Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 615

Wrong Commons category attached to Wikipedia article
When I click on the Commons link in the Lindera benzoin article it takes me to a weird page. But the code for this on Wikipedia does not indicate how this works. The Commons category for the species exists and is populated. Wikimedia is a far greater nightmare for inexperienced editors than even Wikipedia, so I hesitate to ask there. How can this be fixed?

(Please post about IP addresses on my talk page, not here.) Can someone just tell me how to fix the category problem or fix It? --2601:648:8503:4467:2490:76EC:58AE:F1DA (talk) 07:29, 11 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The commons category was not named in the template, I've fixed it. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:51, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Content produced by templates is sometimes imported from Wikidata. "Wikidata item" in the left pane of Lindera benzoin leads to which for some reason listed both "Linda Vista Community Hospital" and "Lindera benzoin" under "Commons category". The hospital has been removed now so Roger's fix is no longer needed, but doesn't hurt either. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:04, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for taking care of this, sometimes the templates are hard to use, and I was in a hurry. --2601:648:8503:4467:10C2:4AB4:8BBC:7325 (talk) 20:32, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the template could be modified to include the Wikidata logo next to the item if it's pulling the date from there? Kind of like the Wikidata logo in this infobox? That would help sort out issues like this more quickly. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 21:58, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Infoboxes usually have lots of data. Pulling a single category link in Commons category should rarely be problematic. I think in total a Wikidata link there would cause more confusion and distraction than help. The documentation does mention it uses Wikidata. The template code might be improved to detect whether Wikidata has more than one category link but I guess it's rare. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:46, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, just a thought. ··· 日本穣  ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 22:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Help needed. I'm working on creating a first article on Wiki, and got a message about that the article will be deleted ;(
Hello, I'm creating my #first article looking forward to hear your opinions to help me save the article from to be deleted. Help needed asap. Roberto_Estuardo_Penedo Thanks Everyone who may have time to take a look at the article and leave your comments how to improve it in order to safe it. Olga Wills (talk) 01:48, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You (yes, you, not someone else) need to cite multiple professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about Penedo but not affiliated with or connected to him. These sources need to point out something unique he has done.
 * For example this source is useless. He donated to John McCain, so what? Who cares?  Lots of other people donated to John McCain.  This source is also useless because Bircham puts up photos of pretty much anyone who graduates. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:19, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message. That's an article about a person who was elected by the Congress of Guatemala and has been serving in offie with the reliable sources to the articles proving his position and about the issues related to it. That is reliable information. About his tights with John McCain, I removed the contribution part as you suggested and replaced it with the link where he was interviewed by the the news. About Bicham University, there is an information on their page saying that he received Honoris Causa Doctor in Services to the Human Kind (not a bachelor), which is an award. I really do want to have this article according to Wiki standards, but as a beginner, I need help to save that article.  What else do I need to change in order to keep the article alive? and how long time usually Wiki is giving for the corrections? Please, leave your comment on what to do next. Thank YOU in advance. Olga Wills (talk) 03:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, Olga Wills. For an article to be retained, the subject needs to show what Wikipedia calls notability. There is a general notability guideline (you can read it on the page I linked above) and there is a related guideline for articles about people. Quoting from the latter, "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." That's the basic criterion for an article about a person. In glancing over the article now, I don't believe it has been met. Rather than trying to fix specific problems areas with the article, it might be better if you read these guidelines carefully and consider the entire article in the light of what they call for. Are you sure the subject is notable as Wikipedia defines notable? If so, it should be clear to you what you need to do in terms of sourcing to avert the article's being deleted. Feel free to check back here if you have specific questions. Good luck! Rivertorch   FIRE WATER   04:18, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not so sure, that our policies, guidelines and explanations are as clear and obvious as you suggest above. Certainly I spend enough time here at the Teahouse explaining them to people who have not understood them correctly the first time through.
 * In any case,, the primary required task is to find and cite a number of independent, published, reliable sources that discuss Penedo in some detail, not mere passing mentions or inclusions in directories or lists. On the other hand, anything that seems like puffery or promotion should be removed, including opinions not cited to a named person or entity. The formatting also needs to be cleaned up, clarifying ambiguous links and providing citation metadata, but that is less vital.
 * As to how long Wikipedia allows to get an article to a proper state, there is no fixed time. Until someone formally suggests that an article be deleted, there is no time limit. Once such a suggestion has been made, both "Proposed deletion" (PROD) and "Articles for Discussion (AfD) take at least 7 days before an article will be deleted, and the article can be edited and perhaps improved during that time. DES (talk) 04:44, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Question: what if to add Category: Politician to the article (which is has reliable sources proving that he was elected by the Congress of Guatemala to an office. Thanks for your input. Olga Wills (talk) 23:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Requesting some review
If anyone has a second to check over Draft:Chase Alexander Crawford I would appreciate it

Ojitchee (talk) 01:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . In my opinion, this actor does not meet our notability guideline for actors. He has appeared in two films but does not have a starring role in either. I do not see any significant coverage of this person in reliable, independent sources. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Easy to Use status update template.
Are there any easy to use status (online/offline) templates that I can use that don't require me making an actual edit to change? I know of User:Cyberpower678/Status and a few others, but they're not what I want. Thanks. d.g. L3X1 (distant write)  01:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There is Template:UserStatus. and you can use User:Enterprisey/StatusChanger.js with it.  Gtstricky Talk or C 02:37, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Greetings and Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, a long time ago, I tried the same thing & got tired of having to edit each time. Instead I made the following which you are free to use if you like.


 * Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 02:45, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

New Article for Review
I have made a new page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Water_Resources_Association. I went through Article Wizard to create the page, and was hoping to save it in Draft space so I could have someone from wiki review it before posting it live. However the page has gone live right now. Can you assist me in switching it to draft and finding a reviewer?Hmb17 (talk) 23:28, 11 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I have moved the article into draft space for you. I'm not sure about the reviewing though: I have no experience with such things. Perhaps someone else could. -A la d   insane   (Channel 2)  23:36, 11 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I have added an AFC draft template to allow the draft to be submitted for review when the OP is ready to do so. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

What action is to be taken on an article whose content is not useful ?
I recently came across the Matrix decomposition article. It seems that the article's content is so vague and isn't so useful to readers in it's current form. It just seems to be listing the various types and a little information about each and seems to miss the most crucial information about how to perform the operation. Shortly it doesn't cover the main picture and thus is not so helpful for readers who come to read the article without much knowledge about the method (I guess that's the majority) There's another article titled Non-negative matrix factorization. On skimming through it, I could see that it has more background information than the Matrix decomposition article. What should be done to make the article more readable ? Kaartic correct me, if i'm wrong 07:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that the Matrix decomposition article is not much use in itself, but is useful in directing readers to an article on the kind of matrix decomposition they are looking for. Maybe it should be retained, but reorganised to make it clearer that it's what I think is called a "set index" (like Inkcap). Maproom (talk) 08:20, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delayed response User:Maproom. In that case, is it removing the contents of the article resemble the Inkcap article and thus  making it explicit to the reader that it's more of an index than an article ?  Kaartic correct me, if i'm wrong 04:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That seems to me a reasonable plan. But you ought to discuss it on the article's talk page first. Incidentally, part of the process of establishing that Inkcap is an "index page" rather than an article or a disambiguation page was the addition of the template – I've no idea whether there's a similar template relating to mathematical techniques. Another page which like Matrix decomposition has brief descriptions of some mathematical objects, with wikilinks to articles on most of them, is graph product. I'm not aware that anyone has ever expressed unhappiness with the way it's structured. Maproom (talk) 08:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Uploading Pictures
Hi. I want to know how I can upload pictures in a Wikipedia article. I know editors need to obtain copyright permissions to upload photos. How can I do that? Thank's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by King Queen Commoner (talk • contribs) 23:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * you won't need to obtain any permissions to upload a photo you took yourself. And you won't even need to upload anything to use a picture that's already at Commons. Can you tell us what article you're working on, and what the pictures would show? Maproom (talk) 08:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol move vote.svg|20px]] To use an image on Wikipedia, follow these steps:


 * 1) Ascertain carefully the copyright status of the image. If in doubt, ask. As a rule of thumb, images that you did not take yourself are almost always under copyright, and images that you took can be released under a free license.
 * 2) If the image is in the public domain, or under a free license compatible with Wikimedia Commons' license requirements, or if you hold the copyrights and are willing to release the image under such a license, upload it on Wikimedia Commons using the Upload Wizard.
 * 3) If the image is neither public domain nor available under a free license, check whether it satisfies all non-free content criteria. In particular, photographs of living people almost never qualify. If it does not, it cannot be used on Wikipedia; do not upload it. If it does, upload it on Wikipedia (not on Wikimedia Commons).
 * 4) Once the image has been uploaded to the Wikimedia Foundation's servers (either to Commons or Wikipedia), follow the steps in the picture tutorial to place the image in an article.


 * Tigraan Click here to contact me 09:35, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

creating a new wiki page
Hi I'm trying to create a wiki page about a companyTheknowledgegroup (talk) 16:04, 12 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . Thanks for asking. Unfortunately, there is not an easy answer. I suggest you start by studying your first article. Take especial note of the following:
 * Creating an article is hard, and I would not advise anybody to try it until they have a few weeks' or months' experience of editing Wikipedia.
 * Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind.
 * Writing about a topic you have a close connection to is strongly discouraged, as your conflict of interest is likely to make it hard for you to write in a sufficiently neutral manner
 * Any article should be based almost entirely on what people who have no connection with a subject have published about it. Wikipedia has very little interest in what a subject has said or published about themselves, and no interest at all in how they wish to be represented. If there is little or no independent material published about a subject, then the subject is not notable (in Wikipedia's sense of the word) and no article about them will be accepted, however it is written.
 * Finally, I'm afraid your user name is almost certainly not acceptable, as names are not allowed which suggest that you are editing on behalf of an organisation. Please change it, or (more easily) abandon that name and create a new account which is personal to you. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Waving Germany flag for userpage
I can't find a Germany flag to display on my user page. Where can I find an animated one that I can see without clicking a link on my userpage to see it? GermanGamer77 (talk) 16:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi GermanGamer77. I answered that at Teahouse/Questions/Archive 609. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

my name is signed for a minor edit on the live page. help!
i just made a minor addition to the robert motherwell page, adding "bert katz" linked to a web site as one of his students at hunter. i signed it with the four tildes and it seems my name is appearing in red. is that bad? Margokatz (talk) 19:11, 12 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey Margokatz. Looks like it was already taken care of. For future reference, if you make a mistake, you can always click on the page history at the top of the article and undo your mistake, or click edit in the relevant section and manually remove the change. Timothy Joseph Wood  19:16, 12 May 2017 (UTC)


 * That just means you haven't created a user page yet. Thanks,DoABarrelRoll.dev(Constable of the WikiPolice) 19:23, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's why 's signature appeared in red, but the broader point is that signatures don't belong in articles, only on discussion pages. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:30, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

‎Adding a category to a protected userpage
Can an administrator please add to these userpages:, User:Tgarden, User:OdedSchramm. Thanks.--Nev&eacute;–selbert 21:09, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ . DES (talk) 22:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * .--Nev&eacute;–selbert 22:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Editing an exosting article
I am a "newbie" to editing Wikipedia. :-)

I tried to change a number of minor things to my College's profile page. The College motto had been "hacked" and was incorrect as well as the names of the existing Chaplains. ClueBot NG then indicated that I was potentially vandalizing the article and should refrain from doing so, thus returning the article back into its original state. HOw can I get these changes implemented? S noonan (talk) 22:16, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please post to Talk:MacKillop Catholic Regional College, explaining what you are doing, and where the information can be verified. Our verifibility policy requires that all information must be supported by a reliable source, if challenged. While I am sure you are acting in good faith and providing accurate information here, you must understand that we have no way to confirm who you are or that your knowledge is accurate. Therefor we insist on sources. I have been looking at http://mackillopwerribee.com.au/, but I cannot confirm the motto (except from the logo) or the Chaplin's name. I have reported that ClueBot made an error in this case. But we still need one or more reliable sources for this info. I will look further in a bit. DES (talk) 01:11, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I found sources deeper in the college web site for both pieces of information,, and I have updated the article accordingly. Please do let us know about future updates that may be needed, but please be sure to provide a source. The article talk page, linked above, can be used for this purpose, but feel free to return here to the Teahouse if you would like assistance. DES (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Number of Sources Needed
If I want to have another Wiki user write an article about the company I work for, how many sources do I need to provide?

Thanks!

KjohnsonSB (talk) 18:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey KjohnsonSB. While there is no hard fast number for how many sources are required for an article, the general guidance is that it should be enough to demonstrate that they subject meets our notability standards for organizations and companies. How many that takes largely depends on the types and quality of the sources provided. Timothy Joseph Wood  19:15, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . In my opinion, three or four impeccable sources that devote in depth coverage to the topic are vastly superior to several dozen mediocre sources that mention the topic in passing or say the same brief thing repeatedly. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  00:06, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

template reference for over copying
Warwick railway station, Queensland - the history section looks like a copy of the [1] link history tab, word for word. What's the notation to add to note this ? my brain won't work this morning. Dave Rave (talk) 01:52, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . That site is freely licensed, under CC-BY in fact. The initial edit summery can be seen here and says so, although perhaps a better attribution is needed on the talk page. DES (talk) 02:27, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The attribution is in the article, at Warwick railway station, Queensland. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:34, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * So it is, and that should be ample. DES (talk) 02:36, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * true, and true, but the refs for [1], a - aq, are a little way too much with every single paragraph being a straight copy. Shouldn't it all be inside a . --David Biddulph (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Why our first article was decline
We are new and unexperienced in writing articles on Wikipedia. It seemed to us that our first article was declined because it was written like a manual. therefore we asked for assistance to understand how to change the article in order to fix Wikipedia standards.

You can find our article at the following link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Menikini/sandbox

Thanks in advance NorbertMenikini (talk) 09:51, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Your article appears to be a copyright violation, copied from your own website. You need to be aware that Wikipedia does not host advertising.  You also need to be aware that your user name is not permitted because it represents a company.  Only individual accounts are permitted, and, if you create an individual account, you will need to declare your WP:Conflict of interest.  What would be the title of the article you wish to write?  We already have an article on Superheated steam.   D b f i r s   13:47, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Controversy sections
Hello again Teahouse!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Perry_(fighter)

Recently edits have been made to the page of a professional mixed martial arts fighter to add a controversy section that includes a story about racist comments made by the fighter's friend and cornerman Alex Nicholson, and accusations that a photo of the fighter wearing a black plastic mask was in fact Blackface. They cite sources from bleacherreport.com, a site any blogger can sign up to and write stories for, and one that employs every dubious trick in the book to get clicks. It is not in any way a credible news site but the editor that keeps making the changes insists it must stay on his page and is going to report me for section blanking. I am the second person to bring up the issue of defamation but they don't care. Sadly this is spillover from another community where one of the fighter's fan groups resides, and this person is purposefully trying to "troll" them as well as hoping the fighter's employer terminates his contract. The "blackface" photo is still on the fighter's instagram account, any homophobic tweets we're deleted and there was no official reprimand of any kind, only a statement made about Alex Nicholson's comments which the fighter did not hear at the time, let alone have any involvement with.

Is this section within the rules? and if not, what do I do to make sure that person doesn't just keep undoing the edits.

ty for your replies in advance Jahannum (talk) 13:02, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I will share the controversy section (below) because it's not currently visible page in question

Controversy

During his UFC debut at UFC 202 Perry and his cornerman fellow UFC middleweight Alex Nicholson were accused of racism after Nicholson shouted during the pre-fight introductions, saying, "He can't even open his motherf--king eyes." referring to his Asian opponent Hyun Gyu Lim. Nicholson later addressed the comment on Twitter, saying, "I respect every man who steps in the cage and my comments were insensitive towards lim (sic) I was hype for my brother but It's all love no hate." Nicholson also referred to Lim as "Dung Him Kong Jung Foo," in a Facebook post. On the Monday following the fight Perry offered an explanation while on The MMA Hour stating "I don't think any of my competition can see me, and when I hit Lim, I opened a lot of people's eyes," Perry told Ariel Helwani. Helwani then clarified that the comment was made prior to the fight to which Perry responded "Well, we can see the future." Perry has also been criticized for making homophobic and racist comments as well as wearing Blackface. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jahannum (talk • contribs) 13:24, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

This user is actually being pretty deceptive and keeps leaving snarky comments on my talk page he makes sock edits without logging in and there's more sources than the ones i used such as. 173.69.20.107 (talk) 13:26, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Also i think the second person he's referring to is his own IP 173.69.20.107 (talk) 13:28, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

No one removed these sections from the page except for the one time Jahannum did with there IP which is obvious if you look at the editing history so i'm not sure what there referring to when they said there was another person before them but the only edit was the IP above that removed it afterwards. 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:04, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

He also keeps trying to spin this as if it was only his cornerman/friend who made the comments Perry responded to those which is why i included it in the article but Perry has also worn Blackface and said racist/homophobic comments himself here's more sources I've gathered. Even LA Times mentioned it in this article. More on Perry's racism 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Other Fighters such as Matt Mitrione and Jon Jones have made controversial homophobic comments and it wasn't removed from there page and Jones also has his listed under a section called ""Controversies"" much like the one i made for Perry so I'm not sure why Perry is a special snowflake and can't have a Controversy section on his page. 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

reply to ... David?

I don't make stealth edits and the original comment about defamation was not made by me, I just copied & pasted it while failing to tag the edit properly, and I still don't know how to do that. Also highlighting comments I made on your talk page adds nothing to this discussion about the controversy section. I am not misleading anyone.

That bloodyelbow.com report isn't useful either because Mike's comments about his cornerman's racist comments have no relevance to the story you're attaching it to. Mike Perry has words in his vocabulary that are often used in a derogatory manner, but not by him, he trains with African American athletes, has a nickname related to an African American athlete and there is many examples of him supporting African American athletes on his social media accounts. The way Mike and Alex speak is entirely because of where they are from and how they grew up, and that upsetting you doesn't give you the right to judge him on his wikipedia page. If Mike had been reprimanded by the UFC or if the UFC had made a statement on it naming Mike Perry specifically, you could add that, but as it is you need to make a page for Alex Nicholson if you really want to push this topic you seem so passionate about. Have you not even noticed how the links on that bloodyelbow.com report don't link to the homophobic comments directly but instead link to "archived" copies hosted on websites that aren't connected in any way to the site the comments were posted on? They are not credible sources. You can edit the facebook pages before submitting to that site by using the inspect button, and it's a common trick used for faking social media content. There is nothing on that article that actually proves Mike Perry is racist, and discussions started on the subject have almost unanimously agreed that Mike Perry is just a "wigga" (apologies for using the term on this page) and not actually racist at all. Homophobia in combat sports is very common too, but it does seem strange you would single out Mike Perry for comments you can't even prove he made.

Jahannum (talk) 14:10, 16 May 2017 (UTC) yours sincerely, a snowflake.

Mike Perry has never worn blackface, that is just people's opinion of a photo Mike posted of himself wearing a black plastic mask, and you can still find that photo on his instagram account as I highlighted for you earlier. Jahannum (talk) 14:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not going single out anyone which is why i brought up Jones and Mitrione nobody is trying to remove there Controversies just you on Perry and I'm saying Perry is the Special Snowflake not you if you even bothered to read my comment or the sources. 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:16, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

You also referred to me as a troll on my talk page. 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

And MMA Mania and Bloody Elbow are reliable sources that are commonly used on MMA articles but i suppose the LA Times is also an unreliable source right ? Are you Perry's lawyer or something ? 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:24, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the Teahouse, Jahannum. Thanks for speaking up. Bleacher Report does not meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable sources, and particular care should be taken not to cite it for any content involving content about living persons. It looks as if the content is currently removed. If there are further problems, you can request that the article be protected by filing a report at requests for page protection. Rivertorch   FIRE WATER   14:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

173.69.20.107 (talk) Please stop trying to create a situation her, I posted that on YOUR talk page not on this page, why do you keep referencing it? and I know you were referring to Mike Perry as the snowflake, but who calls a professional athlete a "snowflake" when they aren't even connected to the page or the edits? That isn't trolling?

Mike Perry is tough and doesn't care about it but we are supposed to be objective and you're definitely not being objective. You're refusing to listen to any arguments and have already condemned him, which is not what wiki pages are for, and no one cares about your opinions. I'm really sorry I had to be rude but you're trying to make a massive scene out of this by cherry picking bits of what I said on your talk page while ignoring the links I provided that have proven you can't keep that section on his page. You conveniently chose not to comment on that at all in fact.

Jahannum (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC) and thank you Rivertorch for your reply

Im re adding it later with sources that i know are Accepted on Wikipedia such as LA Times and MMAjunkie. 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Rivertorch could you please look at some of the other many sources that i provided and tell me which ones are acceptable ? 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

The middleasy.com source has comments by well respected journalists like Brent Brookhouse. 173.69.20.107 (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The issue is not just the sources, it's what you're claiming they prove.

Jahannum (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * 173.69.20.107, this is the guideline we use to decide whether a source is reliable. If there's any doubt, the reliable sources noticeboard is the place to ask. I'd suggest you post something there if you'd like an uninvolved editor's opinion on whether the sources in question are appropriate for verifying the disputed content. Rivertorch   FIRE WATER   15:53, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Article on Johnny Orlando
Do you think it's still too soon to create an article about Canadian singer/voice actor Johnny Orlando? People have made articles about him and they have gotten deleted, but more sources have come out about him since them. I have started an article about him on my sandbox... should I publish it now or wait for more news articles about him to come out so I can expand the article? Thanks in advance for feedback

Hillelfrei (talk) 14:32, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * A quick glance at your draft suggests to me that notability may still be an issue. There's often a bit of wiggle room, but in order to be notable (in Wikipedia parlance), a subject should have received "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." (I'm quoting from the guideline, which you should read in full if you haven't already.) Maybe Orlando qualifies—without a thorough check through the references, it's hard to say—but among the refs you provide, I'm seeing some primary sources and some other sources that don't qualify as reliable (for instance, IMDb is a problem). Rivertorch   FIRE WATER   16:01, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

How to make your article public
Hi,I have created a wikipedia page however it does not show when searching for it. What steps do I take to publish? Sure Thing! Insurance 15:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SureThing! (talk • contribs)
 * Hello, . Sandboxes are not indexed by google, by design. In any case, your pages were all promotional, and your user name is evidently that of a business, so I have tagged the pages for speedy deletion, and blocked you from further editing, pending a change of user name and a block appeal. DES (talk) 16:25, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Maratha Empire article
Someone from the I.P. 74.94.52.197 is repeatedly replacing the Maratha confederacy map of 1760 in the lead of the Maratha Empire article, removing "File:India1760 1905.jpg" and putting "File:Maratha 1320.jpeg" in its place. Can we have an admin control that please? A discussion about that can be seen on the talk page of that article also.-Dona-Hue (talk) 19:02, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, this isn't really the proper forum to request administrator intervention; you may want to visit this page if the issue is user conduct. If the issue is edit warring, you can make a report at edit warring noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 19:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia keep track of changes I make?
I've been making small edits for a while now. I just recently started logging in because I thought Wikipedia would keep track of my changes if I logged in, however that doesn't appear to be the case. Is there a way to have Wikipedia keep track of all the changes I make to articles or do I need to do that separately? Simonga25wiki (talk) 19:36, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * All changes made are tracked, no matter who makes them. They are tracked under the page they are made to in the history tab and they are tracked by who made them.  Yours that you made while logged in are at Special:Contributions/Simonga25wiki.  Those that you made logged out are tracked under the IP address that you had when you made them. I don't know what IPs you have used but it works the same way.  In the link for you contributions you just replace your username with the IP you used.  If you don't know what the IP was, you can go to an article you edited and look at the history, find an edit you made and then look at the contributions for that IP.  ~ GB fan 19:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

How to get my film recognized.
Hi, I'm looking to make a movie. I have personally scheduled a release date and want to give this film a wikipedia page to have it more widely recognized. Is this allowed? If so, how to create a page? Movieman007 (talk) 21:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome. What you want to do isn't really compatible with what Wikipedia is.  Wikipedia isn't a place to promote or bring publicity to a film; this is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with independent reliable sources to be notable.  I would add that you have what is referred to here as a conflict of interest, meaning you are too closely associated with the subject to write objectively about it. You may want to review that page for more information.  Your best bet would be to allow others to write about the film; however, if you have independent sources, you may be able to draft an article by visiting Articles for Creation; but understand that the draft will be reviewed by an independent editor, and even if the page is accepted, anyone can post any content that can be cited to the page, good or bad.  331dot (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Why do people keep removing my content?
im new to Wikipedia and i don't understand why people keep deleting my articles when they are 100 percent true and i put a lot of time and effort in to making them

Yours faithfully Jw100  Jw100 (talk) 20:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello. There is a post at the bottom of your user talk page that will likely answer your questions.  Please understand that creating an article is actually not an easy thing to do successfully; it takes time, practice, and effort. You may find it easier to start smaller and make minor edits to articles.  331dot (talk) 20:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Jw100. Your edits have been undone mainly because they are entirely unsourced, and citing the policy that Wikipedia is not a travel guide. In sum, I'm sorry you have put forth a lot of effort to add, for example, bus schedules to Wikipedia articles on certain locations, but I agree with their removal. The fact that some piece of information is true does not necessarily mean it belongs in an encyclopedia article. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:19, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Finding articles that need work
How do I find articles that need to be edited? I can't seem to find the articles that need to be fixed, and I don't know where I can find this. Thanks! Emineminems (talk) 01:11, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Emineminems, welcome to the Teahouse. Maybe you saw the feature at GettingStarted when you created your account. The linked page shows how to go back to that feature but Community portal, linked on "Community portal" in the left pane (not in the mobile version) is more common to use. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:26, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

PrimeHunter -

Thanks!

- Emineminems (talk) 01:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:OhMyThat'sAlotOfGuidelines
Hello Teahouse,

I am new here, and have read the very basic rules, guidelines and tips for editing. However, it's already evident that the sheer voluminous nature of all the Wikipedia guidelines (which I want to read) and the features and projects integrated into the system will make every little detail difficult to locate. I am not decrying this thoroughness; on the contrary, I completely admire it. Still, is there some sort of list where I can find Wikipedia:This and Wikipedia:That and anything like that? I'd find this extremely helpful!

Best,

Alt3no (talk) 21:22, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Alt3no. I believe Contributing to Wikipedia provides a very good overview of many aspects of Wikipedia, and can be an anchor page to get a summary, while opening new tabs to explore from its (yes: many, many) links, as they strike you as ones to look at in further depth. I think you might also benefit from taking a tour through the Tutorial. After that, a good place to get ideas about where you might start with dipping your toes into editing is the Community portal. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Alt3no (talk) 22:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.


 * Yes, there are are a vast number of detailed rules. Fortunately, many of them boil down to codified common sense, but it has to be written down somewhere because, at some point, someone made a change that others thought was wrong, and the result needed to be recorded.


 * The way to proceed is not to try to commit all of the rules to memory. Many of them will turn out to never be applicable to your editing. Take the advice of the basic rules and, if it looks like you are honestly trying to contribute to Wikipedia, any mistakes will be gently corrected and forgiven. Through that experience, you'll learn which rules are most applicable to your kind of editing and you should find its a manageable process.


 * As for the mechanics of contributing, you've already demonstrated basic competence by being able to successfully post a question here at the Teahouse. That, and the lessons taught in the Wikipedia Adventure are enough to get started with your career as a Wikipedia contributor. The rest will come with experience. I recommend picking off little tasks from WP:Community Portal to get started. After you've made 50-100 small edits, you'll be well on your way. And if you have any questions, the Teahouse is here to help.  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  22:35, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * All of the above is excellent advice. Some pages you might find helpful:
 * List of policies and guidelines
 * Dashboard
 * Glossary
 * Remember, you can always come back here to the Teahouse to ask questions—or, when you've been here for a while, you might feel more comfortable asking at the help desk. Rivertorch   <sup style="color:#FF0066;">FIRE <sub style="color:#0066FF;">WATER   23:00, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much; those pages were exactly what I was looking for! I'll get the hang of navigating Wikipedia quickly. Best, Alt3no (talk) 02:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

how do i go about editing a page on "homeopathy"
how do i go about editing a page on "homeopathy"Fpatanwala49 (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Since this is a controversial topic, and closely watched, you would be wise to discuss your proposed changes on the talk page first. On the other hand, if you just want to add WP:Reliable sources then just click edit and add them.    D b f i r s   16:48, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Your account User:Fpatanwala49 cannot edit Homeopathy. You can click the "View source" tab and follow the instructions to submit an edit request. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:57, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, yes, I missed spotting the fact that the article is semi-protected.  D b f i r s   06:43, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

please review my article.
I have written my first Wikipedia article a while ago and it was rejected first time as it sounded promotional to the editor concerned. I have edited the draft again but the editor hasn't checked it yet. Can a Wikipedia editor please review my article?

Priyanka2887 (talk) 06:38, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . There is currently rather a large backlog of 1,253 drafts awaiting review, so it might take a few weeks for you to receive feedback on Draft:MarkPlus - as it states on the submission template message at the bottom of the draft. In the meantime, you can still edit the draft, and indeed I would encourage you to do so to improve its chances of being accepted. In particular, it would help the reviewer judge the topic's notability if you included URLs in any of the article's references to sources that are available online. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:36, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi the page Draft:MarkPlus is in the queue to be reviewed. The next reviewer is not likely to be the same person, this is deliberate because we do not want your draft to become influenced by the opinion of only one reviewer comming back repeatedly.  Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:36, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't have access to any of the references, but most of them seem to be publications by the subject of the article. Are you able to find independent WP:Reliable sources that discuss the subject in detail?    D b f i r s   07:40, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:CitiusTech Inc.

 * Hi. My article is still in draft mode. The title is 'Draft:CitiusTech Inc.'. By when will it get published and be searchable by anyone? Please help. Thanks.

Edgarjstephens (talk) 07:14, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi you have not submitted the draft to be reviewed. To do so please add {{subst:submit}} (including the double curly braces) to the top or bottom of the page. Without such a tag we have no way to even know that the page exists. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:40, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Mr Puaz reference links
I have added a reference link as a source to the page but the message is still there. also if someone search Mr Puaz on google it doesnt come. kindly show me the right way so i can improve (Randyjoel (talk) 12:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Convenience link: .  Maproom (talk) 12:32, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello Randyjoel. Welcome to the Teahouse. The message you refer to is a template noting that the article is an orphan, which means that no other Wikipedia articles link to it. New articles don't show up in Google results immediately; it takes several weeks. Rivertorch   <sup style="color:#FF0066;">FIRE <sub style="color:#0066FF;">WATER   12:47, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think he was referring to the BLPPROD which i removed in this edit. Some copy editing has now been done on the article, but it needs additional sources. DES (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Plagarism
I was researching for the Matthias Ringmann page, and I found a website in which most of the paragraphs are exactly the same as the Wikipedia page's. I'm not sure who copied who, but I was unsure what I should do about it. I edited the page, so some parts are slightly different, but the ones I didn't edit are exactly the same. Emineminems (talk) 14:45, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There's a noticeboard at Copyright problems which is staffed by volunteers who specialize in these issues. I'd notify someone there, and hopefully they can take the ball and run with it, resolving the issue.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 14:51, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome, . One way to work out what came first can be to use a tool called WikiBlame (also accessible via the article's history tab, as "Revision history search") to find out when portions of text were added to the article. If you know when the external webpage was published, you should then be able to work out which came first. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:22, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

properly formatted infobox
Hi, Can you give me instructions on how to create a properly formatted infobox? this is my first article submission. Thank you so much. Mary Anthony StartzMaryAnthonyStartz (talk) 13:31, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello,, and welcoem back to the teahouse. You do that by placing an infobox tempalte at or near the top of the article or draft. In the case of Draft:William McNamara (soldier), I would suggest Infobox military person. Then you fill in appropriate parameters form the list on the template page. In this case something like:


 * Add in all appropriate parameters for which you have sourced information. Sources can be cited after any parameters where a citation is needed. DES (talk) 13:43, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * , it's often easiest to find an article on a similar topic, £dit Source it, and copy the infobox code, making changes as necessary. --ColinFine (talk) 17:27, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Editing in an archive page
I know you aren't suppuse to edit archive pages, but if I want to stop an archive from showing up in a category because a WikiProject Template was included in one of the sections. It seems someone screwed up the way the page was displayed pasted a bunch of stuff above the Project Banner, and then it was left there when someone re-added WikiProjects onto top a few years later.

Would it be best to remove the WikiProject banner from the middle of the archive page, or would a noinclude or another function prevent it from being added to categories, or should just leave it as is? WikiVirusC (talk) 14:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi WikiVirusC, welcome to the Teahouse. I see no reason for a WikiProject banner there so you can just remove it by using the Edit tab for the whole page. <noinclude ></noinclude> would have no effect but <nowiki ></nowiki> would display the code instead of activating it. WikiProject Television has a  parameter to avoid the normal categories but annoyingly it adds another category in the talk namespace with no apparent way to get rid of that one: Category:WikiProject banners with formatting errors. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! WikiVirusC (talk) 17:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

merge my existing content with references, etc...into an existing wiki article
besides copy and paste everything, is there a way to actually merge the content (including references and links) on my sandbox page to an existing article on wiki? my article was refused but it was suggested i merge it into an existing page and the link was provided to me. I've gone to that page and only managed to copoy and paste my content (but not my references and links) to that page...very time consuming. is there a way to get my stuff without redoing all the links and references? thanks Annaweltman 17:14, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . It sounds as if you're copying and pasting from the displayed page of your sandbox. If you open your sandbox for editing ("edit source") you can copy the text including the links and references. By the way, normally when copying within Wikipedia you are required to attribute the source (see WP:copying within Wikipedia) but if you are the only author of the material you are copying, then you are all right without. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Hi Annaweltman. Please remove the checkmark at "Treat the above as wiki markup" at Special:Preferences. I see you use VisualEditor. I don't know how copy-pasting works there but you definitely have to copy-paste from one of the editors and not from the rendered page as I suspect you did. In the source editor it's no problem to copy-paste what you want. VisualEditor has a pencil icon at the top right to switch to the source editor. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ... and, although it is time-consuming, it is safest to copy and merge one bit at a time and check that the article displays it properly before going on to the next.   D b f i r s   18:01, 17 May 2017 (UTC)