Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 100

A wikipedia admin is reverting all truths on a charlatans page
Hello..

There is a wikipedia admin called january who is doing his maximum to revert all edits to the page ankit fadia the individual in question is a charlatan and a scammer. he is giving out fake and useless certificates here in india. please google "ankit fadia revealed, forbes" and it will give a list of all the scams and lies this person has done..

Ankit fadia has even lied about his education on wikipedia, but when i tried to remove that (because there is no record of him ever being a stanford graduate) and his claims about helping C.I.A are all false...so my question is how can i remove all false claims by ankit fadia without being interrupted by a wikipedia admin(january?) who has been watching over that article for many months..

Jarjarjarraj (talk) 19:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello,
 * If you think that the facts on the Ankit Fadia page are incorrect, but there is a relevant discussion on the talk page. In Wikipedia, we go by the principle of consensus and therefore if there is any dispute, you are invited to discuss that on the talk page.
 * Also, you are requested to not to resort to any Personal Attacks but to try to find the sourced information directly.
 * I hope this helps you.
 * Cheers,
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Did I add the coordinates correctly?
I just added coordinates to something for the first time a town called Neuroofen did I just want to know if i did it correctly or if their is anything else i need to do or any other way to do it that would work better?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroofen

Thats the link to the page. Thanks in advance!!

Shashenka (talk) 17:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yup, it's displayed very nicely on the top right hand corner of the article.  Arctic   Kangaroo  18:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Not to be confused with Nurofen?!--ukexpat (talk) 18:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much Arctic Kangaroo!

Shashenka (talk) 19:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Is it crucial to have birthdate/place information for an article on a musician?
I'm writing an article on a punk rock accordianist - do I need his birthdate/place? Irisalroy (talk) 15:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi there Iris, and welcome to the Teahouse! If the information is publicly available and the subject has not previously shown a preference to keep the information hidden, you should feel free to include it. However, it's not necessary; just a nice thing to have. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Irisalroy, and welcome to the Teahouse. :) Regarding the "birthdate" part, it actually isn't necessary, but I strongly encourage you to put it in if anytime, you come to know about it (or you already know the date). It will provide additional information to the readers. As for the "place" part, could you explain further what you are asking? I don't really get what you mean. Cheers and happy editing!  Arctic   Kangaroo  15:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * My guess is that Irisalroy is referring to the birthplace of the musician. If a reliable source mentions birth date or birthplace, this information should be added to the biography.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  02:13, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

sandboxes
i have started a sandbox and was wondering, when i click to have it requested to be created, will it automatically be renamed inappropriately? thank you Sincerely zeroro 13:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Be more explicit in your question, please...  Miss Bono   (zootalk)  13:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Zeroro, welcome to Wikipedia. Your sandbox has been renamed as User:Zeroro/sandbox. Happy editing! ;) Arctic   Kangaroo  13:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * i meant to say appropriate but i wasn't thinking straight. sorry

thank you Sincerely zeroro 13:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Zeroro. And your answer is no. First you'll have to submit the article for review through WP:AfC, and then someone will review it. If the reviewer approves, then they'll automatically take that article to the title it should be going. If they dont approve the article, they'll inform you.
 * Also, can you remove the word sincerely from your signature? It looks confusing.
 * Hope this helped.
 * Cheers,
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Category section won't recognise certain links
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Seek the Fair Land

In the above page, which I am currently working on, the Category section will not recognise two categories which I know to exist i.e 'List of Irish Novelists' and 'Cromwellian conquest of Ireland' i.e. that both appear as Redlinks Also I would like to change the main title from 'Seek the Fair Land', to 'Seek the Fair Land (Novel)'. Is this possible? Thank you. Wildmountainscene (talk) 10:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Wildmountainscene, welcome to the Teahouse. None of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Seek the Fair Land, Category:List of Irish Novelists, Category:Cromwellian conquest of Ireland exist. I guess you mean Seek the Fair Land, List of Irish novelists, Cromwellian conquest of Ireland. The latter two don't have "Category:" in front of the name so they are not categories. They are articles and could be linked in a see also section, but there is no need for that here. The article is not about a novelist, and Cromwellian conquest of Ireland is already linked earlier in Seek the Fair Land. "(novel)" is only added to an article name if it's needed to disambiguate it from another pagename, for example Waverley (novel) versus Waverley. It's technically possible to change the article title but we don't do it in cases like Seek the Fair Land which cannot be confused with another page. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome to Wikipedia,
 * Please know that articles at AfC (that is, articles that have Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ before their name) do not get categories. Only if they are approved will those articles be added into their respective categories. So I suggest that you add those categories only when you've got the article approved.
 * Hope this helped.
 * Cheers,
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

How do I create columns while creating a new Wikipedia page?
Column is the only word I can think of, though it's not quite what I'm looking for. When you go on a musician's Wikipedia page and you go to an album's track listing, there are "columns" that have, for example, No.- Title - Writers - Length,things like that. I'm creating a new page for an artist's album and I want to add those things, but the problem is that I have no idea how to create the column things in the first place. Can someone explain how to do this? Thanks! JessicaKilgore (talk) 23:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you perhaps looking for how to make a table? Technical 13 (talk) 00:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Jessica! As Technical 13 writes, it sounds as if you want to use a table. They're pretty tricky to get right from scratch -- usually the easiest thing to do is to copy the entire code for a table that looks broadly like what you want (same number of columns) and then rewrite the data. You might like to play around in your sandbox (linked top right menu) with the coding before trying it out in an article. There's also a help page about tables, which explains how to create a simple table from scratch using the table button (second from the right) on the edit toolbar, which you should see when you have an edit window open. Hope this helps and good luck! Espresso Addict (talk) 09:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

What to do about reverted changes?
I delete some junk in the Richard B. Handler article, but twice it has been reverted. I wouldn't mind a second opinion about whether my edits are reasonable, and if so, what can be done about the reversion? Horatio (talk) 22:06, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Horatio. The first course of action is to start a discussion about the links on the article's talk page where you and the other editor can discuss it.  I would be happy to chime in as an unbiased 3rd party once both sides have had a chance to offer their perspective on the matter.  One of the core suggestions of Wikipedia is to assume good faith.  Once you have had a chance to open the discussion and ask your questions as to why this person disagrees with you whether or not the links belong there, you should post a talkback template on their talk page as a neutral way to tell them you want to communicate.  Then it is just a matter of seeing how they respond.  Technical 13 (talk) 00:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Horatio, I have left a comment on the article's talk page; I agree that your edits are reasonable. Steven Zhang re-removed that content, so he probably also agrees. Let's hope Vvv321 doesn't just revert again but joins the discussion instead.
 * In general, inviting more editors to take a look as you did here is always a good idea when you find you disagree with another editor; often articles are covered by WikiProjects (listed on the talk page); the WikiProjects' talk pages are good places to find interested editors. Huon (talk) 00:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks to both of you. I guess adding something to the talk page is a good idea, although I'd be interested to know if there's also some other place of listing such an article, if you fear it's turning into an edit war? It doesn't seem like this page would always be the right place. Horatio (talk) 01:56, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * WikiProjects' talk pages - could be a good suggestion. Horatio (talk) 01:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The article's or the other editor's talk page is always the first place to start. If that doesn't work, you can request a 3rd opinion, come here to the Teahouse, go to the Help Desk, ask at one of the village pumps, ask the proper WikiProject if it is active.  There are lots of options. Technical 13 (talk) 10:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Just an FYI, Vvv321 has been blocked as a check-user confirmed sock puppet. There is an ongoing sockpuppet investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Vvv321. Keri (talk) 11:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * 20 accounts just to edit the Richard B. Handler article? Stunning. Horatio (talk) 11:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Citations to articles that are archived and consequently pay-per-view
Hi All,

I am following your suggestions and cleaning up the draft of my first entry on Nicholas Basbanes. I have run into a couple of articles I would like to use as citations in the new copy, but to see the entire article, I had to pay to see archived material. One is the Washington Post and the other is the South Florida Sun Sentinel, so I would really like to use them. Is it okay for the reader to have to pay to see the citation in its entirety? Dnikkir (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Dnikkir! Yes, that is still fine - while it is generally preferred to link to sources that everyone can read, this isn't essential, and just as it is perfectly ok to reference print sources, it is fine to reference reliable sources behind a paywall. The only thing I try to take care of is to make sure that I add all the fields I can to the reference, in case someone wants to follow it up. - Bilby (talk) 13:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much.

And while I'm at it. I see that some biographical entries that I am using as templates have sections for both references and notes.

Maybe I am querying the wrong way, but I cannot find any info on notes v.references -- how to parse them, cite them (differently?) and have them appear in the contents box. Can you tell me more or direct me to the proper URL to get this info? Or should I just forget about notes?

Dnikkir (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Following up on Dnikkir's first question, WP:RX will allow a person to contact someone who might be able to access articles that require payment. I can see NewsBank at several libraries I go to and frequently use it to edit Wikipedia articles.


 * As for the second question, I found a possible answer at WP:REFGROUP.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 18:27, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Very useful. 24.147.247.94 (talk) 13:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Zodiac
The zodiac has 26 signs. I have to edit the zodiacal section. What is the best way to do it? Here is a link.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/137790249/Academic-Zodiac-13-13-26

http://qat.ch/fk0a historically hosts some 45000 relevant publications. http://qat.ch/EdlD

Since this is the scientific zodiac, it is greatly opposed by superstition. What is the best way to present it?

Thanks.

The Author

user:25fact

Moving this possible question from the host page heather walls (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi 25fact you cannot edit Wikipedia to reflect information in a publication unless the publication was not self-published (with rare exceptions), has or is by an author having a reputation for fact checking and accuracy, is broadly supported by scholarship in the field as shown through independent published reliable sources (e.g., peer-reviewed journals; books published by university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers), is a significant opinion in the literature of the field such that it should be mentioned at all, should only be represented in proportion to its prominence in the field, and must not present scientific claims that are not supported by mainstream science. Even where such criteria are met, it should not be added by the author of the publication because of a conflict of interest. Because of the way this has been presented as your publication, and looking at the websites you refer to, I think this does not meet our standards for inclusion anywhere on Wikipedia. However, the internet is wide and there are many alternative outlets where this material might belong. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:45, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I am relevant source: all calculations are NASA based. The journals will at best wonder at some 13 zodiacal stations, not even knowing how to calculate ascendant; thus, the problem is what is relevant and what is not: public opinion has nothing to so with science. do I make a separate page?

213.103.161.192 (talk) 06:32, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Of course you are a relevant source, because it is your theory. But you are considered not a reliable source for writing about it in Wikipedia, because you have a conflict of interest. Unless and until the theory is written about by multiple reliable sources, independent of you (books from reputable publishers, refereed academic papers, newspapers) it may not appear in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Publishing from user sandbox
Hi Teahouse guys, When I put an article into my user sandbox to see how it will look, I can preview or save. If I save, will the article actually be published? All the legalese makes it look that way. Or is it just a mockup of the editing pane for a real article? Thanks, Jim James Council (talk) 18:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually it won't be published until you post it in the main space. feel free to save your changes at your sandbox.  Miss Bono   (zootalk)  18:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Jim,
 * A sandbox is a "testspace" to see how articles and stuff look, and to edit them at your own leisure. Which means that if you save, it just saves to the "Sandbox", but not publish the article. To actually publish it, you (or someone else) will have to move it to the main space, where the readers can actually see the article.
 * Hope this helped.
 * Cheers,
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Just to be clear, while it is not officially "published" in the article mainspace, it will still show up in searches and anyone can view it. Technical 13 (talk) 18:50, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually, it'll only show up if someone searches for your sandbox exactly. It won't show up in Google searches normally until it's in mainspace :) Remember that all rules still apply in sandboxes however. gwickwire  talk editing 20:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ. Many of my sandbox articles have shown up in various search engines, often to my chagrin. Spiders don't care where they crawl. GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Why is my page getting rejected?
Hello!

I am a first time wikipedia user and am having trouble with my submissions. They keep getting rejected!

Can someone help me out and break down exactly what I'm doing wrong??

Here is a link to one of my pages: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/BPN

I added references after the first rejection. However, I disagree that it lacks notability, as this company has recently won awards that various media festivals, plus it's sister agencies, which do pretty much the same thing have pages (UM and Initiative)

Your help is GREATLY APPRECIATED!

Abrusovanik (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Here is a link to the article WT:Articles_for_creation/BPN for anyone interested.Theroadislong (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I suggest asking to be more specific in their reasoning for declination.  Outside of that, you can always resubmit it. Technical 13 (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I followed up with "Geek4gurl" and did not see a clear rationale in what they did. Which is why I am asking for a fresh perspective.

Abrusovanik (talk) 14:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks Notable to me. I suggest making it go live and see what happens. GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

What should I do when my Page was vandalize
I am gonna quit Wikipedia :'(  Miss Bono   (zootalk)  13:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Surely you're not going to be set back by a vandal? Just revert/rollback his edit. Simple. ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 13:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok... Thanks!  Miss Bono   (zootalk)  13:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * With you having designed such a gorgeous user page, we are not going to let you go! GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, what THEY said... :p I worked too hard on your user pages to let you go, and that's why I pushed and now you are in a 3-day semi-protection on your pages. ;) Technical 13 (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Participating in DYK
I have concerns about an article that has been nominated for DYK. Another editor is acting as if she owns the article, and she has removed all of my concerns about the article and accused me and another editor of being liars, and of hate speech, myself for posting concerns about the article and for raising issues about the owner's English-language level, the other editor for posting a suggestion that I raise my issues on the article talk page, and both of us for participating in the discussion.

What is a useful way to handle this? The article has many problems, and it turns out the editor's inaccurate use of sources seems to be an issue, the reason I raised concerns about her apparent limited-English to begin with. Another editor has had similar problems with this editor using edit summaries to deliver personal attacks, with the editor posting long-winded off topic rants and with not being able to communicate with this editor (about two years ago).

This editor cannot be communicated with, if one disagrees with her. And, as this project requires community consensus, communication is something a requirement. The article she writes do not accurately reflect an understanding of the source material, and they are being spread into cyberspace from the front page of Wikipedia.

I consider that most avenues for dispute resolution on Wikipedia are not open to IP editors because of hostility towards IP editors, although technically a dispute would have communication at some point in time, and there is no communication going on due to the editor's personal attacks and inability to dialogue in English. I have been editing and creating article on Wikipedia as an IP for a long time, and I don't intend to change this. The content of an article is what should stand for a voice around an encyclopedia.

Thanks for any suggestions. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 22:48, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! Nobody is (or at least nobody should be) hostile to IPs, see WP:IPs are human too. The first step is to try to talk it over on the article talk page or the other user's talk page (I tend to prefer the latter because it takes usually hours as opposed to weeks to get a response). Failing this, the next stage is to ask for a WP:Third opinion, ask for WP:Mediation, WP:Dispute resolution, or file a request for comment on the other user. I realize that being an IP, you will be unable to create the relevant pages for a mediation/dispute resolution/request for comment. However, someone else will probably create the page for you if you ask (or you could just create an account and immediately be able to create pages).King Jakob  C2 23:07, 27 April 2013 (UTC)\
 * I have been editing Wikiepdia for a long time, and at some point, I have to say, I have no interest in an account, and I hope that people will either just respect that (not a worthwhile hope) or work hard to get IPs banned from Wikipedia.
 * I think that when an editor is as obsessed with personal attacks as this editor appears to be, my opening a conversation on her talk page will be taken as an act of hostility. I will weigh it, though. Also, dispute resolution appears to require dialogue, as I said above. This person just pours out volumes of words that are not really readable. And, I do consider that if there is no means for an IP to participate in a process, that doesn't mean asking someone to help with it, but taking the hint that that door is firmly closed to you. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 23:13, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have made good-faith attempts to discuss with other parties, and they would not engage, you can then certainly go to the other resources in the Dispute Resolution process. --ColinFine (talk) 00:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I have warned this user with a level 3 warning, and boldly reverted the hook selection at the template. I have also added further note at the end clarifying the situation, and you are advised to report the user to the administrators should they consort to such behaviour again. For safety, I have Watchlisted the article myself.
 * On behalf of all user accounts, I also deeply apologize for such puerile acts by other users against IPs, and hope that such users stop tainting the name of all the rest of us. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 00:51, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I got the most important help: someone knowledgeable is fixing the problems with readability in the article before it goes on the main page. Thanks. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 04:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Common.css/User:Paladox2014
hi could some on please create MediaWiki:Common.css/User:Paladox2014 could some one just copy the codes from wikinews:MediaWiki:Common.css/User:Dendodge to MediaWiki:Common.css/User:Paladox2014 please Paladox2014 (talk) 18:50, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Actually, it doesn't quite work that way and is much simpler.  You can actually copy the css yourself to User:Paladox2014/common.css as that is where your custom css is stored instead of MediaWiki:Common.css/User:Paladox2014 as only system administrators can touch the MediaWiki namespace. If you need any further assistance, let us know and we would be happy to help you further. Technical 13 (talk) 19:15, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * could you copy this wikinews:MediaWiki:Common.css/User:Dendodge to MediaWiki:Common.css/User:Paladox2014 because I would like people to see it visable Paladox2014 (talk) 19:21, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Anyone will be able to view it on User:Paladox2014/common.css, but only you and administrators would be able to edit it. There is no reason for it to go into the MediaWiki namespace and can't imagine you'll convince an administrator otherwise. Technical 13 (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * yes but they carnt view the desgn I created at my user page or User:Paladox2014/Main Page Paladox2014 (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes we can! --ColinFine (talk) 00:44, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Of British agents and Canadian smokers
I note that P:JB currently redirects to Portal:James Bond. Is there any consensus that it should not be redirected to Portal:Justin Bieber instead? ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 13:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Bonkers. I think the right venue for that discussion would be redirects for discussion. Personally I would say perhaps a disambiguation page or keeping it as is... good luck! Go   Phightins  !  13:28, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks. I brought it to the Teahouse first because I was thinking maybe there's consensus not to take it over to RfD or something. Will hop over there now. Thanks again... ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 13:31, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello Bonkers,
 * I see a RfD template on the page, but no place where the discussion is started. Could you remove it and add the tag again? If there is no discussion, the tag must be removed.
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * RFD template removed. It can be re-added if and when a discussion is listed at RFD. NtheP (talk) 19:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

wikinews banner and wikipedia banner
hi could I have some help to create a Wikipedia banner similer to please it is for User:Paladox2014/Main_Page Paladox2014 (talk) 13:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Lock icon next to external link
I was working on the Farida Karodia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farida_Karodia In my further reading section, I added links to the publishers' sites for the books referenced. Next to one of them (Rastogi, Pallavi) is a lock icon. Is this a problem? What does it mean?

FaulkTest (talk) 20:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey FaulkTest, it's no problem :) Links with locks by them (like the one that you put in your question), go to httpS sites. HTTP is the normal internet protocol, whereas HTTPS is the "secure" protocol, actually using a different port from your computer. Basically, it's no different than another link to most people :) gwickwire  talk editing 20:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you! That helps a lot.

FaulkTest (talk) 20:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Help:External link icons shows more icons. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok thanks so much Deor!

Shashenka (talk) 19:51, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Help! Running a GLAMwiki workshop, stymied by 6 new accounts per IP limit
Hi, we have a bunch of new editors registering accounts in the library of Pasadena city college. We have hit the "6 new accounts per IP" limit. A number of editors are submitting requests that an account be created for them, and have confirmed their email addresses. Do we just wait? Is there any way an admin or someone can accelerate the creation of their accounts so that the workshop can continue? They just want to have access to their personal user sandboxes to practice editing. Sarasays (talk) 18:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * example IP: 10.16.30.22 Sarasays (talk) 18:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, and really sorry for the late reply,
 * One of you could request to be granted the account creator status at the requests page so you could bypass that 6 new accounts barrier, and help create the accounts for the rest of you. Also, you could personally ask one of the account creators or admins to do it for you.
 * If you'd want, I could try contacting one for you.
 * Hope this helped. Cheers,
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello,
 * I just contacted an admin, and they granted the account creator priviledges to you. Now you can be creating all the extra accounts that wasn't possible to.
 * Hope this helped, and use it well! :)
 * And once again, sorry for the delay.
 * Cheers,
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you SO much for this! We finished up the workshop by practicing in the main sandbox for those who didn't yet have their own sandboxes.   Account creator status will be very handy to have for the next time I am running a workshop.  We have run into this problem before when doing new editor events on a campus.
 * Another good thing: the whole group witnessed the fact that when you are having a problem and don't know where to turn, the Teahouse has got your back!
 * Thank you again, Sarasays (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * We're always happy to help! :) Do come back if you have further problems. Also, if your problem is urgent, the IRC might get you a faster but less comprehensive reply.
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

need help adding photo
Greetings wise Teahouse folk,

I am trying to add a photo to my Rittenhouse Elementary School article. Unfortunately i do not yet speak Wikipedia, and I'm stumped. I've looked at the various tutorials, but I can't seem to figure out what to do. I have one photo in the article already, and have no idea how I got it there. Oh for a wikipedia microchip implant straight to my brain!

cheers, gagegsGagegs (talk) 00:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome back to the Teahouse Gagegs. Are you trying to add an image to your article that has already been uploaded, or are you trying to upload one? You might read images help or use the file upload wizard respectively. Technical 13 (talk) 00:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Howdy Technical 13. Good to see you here! I uploaded a photo I took today to wikimedia. Thank God at least I figured that out. Now I just can't figure out how to get it over to my Rittenhouse Elementary School article. I've read the images help and file upload wizard, but am having no luck. I am a complete null and void with computer/wikipedia speak, so most of both articles were "greek" to me. gagegsGagegs (talk) 01:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * oops, my response didn't appear. I'll try again. Hi Technical 13. Good to see you here. I took a photo today of the Rittenhouse elementary school, somehow I figured out how to get it into wikimedia, but I can't figure out how to get the photo from wikimedia into my Rittenhouse article. I've tried both of your suggestions previously, but I'm obviously doing something wrong. gagegsGagegs (talk) 01:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello again Gagegs, I have looked at the article and seen the problem. You had "File:File:" which was confusing the MediaWiki software. Files are added by just one "File:" before the image name. Cullen has fixed it for you (he beat me to the save button and I got an ), and you can .  Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 01:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello Gina,
 * Yes, for once, I beat Technical 13 to a solution to a technical problem, and I commented on your talk page. The software gets confused by extra characters. Don't worry, I've made similar errors myself many times.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  01:51, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Why did WikiPedia get a black eye in the NY Times?
This article is about moving females from the category "American Novelist" to American Women Novelist" but not moving males to "American Men Novelist". http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism.html?_r=0 Why is that being done? Bodysurfinyon (talk) 12:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for visiting the Teahouse, Bodysurfinyon. There is an extensive discussion of this controversy on User talk:Jimbo Wales, in the second section titled "WTF". I agree that this is a black eye for Wikipedia, but the situation is more complicated than the New York Times opinion piece describes.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  15:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Template Editing - Subway
On the page for Giheung Station the infobox has a yellow stripe with Bundang Line and I am trying to add it in for EverLine. I can see the code "line_2 = ever" so I thing it should be updated at Template:SMS color or Template:Infobox SMS station/line and I tried but doesn't seem to work. I am also hoping to do the same with U Line. Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! ₪Rick n Asia₪ 09:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Rick, and welcome to the Teahouse. It wasn't working because Template:Infobox SMS station/line was passing "EverLine" (upper case L) to Template:SMS color, which was looking for "Everline" (lower case l).  This was causing the templates to fail to make the connection and display EverLine (anywhere).  I've fixed the problem for you. Happy editing!!! Technical 13 (talk) 12:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much! I'll keep an eye out for upper/lowercase issues. Have a great day! ₪Rick n Asia₪ 16:22, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * You as well. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 18:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Just finished redraft of my first entry. Asking for reviewers before I submit
I have incorporated the excellent suggestions from the Teahouse in my new draft of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dnikkir/Nicholas_A._Basbanes. Now I would like to ask for a few reviewers to see if I might finally be ready to submit. Thanks so much to you all.

Dnikkir (talk) 00:51, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, Dnikkir. I think that you are pretty close to submission. Here are some suggestions: Please wikilink items in the body of the article, such as the city where he was born, the schools he attended, the newspapers he wrote for, the book thief he wrote about, and so on. Convert the bare URLs in the reference section to article title links. Do not use Wikipedia articles as references, as one Wikipedia article is not considered a reliable source for another Wikipedia article. Good work.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  02:06, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

May need to see you at your talk page for help. Many thanks.

Dnikkir (talk) 10:55, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Greetings all. this is gagegs. I created the Rittenhouse Elementary School Article for a graduate school class in history. I started the article in sandbox, then pasted it back into a word document because I am more comfortable with it. Because I'm so new to Wikipedia, I don't even know how my article became "live". I am working on substantial edits of the document in Word on my laptop, and will incorporate those edits into the Wiki article within the next 24 hours. I appreciate all your advice and input. I admit I am virtually lost in Wikipedia, being a newbie, so I need all the help and advice I can get. You have all been extremely kind and helpful, and you have made this process a bit less painful. I appreciate your patience as I learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia, and apologize for my mistakes. I'm learning.

cheers, gagegsGagegs (talk) 01:12, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Just finished redraft of my first entry. Asking for reviewers before I submit
I have incorporated the excellent suggestions from the Teahouse in my new draft of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dnikkir/Nicholas_A._Basbanes. Now I would like to ask for a few reviewers to see if I might finally be ready to submit. Thanks so much to you all.

Dnikkir (talk) 00:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Dnikkir,
 * At first glance, your article looks fine to me. It should be accepted for being in the encyclopedia mainspace without any problems.
 * I suggest you submit it so the person well versed in doing that can review your page thoroughly, and do the needful.
 * Sorry for the late reply,
 * TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * [Next time please add sections at the Top of the Teahouse]

Thanks very much. Dnikkir (talk) 13:01, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

What's the next for FA
??   Miss Bono   (zootalk)  19:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Please explain what you mean by your question. Thus Spake   Lee Tru.  19:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Oops! Sorry, my bad...What category goes after FA??  Miss Bono   (zootalk)  19:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I think she means 'Featured Article'. Revent (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * You can find out what is upcoming on the FA agenda by visiting WP:Today's featured article/April 2013 (or whatever the current July 2024 is) Technical 13 (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * What do you mean "Category"? Are you looking for the list of "Article classes" or grading system? If so, WP:Article classes should answer your question. Technical 13 (talk) 19:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Miss Bono, there is no "next" after FA. An FA is the very top any article can reach. They are Wikipedia's "finest" article. But the TFAs are slightly higher in standard than the ordinary FA. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * What does TFA mean??  Miss Bono   (zootalk)  20:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Today's featured article, of course. The section that comes to the main page. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * TFA is not a higher rank than FA. Featured articles don't make the main page based on quality, some (but not all) are chosen for timeliness (that is, to match a date in the article), but mostly their chosen to provide a variety on the main page over time.  It's assumed that every FA is equally as good, so quality itself is not taken into consideration when to put an FA on the main page.  If you'd like to see a specific featured article appear on the main page, there is a request page at Today's featured article/requests that has a "points system" for getting an article on the main page, but the points do not have a quality component, they're merely there to break conflicts when multiple articles end up wanting to be featured on the same day, or when two articles on similar topics could appear close together, or stuff like that.  And the point system gives a pretty heavy weight to articles that have been FA the longest; the idea is that every featured article will eventually make it to the main page.  There's many times when I've seen an article make the main page just on a single suggestion to User:Raul654, who has run the TFA process for many years.  For example, I had just heard Ray Charles's "What'd I Say" on the radio or something, saw it was an FA,  and dropped Raul a note suggesting it'd make the main page.  It made the main page within a few weeks of my suggesting it, for no other reason than I'd recently heard the song and saw it was a featured article.  TFA is not a higher rank than FA.  It's just articles that ended up on the main page, but the process of picking the TFA article is not based on quality, per se.  -- Jayron  32  05:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying. i did not know the idea is that all FA's will make the front page. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipediholic
where should I answer the questions (which page)??  Miss Bono   (zootalk)  14:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Assuming that you are referring to talk page discussions, there is no hard and fast rule, but conversations often continue wherever they are started. If you post a message to another user's talk page, it is common courtesy to add it to your watch list and look for a response there.  If a conversation is started on your talk page, then respond accordingly.  Andrew327 14:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It's also a good idea to let the other editor(s) know when you respond on your own talk page, as a lot of people won't watchlist your page or simply forget. You could use the talkback template for this, or just leave them a short message. Chamal T •C 14:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Both of those are good answers and not wrong, I might also add that some (many) seasoned editors may have some instructions right in their edit notice (which shows above the edit box on their talk page) that tells you how they prefer to do it. You have to love those people, they make it so easy and there is no question. For example see my edit notice which says if I leave a note on your page, I'll have it watchlisted at least until the discussion is over so there is no need to Talkback and if you leave a message on my page, I'll respond on my page, so your should do the same. ;) Technical 13 (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, uh, I don't know about the rest of these chuckleheads, but I'm guessing from the section title that you're asking about the Wikipediholism test? If so, then you really don't need to answer them at all. I'd just give yourself 10,000 points for asking. :) (In seriousness, the test is purely humorous, I don't think it's intended to actually be taken.) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Ohhh... Yeah, that makes sense too. I actually took it and you can see the results in a userbox on my page (Okay, I'll just post them here: 166,702,505). I simply used the toolserver interactive version, but be advised that it took me like three hours to take. Technical 13 (talk) 15:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Haha I see... way off, me... Chamal T •C 15:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * yeah, but i would like to answer them. Where should I post my answers?? i think I am a Wikipediholic lol   Miss Bono   (zootalk)  15:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * You could just write them down on a piece of paper, type it in a word document, or if you want to keep it on Wikipedia use a subpage of your userpage. There's no "official" place to record the answers because as Writ Keeper said, it's more of a joke than a serious test and you have to do the marking yourself and all. Chamal T •C 16:04, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * There is now a automated form of the test that keeps track for you.  Thus Spake   Lee Tru.  19:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Editnotice
Heh. I just stole your edit notice Technical. Hope you don't mind. :) Revent (talk) 16:08, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't mind at all as long as you're not using my edit count table too. "Do'h!" Technical 13 (talk) 17:00, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Heh, of course not. :) I actually rephrased it a bit when I had time just now. I was just unfamilar with that template, and thought "Neat!". Revent (talk) 18:09, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Typically, that edit notice would go on User talk:Revent/Editnotice which will display the message only when someone is editing your talk page and the notice will be right on top of / attached to the edit box instead of at the top of the page. ;) Technical 13 (talk) 18:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I have the 'please be really nice if editing my user page' attached that way there. Sectioning this was a good idea, btw. Thanks. Revent (talk) 19:04, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

How to deal with vandals....
And how to use the {{subst:uw-vandalism2}} ??? Where should i type it..Sorry im new.. Hi

Im trying to write a list of FAMOUS rich indian entrepreneurs and businessmen...But a user named Sandy.del keeps coming back and adds his advertisement and also add his website links...Sandy.del has also vandalized several other wiki pages by adding his name n websites(u can check his contrib list).. :D..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_entrepreneurs

thanks

Jarjarjarraj (talk) 14:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. I'd suggest putting  or   on Sandy.del's talk page (User talk:Sandy.del). King  Jakob  C2 14:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Jakob is right. For your reference, there are many different messages that you can place on user pages, all of which are listed here.  Andrew327 14:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for answering my questions :-) what happens if the user persists in vandalizing and adding spam links to wikipedia and reaches maximum warnings? who will ban him? Jarjarjarraj (talk) 17:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * In that case, the user is reported to admins, who check his previous vandalism and ban him. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 17:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Diffs between category membership
There has to be a way to do this other than manual comparison, though it may be a bit involved for here. I'm trying to figure out how to generate a list of articles that are in one admin cat, Wikipedia_articles_with_VIAF_identifiers, and not in another Wikipedia_articles_with_LCCN_identifiers. If you look at the cats, you'll see the huge difference in size. Thing is it's trivially easy to get the LCCN out of VIAF, and adding the LCCN gives a link in Authority Control to a WorldCat search, which is a /really/ good thing. Thanks. Revent (talk) 08:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the TeaHouse, Revent. I suggest that you ask your authority control-related questions at Wikipedia_talk:Authority_control, where there's a much more specialist technical audience. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm actually active on that page. :) My q was more about comparing the categories, which I think is kinda off-topic there, though someone might know. I'll try it. Thanks. Revent (talk) 11:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually this is very easy to do with Magnus' Catscan tool, you're just looking for the difference between two sets  Jebus989 ✰ 11:07, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Awesome. I knew there had to be a way. You rock. :) Revent (talk) 11:27, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, it seems that due to the category size (with VIAF is HUGE) I get a 504 error before the comparison completes. :( Revent (talk) 12:27, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah ok sorry, I did start the query but had to leave before it finished so didn't test it fully. In that case I'd just get the two lists in plain text and do a quick string comparison in your scripting language of choice, I can do this for you if you want (probably best to ping me on my talk)—though I guess with 260K vs. 10K the intersection is almost negligible!  Jebus989 ✰ 18:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * NP. :) The pointer will still be very useful. I just was hoping for was a way to do it dynamically so I could fiddle with various ways of getting the books out too, and just limiting it to the Bios, which is what I'm after. Unfortunately, a /lot/ of both groups are missing things that would make discriminating them easy. Revent (talk) 19:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

What can I do on Wikipedia?

 * Considering I work for an ISP, is there anything I can do on here to work with IP's? I often sort out abuse reports but I don't know if there's any equivalent that I could help out on. Had a bit of a go at editing articles but my colleagues say there is much more to Wikipedia than that. Thanks TheHoChiMinhTrail (talk) 19:42, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, one thing that you could get involved with is sock-puppet investigations, looking to see if editors are hiding between multiple usernames. It can get quite technical so your expertise could be helpful over there. Of course, you can also edit IT related articles as well. Happy editing! Best, Keilana&#124;Parlez ici 19:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the Teahouse, TheHoChiMinhTrail. There is certainly much more to Wikipedia than editing articles, but the reason that we are all here is to improve the encyclopedia. Since your question is pretty general, I recommend that you read an essay called IPs are human too. I expect that essay will give you some insights into the question of IP editors. Your might also be interested in the Counter-Vandalism Unit. Please feel free to ask a more detailed or specific question as a followup.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  19:54, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No, sir, I would tend to disagree... You can never be certain... ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 11:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Based on your contributions so far, I might recommend that you spend some time editing articles and get more familiar with the way the community works before signing up for WP:SPI or WP:CVUA or the like. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 20:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * you can also look at Help:Editing to get general help for editing a page and Wiki markup.  Thus Spake   Lee Tru.  11:15, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks for your very helpful replies. I'll spend a week or two getting some experience with editing and then I'll start taking up you suggestions. Thankyou  TheHoChi   MinhTrail   20:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Is there an essay on deletion through redirect?
I am active in new page patrolling and some editors have a proclivity for blanking page content and replacing it with a redirect to a related topic. Is there a standard or an essay on when this is appropriate? Andrew327 16:08, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Andrew! I would start by reading WP:R. Then, I would read up on WP:CSD.  Finally, I would read WP:RfD. When you get done with all of that, if you still have questions, I would be happy to try and help you hunt down the specifics of your question. Technical 13 (talk) 16:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * you can also look at Help:Editing to get general help for editing a page and Wiki markup.  Thus Spake   Lee Tru.  11:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Asking questions at the Teahouse -- no previewing posts allowed?
Um, you can't preview, there's only a "Ask my question" button? Well, that's another question then, why oh why oh why, on a page designed to try to welcome beginners would you not offer a preview to encourage editors to use it?

-68.107.137.178 (talk) 22:48, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That is odd. The Help Desk has a "ask a question" button too, but it allows you to preview.  I don't know why they chose to do it differently here.  RudolfRed (talk) 01:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Can someone fix this here? -198.228.216.170 (talk) 03:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * You might want to make this suggestion on the Talk page for this page, though that might seem a bit odd. Revent (talk) 18:15, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Adding several items to "Category:Seoul subway lines"
Hello~ I enjoy working on the metro/subway lines in Seoul and notices several not in this list including Gyeongui Line, Gyeongchun Line, EverLine, and U Line. How can I make sure they are added to the list? Thanks~ ₪Rick n Asia₪ 17:31, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Rick, if they should be in that category then adding  at the bottom of each article will add that article to the category. NtheP (talk) 17:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Wonderful, that was too easy. Thanks for the help :) ₪Rick n Asia₪ 02:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Category modification is much easier if you turn on HotCat. It's under the 'Gadgets' tab of your user preferences. Revent (talk) 18:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

User Interface very complicated while editing.
Hi friends,

I remember since 8 years back till now, anything which i wanted to know i just type 'xxx wiki' google search. Very recently i became eager to add more info. & edit articles.

However when i go to edit tab my first impression is its just dustbin. So difficult to read it, adding anything like infobox,etc. Many thing i just dont.

My real question is why isn,t the user interface easy like MS-Word,paint,blogspot,etc. ??? Or is it I am the new user & so finding it difficult ? (e.g. Sohamkarnik (talk) 04:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC) Just now I came to know that we have to put this comma 4 times at end. Was thinking for a minute why ask button not working. Oh God now what next!!!)Sohamkarnik (talk) 04:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Sohamkarnik I understand what you say but don't worry you'll see that in time you'll get a hold of it. Try to write everything on the wordpad before you add your edit to make it easier to correct. Also you can use your Sandbox first so you can practice. And read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction_2 it'll help. And I guess it is not that easy in order to make it harder on people that just come to vandalize. And the people that are serious about contributing take the time to read the tutorials. But you'll see that in no time you'll be editing with no trouble. Take care. Maxcat000 (talk) 05:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * This is an issue that has been a high priority of Wikimedia for some time now, and they have an early version of a simple visual editor that is currently in testing. I have been testing it off and on and it is improving.  There is no release schedule set, but at some point, editing Wikipedia will be just as easy as editing Blogger or Wordpress.  Andrew327 16:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Can't a 'crat protect a page too?  Thus Spake   Lee Tru.  19:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Technically they can; however, unless they are an administrator too (not always true), then it is not "technically" in their "job description". Technical 13 (talk) 19:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

move article from sandbox to "live"
Howdy teahouse,

gagegs here. I am very new to all this, and completely confused. I have an article in sandbox, and I cannot figure out what I need to do to actually submit the article. I am completely tech challenged, and Wikipedia help pages are like a foreign language to me. Thanks in advance for any help offered to this stressed out newbie. gagegsGagegs (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello Gagegs, and welcome to the Teahouse. I took a quick look, and it seems like you did a "cut and paste" to create the article, rather than a "move". Moving is better because it preserves the entire edit history.


 * To be frank, your article has a lot of problems. Some are technical, and some are more fundamental. The first thing that I notice is that the school has two names. I understand that can happen, but the title of the article and the description in the lead paragraph should match. Alternate names should be discussed and explained later in the article. Otherwise, it is confusing.


 * Another problem is that there is general consensus that the vast majority of elementary schools are ineligible for Wikipedia articles. Those get redirected to school district or city and town articles. The exception are those of indisputable architectural or historic significance. So, that is the case you will have to make.


 * Your article also has problems with presentation of images, and correct formatting of references. These are the type of issues that can be resolved in a sandbox before moving the article into the main Wikipedia space.


 * Because of the various issues I've identified, I consider your article to be at high risk of deletion. I don't have time to address these issues myself right now, but I encourage you to work on them, and please feel free to ask more questions here.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  03:06, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Your article is Rittenhouse Elementary School, and I notice that other helpful editors have already jumped in to deal with some of the problems I mentioned. Wikipedia can be a wonderful place.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  03:11, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've looked this article over, and am wondering if it is just me or is this article copy and pasted from somewhere else? 16K bits is an awfully large page starting size.  I'm not saying it's not possible, as I know that some editors choose to start writing their article on their local machine in notepad or whatnot and copy it in from there, which is fine.  I just want to make sure that this article isn't a copyvio. I've not yet found an effect tool to search the web and test articles for this.  If anyone knows of a tool or script for that (see my talk page as I've been referred to some already, but one of those returned an error, two of them only compare sites if you have URLs for both, and the last only calculates edits by a user. Technical 13 (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * FWIW, Gagegs has mentioned elsewhere that she is writing this article as part of a graded Grad School assignment, so I think we can be somewhat assured it's not plagarism. :) Revent (talk) 11:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)