Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 584

Website
how do i put my info in the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by De Silva(Thugga) (talk • contribs) 10:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.


 * While this page is for asking questions about how to edit on Wikipedia and new questions are normally placed at the top of the page rather than the bottom, I'll take a stab at answering while leaving the question down here.


 * Wikipedia is not a venue for advertising your website. You should be able to easily find website hosting services on the internet, a few of them are even "free" for small, starter websites. They vary a lot in the types of services offered. If you're just a beginner, I suggest paying the modest amount needed to put up a website on one of the "full service" web host providers. They have software that makes it relatively easy to put up a nice-looking website and their systems will usually do a good job of preventing your website from being hacked or abused.  jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  10:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Help with editing a biography
Hi! I am currently editing a biography, "Al-Kawthari" to be exact. Could you give me some tips? Khalidulhaq1982 (talk) 10:47, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello . MOS:BIO lists conventions for biographies on Wikipedia. Looking at other biographies is also useful. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

How do i get help editing articles
Hi, i have a article that was not approved for posting as it was seen as too much like a corporate advertisement. However, the purpose is just to create a information overview about what the company does. is there any way i can run the content through someone so that i can edit it for approval? 101.127.234.113 (talk) 03:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes there is: Article wizard – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * . --ColinFine (talk) 17:44, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

General structure of an article
Hi! I'm editing the article "Slow Wave Sleep" for my physiology class. I remember from the trainings that thing to look for is a good leading section. Any tips on how a good general structure (subsections) of a medical article should look/address? C.q20n.17 (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, ! All articles are expected to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style. If you're looking for a layout for a specific type of article, I'd recommend reading another article of a similar subject, and looking at how that is laid out. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks! MereTechnicality   ⚙  15:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! 150.108.240.133 (talk) 17:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Adding to what said, it's best if you choose a Featured article or a Good article on a similar subject; otherwise you run the risk of copying the layout of a not-very-good article. (You can pick those links to get lists of the articles) --ColinFine (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

References of Article's
Wikipedia is one of the best tool of knowledge, but as everything as some demerits and marits. So I think there are shortcomings which makes Wikipedia less reliable. These are lack cited or references sibject and less securities biz anyone types or edit anything even not pure knowledge about the articles. For an example some day ago I have seen an article about my city in which more things are written was not satisfied. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kishor Jpotra (talk • contribs) 16:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . You're absolutely right: that is the down-side of allowing anybody to edit. Articles (and individual pieces of information in an article) are in a sense completely worthless without references that a reader can in principle check. But if we removed every unreferenced claim from an article, there would be a lot less material in Wikipedia. This is the dilemma.


 * What you can do, like anybody else, is to help us, by finding references to reliable sources: referencing for beginners will tell you how to do this; but even if you don't feel confident about adding the references to an article, you could list the references you found on the article talk page for somebody else to add to that article. Adding a few references to an existing article can be more valuable that writing a new article. Thank you for your concern. --ColinFine (talk) 17:57, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Deleted page
this page is subject to cancellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carola_Insolera In the discussion page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Carola_Insolera I gave them the reasons why i do not believe this page should be deleted. can you please help me solving this case? thank you. Magise (talk) 16:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not a host, just a newbie who has struggled to come to grips with current wp policies. I looked at the article. I think it should not be deleted. There comes a point, IMHO, when a sufficient volume of primary sources should make a topic notable. DennisPietras (talk) 18:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Is there a WC page similar to files for discussion on WP?
Hi again! I am glad to see that wp has a way to remove a brain cramp, but I've got some on WC too. Does WC have an equivalent way of doing that? Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 18:50, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey DennisPietras. I think you may be looking for Deletion requests. Timothy Joseph Wood  18:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * DennisPietras (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Four questions regarding article creation, articles existing in different languages and stub creation.
Hello:

I have a few questions that are all related to the creation of articles and stubs.

Firstly, is there an established method to introduce an article or stub that exists in one language version of Wikipedia to another?

I tried to introduce a stub that exists on fr.wikipedia.org to en.wikipedia.org, but it was rejected on notability grounds. I had thought that if an article or stub existed in any language on Wikipedia that its notability was established. I did some reading, and from what I understand the requirements for stubs seem to be the same as for articles. On the other hand, I have seen several stubs that are pretty slim on supporting references and are less than 750 characters long when first created. I have also just discovered that “stub maker” is a real label that some editors have.

Secondly, is it possible to request a “stub maker” to create a specific stub?

Thirdly, what would someone need to do to become a “stub maker”?

In the first case where I had tried to introduce the stub my plan was to get the stub in place and return to it later to flesh it out into a full article myself. I’m not sure if that is considered appropriate – it could be seen as a little self-serving.

Fourthly, is it acceptable to create a stub with the intent to revisit it later and expand it to article status yourself?

Thanks, Kumboloi (talk) 19:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Kumboloi - You seem to misunderstand a "stub". To quote WP:STUB:- "A stub is an article deemed too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject." You should not deliberately aim to create a "stub" you should aim to create a full article, which, due to lack of coverage, may be deemed to be a stub.  The standards for any article are the same - a stub that does not meet WP:42, is an article that does not meet our basic standards, so it should be deleted. There are no lower standards for a stub. - Arjayay (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback Arjayay. I had read the requirements for stubs and saw that the requirements were the same as for articles. That notwithstanding, I've come across a lot of stub/articles that (in my opinion) don't meet the requirements. That got me speculating about the possibility that stub articles are given more leeway under certain circumstances to, in effect, "seed" the creation of more extensive articles. Kumboloi (talk) 22:25, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . Each language version of Wikipedia has its own policies and rules, so it is quite possible that a topic considered notable on the French Wikipedia wouldn't be considered notable on the English Wikipedia, but I would say it is equally likely that it doesn't meet the notability criteria of the French Wikipedia but that that has not been noticed yet. You can certainly find articles on the English Wikipedia that should be deleted. I'm not aware of a policy for starting articles here that already exist on other language variants of Wikipedia, unless the article is a translation of an already existing article, in which case you need to credit the source article. See Translation on how to do this. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying Cordless Larry. I'll take a look at the "How to translate" article. Kumboloi (talk) 22:25, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Stub Makers is not an official position but just a term some users use to describe themselves. Anyone can say it. It has no consequences. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi PrimeHunter. Thanks for the clarification. I think it was the article you linked above that gave me the impression that this was more of an official capacity rather than a function that they took on themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumboloi (talk • contribs) 04:59, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for all of the feedback on my earlier questions. I am pretty much left with just one at present:

If stubs are just short articles and have to meet the same notability requirements, how do they ever get created?

Kumboloi (talk) 13:59, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * They don't get created much nowadays, . They are mostly relics of an earlier period, when we were less picky about new articles. --ColinFine (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine. What you're saying makes much more sense. I was trying to reconcile the current policy with the legacy articles that I was tripping across. The upshot seems to be that I should not worry about stubs unless there's an existing one that I can add materially to. Kumboloi (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

how i can edit a page
I want to add something in a page but always removed my data — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usamakaror (talk • contribs) 14:43, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . Your edits to Karor Lal Esan have been reverted because they are inappropriate. Adding the postal code alone would be fine (though it really belongs in the infobox rather than in the text, and all information is better if it is referenced) but adding the name of an internet adviser looks like promotion, which is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. In any case, if someody reverts an edit you make, you should not just apply it again, but should discuss the matter with the other editor: see WP:BRD. Please also read WP:42. --ColinFine (talk) 19:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Died/Passed away
Hey Teahouse, TPM here. I remember seeing a WP page where if someone passed away, you should use "died" instead of "passed away". Where on EnWiki did I see that?

The Phase Master 19:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey TPM, probably at WP:EUPHEMISM. Timothy Joseph Wood  19:07, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Yep, that was it. Thanks!
 * The Phase Master 19:09, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Insert Flying Circus reference here... - NsTaGaTr (Talk) 20:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

how to mark an article for deletion?
I found an article ( Rafi Tshuva ) that only has one sentence and little very little evidence to make it notable. How can I mark this article for deletion, if need be? Bedsidelamp (talk) 16:59, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . The process (and the three different kinds of deletion) is discussed at WP:Deletion policy. Please note that it is better to improve an article than to delete it, unless it cannot be saved; so it is worth doing a little research first to determine whether the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. If he clearly does not, then nominate it for deletion; but if he might do, it is better to tag the article with a template such as unreferenced, and see if somebody improves it. If you do go ahead with deletion, the process is much much easier if you enable Twinkle and use that. --ColinFine (talk) 18:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Notability depends on the topic and how much coverage it has received in reliable sources. The lack of sources actually in the article does not mean that the topic is not notable. The first step is to investigate whether this person meets our Notability guideline for association football players. If so, the article should be improved rather than deleted.  Cullen328   Let's discuss it  21:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * He meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for footballers as he's played for his country. As such, it'd be difficult/impossible to get a consensus to delete. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That is what I thought likely,, but since my personal knowledge of association football is negligible,  I thought it best to let others express that opinion. Cullen328   Let's discuss it  21:40, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Wanted to create an entry for an improv comedy troupe
I'd submitted an entry for my old improvisational theater troupe from Cincinnati. The troupe ran for nearly 6 years and gave rise to numerous other local acts within the arts community -- including the currently extant Over-the-Rhine Improv troupe.

I estimate the artistic contributions of such an organization to be comparable to other local theater groups. So why might such an article be declined?

...aside from my lack of published references for performances that is. And would classified ads from the Cincinnati Enquirer be adequate if I wanted to try again, this time doing my actual homework?

Jolachimera (talk) 20:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse. Frankly, your estimation of the organization plays no part here. It's all about estimation made in reliable sources.


 * On Wikipedia, there is virtually nothing aside from reliable sources that contribute to the suitability of content on the encyclopedia. It's all about summarizing what such sources have written.


 * No, ads don't count. All content must be based on published, reliable sources that are independent of the troupe. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:48, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Youtube explainer video summaries of wikipedia articles and improve user friendliness
Hi! I've a few ideas on how to improve wikipedia but don't know how to implement it

1. Problem - people are visual don't like to read it's unnatural boring long noone will do it except "nerds" (homo sapiens eyes evolved for other stuff).

Solution - animated explainer videos summarizing the article for people who don't like reading. This would allow people on youtube to get all the info in an easy way without boring reading

Maybe even create a youtube wikipedia channel and share the world's knowledge with video

2. Problem - the site's outline is confusing and for "nerds". A normal person who's not on computer all day and doesn't understand how internet works will find wikipedia too complicated confusing etc

Solution - the biggest websites in the world (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_popular_websites)

https://www.google.com/ https://www.youtube.com/ https://www.facebook.com/ https://www.amazon.com/ https://twitter.com/ https://www.instagram.com/?hl=en https://www.microsoft.com/en-us

are all simple nicely designed visual to the point and user friendly in general

Look at all of these top websites. All these top websites look amazing and wikipedia looks awful compared to them but has lots of knowledge and if it looked better and had better user friendliness more people would use it

e.g. A clear "Outline" on the main page of how wikipedia works, simple navigation, nice design, better fonts, more visual, more pictures, better design in general

The main goal is to improve user friendliness of wikipedia to average people so that more people can read it / watch videos here and learn stuff

How to implement this? Maybe there are some better suggestions? What's preventing Wikipedia from using videos, better design and user-friendliness? Can wikipedia be redesigned and use video?

Other educational websites that look much better than Wikipedia and are more user friendly

https://www.khanacademy.org/ https://www.edx.org/ https://www.coursera.org/

Why can't Wikipedia look better? Is it so difficult or expensive?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Old_Wikipedia.png - this is how old wikipedia looked and the current one looks way too old, it needs to be redesigned

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dndm49 (talk • contribs) 06:30, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Dndm49 (talk) 06:20, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the best way to go here is to draw up some specific UI suggestions and show people what it should look like. You can upload these on Wikimedia Commons and start a discussion about it on the village pump to gather community consensus on any changes that should be made.  Also, I'd recommend you change the entire framing of the problem to something other than "nerds vs. everyone else."  I don't think this is a convincing or constructive way to suggest improvements to the UI, at all. I JethroBT drop me a line 06:41, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . The Teahouse is a place to ask questions and get answers about editing Wikipedia, and so I recommend the Village Pump as a better place for a philosophical discussion about Wikipedia's future. However, I will offer some preliminary thoughts. Reading and writing has been the main method for people to communicate and transmit knowledge for millennia. Obviously,  video is of great contemporary importance but good video is the product of great writing first of all,  followed by highly skilled team effort.


 * When you linked to the list of biggest websites, you failed to mention that Wikipedia is #5 on that list. Google is #1 and mostly indexes and searches written content. Google's subsidiary YouTube at #2 hosts videos produced by others. Facebook at #3 allows people to connect with friends and family, using links to written,  graphic and video content. Baidu at #4 provides similar services for Chinese readers.


 * Wikipedia at #5 outranks all the other big businesses you mentioned, and hosts by far the most comprehensive and extensive treasure trove of originally written educational content on the internet. Our readership proves our relevance.


 * So, if Wikipedia is so popular, read regularly by hundreds of millions of people, containing over five million English articles and tens of millions in other languages,  then it cannot possibly be true that a "normal person" "will find Wikipedia too complicated . . . confusing".


 * As for your idea of adding more video content to Wikipedia, the only obstacle is the difficulty of high quality video production. There is no doubt that video production is far easier now than it was 20 to 30 years ago. But it is not truly easy. It is a team effort requiring research, planning,  writing,  camera work,  on camera talent, special effects, editing, coordinating location shots and so on. One person can write a Wikipedia article on a niche topic although others may join in to help. Creating a really useful video requires assembling a documentary filmmaking crew. Because this is a volunteer project, they must all be volunteers willing to give away their labor and expertise for free. Do you think that is an easy thing? <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328   Let's discuss it  06:59, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree with, and I'm not really sure what needs to change. Videos, explainer or otherwise, can already be uploaded to our sister project Wikimedia Commons, and a few articles, such as Zika virus, already contain explainer videos. (Zika virus video at right) As in all things here on Wikipedia, if you want more articles to contain explainer videos, you're going to have to create more explainer videos. Also, I find your idea that "normal people don't like to read" ridiculous. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 09:50, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

We have more than 180 high quality medical videos here Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 12:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I'd like to agree with dndm49, I am very computer illiterate. I mostly find your service wonderfully informative and have donated a tiny bit in the past because I really DO appreciate your services. BUT as I came on your "dashboard" today to find out how to ask a simple question - i.e. how do I ask for a certain item to be written about? - I found there are lists and links and crazy stuff I don't understand EVERYWHERE, lol. And many times I don't have the time to sit down and try to wade thru all that "nerd stuff", which it pretty much is. If it's not written in "English", it doesn't help me at all. Just my opinion, thanks for the opportunity!

Theresa 108.191.58.141 (talk) 19:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * By the way, I'm good at editing but definitely NOT at verifying information. I don't even know how I found THIS page, haha!

Theresa 108.191.58.141 (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks everyone I actually got my 2 questions answered. First - there is a chrome extension Wikiwand which solves the user friendliness problem. Second - explainer videos already exist, to get more I / we need to produce more. So it's all good. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dndm49 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

how to add notable person to Fort Myers FL list of notable people
how to add notable person to Fort Myers FL list of notable people?173.165.210.169 (talk) 19:42, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Please note that all of the listings of notable people are blue links, and references to reliable sources verify their connections to Fort Myers. The blue links indicate that we have biographies of those people on Wikipedia,  If the person you want to add to the list has a Wikipedia biography,  then click the "edit" button and add that person. Use the same format as the other entries. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328   Let's discuss it  22:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Accessible Citations (Experiment)

 * So I've been running some experiments with PDF's, and improving Accessibility of articles and references.
 * Thanks for the ideas and help from My Related TeaHouse Question.
 * See Citing_sources
 * (I borrowed some code from WP:CITESHORT to make this example)

The Goal:

Find the easiest/quickest route to follow a reference back to the original paragraph/sentence in which the writer/editor was reading.

Experiment:

This is how it looks in WikiCode: <blockquote style="border:1px solid #999;"> Sentence.

Another Sentence.

Accessible Citations

 * Letter from Rome (PDF). Rome, Italy. 1871.

This is how they look in the article: <blockquote style="background:white; padding:1em; border:1px solid #999;"> Sentence.<sup id="nbFoot01b" class="reference">[a] Another Sentence <sup id="nbFoot02b" class="reference">[b]

Accessible Citations

Letter from Rome (PDF). Rome, Italy. 1871.

<li id="noteFoot01b" >^ Letter from Rome, page 56.</li> <li id="noteFoot02b" >^ Letter from Rome, page 71. </li>

</ol>


 * Higher Accessibility by having "Citations" separate from "References". This makes it more clear which article is accessible, and which one you are being linked to.  Also, less clutter for the actual references section.
 * Something that I see for improvement would be a clever way to use bypass the URL in-line citations (since the only essential part is the #pagenumber). Ideally, an auto-generated link when using

Thoughts? Criticisms? Suggestions? =) Popcrate (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Popcrate. The efn template is for explanatory footnotes (E.F.N. is an acronym of that phrase), not citations. I suggest instead using either ( s hortened f oot n otes) or Harvnb and calling them with reflist, rather than notelist. I like harvnb a lot. Also, that is not a transparent citation because the attribution details tell the reader little about the source. Let me give you an example (from an article I'm working on):


 * Code :

Text text text. Text text text. "Quote text text text". Text text text. Text text text. Text text text. Text text text.

I have edited the page for the Linux Link Tech Show. How can I remove the Notability maintenance template?
I believe that I have helped to resolve this pages notability requirements. Is it just as simple as deleting the template? Could someone please share any help. Thank you kindly. Huminahhuminah (talk) 02:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but chatlogs for the very first episode do not really establish notability. You need professionally published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are not affiliated with the subject but still specifically about it. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Okay, so just to make sure I fully understand this. Will a reference to the show/podcast from a magazine that lists this as a reputable Linux podcast suffice?

Thank you for your time. Huminahhuminah (talk) 02:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably. See the general notability guidelines for more info.  The magazine should be a professional mainstream source and it should provide in-depth coverage.  An article about the podcast would work, though a single brief mention in a list might not.  Ian.thomson (talk) 02:34, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Directory type listings do not establish notability, and neither do passing mentions. Instead,  we need references to significant coverage of the topic in independent, reliable sources. Experienced editors take these standards very seriously. The coverage must be significant and the sources must be completely independent. If such sources are not provided, then this article may well be deleted.  <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328   Let's discuss it  03:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

General question on an AfC
This is a real greenhorn question, and I know I'm failing at the "be bold" directive, but I'm looking at this AfC submission and don't know what to do. It strikes me as fulfilling the WP:PROF notability guideline (the subject is the chair of a mainstream department at a prestigious school), but the article reads like his CV, which strikes me as coathangery. Am I correct in concluding that the article should be accepted on the basis that it seems to satisfy notability and the guidelines on citations for BLP, and is just in need of a substantial amount of editing? Dunready (talk) 07:31, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Your first task on reviewing the AFC submission would be to address the copyright violation from https://www.utsystem.edu/sites/neuroscience/blog/2015/05/22/dr-john-byrne-running-sfn-president (so you were correct in saying that it looks like his CV). - David Biddulph (talk) 08:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Dunready (talk) 08:07, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * (I went ahead and followed your advice. Thanks again for the help.) Dunready (talk) 08:32, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Interestingly, I now see that the article John H. Byrne, created by the same editor, was speedily deleted for the same reason in June 2016. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:47, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Article can be edited, but only to add material
I wanted to make minor copy edits to a section of an article, and the edit box was mostly blank. What is going on? --Quisqualis (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That section of the article is transcluded from another article, entitled Glass–Steagall in post-financial crisis reform debate.
 * If you make changes to the latter, they'll show up in the main article. (But maybe only after doing a 'refresh', or just waiting a while - or a 'purge', see that link) 86.20.193.222 (talk) 09:50, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Why was my edit removed?
I made an edit to the page Lightsaber. It was valid and correct information, but shortly after it was removed for unknown reasons.Masonr318 (talk) 19:10, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Masonr318 - Ask the reverting editor, and discuss on the article talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey Masonr318. It looks like your edit was likely reverted because it did not include reliable sources to back up the information and where it came from. For an overview how to include sources see Help:Referencing for beginners. For our policy on how to judge whether sources are reliable, see Identifying reliable sources. Timothy Joseph Wood  19:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

i would like to use the work aversion page for my website, how do i get permission for this ?
i am in a fellowship called work anoxerics and underachievers anonymous and i identify with what has been written on the wikipedia work aversion page. i would like to use some of what has been written on the work aversion page on the work anoxerics and underachievers anonymous website. how do i gain permission to do this ? Movement 4 freedom (talk) 19:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Movement 4 freedom - You can't get permission, because you do not need it. The explanation is at Reusing Wikipedia content - you need to attribute our content, and re-issue it under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license (CC-BY-SA). Sample wording for the licensing, and a fuller explanation, are on that help page. - Arjayay (talk) 19:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

What needs to be done to establish a Project Page
Hi, I have created an account and am registered. All I want to do is create a Proof of Concept for my team and really do not understand the process. We are just looking for collaboration of subject matter between different organizations that make up an alliance to support our client. Nothing fancy. NAEPAutomation (talk) 22:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for joining the team. Projects on Wikipedia are called WikiProjects. They are intended to be collaborations to develop and maintain an aspect or subject area of Wikipedia. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a web page hosting site. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for everyone in the world, that everyone in the world can help to build and maintain. Thank you for asking. For business collaborations, you might want to look up web hosting service and wiki. The Transhumanist 22:44, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . It sounds to me as if you are not wanting Wikipedia at all, but are wanting your own private Wiki (there are thousands and thousands of wikis on the web, some of them public and some private. Wikipedia is just the biggest and best known one) There are sites like Wikia where you can create your own wiki; or if somebody in your organisation has the know-how and access to a server, you could download the Mediawiki software that runs Wikipedia, and have your own private wiki on your own private server. --ColinFine (talk) 19:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . You are right. I found that out from an individual reviewer.  So, I guess I can myself delete the page?  205.251.79.68 (talk) 21:29, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

My page Draft:Gaur_gopal_das was refused. Help me improve it.
Hello. My page Draft:Gaur_gopal_das was refused for using peacock terms. Since then, I have made some small edits. I have only a little experience making new pages. Please let me know what changes can be made to improve this one further. Thank you :) Nishant Sah (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Several things are still of concern. Examples:


 * Radhanath Swami should not be referred to as His Holiness. Even the article on Swami does not do that.
 * A quotes sections is unnecessary. That belongs on [Wikiquote project https://www.wikiquote.org/]. Perhaps copy it there or to your sandbox for now.
 * TEDx should be mentioned in the first paragraph as that is essential the bases for possible notability.


 * I am going to help you by converting the references to the proper format. But please do not get discouraged. If you need more help ask the wonderful people at WP:AFCHELP or just ask again here. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

is this really unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company ???
is this really unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company ???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecysound_Systems

"A tag has been placed on Prophecysound Systems, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic."

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... It contains only factual information and quotes of interest to researchers of the company, its history and products

Luminous Industries Australia (talk) 22:44, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Luminous Industries Australia: Most likely yes, since both the page has been deleted as such twice (as well as being unambiguous copyright infringement) and you have yourself been blocked for violating our username policy. Timothy Joseph Wood  23:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Having just looked at the deleted page, this was not a close call. This was very, very blatant advertising.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * --ColinFine (talk) 22:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

How do you insert picture box
How do you insert picture box with links Pghindie (talk) 23:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You can find detailed instructions on this page. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 23:29, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * (e/c) Hi Pghindie. Please see Help:Infobox and Manual of Style/Infoboxes – which is what I think you might be referring to by "picture box with links" – and if not, Nihonjoe's link should cover what else you might have meant. Please note that if this is about Ronald Quigley, a living person, we can only use a public domain image or one affirmatively granted a suitably-free copyright license, and it is unlikely any image of him would qualify for fair use under our strict criteria. If you still have questions about the infoboxes after seeing those pages, please do follow-up here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Soliciting for Peer-review of Abebe Bikila
Could I solicit you to do a thorough c/e or maybe even a peer-review of this article. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I recommend asking over at the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors (on their requests page, specifically). That's what they do. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 23:34, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I will do that. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 23:37, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Is translating a Wikipedia article actually paid?
While I was translating a Japanese language article ja:かみさまみならい ヒミツのここたま into German using Special:ContentTranslation, I saw the text that shows 1$ on Japanese Wikipedia. Is it paid?WDCDECDCDC (talk) 22:42, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi WDCDECDCDC. The dollar symbol is used in variety of coding languages. I am guessing you saw some raw code. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I suspect you actually saw $1. It's used as a parameter name in system messages. See for example [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAllMessages&prefix=Translate&filter=all&lang=en&limit=50]. It's supposed to be replaced by some text in the call of a system message but this occasionally fails. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * And to answer your question directly,, apart from a few employees of the Wikimedia Foundation who keep the servers going and look after the foundation's operation and fundraising, nobody is ever paid by the Foundation for work on Wikipedia or any of its sister projects. Sometimes people or companies employ people to work on articles: many editors disapprove of this process, and anybody who is being paid to edit is required to declare the fact according to WP:PAID. --ColinFine (talk) 19:58, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * There are occasional prizes (such as the WikiCup) and grants (for research projects, events, etc). But nobody's getting rich off of these. – Reidgreg (talk) 00:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

using census records as reference in a biography
I am working on a biography of Myrtle Broome. I have a reference that lists her birth year and city, father's name, but not mother's name. I could look up UK census information to determine her birthdate and mother's name.

Are census records ok to use in a biography? If so, do you have an example of how I would list that information in the reference area?

thanks MauraWen (talk) 01:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . Census records are a primary source, and so they may be used as references, but only in limited ways. For uncontroversial factual data such as you mention, it is almost certainly all right. For US Census records, you can use the template cite census. I'm not sure what's the best thing to do if it is somewhere else. --ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with the above. You can use citation specifically like this:
 * I looked and could not find any census info on her. I found these though which should be helpful:
 * http://www.brown.edu/Research/Breaking_Ground/bios/Broome_Myrtle%20Florence.pdf
 * The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology should contain her obituary. If you have access to a library find these books:
 * &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Arts Reviews
I am writing an article about an artist. He has numerous NY Times reviews.. but only one article of significance that specifically highlights this individual... Do these count as cites? (Dchaissejohnsier (talk) 22:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The article with significant coverage can be used to help establish notability. The others can be used in the article as needed once notability has been established. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 23:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . According to our notability guideline for artists, serious critical attention such as reviews are among the factors that make an artist notable. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  00:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Having trouble publishing a page. Draft:Party of Communists USA
Hi all,

I am having trouble publishing a page. I have edited out any references to the organization itself.

What remain are 6 external, independent, verifiable references.

Draft:Party of Communists USA

Please help me publish this page. There is no other such page on Wikipedia, and it is high time this article is on Wikipedia, as the organization is relevant to current events today.

So far I have followed every step there is. I have noticed that the PCM - Communist Party of Mexico (2011) page only has ONE external reference, yet we have 6. Why was the PCM page approved, but our page denied? All other links have been removed on the PCUSA wiki.

Please help.

Thank you.

Dragunsky1922Dragunsky1922 (talk) 17:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Let's begin with Communist Party of Mexico (2011). That article was started in 2007 when the group had a different name and Wikipedia had lower standards. The Articles for Creation process did not exist at that time, so it appears that no one approved the article. It was added without review. It is a poorly referenced article although the party may well be notable. We do not accept mediocre articles in 2017 just because someone wrote a mediocre article ten years ago. Instead,  that article should be cleaned up. We have well over five million articles and many of them have shortcomings.


 * As for your draft, none of your sources appear to be truly independent and reliable. We are looking for coverage in sources with professional editorial control and no connection to the group in question. Blogs are not acceptable.  An academic book about the history of Marxist-Leninist organizations in the U. S. would be a good source. But this group was only founded a couple of years ago and had its founding conference ten months ago. Accordingly,  it may be too soon for a Wikipedia article about this group, unless you can provide much better references.


 * We have an experienced editor called with a lot of experience working on articles about left wing political parties. Maybe he has something to add.  <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328   Let's discuss it  21:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Actually might be the best person to comment here. There very clearly needs to be more time and sourcing before an article on this organization will pass muster in the event of a notability challenge. A good rule of thumb is that there needs to be three substantial sources about the subject of an article, of presumed reliability and published by external entities. If the mainstream press starts writing the group up, notability will be passed. Even though I personally would like to see articles about every single extant political party in history, consensus at Articles for Deletion is to the contrary and there is no way that a free-standing piece on this organization would survive at this time. Carrite (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * If they can't be written up individually, you could always create a list (or more than one list) of all of them. Have a summary for each entry, and link to the main article for each if the article exists. That way, information is available still. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 23:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I am going to be adding a much longer list of references later today. Now the article will have impeccable references.

Dragunsky1922 (talk) 06:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC) ---

The page has been updated with thirteen sources, all of which are separate from the article's subject. Some of the news sources openly attack the article's subject.

I think the claim "The Party of Communists USA is too new to be on Wikipedia" is baseless, as the article's subject dates back to 1919, although the article's subject was officially created in 2014.

I am glad that you brought in some Wikipedia users that have experience working on Left-Wing articles. They will understand the next thing I am going to say, regarding relevance:

The article "Party of Communists USA" is relevant on Wikipedia because the Party of Communists USA is the only Marxist-Leninist Communist Party in the United States.

There is no other such formation on the left in existence in our country.

My submission is not the first nor the last time the Party of Communists USA will appear on Wikipedia.

So is there a minimum of 25 or 50 references required to publish a Wikipedia article? The "Time Factor" is a totally baseless claim; why then was the Women's March Wikipedia article already published, if that article's subject occurred only a month ago?

Please give me tips on improving the approval status on this article; I am not interested in "Time Factors" rather suggestions to get this article approved and uploaded to Wikipedia.

Many users will not understand what I mean by the "sole Marxist-Leninist Communist Party in the United States," but those users who work on Left-Wing Wikipedia articles will understand the importance and relevance of the article.

Dragunsky1922 (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

How to use objective language
Any suggestions on how to write my article using more 'encyclopedia' type language. It constantly gets rejected. The article is on Peter Mylonas ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peter_Mylonas HoundDog17 (talk) 04:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse.


 * Don't call him a "leading karate expert" when no one else calls him that (not even his website, which you use as the source, even though you shouldn't). Neither did he play a "prominent" role in anything or was "avid" at that, unless you can cite such evaluations to reliable third party sources. The same goes for the "significant promise" that he purportedly showed. Please see Manual of Style/Words to watch.


 * There is an even bigger problem than language though. You need to base your article on information found in reliable published sources that are independent of this person. His own website is not. If he isn't covered at depth in such sources, there cannot be a Wikipedia article on this person. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:00, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Here is another example: Your draft claims that his father played "a prominent role model in his son's life and an avid supporter of his life-long karate journey", but who says that praise is true? There is no reference for that evaluative language. That is not the neutral language of an encyclopedia article summarizing what independent sources say about the topic. That is hagiography which does not belong in an encyclopedia. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  06:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Publishing scholarly papers
Hello All, One of the scholars from Georgetown University is writing scholarly papers on "Slavery" specially in relation to Islam and ISIS. I took his paper and created an article here then submitted it for review/approval. This submission was rejected stating this article reads like personal opinion and not Encyclopedic article.

I dont want to change his article, as it is a scholarly article, but then how do i publish it here as an encyclopedic article? Thanks for your help in advance!!!Larkin.Bryze (talk) 13:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.  Wikipedia articles should be based on a range of reliable sources, not on a single author's unreviewed and unpublished papers. It should summarize all the major views on the topic from reliable, independent sources - not summarize just one person's views. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, if you have created the article by copying and pasting text wholesale from the source, then this is a copyright violation, . Cordless Larry (talk) 13:32, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . If you take a look at the disambiguation page Islam and slavery, you will see that we already have several articles covering this broad topic area. We do not accept duplicative articles. I suggest that you read Your first article. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  16:46, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It might be possible to expand some of these articles using the paper as a source, . That's how we use sources on Wikipedia, rather than copying and pasting them into their own articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

How to italic?
I tap the italic button but it does not italicize? Bruce Metzger (talk) 01:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


 * That's weird. if you add two apostrophes between the text (e.g.  ), then it will italicize the text (e.g. Text). —MRD2014 📞 What I've done 02:11, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Why have such a convoluted method to use italics? I'm afraid to the answer. Bruce Metzger (talk) 02:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Usually, clicking the italic button produces Italic text, with "Italic text" highlighted so you can adjust what you want to have in italics. —MRD2014 📞 What I've done 02:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Wikipedia operates on MediaWiki software, which many people consider quaint and antiquated. On the other hand,  it successfully powers this, the #6 website in the world, and countless other wikis as well. It has its idiosyncracies but tens of thousands of Wikipedia editors use it every day without a lot of trouble. The Visual Editor is a WYSWYG overlay,  but personally,  I prefer to work in wikicode, which I found easy to learn even though I am not a professional programmer. You may find the Cheatsheet helpful to assist in learning wikicode. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328   Let's discuss it  02:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The apostrophes must end up in the saved source page but they can be added with a click. I dont know what you tried but if you want to italicize existing text then mark the text before clicking the italic button. Some text is produced by templates and then the details may depend on the used template. Which text on which page do you want to italicize? PrimeHunter (talk) 10:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

page protection
How to make an wiki page protected or semi protected? thanksArpon chakma (talk) 10:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Arpon chakma, welcome to the Teahouse. Pages can only be protected by administrators. See Protection policy for when it's done and Requests for page protection for how to request it. If you say which page you want protected and why then we can give more specific advice. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:00, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Template help
I created a new template here Template:Board of Admiralty after using a template I had in draft Template:Departments of the United Kingdom Government, the new template created but when you click view or edit this template it takes to Template:Departments of the United Kingdom Government have I been naughty and cut corners? I would appreciate very much if I can have help resolving the problem many thanks.--Navops47 (talk) 11:48, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Navops47. The name parameter must be the template name to make the right links. Fixed in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Board_of_Admiralty&diff=767183285&oldid=767182213]. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for rectifying my eye sight despite wearing glasses is getting worse :).--Navops47 (talk) 11:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons?
Hello all, why are some images hosted on both Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons? For example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Magna-carta-embroidery-top-left.jpg and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Magna-carta-embroidery-top-left.jpg

thank you !Eartha78 (talk) 14:05, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Eartha78. File:Magna-carta-embroidery-top-left.jpg is not hosted at Wikipedia but all images hosted at Commons can be viewed at a corresponding Wikipedia url unless another image with the same name is hosted at Wikipedia. The box below the image in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Magna-carta-embroidery-top-left.jpg says: "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below." A few images are actually hosted at both Wikipedia and Commons but this is usually temporary until one of the versions is deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Contemporary Artists - Links to gallery websites
billinghurst asked me to take a discussion to the Teahouse. Maybe you guys here can help! According to External links external links should just go to official websites. In case of contemporary artists - who very often don't have a website - it's mostly the galleries representing the artist that provide information on the person, the CV and the works online.

So, it's a general discussion: Does linking to the websites of the galleries add additional value? Should all directions to galleries be taken off Wikipedia? Or should just some be named an - in case yes - what would be the criteria?

In my opinion, adding the links does add value. Due to copyright reason, images of artworks from contemporary artists can't be found on wikipedia, but on the galleries' websites. Also, if you want to get a more profound overview of the exhibition history of an artist, you would go to the gallery website - where you would also find installation views and info on exhibitions that took place... and so on.

What do you think?

Thanks and all my best, NanoHeemskerck (talk) 13:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


 * it's very useful to readers of an article about a visual artist, to be able to see images of the artist's work. Ideally some of the best-known pictures should appear in the article. But when copyright does not allow this, I think it's appropriate to use external links to web sites where their work can be seen; as at Mir Abdolrez Daryabeigi for example. This is quite a different case from an article with external links to the subject's own page, Facebook page, LinkedIn page, employer's page, etc.; all but one of those should be deleted. Maproom (talk) 15:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Extended Confirmed Users
Hi, how do you become an extended Confirmed user? Thanks L1amw90 (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse. After your account is 30 days old and you have made 500 edits. The right will be given automatically. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)