Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 165

Identifying pictures as a users own work
Dear Sir/Madam,

User Noah Levinson uploaded a photo of Nutritionist Alan Berg that Noah took of Mr. Berg, to add to an unpublished article on Mr. Berg. Wikipedia deleted the picture on November 22nd because it was 'unlikely to be own work; small resolutions, missing EXIF.' Why was the work suspected to be someone elses? How can Noah successfully upload this image?

Thanks! - Lily Lily.olson23 (talk) 07:31, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't give you a complete answer, but I can give you some hints. Freely licensed images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons rather than Wikipedia, which hosts copyrighted images under very limited fair use exceptions to copyright law. The first step is to be sure that any given image is being uploaded with the proper license or fair use rationale to the proper site. If that's not the problem, what is? Suppose an editor says they are 25 years old, and claims to have taken a photo dated 1980. That doesn't add up. As for "EXIF", that refers to Exchangeable image file format, which is data generated by digital cameras and other devices. If someone says they took a photo with a digital camera, and the Exif data is missing, that raises questions. Original photos supplied by the original photographer are normally high resolution images. If a low resolution file is uploaded, this may also raise questions. Fair use images should be low resolution, but by definition, are not uploaded by the original photographer. In conclusion, honesty is the best policy when trying to upload images, and copyright rules can be quite complex.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  08:13, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * By the way, we have no user named "Noah Levinson", so I am unable to look any deeper into the problem. Please double check the name, including spaces and capitalization.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  08:23, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Cullen,

Thank you for your prompt response! A few more details about the Berg photo: - Mr. Levinson did upload the photo to Wiki Commons so I don't think that was the issue. - He took the photo himself and specified that during the upload so I believe that takes care of the licensing, does it not? The photo had not been published previously so there was no call to site a previous publication. - Noah made no claims about taking the photo with a digital camera, so I wonder why it mattered that EXIF data was missing.

Do you have any other thoughts or observations? Could this be the work of an overprotective editor? Lily.olson23 (talk) 08:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I can find no user on either en.wikipedia or commons called Noah Levinson. I can find no picture in Commons of Alan Berg apart from File:Dr Khoo with Alan Berg and Richard Markel.JPG, which I suspect is a different Alan Berg. Please give us some links to the user and photo you are talking about. --ColinFine (talk) 09:36, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * @Lily.olson23:  Hi Lily. The file was deleted with the text you stated (deletion log entry) at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alan Berg.png. Because the Commons is a separate (sister) website, only Commons administrators can see what text appeared on the image page, and most users and administrators here, at Wikipedia who would see this post, are not Administrators at the Commons. What I would suggest is that more information be provided upon any re-upload about the origin of the image to address the questions raised at the [somewhat barebones] deletion discussion. Upon an upload, there are prompts for data to be entered about the image. Once uploaded, the person can also click "edit" at the top of the image's page and further edit the information. They'd likely see something that looks like this:


 * With the data one entered on the upload populating these entries, the person can fill the information in further and then click save. For example, under Author, the uploader might write something like "Taken by me with [Type of camera] on [type of film] at [location] where Alan Berg was a guest speaker" and so on. Note that you can leave a message for the person who nominated the file for deletion at Commons:User talk:EugeneZelenko, and the administrator who performed the deletion at Commons:User talk:Yann. Note that the Commons has its own help desk at Commons:Help Desk. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:04, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Deleting a picture
I accidentally uploaded the same image two times. I was trying to add an image to my user page and since I didn't exactly know how to do that I ended up uploading the image two times cause I thought I did it wrong the first time. Can anyone tell me how to delete the picture please? Thanks Alan florencia (talk) 05:02, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, Alan florencia, and welcome to the Teahouse. As far as I see, there is only one image uploaded by you (File:Alan Florencia.jpg). I can't see the other one. Maybe it is already deleted? Anyway, if you upload same image two times, and want one of them to be deleted, you should use Template:Duplicate. You should put the following code to the page of the image you want to be deleted:  , where you replace "Image:Example.jpg" with the name of the other image you want to keep. After you do that, the image will be marked for deletion and one of the administrators will delete it soon.
 * But, I want to point out one important thing to you. You should not upload free images directly to Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a sister project called Wikimedia Commons that is a database of free images, films, and other files. When I say "free", I talk about copyrights. All free images should be uploaded to Commons, and only copyrighted images are uploaded directly to Wikipedia. But, when you upload an image to Commons, you can include it in the Wikipedia article or in your user page the same way you do with the images that are uploaded directly to Wikipedia. See, for example, this article: Barack Obama. All the photos and graphs in the article are actually uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, but are used in the article normally. Don't worry, what you did is not a big mistake, but I just point out that, in the future, you should upload free images directly to Wikimedia Commons. I tagged your photo (File:Alan Florencia.jpg) to be moved to Commons, ant it will be moved soon, but it will be still visible on your user page. If you want lo learn more about copyrights and what are "free images", you can read this: Copyrights, or you can ask me anything you want to know. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:54, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ P.s. Ah, I see now. The other photo was File:Alan Florencia at the age of 15.jpg, but it is already deleted. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Some very good advice above. One clarification. non-free copyrighted images can be uploaded here under a claim of fair use, if they qualify for that treatment. Images without any copyright (public domain) should indeed be uploaded to the Commons, but also copyrighted images bearing a suitable free copyright license are also welcome at the Commons, which is chock full of them. Such images are still copyrighted, but the free copyright license allows them to be used and modified by anyone even for commercial purposes, generally with the only requirement that the author(s) be given attribution.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:25, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia style guide
Does a Wikipedia style guide exist?

I have encountered three grammar related situations where I felt a change was needed, but was unsure about the Wikipedia standard. The examples below are from a page I have been editing

These have been:

1. Serial comma. For example: "a Prince of Gorodets, Suzdal and Nizhny Novgorod" vs. "a Prince of Gorodets, Suzdal, and Nizhny Novgorod." My rule of thumb is to use a comma in a serial comma in a list or 3 or more, or if it improves comprehension. Is there a standard for this?

2. Time series. When a list of timed events separated by year occurs, should the year be followed by a comma? For example:

In 1364, Dmitri ... vs.

In 1364 Dmitri ...

I appreciate any input on this. Also, if this type of question has been asked before, please let me know.

Lailand (talk) 08:05, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . I hope that our Manual of style will answer your questions.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  08:15, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * As Cullen328 has said, MOS:SERIAL should answer your first question. Your second question isn't dealt with in the MOS, so either usage is acceptable, though consistency within an article is obviously desirable. Deor (talk) 18:13, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Two pages about the same thing
Hi. I just started editing, and have found two pages that seem to be about the same Welsh musical, due to a spelling variant in the titles. Is there a way to merge them, or delete one? The pages in question are Atgof o'r Sêr and Atgof y Ser Yan118 (talk) 18:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * That's strange, the same user appears to have made both. I'll request the speedy deletion of one of them as a duplicate :) Samwalton9 (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Why delete? If both titles are potentially useful, just redirect. --Onorem (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a really good question, Yan118! What we do in such situations varies in different situations—we may delete one of the articles (usually if it's recently created, matching the topic of an older article; see criterion A10 at WP:CSD), merge them under one title (if they both contain different bits of information that could be used in an article on the topic), or change one to a redirect to the other. In this case, both articles were created on the same day by the same editor—I'm not sure why; perhaps it was an error—so since Atgof o'r Sêr seems slightly better developed than Atgof y Ser, I've changed the latter to a redirect to the former. That said, neither article has any sources or evidences any particular notability, so the topic may come up for deletion someday—I haven't checked to see if there are actually reliable sources dealing with the play. Deor (talk) 19:22, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

help in editing
how can I create separate sections in an article? and how can I put references in an article? please help me.(Akib.H (talk) 20:44, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Adding section names is easy. Simply create a blank line in the wikicode. In that space, start with two equal signs, then add your section name, then two closing equal signs. The wikicode looks like this:

==Sample section name==


 * When you have created three sections, the software will also create a table of contents.  Cullen 328 Let's discuss it  20:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Adding references is a bit trickier. First, the article needs to have a section for references, with some wikicode. The simplest example is:


 * Then, wherever in the text you want to add a reference, the basic method is approximately like this:


 * You can vary the content as you see fit, if the original reliable source is a newspaper, magazine, journal, website or whatever. We have templates and even semi-automated tools for referencing, but that's a simple, manual method that creates a footnote. Please see Referencing for beginners for a more detailed explanation.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  21:10, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you sir, and can you please tell me how can I put some references in an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akib.H (talk • contribs) 21:05, 14 December 2013 (UTC) Thank you very much. I'll try to learn these. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akib.H (talk • contribs) 21:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

An author's own work
I have a question on copyright, for which I have not yet been able to find an answer. Is it acceptable for an author to cut and paste a section of his own book into a WP article? Let us assume the added text is of moderate length. In other words: does an author have rights not available to other editors? Greenmaven (talk) 01:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . The simple answer is "no" in most ordinary circumstances. If the author in question wishes to retain full copyright of the work, then only a brief cited quotation is permissible, which normally should not exceed two or three sentences. And it makes no copyright difference whether it is the author or any other editor who adds a cited quote.


 * It is possible for an author to release their previously published work under an acceptable Creative Commons license, so that it can be freely used by anyone, anywhere, but even in that case, it would be considered bad form and not encyclopedic to add a lengthy passage to Wikipedia. Other editors would suspect a promotional intent, I believe. Please refer to WP:SELFCITE for a more complete explanation.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  03:35, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

use a few of your pictures
I am publishing a 350 page historical book and I would like to use 10 of your pictures.....what do I do ?86.210.212.173 (talk) 07:35, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor 86. Any image that you find on Wikimedia Commons can be used freely, as long as you credit the source properly. Refer to the image's source page for more information about the free licensing of those images.


 * You will find some images here on Wikipedia which are used here on a much more restrictive "fair use" basis. Most commonly, these are low resolution images of company logos, book covers, movie posters, album covers, photos of dead notable persons and images of notable art works or photos used in the context of critical commentary  about those creative works. You can't use these images freely, but only with a clear legal understanding of their restrictions.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  07:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)p
 * To add to what Cullen said: you can get to an image's source page, which has its licensing information, by clicking on the image. --ColinFine (talk) 11:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

My reviewer did not understand the context of may submission
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Technical_Civilization_and_Digital_iQ:_ENHANCE_DIGITAL_iQ_and_INCREASE_TECHNICAL_CIVILIZA...

I have edited my submission and added a LEAD: Context segment. How do I resubmit from the Talk page. 182.64.45.100 (talk) 04:06, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, IP editor 182, and welcome to the Teahouse. When I click on the link you provided, I am informed that no such page exists. When I try variations, I find nothing. When I try to check contributions from your IP address, it seems that your question here at the Teahouse is your only contribution. Such difficulties go along with editing without an account. Creating an account gives you many benefits, but creating an account is optional. But without more accurate information, it is difficult for me to provide specific answers. I am sorry.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  04:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * (e/c) Hi person editing from 45.100. I have added back the declining text, which should remain to give context to a second pass by the same or another reviewer, and also contains a resumbit link; just press that to do so. Unfortunately, after reading the proposed article, it still in my opinion greatly lacks context. There are other issues I see that would keep it from being accepted. It lacks citations to reliable sources that are independent of you and the topic, that show notability and verify the content, and reads to me as an original research essay with an appearance of being promotion for your company Evo-Devo Books. I'm sorry but it would appear to me that this would need to be substantially rewritten to have any possibility of being accepted. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note to Cullen: I found it through Google; sometimes it's easier and better at finding things than using the internal search engine:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh please no. Oh, no! ! Are you trying to tell me that Wikipedia isn't the VERY BEST website for every single thing? I am shocked, and will have to punish the code monkeys working in the back room.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  05:18, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * They're not doing too badly. Google has 42,162 employees and Wikimedia, just 150ish. If you have access to them, give them some bananas in my name.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * As I live only about 35 miles from Wikimedia World Headquarters, I do occasionally interact with that gang of primates they've hired. Should I reward them with Bourbon, Gin, Vodka, Rum, Tequila or the finest single malt Scotch? There is at least one among them who prefers the last on my list.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  05:56, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oooooh, poor . That reviewer's head may have possibly exploded after reading that draft article. We have "conventions" here on "Wikipedia" about what constitutes a halfway decent "coherent" article. I know that these are nothing more than social conventions, and alternate conventions are philosophically equally valid, but those are the rules of the Wikipedia game. We are here to create an encyclopedia according to our accepted conventions, which we call "policies and guidelines". Any article here is expected to comply, or alternatively, can be posted to an entirely different website. Call it "Alternativepedia" if you want.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  05:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * For the record, the IP posted the correct url http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Technical_Civilization_and_Digital_iQ:_ENHANCE_DIGITAL_iQ_and_INCREASE_TECHNICAL_CIVILIZA... Our software incorrectly guessed that the odd ending "..." was not part of the url. The wikilink is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Technical Civilization and Digital iQ: ENHANCE DIGITAL iQ and INCREASE TECHNICAL CIVILIZA... PrimeHunter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

lost page after donating
After I donated I wasn't directed back to my page, on Swansea Jack. Not a big deal, but I took the time to donate, and figured I wouldn't lost my page as a penalty. Why disincentivize, right?

71.229.207.90 (talk) 02:48, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor 71. I am not sure what you are asking. We have an article Swansea Jack, which last had a minor edit about six weeks ago, and hasn't had a substantive edit since July. Why do you describe it as "my page"? No one owns any Wikipedia article and anyone is free to edit any article in compliance with policies and guidelines. If you are discussing a financial donation, then that is wonderful, but isn't linked with any specific article. So, can you please clarify your question?  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  03:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the IP means that they were on the page Swansea Jack, clicked on a link from that page to the donation page, and was disappointed that they weren't taken back to the Swansea Jack page after donating. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 04:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you are correct, . If so, I would simply recommend reading the full article before donating, or simply typing Swansea Jack again in the search box after donating, but then again, I am a simple guy. Many, many thanks to the original poster for the donation.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  05:00, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * submitted. I agree this should be fixed. Technical 13 (talk) 13:19, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Color Change of Infobox?
I'm looking to change the background color of a heading in a CAMPGROUND INFOBOX TEMPLATE. I'd like to change the color of the heading to #800000 (maroon) and if the text color won't automatically stay on white, I want the text color as grey or white. Mfribbs (talk) 13:44, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Mfribbs. Template:Infobox campground has no option to change the dark green heading. The template source has this hard-coded: . PrimeHunter (talk) 15:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse ! While there is currently no option for this, you could probably add one or request it be added on that template's talk page  Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 19:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Two Questions, Thanks for Any Help
Here is the article I have worked on-- I plan to expand it but offered it for review as I know that takes time and I can still edit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Courtland_Hector_Hoppin

First Question: How is it that I have been writing this in "talk" rather than "project page"? Makes me feel lame, and has given me no place to talk about what I am doing. I assume that it's okay for the article to remain in "talk" as it would be moved if accepted, but I don't know why it's there.

Second Question: I placed an image in this article that met "fair use", as far as I could see... and this was discussed here. But it appears the image may have been deleted at the source or something, as it's gone from the article. Do I try to load it again, and explain my reasoning (re "fair use") in more detail?

I feel if someone is described as "an artist", an example of their art is almost a requirement!

Thanks for suggestions and feedback. Kathrynklos (talk) 19:22, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Kathrynkos, welcome to the Teahouse. To your first question: all Articles for Creation are created in the Wikipedia Talk namespace (it's so that IP editors, who can't create pages anywhere except in Talk, can submit articles there). To the second question, I suspect you uploaded the file to Wikimedia Commons (you've uploaded other images there). Commons doesn't accept fair use images, only free ones - for fair use files, you need to upload directly to Wikipedia (use the Upload File link in the Tools menu on the right). Hope that helps, Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  19:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Another problem with fair use images is that they are only allowed once the article has been moved to article space, not in user sandboxes or drafts. I'm not absolutely sure whether that applies here, but I'm guessing it does.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 22:12, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * is 100% correct. Images of copyrighted works used under our narrow fair use exceptions are allowed only in main space encyclopedia articles. They are not allowed in Articles for Creation drafts, sandbox pages, user pages or on any "behind the scenes" areas of Wikipedia. So, wait until any given draft article has been moved to main space, and then upload the low resolution image with an acceptable fair use rationale, such as movie poster, album cover, company logo, book cover, photo of a notable person who is dead, and so on.  Images of copyrighted art work are acceptable only in the context of critical commentary on that piece of art, not simply as a representative sample of the artist's work, . After uploading, add the image to the article promptly.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  03:40, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * A question for you, . Did you take the 1961 photo of Hoppin yourself, as stated in the file description?  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  03:54, 14 December 2013 (UTC)



Hello again. Yes, I did take that really crappy picture of Hector Hoppin myself, with a wondrous Kodak Brownie Starmeter camera he gave me for my 14th birthday. Oddly, it's the only picture I have of him... but he's on some super 8 movie film if I can some-day snarf an image from that. The picture in the article was in color but b&w looks better.

The image I tried to add to the article is one of the many many stills from his film that are on-line. To my knowledge, no posters exist. In the 1960s, Hector Hoppin didn't believe any copies of any of his films existed, so one never knows... Kathrynklos (talk) 04:53, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Although it is not the greatest photo ever, thank you for contributing it, and taking it all those years ago as a very young woman, ,. I apologize for even asking the question. Please consider adding that information to the image description page.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  08:14, 15 December 2013 (UTC)



Okay-- I'll add the photo information, thanks for caring. I appreciate that Wikipedia is careful about the use of things and desires to be thorough. My mother's good friend was Hector Hoppin's third wife-- and they were "Uncle" Hector and "Aunt" Marion (and signed things just that way!). There is much I'd like to add about his life but it would be "primary research", unless I can locate something in print. Kathrynklos (talk) 22:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)==Campus ambassador question== Hi, I am a campus ambassador, but I don't seem to have the user permission. Do you know what I should do? Dward2612 (talk) 02:42, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Dward2612, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what you mean by being a campus ambassador but Education program/Ambassadors shows how to apply. Does that answer your question? PrimeHunter (talk) 03:12, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Do we need an entry for 'flexplate'?
I've just found the word flexplate in an article.

I thought that I understood the parts in an internal combustion power-train (eg in a car or truck) but I'd never heard of that one.

It seems to be a second flywheel, on the same axis as the flywheel tied to the crankshaft, which has limited freedom to rotate, relative to the flywheel, and is tied to the input side of the transmission.

Its purpose is to suppress rotational shocks from the pistons firing, so that they do not damage the transmission, or unnecessarily shake the vehicle through the wheels.

It may also have a purpose of allowing flexing in the combined axis of all of these assemblies.

Everything that I know about this, I learned on the internet: http://www.marinemechanic.com/site/page113.html http://repairpal.com/flex-plate

Is that enough for an article?

If anyone has real personal knowledge, and wants to write it instead, they're welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArthurDent006.5 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi ArthurDent006.5, welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know transmissions but my Google results like indicate that a flexplate is used in automatic transmissions and reminds of a flywheel in manual transmissions. Some people may say flywheel about both. I'm not sure it needs its own article. Maybe a redirect to an explanation in an existing article like Automatic transmission would be enough. A Wikipedia search on  shows several mentions but no explanation. Article content should be based on published reliable sources and not personal knowledge, but having the latter can certainly still help in research and writing. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Article at a standstill
I am at an absolute lost on what to do with the article over at Federal prison. As you can see right now, in it's current state it is nothing more than a stub with an extremely short lead (with no references). Some users think it should be a disambiguation page; others think it should be an actual article that educates people on what federal prison is. I have tried to expand the article (see my edit here) but then it was reverted for being original research. The problem is, there are literally NO credible sources that I can find to cite when expanding this article. I have even looked for books to reference but there are no books on federal prison. What do we do with this article?

Check out the talk page where there is some pretty in depth discussion about this article.

Skarz (talk) 03:45, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * There appear to be articles about various problems in federal systems (THIS), or various aspects (such as THIS or THIS), or particular countries' systems (THIS and THIS) &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 04:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Amazon link to a book
Is it okay to link to amazon book page of a celebrity?

For example xyz wrote book abc in 2000. Something like that. I see a link of this sort being removed saying amazon is commercial site and is not reliable.

04:35, 15 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronmax (talk • contribs)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Although Amazon now sells pretty much everything, they started as an online bookseller, and that is still a significant part of their business. So, it is better here on Wikipedia to link to an online listing that is not overtly commercial. Google Books links are commonly acceptable. Although Google is a commercial venture, they are not a bookseller, and their book listings are more neutral and less directly promotional and commercial. To summarize, Google tells you about a book. Amazon tells you about it, and then tries to sell it to you, and if you don't buy it, Amazon tries to sell you similar books. There is nothing wrong with that, and I am an Amazon customer myself. But Wikipedia prefers less overtly commercial sources. I hope this makes sense.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  04:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Probably the best thing to do as far as referencing (the existence of) a book is to use the Cite » Book template from the toolbar -- then simply enter the ISBN number and use the 'Autofill' feature (magnifying glass icon). This way, the user can use the link generated from the ISBN to access a variety of sources (WorldCat, etc.) For the following example (from your recent contribs), I did a copy/paste of the ISBN from Amazon:
 * "Hayat published a book called, Dishonoured ..."


 * ~I hope this helps. ~Eric: 71.20.250.51 (talk) 04:53, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * P.s.: I just noticed that both ISBNs (10 & 13) from Amazon generated a title (Sofia's story) different from what was listed (Dishonoured).  I wonder if the publisher changed the title (?)  ~E:71.20.250.51 (talk) 05:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)  WorldCat shows both titles for same book:

I have multible issues
I am making Wikipedia article for free over writing software named ErAce. It Wuold be nice if somebody helps me with this projectNeo Jensson (talk) 06:17, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, Neo Jensson! As you can see from the tags, your article doesn't cite any independent sources.  It's not enough for a piece of software to exist and be free; for it to have a Wikipedia article it must be shown to be well known, for example, to have been reviewed in computer magazines or written about in news articles.  If the software has not been written about by journalists, authors or tech experts, the article will likely be deleted.  I hope that you are able to find some of these published reports and add references to them in your article.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Article in wrong namespace
Hi. What to do, if you find an article kept in wrong namespace. I found this George F. Carter. Looking at the history, I think the creator may have wanted to move it to mainspace. I can not assess its notability, so I can not myself move it to the mainspace. Note: the creator is not active now, so I did not contact her/him. Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 04:47, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Vigyani. The page certainly could use more sourcing to a variety of reliable sources, but there appear to be many such sources in existence and the article is a pretty good effort so I have moved the article into the mainspace and left a note for the creating user so they will know where it went should they return. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. After posting this question. I did some more searches, and found that many a times, users by mistake move the article to WP space and then subsequently to mainspace. But the redirect is left behind. So what to do with those re-directs. In this case you deleted the redirect. Can those all such re-directs be tagged and deleted using WP:R2 -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:13, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No need to worry about this! If an article is moved once, and then again, there is a helpful bot that fixes up the double redirects.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 13:25, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * @Vigyani:  I am very glad those bots exist Anne. Before they existed there were so many double redirects being created that some users concentrated most of their time fixing them. Regarding deletion under R2, no, that is for redirects from the mainspace to other namespaces (and not all), whereas, these are redirects from the Wikipedia namespace to other namespaces. Deleting them would be possible under CSD G6 though. Even though "redirects are cheap", these are generally quite useless. Before doing any taggings, check what links here] to make sure they are are not in use. If you were to tag, I suggest using, maybe in a form not unlike  --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Help with the tone of my article.
My article is below, I need help writing in the formal tone. Below is the reason for denial and below that is my actual article. I would appreciate some help to get this article in the correct tone for wikipedia.

Reason for denial: This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms, that are designed to promote or show-off the subject.

Actual Article: Vincent Anthony Venditto Jr better known as Vinny Venditto was born in plantation Fl in 1984, he was basically born with a piano and guitar at hand. His love for music expanded when he started to become the pianist for all his school performances and plays. After that he went further by arranging choirs, national anthems, and vocal groups by the age of 14. He loved the music and vocal aspect of it so much, he started his own vocal group such as a "Boy Band" and expanded his creativity more in depth by starting to produce his own music for the group. At the age of fifteen his parents bought him the equipment to record and produce his own music. His mother became his biggest fan and basically converted her home to accomidate recordings and have rehearsal's for Vinny to expand his talents with the group. His group started to tour in most parts of the US and his music started to develop fans all over the world! At the age of twenty with a baby on the way, he realized that he needed to further his career, so he left the group and started to focus on his own production.

Artist and music reps started to immediately acknowledge Vinny's Talents and started to become more in demand for his production, in the mean time Vinny was DJing at Local Clubs, Wedding, Bar/Bat Mitvahs, and Private Events for financial income. Over the next couple of years he had made quite the accomplishments and earned a name for himself that led him to "Clean Face Management" who now manages and helps him take over the world one song at a time.

Vinny has worked as a Producer, Engineer/Vocal Arranger for the top artist/producers in the game on major placements with artist such as Eminem, Streetrunner,Don Omar, DJ Khaled, 2 Chainz, Mims, Blackout Movement, Mr Vegas, Kevin Little,Trina,Cory Chorus,French Montana,and Juvenile just to name a few. For a list of year to year credits please see Vinny's complete Discography below.[1] Vincent Anthony Venditto produced his first major record called "FML (F*** My Life) ft Mims and ""Don Omar released"" April of 2012.[2]Vinny has also produced "Outerspace" for Trina ft Kidcadet, Co-Produced "Romans Reloaded" "Pink Friday: Roman Reloaded – The Re-Up" [3]with two-time Grammy nominated Producer "Dj BlackOut" of BlackOut Movement, which premiered #1 on "Billboard top 200", "Oo La La" J Rand ft Akon", "On My Mind" Kristin Williams, Co-Produced "Beggin" with Grammy Award winning "StreetRunner".[4] Vinny enjoys surrounding himself to all genres of music such as, dance, pop, electro, soft rock, hip-hop, R&B, and country. He has an ear for music and does not limit himself to one specific genre, as this helps him when he is in the process of creating. When it comes to submitting a track to an artist, Vinny focuses on presentation- “Presentation is everything.” Along with knowing how to formulate hooks and put together collaborations for the right mix on a song, will create an astonishing production. Vinny has now deejayed in Vegas, Tampa, Bahamas, New York, Miami and all of South Florida. He looks forward to working overseas to expand his name brand.

“Work so hard that one day your signature will be called an autograph” His Mom is still his biggest Fan!

Sergio Deleon 75.74.120.38 (talk) 18:02, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the Teahouse. This isn't the place for the full text of your draft, all we need is a wikilink, which I guess is to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vinny Venditto? - David Biddulph (talk) 18:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello, Sergio 75.74.120.38. Gosh, that article sounds more like a fansite than an encyclopedia article.  Fans love to hear about the artist's feelings and aspirations, but an encyclopedia article should have just the facts (a little dry, but more verifiable).  Pretend that you don't know the person at all, and are just writing a summary of reports in news reports and magazine articles, and you will be closer to what's needed.  Cite the sources specifically for each piece of information.  Then submit again.  Good luck!  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 00:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Can I talk to an admin?
Sorry, but Clue Bot has deleted multiple of my posts, for reasons I find messed up. It first said, you have put a lot of something in a row (writing a big number) press save page if this isn't vandalism, I pressed save page, and it deleted the whole thing I was writing. I wanted to talk to a Clue Bt manager or an admin to get my posts back. Tobyepic (talk) 16:49, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the Teahouse. For most purposes an admin has no more capability than any other editor.  If you disagree with a reversion of one of your edits, the place to start a discussion, and to hear the views of other editors, is on the talk page of the article. If you are referring to, then ClueBot was perfectly correct in reverting it. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Although, to be fair, Cluebot misclassified your edits as vandalism. They were clearly in good faith. -- Ross Hill  •  Talk  •  Need Help?  • 17:27, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * However, when an edit includes the text "Sorry if this is spam" it is hardly surprising it is deleted.Arjayay (talk) 17:30, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * ... and the edit summary from ClueBot said "... possible vandalism ...", and the text of the warning message on the user's talk page doesn't use the word "vandalism". Obviously a bot like ClueBot will often be unable to tell the difference between an edit which is deliberate vandalism and one that is merely confused or misguided like this one. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:35, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The text said "Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.", before I reverted that edit as inaccurate. -- Ross Hill  •  Talk  •  Need Help?  • 18:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, it told me if it wasn't vandalism I could continue, but it deleted it instantly.

Tobyepic (talk) 12:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Review request
I created an article in Sandbox, can anyone review of its quality? Sendtopms (talk) 11:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You didn't create it in your sandbox, which has never been used. You created it in mainspace, twice, and when it was deleted, twice, created it on your userpage - before moving it into virtually every other namespace and leaving a trail of redirects that I've just had to spend the last five minutes mopping up. When you finally moved it into article space it was deleted again - by me - since it contained no suggestion that the subject was notable, and no independent sources.
 * If you would like to try recreating the article, please do so as follows:
 * Create the page in your sandbox.
 * Support it with inline citations to significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources.
 * Add the code  to the top of the draft.
 * DO NOT MOVE THE PAGE.
 * It will shortly be moved by a bot to the Articles for creation queue, where it will be reviewed. If it meets Wikipedia's requirements, it will then be turned into an article. Note that in order to meet these requirements, the aforementioned sources are vital. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

How to become an administrator
Hello. I'm just wandering, how can I become an administrator on Wikipedia? Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 18:49, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. The procedure for becoming an administrator is described at Requests for adminship, often called "RFA". There are no formal requirements, but you should know from the beginning that is a rigorous process, which many believe is too rigorous or even cruel. Either one or more experienced editors nominates you, or you can nominate yourself. You will be expected to answer some standard questions, and editors may ask specific questions. Then, editors will declare support, opposition or neutrality. A bureaucrat will evaluate and close the discussion, and normally about 70% editor approval is the threshold for receiving the "mop", which is the slang term for the administrator's tool kit.


 * Most editors who participate regularly at RFA have certain standards or expectations. A clean block log, at least in recent years. Good solid contributions to articles. A clear understanding of policies and guidelines, especially regarding administrative issues. A calm, mature and collaborative style of communicating. Positive contributions to dispute resolution. Participation in administrative areas, such as deletion procedures, fighting vandalism, dealing with username issues, and dealing with problems with biographies of living people, the type of article with the most stringent standards. I suggest you read recent requests for administratorship, both successful and unsuccessful. Participate in current requests. Ask lots of questions. If you are weak in some areas, work on strengthening your record. When you think you might be ready, ask a highly experienced editor to review your work. Thank you for considering this step. We definitely need more good administrators.  Cullen <sup style="color:purple;">328  Let's discuss it  21:34, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I will be 18 on July 17th. Is there an age limit to become an administrator? Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No there is no formal age limit. However some users may judge your abilities based on your age. For the most part you will be judged by your edits. -- Ross Hill  •  Talk  •  Need Help?  • 22:48, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * There are no age requirements for adminship. A 13-year-old kid could presumably become an admin given they demonstrated the right characteristics and just as well a 60-year-old expert of their field could be declined for demonstrating wrong ones (more about what's expected of admins and what to expect of adminship nomination process etc. here) Revealing your age on Wikipedia is not necessarily a good thing. Since On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog, keeping your age secret will allow you to avoid being judged by prejudice instead of what you actually do. --Pitke (talk) 22:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * There are definitely some editors who oppose promoting minors to administratorship. So you might consider waiting until you are at least 18. But genuine maturity in action is more important than what the calendar says. As for revealing age, I am open about my identity and that I am 61 years old. That's just how I roll, but anonymity is fine too.  Cullen <sup style="color:purple;">328  Let's discuss it  23:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * There is an essay at Age and adminship. Some admins openly say they are under 18, some of them much below. You might get some but probably not many opposes for being 17. However, if somebody sees edits they consider "immature" then being 17 may be a contributing factor in an oppose. Internet warnings to not reveal your age are usually aimed at minors who may be targeted by "internet predators" (see Internet-initiated sex crimes against minors). PrimeHunter (talk) 00:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing to that essay, . I had never read it before. It is well written, and makes some excellent points.  Cullen <sup style="color:purple;">328  Let's discuss it  01:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Will all due respect, you're mixing up my suggestion to not reveal one's age on the Internet (for everyone, for convenience) with a very different thing. --Pitke (talk) 15:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Disamb or not?
Hi hosts, and parasites. I am in a bit of a fix now. I created an article for a song titled Malang but an article already having the name Malang already exists! It has a hat note. I am confused... Do I name my article Malang (song) cause its essentially a song even if I do so how I manage to include it in the hatnote? I tried doing so but it seems three or more articles with similar name = A disambiguation page. Right?  Soham  13:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep, that's right. Here's what I'd suggest you do:
 * Move your draft to mainspace under the title Malang (song).
 * Move the article currently at Malang to Malang, East Java.
 * Overwrite the redirect left behind at Malang with a disambiguation page (linking to Malang, East Java, Malang (song), Malang Regency and Malang (painter).
 * Remove the hatnotes from the three pre-existing articles.
 * Hope that helps, Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks!  Soham  13:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, better idea - since the city's the primary topic, leave it where it is. Instead, create the disambiguation page at Malang (disambiguation) and change the hatnote at Malang to point there. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thanks,  Soham  14:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've tweaked it a little; removing the piped link and additional blue-links - there is a useful checklist at WP:DDD - Arjayay (talk) 14:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Further tweaked with an appropriate lead.--ukexpat (talk) 16:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Improvement on minimizing issues on Storming Robots Page?
I finally got the time to come back to review the possibility of improving this:

issue 1) The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. (November 2013)

issue 2) This article relies largely or entirely upon a single source. (November 2013)

issue 3) This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. (November 2013)

issue 4) This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral. (November 2013)

I think I have put in the changes in order to resolve issue 2 and 4. Please review and evaluate.

About issue 1: Not sure how I could possibility fix that as the education facility is only a 7-8 years old institution.

About issue 3: "other articles" Do you mean wikipedia articles, or others.

Advise?

Dec 16th : Another try to minimize the "Issues" that you have listed. I tried to improve the article and put in the proper references from other websites. If still not good enough, please advise.

ESKCheung (talk) 13:47, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the Teahouse. I've removed the one source tag as there are 25 references. The "orphan" tag should be pretty easy to fix: just find an article from which you can reasonably link to the article. The other tags are harder. Notability should be resolved by adding information from reliable, significant sources that weren't written by Storming Robotics itself. For example,, , and are good places to start. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 14:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the Teahouse. For the benefit of other editors, the article is Storming Robots. On the points which you list, Issue 1 is the prime one.  If you are saying that the subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations, then there should be no Wikipedia article so there is no point in looking at the other points.  If the subject does meet Wikipedia's notability requirements, then point 3 refers to the absence of links from other Wikipedia articles. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:18, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for prompt assistance.

I feel bad to ask again. This is my very first article I submitted at Wikipedia, so please bear with me if my question may seem too blatantly obvious to you, but not to me.

I am trying to learn from other articles so that I can see how best to improve them. I searched.. this is one of them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livingston_Robotics_Club.

Regarding issue 1 and 3: - since this Livingston Robotics Club has no issue and does similar categories like Storming Robots, i am seeking the difference between the two in order to give me some clubs as what else to do differently. I am sorry, I need your guidance here as there seems to be no difference in-between this LRC and Storming Robots articles; except perhaps the person may have better writing skill ;-) A lot of the posted information is directly associated from its own site as well. In addition, I am trying to figure out what makes the LRC articles more verifiable as it was established later then Storming Robots.  After searching on the internet, it seems having more hits. After reviewing some of them, it has much to do with LEGO and the popular game FLL. Storming Robots focuses on robotics which require much more complex software and algorithmic work, the Robocupjunior and ZeroRobotics. These are for a much more selective group kids than LEGO related FLL/FTC have to offer. I am scratching my head here.  Advise is always appreciated.

Regarding issue 2: - You suggested me to use the links such as the newspaper articles. I am not sure what you mean by links from them though. For example, the Wharton school of UPenn has a link directly to Storming Robots, so as the NJ Garden State Woman Organization as well. Therefore, is it a formatting issue from my posting? Please advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.106.59 (talk) 17:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Inappropriate external links
Dear Teahouse hosts: An article that I rescued from deletion as a stale draft has been tagged as having inappropriate external links. Aside from the IMDB, which is not particularly reliable but as far as I know not objectionable, I can't find any external links at all, just general references and citations. Here's the article: Barbara Gordon (filmmaker). Should I change the tag to the one for bare URLs instead? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 17:40, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Anne. I agree. It appears that tag was placed to flag that the citations used do not appear very reliable and are in some cases bare, but referred to external links. I would (boldly) replace it (if you agree with the assessment about the sourcing; I do) with probably unreliable sources and maybe cleanup-link rot. See also Template messages/Sources of articles. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

My article was declined but is similar to a competitor's wiki. . . How can I get it accepted?
My article is modeled after a competitor's page and has more external/respected sources. Mine has been declined...any suggestions for how to improve it to get it approved? The article they use as their primary source mentions us (it is a comparison of kiosk software products). It was extremely controversial in the industry at the time of publication (7 years ago) and is considered extremely biased toward their product. Articles_for_creation/KioWare Lboniello (talk) 16:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)--
 * Hello . The draft article WT:Articles for creation/KioWare has a comment from which says "No extensive coverage in independent nor reliable sources". If FoCuSandLeArN is correct then Wikipedia may not at present have an article on KioWare no matter how you write it, because it does not meet the criteria for notability. I have not checked this myself, but certainly none of the references currently in the draft article are substantial references from sources independent of the company. The only way to get the article accepted is to find reliable sources independent of KioWare which have substantial treatments of the software, not just passing mentions. As to the other article you mention: it may well be unsatisfactory, and if so, anybody is welcome to improve it, or nominate it for deletion if it is unsalvageable (but if you were to get involved, you should certainly declare your Conflict of Interest). But it has no bearing on whether the article you have proposed is accepted or not. --ColinFine (talk) 18:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just deleting this, since FoCuSandLeArN had responded. Also wanted to mention a GREAT chat experience with Dragonfly6-7 and Howicus who helped to clarify. I look forward to using my newfound knowledge to improve, approve, and assist other posts/articles.--Lboniello (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Citing problem
Hi, I've already tried to ask a question but I don't know where it went, I probably put the tildes in the wrong place, anyway have a look at my page; https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rudy25/TWA/Earth/2&oldid=586545263 and see if there is an error or is it a bug? Kind regards ... Rudy Rudy25 (talk) 22:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse. It's now been fixed by User:Fugghetaboutit. What you did was put in citation tags with nothing in them, like . There should always be something between the . Happy editing, --Jakob (talk) 23:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Many thanks Rudy25 (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

how can i improve citations to clarify notability of article subject?
I've submitted an article that has been rejected twice. The first time for lack of "independent" references supporting subjects notability. The second time around, I added "independent" references but it was rejected for CITEKILL. I need some assistance tweaking the text or citations so that they are acceptable. The article is ArticlesForCreation/Jon Younger. Any assistance would be welcome. Thank you. Hudsonscg Hudsonscg (talk) 17:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The article is at Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jon_Younger. Please do let us know where these things are.


 * The broad answer to your question is that so many of the references you have chosen are a mixture of PR material (speaker profiles etc), and material which mentions the gentleman in passing. You have concealed any valid references in clutter, hence WP:CITEKILL. PLease look at paring down the references that are, broadly, useless, and major on finding people who have written about the man, not things written by him. As about each reference "Does it qualify for WP:RS?". If so it can remain. If not it needs to go.


 * Once you have mastered that skill, seek out further, really good, references. A [primer is at User:Timtrent/A good article, and you may find it helpful. Fiddle   Faddle  18:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It has also been deleted after an WP:AFD here Theroadislong (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That is slightly confusing. Jon Younger has been deleted via Articles for deletion/Jon Younger, but Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jon_Younger still exists. When ready and submitted for review it may well be approved. Let us not discourage from working on the draft article, and perhaps help them. If JY is notable his article should exist. If not, then not.  Fiddle   Faddle  23:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Any article that includes an uncited promotional jargon phrase like "recognized global thought leader" is likely to receive intense scrutiny. Every single trace of such puffery must be stripped from this draft it is to have any hope of becoming an encyclopedia article.  Cullen <sup style="color:purple;">328  Let's discuss it  03:23, 18 December 2013 (UTC)