Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 696

Why is there an entire draft of an article in its talk page?
I found an entire draft of the Green infrastructure article written out on its talk page. I believe it is a student draft, but its organization and topic coverage are well done. Because I'm new to Wikipedia, I've never seen a draft laid out on the talk page - does it belong there? Is it awaiting approval from an experienced editor because it is a complete reorganization of the current article? Or can any editor go in and replace the existing article with this improved version just waiting around in the talk page? Thanks very much. Ccluff4 (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello Ccluff4 and welcome to the Teahouse.


 * That sounds like a misuse of the talk page, but a sometimes-seen mistake by new editors who don't understand the difference between a page and its talk page. If, based on the history, you can discern what the contributor's intent was and, if you agree that the new content should replace the old content, you are probably doing that contributor a favor if you carry through the intended action. If you can't figure it out or if the new material is not an improvement, it would be okay to replace or revert the talk page version, and leave a message on the talk page explaining your action. The content is not lost, it is just out of the way in the talk page history and can be retrieved by anyone who thinks it is worth saving.  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  06:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Ccluff4, for future reference, whenever you are talking about an article (or its talkpage) anywhere, you should link to the specific article. I'll do that for you here: Green infrastructure. The draft you are talking about is on the talkpage, here: Talk:Green infrastructure. That draft seems somewhat inadequately cited (or perhaps the citations simply need to be repeated when they seem to apply to an entire section), so I don't think it would be good to replace the entire existing article with it without serious thought first. If there is useful cited material in it, you can transfer that over. And if there is usable material that is uncited, if you can find and add substantiating references to it (or repeat the references as needed), you can add that as well. You can also take any tips from the organizational structure of the draft and use what you find useful. It is not entirely unheard-of for people to draft improvements to an article on its talk page, as this allows editors to participate in the draft as a group, etc. More often, this is done on a subpage of the talk page (typing /Name -- with a slash -- on the talkpage and then clicking and drafting there). Anyway, that draft was created in 2014 by and then abandoned. Softlavender (talk) 09:21, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Is a birth date required on a BLP article?
I'm working on a draft article. I've asked the subject of the article for his birth date. He responded, "I’m wary of disclosing birthdate or place because they are often used as ID and I don’t want to facilitate identity theft". Is it acceptable to have a BLP article without a birth date? Or is that considered bad form? I think I may be able to convince him to give it to me, but I can't be certain he will.

He also wrote, Could we say something like “He was born during WW II shortly after his father, an Army-Air Force flight surgeon who after 34 years of service retired as Surgeon for Fifth U.S. Air Force, and grew up on military posts in Georgia, Norway, Massachusetts, Indiana, and with extended visits to France and Japan.”

I'm not entirely comfortable with writing that part of the article in that way.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. Txantimedia (talk) 23:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Including the year but not the exact date of birth would seem reasonable. This is what is sometimes recommended by privacy advocates. It certainly isn't true that lacking the birth date means we can't have an article. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * A date of birth needs to be supported by a published source in any case, - it can't be based on what the subject has told you if that information is not in the public domain. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:23, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think he has any personal information (family members' names, birth or death dates, places lived, etc.) in the published sources. Is it really OK to leave all of that out? Txantimedia (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, if the information isn't in a reliable source, then it must be left off the article on the person. NZFC  (talk) 00:11, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It's fine to leave trivia out of a BLP. We care little about family members, or the exact date of birth, etc - just details of their notability. It took me less than 60 seconds on Google to find his full birth date in 1944 from his 2007 CV, plus his full employment record. (see here) But even so, I see absolutely no reason why the article needs to state full month and day, especially if their cooperation in preparing this article is helpful. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:23, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * WAY too much information in that draft, much of it having no place in a BLP. David notMD (talk) 00:42, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, please be specific so I can trim it down. Txantimedia (talk) 01:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I took a look at quite a few but not all of your references,, and was not impressed with their quality. I saw a lot of what experienced editors call "passing mentions", where Turner is mentioned or quoted in a sentence or two in a much longer article, or references to things written by Turner himself. These sources do not establish notability. What really counts for establishing notability are published items written by other unconnected people which are substantially about Turner as a person, academic and author. It is far better to have five high quality sources than 40 lower quality sources. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  04:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * While some of the sources may be less than ideal, the subject of the article is most certainly notable.  Volunteer Marek   05:17, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You may well be correct that he is notable, . I was not assessing his notability and did no Google search. I was offering advice about the quality of the sources now in the draft based on looking at quite a few of them. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I am not sure why none has linked to it yet, but not providing the full date of birth is actually policy. You could argue that if their CV is online it counts as "disclosed by the subject" but I wouldn't go this path. Tigraan Click here to contact me 11:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Duplicate articles
Hi, I've come across two list articles on the same topic: Comic Con and List of comic book conventions. Both articles were written over a decade ago and they list out the different comic book conventions from all over the world, with many overlapping entries. The latter article mentions This is a list of noteworthy comic book conventions, but doesn't every country consider their comic cons notable? I'd like to know how to approach the issue in these articles. Thanks, MT TrainDiscuss 11:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Comic Con list seems to be a list of conventions specifically with "Comic Con" in the name, while the other list seems to be a list of comic conventions regardless of name.  If you feel that these should be merged, you should start a discussion on one of the article talk pages.
 * Most articles like that state "this is a list of noteworthy X subject" because there may be other such possible members of the list that don't merit articles(and thus aren't noteworthy enough) but still exist. 331dot (talk) 11:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

feedbak
I just made a donation. But I made an effort to figure out how to do it. In the blurb that comes up asking for a donation, there should be a spot saying "Make a donation" that you can click on and go straight to the donation place. If you don't do this you will lose a lot of donations because most people won't make the effort. I've done fundraising for 30 years so I know what I'm talking about. Good luck. 2602:30A:2CE8:E790:B547:19AB:A475:3AE6 (talk) 13:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You may want to address your suggestion to the Foundation directly; we are all for the most part regular editors like you that have nothing to do with collecting donations. 331dot (talk) 14:00, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid we are rather good here at making long-winded pages. You probably found all the innumerable ways to donate from anywhere in the world on this page. Your support is certainly appreciated - thank you - but if you would like to follow up 331dot's suggestion, the best email address to contact is probably: donate@wikimedia.org  Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So... A user complains that procedure X is too complex, so we give him complex procedure Y to follow? I am going to email the donation address when I have time this weekend with a link to this thread. This looks like legitimate feedback. Tigraan Click here to contact me 11:30, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Respectfully what is so complex about sending an email? 331dot (talk) 11:34, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The same thing that makes it more complex to click two links than one to donate. More friction = bad, even if only marginally.
 * The problem is not really that the OP lacks the time or ability to send an email, but that the OP just left that post here and will never come back to read the replies, in all likelihood. Tigraan Click here to contact me 12:39, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Sentence fragment leads okay sometimes?
I've been looking at random articles for improvements I can make, often related to missing verbs in the lead. I now doubt if a class of my edits are appropriate. It seems like lots of sports statistics articles do not have complete sentences as leads, and that this is an intentional style for this kind of article. I do not see any guideline that would allow a sentence fragment lead, but I am hesitant to upset an unspoken consensus for style as a new editor. These are my edits: Are they appropriate? Would they be more appropriate if I also edited the rest of the series (other years) in the same way? Thanks so much Bl184999 (talk) 14:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's consensus that leads are made of complete sentences. I think "well-composed" in Manual of Style/Lead section at least hints to this direction, if you want something "official" on it. And yes, sports articles tend to have horrible leads. I frequently tag them with when applicable. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

How can I get my article approved?
I'm struggling to get my wiki approved. Yes, I have a huge self-interest, but it keeps getting rejected due to notability.

Yet I've noticed many other articles with iffy substance and they are getting approved.

I feel our company is doing something special and well beyond what other similar companies are undertaking. It's been recognized in a national publication.

Any help would be appreciated. The wiki is Hemmels.

Thanks Sablet (talk) 18:22, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Other similar articles existing doesn't mean yours can, too. Please see WP:OSE. This is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, and as a result inappropriate pages get through. If you see one, feel free to suggest it for deletion. Regarding your draft, you've been given some advice at the top of it. The article must do more than merely tell the world about your company. Please review the notability guidelines at WP:ORG to learn what is being looked for. 331dot (talk) 21:23, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Article size and global versus local nomenclature information
Hi Wiki! I'm about to finalize writing on the article Frode54/Viscosity. When it is approved I would like to upload it having the title "Viscosity models for mixtures". The article displays important viscosity models for fluid mixtures that have been proposed throughout the history. One of the insentives to write the article was to show the huge difference between "defining equation" and "constitutive equation", and also the huge amount of work that the scientific end engineering community put in deloping the constitutive equations. The article thus have uniform theme, so I would prefer to have it as one article, unless the peer/administrator have very good arguments and proposal of how to split it. The major item that is left, is to go through the nomenclatur and units.

There are two questions I would like a peer or administrator to answer: 1) The article has become somewhat long, but is it acceptable to keep as one article? If not, how do you propose to split it?

2) Should I go for a big global numenclature table with small local correction lists, or should I skip the global table and use only local nomenclature lists?

Please, do not start changing the article before these two questions are settled.

Best Regards Frode54 (talk) 22:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * , you have written a wonderful review article of the subject, examining the primary sources and explaining in great detail. But Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and does not publish review articles. Before dealing with nomenclature you need to rewrite the article. See WP:PRIMARY. Almost all your sources are primary. You need to find secondary sources, review articles that discuss the topics rather than the original authors' publications. Also see Writing better articles. A Wikipedia article isn't a textbook or a published academic lecture. Avoid phrasing like "In this experimental setup, we select a value for the force". The tone should be impersonal. Leave out sentences like "The target of this article is to cover a variety of viscosity models based on such approaches." Just do it, you don't have to say it. You also need references for all your statements and paragraphs. A Wikipedia article is not about what you know but about what has been published in reliable sources. Everything you state needs to have come from a reference. Older scientific articles here are often not referenced well, but standards have changed and we are improving them. If you want to say "The classical Navier-Stokes equation is probably the most famous balance equation for momentum density for an isotropic, compressional and viscous fluid that is used in fluid mechanics in general and fluid dynamics in particular:", you need a reference to back it up. Do you really need to say that in an article titled Viscosity models for mixtures? Rely on linking to existing Wikipedia articles rather than providing explanations. This will be a wonderful addition to Wikipedia but needs to be in encyclopedic style.


 * Regarding nomenclature, in articles I've seen local nomenclature seems to be the most effective. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

How do I add my references?
I went back to the training module but it tell me to click on 'paragraph' which I do not see. I need some help please. Butterfy215 (talk) 23:03, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * If you give us a link to the "training module" to which you refer, then we may be able to help you. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:36, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Tools for different types of English
Hello! Just wondering, is there a tool that will automatically change American English to British English, vice-versa, and with other types of English? Ranged Ranger (talk) 03:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome. I don't know if there is or is not such a tool, but I was wondering for what reason you wanted it.  331dot (talk) 11:36, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * @331dot I was just curious, I read the English dialect policy on the tutorial and thought it would be convenient for editing. Ｒａｎｇｅｄ Ｒａｎｇｅｒ (talk) 00:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposing change in the article assessment process
How would I go about proposing changes in the process for assessing the quality of wikipedia articles?. I believe the present system is complicated, arbitrary, and wastes the time of editors who should be undertaking more productive tasks. I'm not so delusional as to think that my opinion will have much impact -- but I'd like to join or get a discussion started about simplifying and improving the assessment process. Smallchief (talk)
 * Hi . I'd suggest Wikipedia talk:WikiProject assessment or, for more visibility, WP:VPR. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 15:34, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Smallchief (talk) 18:23, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . In my opinion speaking as a very experienced editor, I think that the average editor spends very little time formally assessing article quality. The exception is the minority of . editors heavily involved with assessing Good articles and Featured articles. Since this is a self-directed volunteer project, any editor who does not like doing assessment work need not waste even a minute on it. Never once in 8+ years of editing has anyone told me, "You are not doing your fair share of assessment work." Cullen328  Let's discuss it  04:54, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

IP Block Exemption
How can I get an IP block exemption?

Recently I had to enable an extension via Google Chrome that allows me to view certain .gov websites. In the course of running this extension however, it inhibits me from editing and/or posting on Wikipedia.

Who do I need to contact to try and get a block exemption because of the extension/proxy?

Thanks. Snickers2686– (talk) 20:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hey Snickers2686. See guidance at WP:IPEXEMPTCONDITIONS.  G M G  talk   21:05, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Not sure, but maybe use a different browser to edit? I'm not sure though.  A lad insane  talk 05:03, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * , unless the extension somehow routes your contributions through a proxy, I don't see why it would matter. If it does, I doubt you'll get a IP exemption to use it. Can't you simply disable it when editing here? I think you'd get a better answer if you shared the name of the extension. And perhaps the suggestion above on using a different browser is appropriate. If not chrome, I'd suggest Firefox. IE is awful for editing Wikipedia. John from Idegon (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Is Very High Gravity Fermentation a notable subject?
Your_first_article directed me here.

Very high gravity fermentation is a method of fermentation using (I think) ethanol resistant floccuating yeast and controlling oxidation reduction potential to limit stuck fermentation caused by ethanol inhibition and osmotic pressure. The goal of VHG fermentation is increased efficiency in the industrial production of ethanol.

My sources are here, here, and here.

Is VHG fermentation a topic that deserves a Wikipedia article? And would the sources listed be adequate?

(Also, adding this question via the "Ask a question" link at the top of the page didn't have any effect. It took me a while to figure out the syntax to use in my question, so maybe there was a timeout? Or otherwise there might be a need to wait for approval for edits? If the latter is the case, I wasn't notified as such when posting the question. I thought I should mention it in case this edit ends up as a duplicate)

Sebastian Hahn (talk) 04:08, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I suspect it is. You have provided two sources (the 2nd & 3rd links above are to two versions of the same paper), both to scientific papers. It would help to have a couple of links to commercial, or general-interest, publications. Maproom (talk) 08:44, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * You're right. I only skimmed the abstract of the 3rd one, since the rest is behind a paywall, and scrolled right past the abstract on the second. I'll look for more info later and report back if I find any. I'm watching a movie atm and am taking a grandparent to town later after being awake all night. Sebastian Hahn (talk) 15:26, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Doubts regarding the redirects
I am having doubts regarding the redirects whether they affect the number of articles in Wikipedia. For example I created a biography about a netballer called Tharjini Sivalingam for the WIR contest last month. But unfortunately I created the article initially as Tharjini Sivajilingam which is not a deliberate mistake of mine it was due to the uncertainty of me since childhood age. Then I redirected this name to Tharjini Sivalingam which is the correct name. Will this affect the number of biographical articles in English Wikipedia? I has also checked that both correct name (Tharjini Sivalingam) and redirect (Tharjini Sivajilingam) as recorded as 2 separate articles in the Women in Red metrics for the month of November. Abishe (talk) 07:06, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * It looks like you've taken the right steps to correct the spelling of the name: you moved the page, not redirected it. But moving leaves behind a redirect. You can request deletion of the redirect left behind by the move - this is allowed under CSD R3/G6 for implausible misspellings made when creating a page and both the page creation and move that corrected the misspelling are recent. Otherwise, you'd need to take it to WP:Redirects for discussion.


 * But if this misspelling is something that is not just idiosyncratic to you, it would be best to just leave things as they are.  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk) (contribs)  08:12, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Not to worry,, these things happen. I've delete the redirect as an implausible typo for you. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 12:58, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * with the shiny new bucket to the rescue :-) Alex Shih (talk) 18:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

locking
What does it mean to "lock" an article? How when and why would that ever be done?Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello Jenhowk. Thanks for your question. You will find useful info here Protection policy. There is a lot to read (on the protect policy that Alex has linked in his reply below) so if you still have questions please post them here and other editors will try and explain things. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 05:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, welcome to the Teahouse. I don't usually use the term "lock", but it refers to Protection policy. They are usually done when someone submits a request (for a page that has been under problematic editing) through Requests for page protection. Alex Shih (talk) 05:22, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The editors above have linked to useful policies, but the policy pages can be long and tedious to read. Full protection (the type of protection most commonly referred to as "locking") is rarely used, but when it is, it is either extremely visible pages and templates (the main page, for example), articles that have been subject to persistent edit warring by extended confirmed editors, or articles that are involved in confusing news reports and otherwise would be flooded with edits that are based on flimsy sources (TMZ, usually) and may or may not be accurate. For example, when Michael Jackson died, the confusion about whether he had actually died was severe enough that the article was briefly full-protected. Tom Petty was similar (see Talk:Tom Petty/Archive 2 for the confusion) but there it mostly consisted of news media reporting his death based on either the LAPD's tweet or TMZ, and not retraccting it immediately when the cited source retracted.  A lad insane  talk 17:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanx both of you, I appreciate the response and the info. Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

How do I make one of those boxes on the user page that describe personality, knowledge, privileges, etc.?
How do I make one of those boxes on the user page that describe personality, knowledge, privileges, etc.? I'm looking specifically for a box on the upper right hand corner of my user page that on the inside states "This user likes mudkips." with a picture of a mudkip to the right. Hoping it invites some interest in others to discuss pokemon and a little this and that on a social media platform (i.e a chatroom for example) :) Thanks! Reixus (talk) 08:40, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * @Reixus, those boxes that you are looking for are called Userboxes. You can search for userboxes at this page. Alternatively, you can browse through other user's user pages and get 'copy' the userboxes that they use if it applies to you. -1.02 editor (talk) 08:58, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks! Also, does it work to delete comments on one's user and/or talk page as well? Reixus (talk) 11:32, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * @Reixus You are permitted to remove comments from your own user talk page if you wish; many users prefer to archive them, but that is not required. Please be aware that removing comments from your user talk page is considered an acknowledgement that you read them. 331dot (talk) 11:47, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * All Mudkip images will probably be non-free and not allowed on your userpage by Non-free content criteria and User pages. Also note that Wikipedia is not a social network. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm, is even the picture of a mudkip in the WP mudkip article non-free? Also, I'm having trouble with how to include an image in the userbox. It just states the name of the file when I fill in the image name. Do I have to upload the image to some location first or? Would appreciate some more detailed help on all the source code needed to finalize the userbox. Best, Reixus (talk) 19:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Mudkip displays the non-free File:Pokémon Mudkip art.png with a fair use rationale applying to an article but not a userpage. It's also not allowed to display in this discussion so I only link to it. All images must be uploaded to the English Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons to be displayed. Commons doesn't allow non-free images at all. The English Wikipedia only allows them in certain circumstances for use in articles, and they can only be uploaded by autoconfirmed users. The Mudkip design is owned by a company which is unlikely to have published any free version you can use. A drawing copying the design would also be disallowed. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

clean up/corrections before submitting draft
Hi all, been working on a bio page and would like someone to look it over before I submit the draft for review. I know I have too many duplicate citations, where I use the same one multiple places, but unable to figure out how to minimize those. As well, need to confirm that my citations are acceptable and numerous enough. Compared to other bio pages it seems ok, but would like second or third opinion. Don't want to waste anyone's time reviewing my draft until it's worthy. Thank you. Page is located in my sandbox at "UnlikelySailor"

UnlikelySailor (talk) 21:55, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Please read WP:REFNAME for technical details about how to create a named reference, so that references appear once rather than multiple times. Be careful about using local newspaper obituaries to establish notability. Especially those that simply repeat colorful anecdotes told by family and friends about an eccentric person who has just died. Such coverage is often not subject to rigorous fact checking. Every substantive assertion in your draft should be cited to a high quality reliable source. We do not echo personal memories, and biographies of flamboyant local celebrities should be written cautiously and conservatively. We are not myth makers. Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  07:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Proper formatting of references for draft article Rita Kuhnke de Tepoztlan
I am using print copies of news articles published in the 1980s and '90s. Two are in English and one is in Spanish. They do not have online sources. Do I need to use the full cite template in the body of the text following the relevant statement? Should I use the format < > or do I use the format in the body of the text? Do I also need to re-list these references under the "References" section and, if so, in what format?(Robert L Mitchell2 (talk) 19:46, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Welcome to Wikipedia. You'll find advice at Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:55, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . It is OK to use paper sources that are not online as references. However, you should be sure to cite the most complete possible bibliographic details about the source. In the case of a newspaper article, this would include author name, article title, newspaper name, city (if not part of newspaper name), date of publication and page number. Including a brief relevant quote from the cited article in the reference often adds credibility to the reference as well. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  07:38, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

making article public
I am having trouble making my article public and I do not know why. What do I need to edit on my article for it to go public? I am getting graded on this assignment for a class and I have no idea what is wrong with it!Cjott (talk) 23:42, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Did your teacher approve this topic?!? As noted on your Talk, there already is an article Philopatry. It was started over 10 years ago. You do not get to create a new article with the same title. You can add to and subtract from the existing article if what you have is better. David notMD (talk) 00:20, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I see that you have now added some of your new referenced content to the existing article, and this is the correct procedure from Wikipedia's point of view. Wikipedia is not free webspace to publish your studies, however good they are, but if the task you have been set was to improve the existing article, then we appreciate your efforts.  If you were set the task of writing a new article, then you should have chosen a subject that did not already have an article in Wikipedia.  Perhaps you should clarify this with whoever set the task.  I think other people on your course might have similar problems.  Perhaps you can be graded on your sandbox version or user-page version?  We can't advise because we don't know what task you were set.  By the way, I explained above how to create internal links using double square brackets, but I see that you are still using single brackets.  Ask again if you need an example.    D b f i r s   07:38, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

why my article has been declined
why my article about chennai one tv has been rejected or declainedChennairam2000 (talk) 10:10, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi and welcome to the Teahouse.  At present, the article in your sandbox does not contain a single reference to establish WP:Notability.  You need to find independent WP:Reliable sources in which the subject has been written about in detail.  See WP:Referencing for beginners for details.    D b f i r s   10:41, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

How to create  a article
Can someone help me create a page about wanjiku kahore pliz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colony worldpress (talk • contribs) 12:36, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would first ask you if your username is that of a company?  If it is, you will need to change it as Wikipedia policy is that usernames must show that they are used by a single person.  I would suggest that you change your username to "YourName of Colony worldpress"(substituting something for "YourName"), which would be a good username. You do not need to use your real name, just something unique to you.  Please visit this page to make a username change request.
 * If you work for a company, you also need to read WP:COI about conflict of interest and WP:PAID about paid editing.
 * Regarding your question, it will depend on what "wanjiku kahore" is and how it is notable. All articles on Wikipedia must have independent reliable sources that support the content of the article and say how it is notable, that is, worthy of mention in this global encyclopedia.  If you can do that, you should visit Articles for Creation to draft an article for review.  If you do not wish to do that, you can post at Requested Articles, but it is severely backlogged and it may be a long time before someone writes about your subject.  If we know what the subject is, there may be a relevant WikiProject that we can direct you to where you can ask for assistance. 331dot (talk) 12:45, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Birth year query?
I've seen two different birth years for one of my article subjects, one is from the Oxford dictionary of Music and the other from Debretts, but I'm not sure which one to use. Any suggestions? Alfshire (talk) 15:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Assuming by Debrett's you mean Debrett's People of Today, then in the absence of evidence to the contrary assume that's the one that's in error. DPoT is basically a knock-off of Who's Who in which the subjects write their own entries, and as a reliable source is about as trustworthy as Facebook. &#8209; Iridescent 16:21, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll go for the Oxford dictionary of Music Alfshire (talk) 16:47, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Lowercase SIgmabot won't archive
A few months ago I set up LSB to autoarchive the Talk:Tesla Model S page, and asked an experienced to editor to check and make sure I didn't mess up the code. 2 months have elapsed, and the bot has not lifted a finger to archive the page. I went to the bot's talk page and it recommended I ask here at the TeaHouse. Should I use some other bot or make 1CA? Thanks L3X1 (distænt write)  15:20, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * There was a stray  in the archiving template, which I've just deleted. I don't know if that would be enough to throw off the bot – we'll have to wait and see. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 15:39, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, :). L3X1  (distænt write)  21:18, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Which version of English is acceptable?
Hello, I was just curious to know if while editing the English Wikipedia, if there was an acceptable version of English used universally on all articles, i.e. British English vs. American English, etc.

For example, I was editing a Canadian topic earlier today and changed "practised" to "practiced". My edit was reverted because I was told Canadians spell it as "practised". Is either way correct? Does it depend on the region in which the article is talking about?

Just need clarification please. Thanks Snickers2686 (talk) 05:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . We have no universal standard form of English on Wikipedia. If an article topic has a strong connection to a country with its own variety of English, then we use that variety in that article. In other words, Toronto is written in Canadian English, New York in American English, London in British English and Mumbai in Indian English. A general topic with no national connection is written in the variety of English used when the article was begun, and should remain consistent. It is considered disruptive editing to try to change English varieties without a very good reason. Please see WP:ENGVAR for complete details. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  05:40, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia test?
Could this edit by an obviously well informed anonymous editor which however includes an "illiterate" indication of the source ("light matters a closer look at the ideas behind their work" author Glen Shum) be an honest test of how Wikipedia works? Despite being hidden in a serious and impressive edit, it doesn't pretend to be impressive and is even blatantly incorrect and looks like a joke. And no mention of a Glen Shum writing on art exists online according to Google, and no book by anyone with that name exists according to worldcat.org and direct library searches.

BTW, pressing the Ask a Question button here opens a visual editor(?) window that is unusable on my Samsung Galaxy S2. How can i turn that function off? --Espoo (talk) 08:50, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * The correct title for the source is "Light Art Matters: A closer look at the ideas behind the work by Glenn Shrum; it appears to be a good-faith addition that's just accidentally left out the "Art" and two characters from the author's name. &#8209; Iridescent 09:08, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't understand why this article is not accepted
Hello, I submitted an article on a feature film that will be released early February. The article was refused on the basis that IMDb is not a reliable source. I'm dumbfounded: IMDb is a pretty reliable source used by all the professionals in the industry. I added links to critics and external websites, what else could I use? I used an already published article which has exactly the same references as a template. So why this article was accepted and mine is not is a mystery. I can't spend hours trying to fit some obscure requirement that nobody is willing to explain. There is an existing film which is about to be distributed and Wikipedia will simply not know about it. My experience with this platform is highly disappointing. Veronica Orlova (talk) 17:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Veronica Orlova, our policy is at Citing IMDb; basically, it's only usable for hard data which they've in turn received from a reliable source (such as the material they've received from the WGA and MPAA). Although it seems bureaucratic, it's necessary—because IMDb allows third parties to contribute, those parts of it which aren't credited to reliable third parties can't be considered trustworthy by Wikipedia's standards. I agree it can seem frustrating, but we need to ensure that any material we republish is attributed to a reliable source so readers can see exactly where it came from, who said it and when. &#8209; Iridescent 17:19, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I understand that but then the existence of a film is only validated through articles, I did add links toward articles and that too doesn't seem enough. I am at lost of what I could constitute a valid proof of existence and notability for a film? Should I try again when the film will be distributed with a link toward Amazon or that too won't be enough? Please help.

Veronica Orlova (talk) 17:53, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, . I am an administrator and will look into the matter. What is the name of the film? <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  19:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

the donation
When I come on Wikipedia, there is a message that talks about donating, is that really you guys at wikipedia or is that a scammer trying to make money, if it is you then why do you need money? You are a website.82.16.170.199 (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * From WP:DONATE "[...] we have around 800 servers and 150 staff, and cover our costs through donations [...]". There is a link there that leads to more details on how the money is spent.  RudolfRed (talk) 18:49, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, just to expand on RudolfRed's answer a bit: yes, that is a legitimate request for donations you are seeing. Wikipedia is the world's fifth most-popular website and one of the only large websites to be owned by a nonprofit charitable organisation (the Wikimedia Foundation or WMF). It costs a very large amount of money to operate and maintain such a large project, and since we don't run advertisements or engage in any other commercial activities, those costs are supported almost entirely by donations to the WMF. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * There is a donation drive each December. I assume you are seeing that but if you want to donate and are worried about the origin of the message then you can click the "Donate to Wikipedia" link below the globe logo at the top left on the desktop version of the site. If you are on the mobile version then first click "Desktop" at the bottom. The link goes to https://donate.wikimedia.org which (unlike Wikipedia) cannot be edited by the public. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * How badly does Wikipedia need the money? What's its financial situation like? Benjamin (talk) 08:08, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * See Wikimedia Foundation/Annual Report/2015-2016/2016 financials for details of where the money comes from and where it goes. If all donations stopped tomorrow, and the Wikimedia Foundation cut all spending not directly related to keeping the servers running, the existing reserves would keep the lights on for about three years. Thus it's not at immediate risk of collapse, but it's also not secure in the long term. (The "assets" section is slightly misleading, as some of it will be grants that have been given for a specific purpose and can't be used for general maintenance.) &#8209; Iridescent 08:18, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That is something of a bone of contention in the Wikipedia community. Last year the WMF's revenue was $81.8 million (see Wikimedia Foundation). This is far in excess of the money needed to meet Wikipedia's direct costs, and even though the WMF has also significantly increased its spending year-on-year ($65.9 million last year), it currently has reserves of over $91.7 million. Some editors feel that this means the "Wikipedia is in trouble!" tone sometimes adopted by the WMF in the donation drives is dishonest. The WMF maintain that large cash reserves are a necessary safety net and that their rapid increase in spending is justified. Either way if you're thinking of donating it's important to realise that the WMF and Wikipedia are separate entities. Your donation goes to the WMF, and although they do financially support Wikipedia, they also have other goals that diverge significantly from those of the community of volunteer Wikipedia editors (who, it should be noted, will not receive a penny of your donations). –&#8239;Joe (talk) 08:30, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Emirates to Windhoek
Does anyone have any knowledge about when flights from Dubai - Windhoek would commence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlyByNight (talk • contribs) 09:44, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . The Teahouse is a friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia, so we do not provide travel advice. You might have more luck asking your question at Reference desk. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:50, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Editing Football Kits
How can I modify the existing template Football Kits present in Wikipedia?SabyaC (talk) 14:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi,, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry you've had to wait a long time for a reply. As I know absolutely nothing about football, this may only be a partial answer. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong in my understanding of your question, though had you explained precisely what change you want to achieve and where, this might have helped us a bit more. However, if you genuinely want to make changes to the Template:Football kit you need to be extremely careful as it is used in over 29,000 articles. One change to the template itself would affect a huge number of pages. You'll see on that template's page there are very detailed instructions on how the template is used on any given page, and a warning that all suggested changes to the template itself are best discussed on its talk page first, and also tested in its sandbox.
 * However, my guess is that your question probably relates more to how to change the colours and designs of an individual club's kit on one particular page, either using Template:Football kit or using Template:Infobox football club. I see you've done a lot of work on 2017–18 East Bengal F.C. season where the Football kit template appears to use a combination of image files on Wikimedia Commons (like these), plus simple hexadecimal colourcodes to colour-fill basic elements like socks and shorts. If you know these colours, and the kit is simple, you should be able to easily change the value of each parameter in the template (that's the bit after the "=" sign) to match your club's kit, and these changes will only affect that one page you're editing. Unfortunately, this is where my ability to help you sadly ends, but I see that the Talk Page for the football kit template does receive requests from people asking for new files to be created for specific clubs where none already exists. I'm sure others here could add to what I've suggested, or alternatively you could ask for assistance in creating new kit images at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Does this rather poor explanation offer some help? If not, please let us know what precise change you'd like to achieve. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:36, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Nick Moyes, thank you for your reply.

I do not wish to change the entire template, I am saying how to use that template for my page and modify it on my page by using parameters. There is sadly no information about changing the base template colours. If anyone can help me by providing some kind of reference or tutorials, I can then modify the existing template on my page.SabyaC (talk) 10:43, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * OK,, that's not so difficult. I had thought in my reply I had given you pointers to where to find those instructions on the Template:Football kit page. Was there not enough information there? You will need to help me by being as clear as possible about which steps you find problematic. (I've never edited a football template's parameters before, but the principle looks simple enough). If you look below, I've shown two football kit templates. The top one is the outline of the kit with all the colour settings stripped away, so it's just a blank outline. The bottom one is taken from the page you've been editing on 2017–18 East Bengal F.C. season. I suggest you go to "Edit source" and copy the relevant template text into your own sandbox to experiment on there. Perhaps you can reply with a link to a page showing whatever kit it is that you want to represent? Without that, I am unable to help you with a demonstration. For each of those colours of socks, shorts, top you will have to change the a series of letters or numbers (hexadecimal code) for each of those colours. Here is one online tool that lets you upload a photo and select the patches of different colour you want to use within the template. Ignore any complex designs at first - just try to change the basic colours. Give that a go and let me know how you got on. If you still have problems, do please include a link to a page showing the colours and make sure you explain exactly what you want to achieve, and I'll do my best to help you. Because I'm not inside your head it's hard for me to know which bit is frustrating you - so help me to help you by explaining as simply as possible (ie treat me like an idiot and I might understand!!). Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:16, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Here's a quick demo. So, I've just randomly found this flag online. To use all its colours in a football kit I've pasted its url into the colour picker tool and clicked on the blue background. This gives me the HTML code: #02A2DE. Just paste 02A2DE after the = sign of the body parameter. This fills the shirt in blue. Now click the orange colour in the centre of the flower to get HTML code:	#EC7F32. Paste EC7F32 into the shorts parameter. Do the same for the yellow stripe either side of the big black diagonal stripe, and paste that code (9F1D219) into the socks parameter. And, finally, select the black colour (code 000000) for the right arm, and the white colour (code: FEFFFF) in the flower for the left arm, and this delightful kit shown below is what you see online. Is this the kind of thing you're trying to do? Nick Moyes (talk) 10:16, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Not a Word Yet
Greetings.

Please i'm a greenhorn Wikipedia contributor.

I have got an issue. I created an article tagged "OLUWATOBI AJAYI" several weeks ago and I haven't heard a word about it from Wikipedia.

Please what do i do?

Regards,

-Oba Adeoye Nigeria Obafemiadeoye (talk) 12:27, 4 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Obafemiadeoye Draft:Oluwatobi Ajayi has yet to be reviewed - as it states in the big box at the bottom, this may take over 2 months. As for your other submission, Draft:Opeyemi Oke you can see that it was declined on 22 October, for having insufficient reliable sources.  You need to provide additional references and re-submit it for reconsideration. - Arjayay (talk) 12:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

why mine article is rejected please help
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Amitagarwal3000

please helpm me i am new — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitagarwal3000 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

why mine article is rejected please help
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Amitagarwal3000

why mine article is rejected please help

i am not doing any wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitagarwal3000 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 4 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Welcome to Wikipedia. You asked, and had a clear answer, at WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The submission you have written, I regret to say, is unsuitable for Wikipedia for several reasons.  The first is that you seem to be the producer of the album you are writing about.  Writing a Wikipedia article about something you are associated with is what we call a conflict of interest.  This means that it is likely difficult for you to write about the subject objectively, in other words, forgetting everything you know about it and starting over as if you know nothing about it. You will also need to formally declare your association with this subject if you intend to write about this album. Also, if you are paid to be the producer, you must tell us that, otherwise you may be prevented from editing Wikipedia until you do.  The Terms of Use of Wikipedia require this.  Please read more about this at WP:COI and WP:PAID and make the appropriate declarations before editing further.
 * The draft you are writing does not indicate with independent reliable sources how this album meets at least one of the guidelines listed at WP:NALBUM. It must do this in order to be accepted. The article also seems to be advertising this album(you post several YouTube links) which is a promotional activity and not permitted.  My suggestion is that if this album is truly notable, that you allow other, independent editors to eventually write about it. 331dot (talk) 13:47, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Cardiff School of Law and Politics Page – An Advertisement?
I came across https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiff_School_of_Law_and_Politics this page for the Cardiff School of Law and Politics while I was editing for Wiki-links. A lot of it reads like promotional material to me so I tagged it as such with the advert tag for the time being. Was I correct in doing so? TheTechnician27 (talk) 22:30, 4 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I assume that you intended to link, rather than transclude, the advert tag, so I've changed it accordingly to prevent this help page from being tagged as an advert. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Notifications
Can i delete my notifications? User5554canada (talk) 23:58, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your edit to this page is the only edit under your username, and there is no content on your user talk page, so I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "notifications" and I assume you had previously used a different name; but if you mean any post on your user talk page, yes, you are permitted to remove posts from your user talk page.  Archiving is usually preferred, but it is not required. 331dot (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * i mean notifications by the little bell on top of your userpage, can you delete those notifications? User5554canada (talk) 00:03, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK. I'm not aware of a means to remove them, though I think if you go into your preferences you can change what you get notifications for. Others may know more than I do. 331dot (talk) 00:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * By remove them, i mean delete them User5554canada (talk) 00:43, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand that now. I'm not aware of a way to outright remove them, only to prevent them from appearing in the first place. 331dot (talk) 00:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia ads
I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but what happened to Wikipedia ads? Do they still exist? Am I unable to see them because of Adblock? The Verified Cactus 100% 23:48, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * They still exist. I have them displayed on my user page, for example. Do you have the code in your CSS that hides the ads? Or, do you have an example of a page where they are not showing up for you?  RudolfRed (talk) 01:12, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I turned off Adblock, and they're still not appearing. What I meant by that is that why are they no longer being displayed on the banner? Or anywhere outside of user pages, etc. The Verified Cactus 100% 01:42, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, the ads are only intended to be shown on User and Talk pages. Don't know why they are not showing for you.  RudolfRed (talk) 01:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, then I misinterpreted their function. Whoops. The Verified Cactus 100% 02:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)