Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 568

Providing Edits & Reversions
Hello, there. I am currently attempting to point to a number of peer reviewed articles in various Wikipedia Pages. As an example, I added a small paragraph to the [E-Book] section in Archival Storage, seen below:

The difficulties surrounding the storage and curation of e-books have continued to expand as technology grows and evolves. Simplified “strategies of preservation, upkeep, and ongoing access in the print medium have changed little since the arrival of the mechanically-produced book, though the details of those systems have undergone changes when technological developments enabled certain strategies.” Three critical components have been identified as major obstacles to preservation and archival strategies. These include the speed of rapidly changing technologies, the malleability of electronic materials, and proportional changes in e-book functionality, with respect to the user.

This section was reverted. However, I don't see it as in any way promotional, incorrect, or unhelpful. Should I simply press this matter into the Talk page and inquire about whether or not others agree? If I put this through the talk page, how long does it typically take to come to some form of consensus so the section I have written above can be added to the relevant place? Thenewpulp (talk) 23:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with the addition of the content you wrote above. However, it's a good idea to take it to the talk page and see what others think. I've never edited on that topic, but it generally takes less than a week to get talk replies. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 23:42, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * (e/c) Hi Thenewpulp. There may have been a good reason for the revert but the edit summary by is opaque, stating "Rv Siemens SPA", which seems to translate to "revert unintelligible word single purpose account—and the edit looks helpful to me. My first guess was that the editor reverted thinking you are a sockpuppet of some account they are familiar with named Seimens, but no such account exists. Anyway, yes, certainly, take it to the talk page – post to the user's talk page; seek a third opinion if applicable; read WP:BRR; follow Dispute resolution – but now that the user who reverted has been pinged here, maybe they can explain what they intended? Certainly I've left a few unintelligible edit summaries in my time, but I do try to be very clear when I am reverting, and most especially when the issue is not obvious (which I think applies here). At times, when something similar has happened to me, I have reverted right back, stating something in the edit summary like "If you revert again, I will attempt to discuss with you, but since I cannot understand your edit summary, I see no basis for your reversion..." or words to that effect. Of course, once you're here a long time, you can step a bit heavier. As a brand new user, being cautious is good. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:49, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I reverted him because he was systematically adding references to Ray Siemens, head of the Electronic Textual Cultures Laboratory to Wikipedia articles. Thenewpulp has since disclosed (elsewhere, not here or on the talk pages of the articles in question) that's because he is a paid editor who is being compensated by the Electronic Textual Cultures Laboratory for his editing. - MrOllie (talk) 23:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, this is the sort of thing that can be hashed out on the talk page. My observation is that your addition contains too large a quote and is expressed in somewhat vaporous language, not really appropriate for Wikipedia.


 * But that's just my opinion. Welcome to the Teahouse, . I hope we can help.  &#8212;jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  23:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree. Take out the superfluous language.  The addition does have merit, though. Justin15w (talk) 02:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Note I've also reverted edits by this editor. As can be seen in this diff there is a strong, paid, connection and subsequently a conflict of interest exists regarding all articles connected to the Electronic Textual Cultures Lab and inke.ca. As I've posted on the editor's talk page, a disclosure of a Conflict of Interest does not give editors carte blanche to post content regarding the people who are paying them to edit - in fact, they should restrict their edits to suggestions on talk pages, taking care to ensure they disclose their Conflict of Interest when making these suggestions. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 01:15, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note Before seeing this, I also pointed out COI and SPA issues at Talk:E-book. Objective3000 (talk) 01:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Creating hierarchical charts
Hi I would like to create hierarchical charts for some drafts dealing with chain of commands that I am working on and I would like them to be in color I understand MediaWiki has a specific add on tool you can use to create them any feedback would be appreciated.--Navops47 (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.  The MediaWiki extension FlowchartWiki is not available here, but you can get much of the same functionality via the Chart template. Without a more specific example of the hierarchical chart you'd like to add it's hard to give more specific advice.  Psiĥedelisto (talk) 10:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for highlighting the page for me to use surprised though as there are so many military and business related articles that would benefit from the FlowchartWiki extension.--Navops47 (talk) 03:46, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Editing image on wikipedia page protected from vandalism
Hi, I wanted to know if the picture of President Trump as shown on wikipedia, which cannot be edited as it is protected from vadalism, can be changed,to the picture which is found at this link  which I think is a better picture,and one that presents in the most optimal manner. 2600:1004:B05C:CA13:0:45:4498:1 (talk) 04:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)Albert Davis.
 * Yes it's a nice picture. Did you take it? If you did and are willing to donate it to Wikipedia we can use it, otherwise the answer to your question is no. Please read WP:COPYOTHERS (and no, there is no possible way we can justify fair use of this image if it is not free}. Meters (talk) 05:00, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

==hi, I am inspired by a spiritual motivator who has travelled to 111 countries so far in just 2 years and also create a bio page for his Global contribution for spiritual work and wwikipedia for have traveled 111 countries within 2 years. Please advice how this can be done.== How do we make an entry for the 'List of people who have traveled most number of countries in the world' what kind of references can be shown as evidence so that the same could be accepted on Wikipedia and remains there with the link to the biopage of the person.Fulchand 06:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atma Siddhi Shastra Mission 142 (talk • contribs)
 * Articles should be created by people who are not affiliated with the topic in question, based on professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources which are likewise not affiliated with the topic but are specifically about it. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:25, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

hi
I need some help Abraham Sackey Ohene Gyan (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * What exactly do you need help with? We'd like to help, but it's hard to help without specifics. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 23:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the teahouse, how can we help you? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Link to an image
I found an image online and I'd like to add a link to it in a wikipedia article. Is this permitted?

http://docenti.lett.unisi.it/files/3/1/15/3/Calice_di_Niccol__IV_Assisi_Guccio_di_Mannaia.jpg

TimeForLunch (talk) 15:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

PS I think the system on the teahouse page has put my question automatically at the bottom of the page. Is this the new way of doing this or ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimeForLunch (talk • contribs) 15:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . I'm afraid the answer is, probably not. Part of the point of Wikipedia is that all the material in it may be freely reused: this means that copyright images may not usually be used unless the copyright holder has explicitly released them under a suitable licence (such as CC-BY-SA. Images of unknown provenance are usually assumed to be subject to copyright, unless they are uncontrovertably old enough (1923 in the US) to be public domain. That photo has no copyright information on the site, but the home page of the site says "© 2005 Università degli Studi di Siena, Centro Servizi della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia - Laboratorio di Informatica". (By the way, I assume the artifact is old enough to be out of copyright, but that does not tell us whether the photo is also).


 * It is possible in some circumstances to use non-free images: such use must meet all of the non-free content criteria: if you think your proposed use will meet these, then you can upload the image to Wikipedia (not Wikimedia Commons) as a non-free file. See Help:Upload.


 * The third option is to link to it as an external link. That does not give any copyright issues, but it may not comply with the policy on External links: if you want to insert the link, you'll need to show that it does. Note that if it does go in as an external link, the image won't appear in the Wikipedia article: readers will have to click the link to see it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks ColinFine (talk) for the detailed input. I've taken a look at the third option, and it looks like it will work as an External Link. TimeForLunch (talk) 11:02, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

how to add image to my articles.
Hello everyone, my question is how do I post my contributions with files, like image. And can I upload a pdf file to an article ? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuel Daniel (talk • contribs) 09:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can upload files here. Follow the instructions very carefully. We take copyrights especially seriously. PDF files can be uploaded using the same process. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:26, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * But in addition to 's advice,, I would add that it is very rare that it is appropriate to upload a PDF. Uploaded material can only really be used to illustrate things, not to demonstrate or verify them, because nothing in a user-contributed site such as Wikipedia (or Wikimedia Commons) can be regarded as reliably published. Hence most uploads are images, and some are video or sound files; but textual uploads are rare. --ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Is an information from a famous blog post a credible source?
Hey, I want to edit a profile and I found an information in the blog of a famous blogging website. Is it a credible source? Please help! JennyGon (talk) 15:26, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . The vast majority of blogs are not considered reliable sources. The only rare exception is if the blogger is a widely recognized expert about the topic. Please see WP:BLOGS for details. Also, Wikipedia consists of articles,  not profiles. Cullen328   Let's discuss it  16:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Question about length of articles/entries
Hi! I just had a question about the length of an article, if there were requirements. I scroll through the Deaths in a given year and do a general check to make sure the dates match, i.e. if Joe Smith died on January 1, 2017, I always make sure the corresponding article is listed in the right category (i.e. 2017 deaths), etc. On occasion, I will come across a person or two who has a very bare article, maybe a sentence or paragraph or two; (see: Hubert Lucot or Roland Glavany) and as a common sense idea I would add the hatnotes regarding reference improvements or notability or anything that would indicate the article needs more information/substance.

For whatever reason said edits would be reverted by the same user because an article was undergoing a “major edit” and the author deemed my edits unnecessary. (ex: “Undid revision 760917608 by Snickers2686 (talk) Chill out, this is in use”)

Now I understand nearly anyone can revert for any reason but my question is, if an article is too short and I think it needs to be improved upon to be more substantial, what else can I do in terms of tags and/or other notices? Or should I just leave it be?

I did try to talk to the person who reverted my edits but he/she just pushed me off on another user and never responded. Any input would be appreciated.

Snickers2686 (talk) 07:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I have re-added the hatnote to Hubert Lucot, as it clearly still applies. Once has finished the major edit, it may be appropriate to remove the hatnote. Maproom (talk) 07:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * What exactly is the point if it's in use/under construction? Sorry, I never really do this, but with the inauguration I have not had the time to work on them properly. I also asked another editor on my talkpage to help with this. The hatnotes seem utterly pointless for articles we are clearly working on.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:01, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Problem solved by the great User:LouisAlain!Zigzig20s (talk) 16:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

how to find edited articles for reference
hey teahouse, how to find edited articles for reference?kindly help ..please and how do i type 4 tildes please someone help. 117.202.105.95 (talk) 12:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello. I'm not quite sure what you are asking. Do you mean, how can you find reliable sources to use as references? That is the $64000 dollar question, and one of the things that makes writing Wikipedia articles challenging.


 * One tool you may find useful is the template find sources. Suppose (for the sake of example) you were researching Nikola Tesla. If you place somewhere (eg on your user page, or temporarily on the draft page you are working on) it will produce the following:


 * You can use those links to try and find sources. (But obviously for a subject like Tesla, who lived long before the Internet, many sources will not be available on line, and you won't be able to find them online. You may have to go to a large library for your research).


 * As for the tilde: it should be somewhere on your keyboard. On my (UK) keyboard it is next to the Enter key, as Shift/#; on my Android phone, where I use the Minuum keyboard, I have to go into numbers and then it is available as a shift. Alternatively, if you are in the desktop version using Javascript, there should be a "signature" icon above the editing window. --ColinFine (talk) 16:27, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Award
How do i get a award — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joba Chamberlain (talk • contribs) 18:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia has many informal awards. See: Awards – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Archiving from WIkiProject main page
The advice for reviving a WikiProject at WP:INACTIVEWP advises to "Archive old clutter" from the project page. Is there a method for doing that for the main project page rather than the talk page, or does this really mean to edit as for any other page (with appropriate discussion in the talk page)? DferDaisy (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , welcome to Teahouse. It would help us answer your question if you would tell us specifically what project you're concerned with. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 19:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello John from Idegon, thanks for taking the time to reply. I've been looking at WikiProject Veterinary medicine, and was wondering how best to help revive it. I won't make any changes without discussion on the talk page of that project first, but I wanted to determine what was possible/recommended before I proposed anything on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DferDaisy (talk • contribs) 19:53, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia Adventure
I try play but it not working i press 1 and i don't see anything. Kovilan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse,, and goodbye. Sorry we weren't able to be more help.  &#8212;jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  21:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Disagree with interpretation of reasons given for article rejection; how to resolve
Hi. I submitted Draft:C4LD and finally got reviewed. Thanks to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NewYorkActuary for doing the review.

Reason given for rejection was "The draft does not demonstrate that the subject has received substantial coverage from non-local reliable sources." I think it is a mistake to say this, as The Globe and Mail newspaper is national in scope, regardless of whether it is based in the same city where the event occurred. Should references from that paper not count? Specific Generalist (talk) 15:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . The first thing is to engage with : as far as I can see, you haven't posted on their User Talk page. You have posted at WP:AFCHD, which is not a bad place to do so. You have also been answered there. Whether you like the answer there or not, asking the same question here looks like Forum shopping, and is not acceptable behaviour. Please either take up the discussion with the reviewer, or continue it at AFCHD. --ColinFine (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No forum shopping intended. Actually, the response at AFCHD was made by actually reviewing the article. Then the third comment in there was made by myself again (much too verbose, really), with no response since.  So bringing it up here has more to do with asking a simpler question than the one at AFCHD.  Thanks for the tips. Specific Generalist (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . The Globe and Mail is certainly a good source, but will only count towards significant coverage of it covers the topic in some detail. If it's just a passing mention, then it doesn't help much. Since the article doesn't seem to be online, I've not been able to check myself. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:14, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There are some good sources here, . Cordless Larry (talk) 18:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, . Please remember the reason we all should be editing this encyclopedia is to improve it as a whole. Everyone starts somewhere, and you've started on this particular subject. Assuming good faith is a pillar policy. The reviewer reviewed your article in good faith and gave you very constructive good faith advice on things that needed fixing. It would show good faith on your part to address the mechanics issues that were presented to you by him. Fix the headers, match the references with the facts they are referencing. And he was also quite correct that you need out of town sources. So please go work on your draft and address the issues you were presented before you run to every forum we have. Once you've addressed the issues that were presented to you in good faith, then if you need further help, ask. If you need help with the mechanics of fixing the issues you've been presented, ask. The only side the majority of editors here have is the side of improving the encyclopedia.  The reviewer did not criticize your draft because he has a position on its subject.  He did it so you'd know what to fix. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 19:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone. gave some useful feedback. Part of my problem is how to get from Point A to Point B. I have beside me a file folder 2" thick of newspaper clippings and other papers from the event.  I tried to translate some of those clippings into Wikipedia citations by using the Citations tool and supplying newspaper name, page, title, etc.  I hoped that would be enough for someone else to see what I see, which is the full article.  Apparently it is not.  I'll have to investigate whether for certain newspapers I can turn those into direct links.  Thanks to  for pointing out how this is a community.  I'll try to tidy the article up, as per .  Thanks again to  also.  Regarding out of town sources, my problem is still that I don't really understand how this applies here.  The Globe and Mail is a paper of national scope, so it should represent the whole country, not just Toronto.  Newspaper coverage originating in other provinces and countries did exist, but is harder to find through Google. I can try the suggested books and see if those are accepted by people. Specific Generalist (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that sources that are only available offline are perfectly acceptable, . It's good practice to link to them if they are available online, but they don't have to be. I can see how draft reviewers struggle to assess notability if they can't access the source though, so they have my sympathies there. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I edit topics associated with Chicago frequently. It is always contentious when a guideline requires geographically disperse sources where the local paper is also a regional paper. I've seen Articles for Discussion deletion discussions go both ways on the regional/local paper issue. AFC's primary mission is to help you create an article that will with certainty survive a deletion nomination. Hence, the more conservative view that you need out of town papers or nationally circulated magazines. Template:cite news is fine for offline newspaper articles. Template:cite magazine works for offline magazines. Best of luck. John from Idegon (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

how to incorporate an emoji
Hi again. I know how to use this emoji, but it isn't quite my style. I'd prefer to use File:Emojione 263A.svg, but I've abandoned all hope of figuring out how to use it by myself. doesn't work. Might one of you know the secret? Before you answer, consider whether you really want lots of newbies to learn how to scatter emjois all over the place.... Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 20:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * What about  LouisAlain (talk) 20:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, looking at the way that the template is designed, I assume that  Name of file on Commons  would produce Emojione 263A.svg? --  talk2Chun  (talk) (contributions) 20:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)


 * It worked even for me! Emojione 263A.svg
 * You have opened a whole new wonderful world for me and so many newbies! DennisPietras (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, and I trust you'll use this newfound power wisely.-- talk2Chun  (talk) (contributions) 21:52, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * ...and be careful not to waste too much of your life playing with the options at Emoticons, Smiley, Smiley2, Oldsmiley, Sert, Emoji, etc. --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:27, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Is it possible to change the title of an article?
The article "Ngawang Chophel" is misspelled. It should be "Ngawang Choephel". Is it possible to change it? Depthburg (talk) 02:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out. I will move the article. You have enough edits that you could have done it yourself using the "Move button". Meters (talk) 03:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I use Wikipedia on iPad, which is a bit different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Depthburg (talk • contribs) 05:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Infobox settlement - how to define metro area
The template:Infobox settlement includes population_metro but it is not clear how this is defined and how to match this with numbers from the Statistics bureau. We try to fix the Oslo article. — Erik Jr. 15:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

The current number is based on a 100 km radius from Oslo. This includes the villages along the Swedish border, Notodden and several other places that probably do not form part of any meaningful entity with Oslo. This creates a larger metro area than f.ex London. 109.202.107.10 (talk) 01:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, we need a clarification of what metro population means in WP context. Currently the footnote states that the number is based on 100 km radius, this is OK as it is explicitly stated. But we need another number within a more reasonable radius, but for that we need a definition. --— Erik Jr. 10:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Catholic Church
What is the origin of the Catholic Church?Josietony (talk) 06:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia, ! This page is for getting help using Wikipedia so it is not the proper place for your question: that would be WP:RD. If you have a question about using Wikipedia, please feel free to come back and ask a new question here. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 06:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * You could also see the "History" section of the article Catholic Church. --Gronk Oz (talk) 12:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Copy-right rules in different countries
Hello!

I put some links on books in Russian the an article about Russian Said Gafurov to the source that is censored in Russia but available for example in Germany. It is an electronical library which has a huge corpus of books in Russian - Flibusta.

Then a bot removed the links.

I think that these links are important, and that they should be used for all the Russiams who wrote books starting with Tolstoy and Dostoevskiy.

What are the rules about such links?

Thank you ARussian (talk) 15:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * It is probable that the reason why the bot reverted your links is that you were placing external links within the article text, rather than as reference citations. Please read WP:External links and Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

publishing a article about other person
Hi, please help me! if i wanted to write something about some famous person. or making a page Tapannaubagh (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)for other person what should i do.

some regional actor and actress doesnot have there identity on wiki, though they are very famous on some regions. so, i wanted to write about them and make their page too.

i try to create on sandbox too, but after 2 days the article is been deleted by admin with some reason.

Please help me. Thanks Tapannaubagh (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , an admin probably deleted your sandbox for copyright violations. I didn't double check, but generally that's the only time a sandbox will get deleted. If you want to write a page for somebody, you'll have to get sources like magazine articles about them and then rewrite it in your own words. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 19:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * The deletion log at User:Tapannaubagh/sandbox says that it was deleted under criterion U5: misuse of Wikipedia as a web host. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Tapannaubagh. In many cases, it helps to check your talk page, which I've linked to here: Tapannaubagh's Talk Page. It seems that your sandbox article was tagged for speedy deletion, which list the limited specific cases in which an administrator may delete an article without discussion. In your specific case, your article was deleted under the so-called U5 criteria (criteria for speedy deletion of a user page #5), which is the case if an administrator agrees that the content of your sandbox article is against the goals of Wikipedia as an encylopedia (the criteria specifically states: "U5. Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host: Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals, where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages, with the exception of plausible drafts and pages adhering to User pages").
 * For the future, may I suggest that you read Wikipedia's policies on what Wikipedia is not to avoid deletion? You may also want to read some of the Help Guides posted on your talk page, including Your first article and How to develop an article.-- talk2Chun  (talk) (contributions) 19:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Does language of the references matter?
Would it be possible that the reason of declining of a new article can be that the references i've been given are not in English? That is why it is impossible to verify for only English speaking audience? I am writing about Turkish musician, so the references in majority are in Turkish.Asya Kush (talk) 18:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi - you can absolutely use non-English refs.  See WP:NOENG. Justin15w (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Asya Kush, welcome to the Teahouse. As Justin15w noted, the language of the sources are not a problem, although here, at the English Wikipedia, sources in English are naturally preferred. However, assuming you are referring to Draft:Yalçın Hasançebi, the reviewing editor has provided you with some reasons why the draft is not sufficient (specifically, in his replies to your questions on his talk page). May I also be so bold as to recommend that you read what Wikipedia considers as reliable sources (this was one of the problems that the reviewer had with your references)? -- talk2Chun  (talk) (contributions) 20:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Requesting second opinion on first Wikipedia article & help with alternate account merging
Hi, I've recently posted my first article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopi_Krishnan) directly into the main page without going through the Draft stage (I realized my mistake after I had already posted the article, sorry about that). I also admit I have an acquaintance with the subject though I have not been asked to post this article and I've added a COI template for that reason.

Now that it's already posted, I'd like a second opinion please on the notability of the subject. I wanted to write about Gopi Krishnan because I feel he has made big contributions in bringing technology to banks in the Middle East and he's won awards for his contribution. I spent a couple of hours searching for sources that I think are not primary. If anyone could please take a look and tell me if the subject is notable enough to be included?

Also, I have two accounts on Wiki, an old one I used for Wikimedia Commons and another I've recently created for Wikipedia. Without realizing it, I seem to have violated policies by unknowingly editing my own article with my alternate account. Please help! I don't want to get in the bad books of Wikipedia, I intend to help to contribute for a long time. Is there a way I could merge my two accounts without losing edits on either account?

Thanks so much for your time.

Kaybee85 Kaybee85 (talk) 22:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Linking to posts in members-only forums?
Title says it all, really!

I want to include a quote that would link to posts from a members-only forum. (Not a private forum, just one you have to join to view.)

The post is by a respected published author in the relevant field and I can't any examples of them saying anything similar anywhere else.

Is this allowed? Funky1&#38;2 (talk) 21:35, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Let's take the bits one by one, :
 * References do not have to be easy to access, just possible. In particular, sources that you have to pay to access are not prohibited. I haven't found a clear statement on sources available only to members: it seems to me that if membership is open to anybody, even if there is a cost, that would be all right; if membership is not generally available that may be more problematic; but the Resource exchange may still be helpful. See WP:SOURCEACCESS
 * Normally forums are not acceptable as sources, since they are user generated; but WP:SPS says "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications", and from your description that might be the case here.
 * So, the answer is "it depends". Please read the whole of WP:VERIFY (two of the links I gave above are to sections of that page), and make your own judgment. Alternatively, you could ask about the specific case at the WP:RSN. --ColinFine (talk) 23:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

It's not a paid forum, just one that has to be joined before viewing is possible. The author concerned is indeed an "expert [whose] work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." In fact, he is generally regarded as the leading authority on the subject, so I suspect the quote will be justifiable. Will check out the link first though.

Thanks again.

¿como puedo editar los cuadros visuales que salen?
al poner en google algo sale un cuadro al lado de las paginas para buscar y quisiera saber como puedo editarlo porque ay contenidos de wikipedia que no concuerdan y quisiera saber como hacerlo para que concuerden con el contenido de wikipedia K.Kapoor (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi K.Kapoor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'll try to translate your question into English below, so that other editors may also attempt to answer your question. However, I fear that, without the specifics (Which Wikipedia topic? In which language did you Google? etc.), we won't be able to assist you too much.
 * Rough translation of K.Kapoor's question
 * Heading: How can I edit the visual boxes that appear? When searching for something in Google, a box appears on the side of the search results pages, and I would like to know how I can edit this information, because some content on Wikipedia are not correct and I would like to know how to make it so that it matches with the content on Wikipedia [sic].
 * To better answer your question, it would help if you could provide more details about your problem. If the issue is that some content on Wikipedia pages are incorrect, and you can find reliable sources for them, I'm sure other editors here would be more than happy to help you out. If the problem exists outside of Wikipedia, however, I'm not sure that we can help you.
 * Finally, please note that this is the English Wikipedia, and most (if not all) of our editors will generally use English here. If you would prefer, you can also try to ask your question at the Spanish Wikipedia (especially if the content issue is located there).-- talk2Chun  (talk) (contributions) 23:26, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

How long of a wait?
How long does it normally take for a new page to be approved? Jacob Long 06:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacobLong01 (talk • contribs)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia, ! Draft Wikipedia articles are approved via the WP:AFC process. This can sometimes take quite a long time - currently 20% of articles there (78 out of 377) have been waiting for three weeks or more. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 07:06, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There are a number of things that Psiĥedelisto didn't mention to you in his answer. Firstly you have an unterminated comment at the start of your sandbox draft, so all the rest of the draft (including the submission for review) will be ignored unless and until you terminate the comment.  Secondly, the "Quick Note" at the start of the draft, requesting donations, is unacceptable here in Wikipedia.  Thirdly, the draft contains a lengthy stream of text without references to reliable sources, so you need to read about verifiability, and also about notability.  Fourthly it appears that the subject of the draft may be a fictional character but you have failed to explain the context.  Fifthly it appears that your draft is a somewhat incomplete and malformatted copy of an existing page in another wiki.  Such copying seems rather pointless, and you have not given proper attribution for the copying, so it is plagiarism.  I would suggest that you read WP:Welcome, and particularly the guidance at WP:Your first article.  --David Biddulph (talk) 00:20, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Alternative account for Wikipedia Adventure?
I though it would be best if I asked first, so here goes. I really want to see what I can learn from the Wikipedia Adventure. However, for (irrational) reasons, I don't really want traces of this on my main account. Would it be considered as a legitimate use of an alternative account solely for running through the Wikipedia Adventure? Or would it be considered a sockpuppet? Thanks for indulging in this strange question. --    (talk) (contributions) 21:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, . There is no prohibition on having multiple accounts. Sockpuppetry is when you use multiple accounts in a way that is disruptive. I see no problem with your idea. However, don't ever edit the same article with two different accounts, and declare any alternate accounts on your userpage. John from Idegon (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)  John from Idegon (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I do not think there's anything wrong with idea. Although i have been wrong before :)

Jacob Long 06:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacobLong01 (talk • contribs)

It's recommended in the adventure hangout to use a specific account for testing, so I would reccommend using this account: That's just what I've read.Svrangerchrista (talk) 01:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Start over fresh with a new account: Like User:OcaasiTWA17 (these are legitimate alternate testing accounts and are not considered sockpuppets)

Creat own biography
Hi i am just wondering how creat own biography in Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arafat786au (talk • contribs) 19:26, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the Teahouse,, and thanks for asking. I'm afraid my answer is, Please don't! It's not forbidden, but it is strongly discouraged: please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for why.
 * If after reading that you decide that you do meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and you think that you can write sufficiently neutrally to try it anyway, please read Your first article carefully.
 * [[Image:Symbol move vote.svg|20px]] Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in anything which a subject (whether a company, a person, a band, a charity, or anything else) says or wants to say about itself. That includes anything published by an independent source but based on an interview or press release from the subject. An article should be largely based on what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places. In any case, every single fact or claim in an article should be derived from a published reliable source. Please see WP:V for more information.. --ColinFine (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Please note this incident, where someone created an autobiography. They are on the verge of being blocked now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Dylan (talk • contribs) 01:53, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How to edit an inline reference
I have had some help recently and with thanks for an entry called Signals Through The Flames (film).

It contains book references.

There is something wrong with the formatting of the References area. When viewing the draft, inline citations edited by admins show as indented 1.) and 2.). But using the edit button shows something different: my hand-entered entries which wind up being duplicates.

I have searched for how to edit an inline reference and only find how to make it, not how to retrieve and edit it for accuracy. Bringing in a fresh template does not seem reasonable.

Advise, please.Loninappleton (talk) 01:58, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Inline references are usually edited in the section where they are used and not in the references section where they are displayed. Draft:Signals Through The Flames is so small that you can just click the "Edit" tab at top to edit the whole page. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How to make a brand-new page available for everybody?
I have created a page for the biography of Silvia Osuna Oliveras and it is not available yet. I can find it on my sandbox but there is no title and I couldn't find the way to make it public. Do I have to do somethig elese apart from writing the content of the page or just wait until it is published?

Thank you in advanced

Sfdezmartin (talk) 03:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi . Moving a draft from a user sandbox to the article namespace is something that can technically be done by pretty much any editor, even yourself, but this does not mean that the article will not be nominated for deletion. Another option for you to try would be to submit the draft for review via Wikipedia:Articles for creation by adding Template:Userspace draft to the very top of the page, and then clicking click "Save changes". You should then see a blue "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top which you can click whenever you feel your draft is ready. Submitting your draft for review will allow experienced editors to assess it an proved suggestions on ways to improve it. Drafts submitted for review do seem to have a better chance of surviving since the reviewers job is to weed out those which are likely to be quickly deleted for one reason or another.


 * After taking a look at User:Sfdezmartin/sandbox, my recommendation would be for you to submit your draft for review because it does not appear quite ready for article status. The are some problems with the formatting/markup such as embedded external links and the lack of proper sections, but the main issue is that's not clear (at least at first glance) whether the subject of your draft satisfies Wikipedia:Notability (people) or Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Formatting issues, etc. tend to be things which can be easily fixed through copy editing, but Wikipedia notability (or the lack thereof) tends to be one of the main reasons why newly created articles end up being deleted. It might be a good idea for you to take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article and also ask for some feedback from editors who belong to Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science and Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry. Editors from those two WikiProjects would probably be most familiar with the type of research Oliveras is engaged in and would be able to provide more specific feedback on ways to improve the article or suggestions on where to find additional sourcing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

ISBN error I can't resolve
Today I tried my first inline reference for a book contained in the draft entry Signals Through The Flames(film). I redid the inline entry twice from a library printout of the reference. It has a problem with length. My entry from my library ref is:

9780802150301 0802150306

Trying to get to Grove press all that happened was an Amazon reference to purchase popped in. That showed differently formatted ISBN info:

Paperback: 159 pages Publisher: Grove Press (January 7, 1994) Language: English ISBN-10: 0802150306 ISBN-13: 978-0802150301

Also the wiki drop down box is unclear to me in referencing a translator, the original French published date of 1938 (rather than the Grove edition.) Also  birth and death info is available at the library notation. Is that included? Is there a long form to do this I am unaware of?

I cannot resolve these errors. Will watch the tearoom for replies.Loninappleton (talk) 21:10, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * ISBN corrected in . --David Biddulph (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

How to insert some form of Contents box?
Hello humanoids, I've spent about 3 solid days working on an article "Reverend John Davies (Shon Gymro)". I've got a fiar bit done but it clearly needs some more structure, ie, contents page. I've seen them on other articles and think I could use one on this article. Very much appreciate the help. Ian Iantheluke (talk) 04:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . A Table of Contents is generated automatically when an article has more than three sections. You create a section by putting two equal signs before and after the section name.  The wikicode look like this:


 * ==Section name==


 * Add sections and you will get the Table of contents. Read more at WP:TOC. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  06:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

academy award
Hi, I'm trying to add a notable person. he won a technical achievement academy award which shows in the academy's database via the academy's search function but it does not show on a permanent webpage that could be linked as a reference. has anyone successfully jumped thru this hoop? thx!Naiadescoven (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * What is their name? maybe there is information on another site, but no one will be able to help you, if they don't know who the person is. Svrangerchrista (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I assume it's about User:Naiadescoven/sandbox/David Johnsrud. You can use   from Template:Cite web to briefly specify a search, e.g.  . Omit details like "Enter the name in the Nominee field".


 * Hello, . I found this article in Variety, which says, "Gary Nuzzi, David Johnsrud and William Blethen for the design and development of the Unilux H3000 Strobe Lighting System, a high-speed strobe lighting system that generates a high intensity light pulse with a duration of only 1/100,000 of a second, the effect of which is to freeze an object moving at a high rate of speed so it can be photographed with extraordinary sharpness." I suspect that wording comes from an Academy press release. It is a start but sources providing more significant and truly independent coverage are needed. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  07:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Logo
How to add a logo of any organisation. Because they are copyrighted. But i see them in many pages.srini (talk) 10:40, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Example, This page has one, and I would like to add this image to this page.--srini (talk) 10:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi srini - please see WP:LOGO - Logos are used under a claim of fair-use, which means they must be uploaded to en-wikipedia, not wikimedia commons, and a fair-use rationale added (please see WP:LOGO and look at the rationales for similar logos). They can, normally, only be used once, in the article about the organization, not on associated pages about their town/city, competitions they compete in, etc. - Arjayay (talk) 10:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How do I get a Wikipedia page back up?
I was editing an existing Wikipedia Page for someone but the page has been deleted since then. Can someone give me any inputs on how I can get it back up?

Nivedita Ranit (talk) 10:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . Assuming you are referring to Suresh Rangarajan, you can find the deletion discussion here. As you can see, it was the consensus of those who contributed that Rangarajan did not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, because there were not substantial reliable sources about him. (Remember that an article cannot be based on what you know, or what I know, or what he and his associates have said or published: it must be largely based on what people who have no connection with him have published about him; and if there is little or no such published material, there will be nothing that can go in an article.


 * So my advice to you would be first to read the link above to understand what we mean by notability, and then look for suitable sources. If you cannot find these, give up and don't waste any more of your time. If you can find them, you can ask for the article to be restored to your user space: see WP:REFUND. But my suggestion would be to read your first article and start again, because my guess is that your draft will not be very useful, because you almost certainly made the (common) mistake of writing it from what you know rather than from what the independent sources say.
 * One further point: you say you were editing the page for someone. If by that you mean that you were editing on his behalf, then you need to know that Wikipedia discourages you from editing articles about people you are associated with: please read WP:COI carefully. --ColinFine (talk) 11:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

contribuite
as I can contribute more with the wikipedia?Pedro nduca (talk) 07:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Anyone can contribute to Wikipedia, . You can find some ideas on what to do at Introduction. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:42, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Split
1- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Split_(2017_film)&action=history

2- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Split_(2016_American_film)&action=history

Both the titles have own group of editors. They are editing the same film as different article? Marvellous Spider-Man  10:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, that's problematic. It looks like the article originally existed at Split (2017 film) but was https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Split_(2017_film)&oldid=748344993 moved to Split (2016 American film). An IP editor then attempted to revert the move (badly) by restoring the old content at the redirect and ended up forking the page. I'm not sure if it's fixable but I think the thing to do in cases like this is a request a history merge. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:34, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I have redirected Split (2017 film) to Split (2016 American film).[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Split_(2017_film)&diff=761522578&oldid=761509974] It is not suited for history merge due to interleaving edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

New pages for a film
Hello. I prepared a page about a short doc that was shortlisted for the Oscars. When I search for it on wiki I find it. It says its an orphan but I've tried linking as much as possible. How can I publish it. And, a HEBREW page exists for the film but when trying to link the two together, wiki couldn't find the Hebrew article. This is the page in English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mute%27s_House and this is the page in Hebrew: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/בית_האילמת Arielgrichter (talk) 08:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It's true that no other article links to The Mute's House, but it's not a serious problem. A greater concern is that it cites no references. It lists some references, but it doesn't cite any of them. Maproom (talk) 08:46, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Links between corresponding articles in different languages are made through Wikidata. I've now linked the English and Hebrew articles, so you should see the other language link at the foot of the left-hand toolbar in the English version (foot of the right-hand toolbar in the Hebrew version). --David Biddulph (talk) 13:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Need help with a problem.
Okay, here's the situation. IP editor User:141.51.213.208 has been editing Megalia for about 2 minutes now, however, both edits are marked as vandalism. I went ahead and reverted them, but they've contacted me on the matter saying this:

"Hello. The edits made on Megalia were clear vandalism. He even removed all the NPOV and OR templates. Just read to the article, it is just a rant about the website." They also sent [|this link]. To me, ZERO2CT's edit looks alright. What I'm asking for is a second opinion.

Oh, great and wise Teahouse Hosts, please help me with this problem.

The Phase Master 14:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC):


 * The edits by aren't technically vandalism (not by our definition, anyway) but they are an attempt to push a particular position on the article, which isn't acceptable. The best advice I can offer would be for you to try and bring the parties concerned to the articles talkpage, where they can discuss how much of the new information to include, and how it should be phrased (pro-tip: not like ZERO2CT was phrasing it). Yunshui 雲 水  15:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * TPM: Agree with the above. For edits to constitute vandalism on WP they have to be intentionally disruptive, and this does not cover edits, no matter how disruptive, that are done with the intention of improving the project, no matter how misguided that may be. That doesn't mean they won't result in a block or ban, but that would likely be something along the lines of a WP:CIR sanction rather than for vandalism.


 * On their face, the edits to appear to include quite a bit of unencyclopedic information, and have definitely not been done by a native English speaker. Personally, I would revert, especially since they may have tangential BLP implications, and then the edits can be discussed piece meal on the talk if necessary. Timothy Joseph Wood  15:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Fix a Language link on an article
Hi, I'm trying to fix a link from the English page of Cambrai to the French one of Cambrai When on the English page, the French link points to Ducasse. I've tried editing the link on Wikidata but it is correct there, pointing to Cambrai.

Is there a way to force the English page to synchronize with wikidat? I've raised the problem on the talk page of the English page, where another person noticed it as well but was also unable to fix it. MaximilienThiel (talk) 15:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Simply cured by a colon in . --David Biddulph (talk) 15:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. Wouldn't have thought that the page itself would affect the links since they moved to wikidata. Cheers! MaximilienThiel (talk) 16:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Links hard-coded on a page will over-ride anything in Wikidata. This is necessary because Wikidata is severely flawed, particularly as Wikidata is limited to one-to-one mapping whereas the scope of articles may easily differ between different language's Wikipedias. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

How to use Wikipedia information in my own book, copyright articles, photos
I am expanding my family geology booklet to include associated historical information using Wikipedia as my source. I extract parts of a Wikipedia search location and paste them into my file within my own text. . I do that also with photos. This becomes a significant portion of my book which I want to copyright. What is the acceptable procedure to identify the Wikipedia items extracted? I presently identify each extraction(s)from an article with the prefix {wik: search source} For each photograph I include the {wik:search source + photographers name}. I request information that allows me to proceed legally and within your guidelines, and ultimately get my book copyrighted. It will become a 'History book based upon my family genealogy'.

69.121.255.231 (talk) 14:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, you should find your answers in Reusing_Wikipedia_content. You mention that you want to copyright this, but you didn't say what copyright license you intend to use. The easiest way to do this is to use a copyright license such as "CC BY-SA 3.0 License" that is compatible with Wikipedia, and then do the things needed to comply with that licence.  Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers  14:51, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Please note that we allow several different free licenses for images, so make sure you check each image and its license terms individually. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

how can i translate a page which is in English into persian??
hello.my teacher asked me to translate 10 article into persian and then save in wikipedia.the translated page should be linked to the English one.the problem is that i do not know how to link the translated page. Rzaahmadi69 (talk) 17:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . For translating articles, please see WP:Translate us - note that you must credit the original article properly, or you will violate the licence under which almost all material in Wikipedia is released. To add language links, pick مورد دیگر in the sidebar, and that will bring up a window where you can add links to articles in other languages. See WP:ILL for more information about these. --ColinFine (talk) 19:06, 23 January 2017 (UTC)