the joys of being smugly self-superior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.104.23.26 (talk) 05:50, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * We can do away with the hidden comments and add an edit notice. See editnotice for details. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  22:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Help with this page
After discussion, I have gone ahead and forked this page from WP:Starting an article. I think this one should be more encouraging of new users, and only focused on what we really need from them. I also think it makes sense to have some samples of first article "types" (bios, companies, music) perhaps we can engage some WikiPorjects in this? Thoughts, help and assistance all of course welcome. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a good start. I reworded and reordered a bit at the top.
 * Another avenue to simplify things is to better split "show notability", "add references", "use reliable sources". These are interrelated but distinct topics. Each one of them are difficult for the new writer to grasp.
 * And the more concise we can make the intro, ideally fitting onto a single browser screen, the more plus-good.Franamax (talk) 05:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Great ideas, and thanks for your help so far. I have to turn in, but will tackle again tomorrow.  Hopefully we'll attract some more help.  UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I have read it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinostrong (talk • contribs) 05:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC) I don't get anything on here. Moonbeam136 (talk) 06:22, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

pictures
how the heck do i add pictures to this thing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilary Duff124 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Simply put, add [[File:Example.jpg]] to the article (replacing the "example" part with the actual filename). You should always use the show preview button when adding them, to make sure they will look right once it's saved. You should read over Image tutorial first, though, as there are many more options and things to know about how images can and should be used in articles. Cheers. – Alex43223T 11:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Small Formatting Fix
I just re-wrote the first small section on reading the Noticeboard. The way it was, the words "if unsure" overlapped with the pullbox. I re-wrote the previous sentence and commented out the last one (still commented if another user decides to undo my edit). I also just deleted the JaszBlack or whatever section above mine since that was visibly spam (it had a comment saying something like "autosigned by spambot" or whatever). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathew.Reiss (talk • contribs) 17:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Social Networking
For the educational technology toolbox, Bloom’s technology tool acknowledges that remembering an important tool used is social networking. In this assignment I will be sharing the uses and benefits of social networking and its weaknesses and challenges. I will list types of social networking, as well as discuss a learning example of social networking (Facebook) for the classroom. This assignment will help the student to remember how to use Facebook by introducing Facebook in a classroom using a whiteboard, talking about the pros and cons of Facebook, how to create a Facebook account, and demonstrate how to use it. Using Facebook properly can develop a network of friends and associates, as well as create a positive self-image.

A)	The tool used from Bloom’s Taxonomy is social networking and the web link is http://www.techlearning.com/studies-in-ed-tech/0020/blooms-taxonomy-blooms-digitally/44988 B)	The level of Bloom’s technology tool acknowledges remembering. C)	The uses and benefits of social networking 1.	Inexpensive 2.	Develops networks of friends and associates. 3.	A good way to create connections with people of similar interests. 4.	An opportunity to meet new people, including other students, staff, faculty and alumni. 5.	Social networking sites offers campus surveys, party or event listings that communicates with campus culture. 6.	Some offer advertising to its subscribers. 7.	Facebook has a variety of uses, for example personal, advertising, marketing, and businesses. 8.	Offers students to create a positive self-image. D)	The weaknesses and challenges of social networking 1.	There is social networking addiction. 2.	There are privacy issues. 3.	There is trolling used to emotionally abuse individuals. 4.	There is spamming where social networking sites can sell one’s personal information. 5.	There is copyright infringement. 6.	There is online bullying. 7.	One can spread negative sentiments. E)	Learning example of social networking in a classroom 1.	I would introduce Facebook by using an interactive whiteboard. 2.	I would show the students how to create a Facebook account. 3.	I would give the students directions how to use Facebook. F)	Types of social networking 1. Friendship, ex.Friendster 2. Dating, ex. Date.com 3. Business, ex. LinkedIn Business Network 4. Hobbies, ex. Music Social Network 5. Informational, ex. Do-it-yourself Community 6. Educational, ex. The Math Forum 7. News, ex. Now Public

Work Cited

Online Social Networking Dangers and Benefits Social Networking Site Dangers. Web.19 Nov 2012.

Social Networking-Pros and Cons. Web.19 Nov 2012.

Tech and Learning. Web. 19 Nov 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.150.66.2 (talk) 22:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 November 2012
Small typo on this page, in numbered point 1. the word question is spelled "queston".

Checa985 (talk) 05:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done RudolfRed (talk) 06:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

King Shawn
Travis Shawn Steele Or Better Known By His Stage Name King Shawn Is An American Underground Rapper — Preceding unsigned comment added by TravisSteele96 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Translations
I'm sure there's a page on what to do if you have an article from another Wikipedia and you want to translate it for the English Wikipedia; this page should mention that one at some point.--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:32, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 22 May 2013
Chandu.nikam (talk) 11:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Empty "request". &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 14:53, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Charles Emmanuel Santos Mauricio Demain Fajardo Santander 408th Prince of France Arsenal Kingdom
Charles Emmanuel M. Demain for short is the 408th prince of France Arsenal Kingdom, and therefore granted the Junior C.E.O. of Demain Industries as there Family business... Anyways he is Born in France He is born at January 14, 1997 and currently leaving in The Philippines and even though he is an American citizen he still wants his Mother's Home town. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.205.152.130 (talk) 14:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Today's edits by Biosthmors
I see from the edit summaries that the user is being WP:BOLD, but such a large removal of content (while leaving a far less daunting page behind) is, well, removing lots of useful content. Would it be better to move the pre-bolded version (some 28,000 bytes larger) to another page and make it easily and obviously accessible from this one as a more advanced version for those who want the extra depth? —Vanderdecken∴∫ξφ 14:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Good point Vanderdecken. I'll do that. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 14:34, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:Your first article in more detail. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 14:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * See Copying within Wikipedia; you've just made a cut and paste move. Once the dust has settled, this will need an admin to sort out the history of the two pages. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops. Good thing newbies are experimenting though. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 15:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * What can we do to fix that? Hmmmm.... Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 15:50, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed? Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 15:54, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the histories of the pages involved. (I think this is my fault, because I suggested that Biosthmors just edit this page rather than just moving it and starting a new page.) I haven't done anything with the talk page histories yet though. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Why wasn't the simplified version better? Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 14:42, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There is some related discussion at my talk page about my revert of the move, which can be viewed here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)