Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 847

Page blanking
What happens if I blank someones user talk pages? - 114.124.140.93 (talk) 08:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't unless there's a very good policy- or guideline-based reason for doing so as explained in Wikipedia:User pages. You may remove posts you've made as long as noboby has responded to them as explained in Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, but anything else you should leave as is. Now, you can blank your own user talk page if you want, except for type of posts specifically mentioned in Wikipedia:User pages. As to what would happen if you do blank another editor's user talk page, you'll probably be warned and the content will be restored; if you continue to do such things despite being warned, the content will still be restored and ultimately an adminstrator will likely block your account to prevent any further disruption on your part. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

But now, it may trigger the edit filter and disallow the edit. - 182.253.162.204 (talk) 14:32, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Difference of opinion
I've been having a nice dialogue with another editor about a difference of opinion. It isn't a dispute, or an edit war, but I don't want it to become one. The page is somewhat active and I've been hoping that another editor would way in on our talk section, talk:St Donat's Castle, but so far none have. How do I attract or ask other editors to take friendly looks at disagreements without escalation? StarHOG (Talk) 13:50, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey StarHOG. See Dispute resolution, which has a number of options available. You may want to consider starting with Third opinion, or seek input from a related WikiProject, which can be found via the banners on the article's talk page.  G M G  talk  14:15, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I didn't waqnt to jump to dispute resolution, and yes, I've posted to projects before when situations like this have arisen, but this article doesn't seem to have a project page associated with it, so I was kind of up in the air. The Third Opinion was a great resource tip, thanks! StarHOG (Talk) 14:30, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey StarHOG. WikiProject Military history is probably the most active WikiProject of them all. So that might be a good place to start.  G M G  talk  14:32, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Filter log
How can I view the filter log through mobile? - 114.124.172.212 (talk) 15:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Article Review
Hello,

I am expanding from AV patrol, and I want input on my article and answers to a question. I can only find one source for the history section, which is. Can I legitimately only use that source for the section and get it moved into mainspace?

Thanks, Plaba123 (talk) 17:13, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's a source for foundation date: []. There's some history here [], although it's quoted from their own site. You could also use Charity Navigator [] - it's a little better than their own site.  I'd like to point out that your draft ignores the most notable thing about the group - that it's getting the most coverage for how it discriminates against non-Christians. That will be added by someone if your article is submitted. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  17:41, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help!

Change Username Displayed
Can I change my username or do I have to create a new account? Stanulisd (talk) 17:39, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * For information on altering your username, see Changing username. TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  17:45, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Editing
Hello Teahouse Thank you for offering to help me. I am trying to post a section about The Hunger Games and it will not let me post it. Now I do not want to have to read so many articles about why I can't and what I have to do to post it. Please help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Unrelated (talk • contribs) 16:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * First, please sign all discussion comments with four tildes ( ~ ), so we know who did it. Here, the bot signed it for you, but that's just good to keep in mind. As for your article, the issue appears to be that your subject already existed in Wikipedia. It's usually best to keep things confined to one article, which is why your submission was declined; after all, it would be a bit confusing if we had fifty different articles about Michael Jackson. (There are exceptions to this, but that is typically when the article is very long and could load very slowly on older technology; imagine trying to load the article Barack Obama on a dial-up connection!) If you would like to contribute to the coverage of the Hunger Games, we have plenty of existing articles you can feel free to improve! As per your comment at the talk page for the Host Lounge, I do have to give you credit for having a better formed request that 95% of anything else on that talk page! However, that doesn't mean you posted it in the right place, sadly; that question would probably have better been placed here, the Teahouse. You will be able to create articles when you are autoconfirmed, which means that your account is at least 4 days old and has made at least 10 edits. -A la d insane  (Channel 2)  17:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Key point: There is an existing article about the film series The Hunger Games (film series). If you believe you can add content - with references - that is the place. What you wrote in your Sandbox is about comments by the actors, but without references. David notMD (talk) 17:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Editing drafts for creation
Hello. I've been around a few months and am trying to get familiar with Wikipedia by editing articles for creation. I understand this is an OK thing to do. I am currently work on the draft for Damian Gorman. It was basically a pasted CV when I found it. I've been editing it for flow, spacing, and content to see if there is a decent article in there. Lots of the information is trivial, not directly relevant, repetitive, or unsourced. Is it typical to reject drafts of this quality? Should I give up or keep at it? How much editing should I do for articles for creation? Please let me know if I shouldn't spend more time with it or if its the job of the person who created the article to do such massive overhaul. Thanks!--DiamondRemley39 (talk) 23:36, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The creator abandoned it in July, and may have lost interest in submitting it to AfC. David notMD (talk) 03:48, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi It sounds as if you're asking whether it's OK to edit something in the draft namespace. If that's the case, then the answer is technically yes since basically any Wikipedia page can be edited at any time by any editor (except if it's been protected for some reason). Whether you should edit the draft is a trickier question to answer and can depend upon a number of things. The goal of anything added to the draft namespace is (or at least should be) for it to someday be accepted as an article. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project after all and most articles are improved over time by people working together, and this same way of thinking should also extend to drafts. People, however, can be very protective of their drafts and they might not respond favorably to others editing "their work", even if the edits actually are improvements. Of course, they don't WP:OWN the draft any more than they would own the article that it someday hopes to become, but they might have a certain vision for the draft and how it should be developed. So, instead of just jumping right in (unless it's to fix a serious policy or guideline violation, or an obvious formatting error) and taking over the draft, it might be a good idea to first offer to help on the user talk page of the creator. If they unequivically say "No thanks", then it's probably best to leave the draft be since any edits you make might be reverted and other problems between you and the other editor might develop. On the other hand, if they say "Sure", then at least you can discuss how the draft should be developed so as to not step all over each other by undoing each others work all the time. Now, if you come across a draft that hasn't been edited in awhile and the creator also hasn't edited in awhile, then post a message anyway as a courtesy. If you don't get a response, then it's probably OK to go ahead and just start editing. Drafts which go unedited for six months are subject to speedy deletion per WP:G13; so, maybe looking for something close to being deleted and seemingly abandoned is a better idea than on something just created. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello . Could you explain to me what exactly an abandoned draft is? And thank you to for explaining all that.--DiamondRemley39 (talk) 18:29, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Officially, is a draft has not been edited (by the creator or other editors) for six months, it can be deleted. In this instance, not only did the creator stop editing this draft in July, but also made no other edits on any article since then. So, you were a wee bit jumping in, but the originator is no longer around. Once an article is an article, it's there for everyone to edit. With drafts, even though they can be seen, the thinking is to let the originator continue to build it before submitting to Articles for Creation (AfC) or just posting it into main space. i.e., as an article. Which is what MarchJuly wrote. David notMD (talk) 19:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

help meh plz
hey um i would like to know what i could make a page about can somone help meh? Pearl playa (talk) 16:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia, Pearl playa! You could see if there's any topic mentioned in Requested articles that you could write about. But it might be easier to start by editing existing articles before trying to write articles from scratch. You could try and look at a random article and see if there's something there you could improve. There's also maintenance categories which contain articles known to have specific problems. Categories like Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2000. Another place to look for stuff to do is in WikiProjects. There's also the TeaHouse suggestions.
 * Whether you want to write articles from scratch or you're looking for stuff to fix in existing articles (or do both!), you might want to take a look at the manual of style. Best wishes. – Pretended leer { talk } 19:50, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Whether you want to write articles from scratch or you're looking for stuff to fix in existing articles (or do both!), you might want to take a look at the manual of style. Best wishes. – Pretended leer { talk } 19:50, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

hey thanks for the help i appreciate it!-Pearl playa (talk) 21:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Adding artwork
I would like to add artwork to a site that I have been contributing to. To get started, so that I can get familiar with the process, I would like to add two newspaper ads. One is from 1858 and the other from 1859. How do I get started? Gerald T. Ahnert (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2018 (UTC)Gerald T. Ahnert
 * Welcome back to the Teahouse, . It sounds like your ads will be well out of copyright, so you might like to familiarise yourself by reading the guidelines on how to upload them, which you can find at: Uploading images. I think most people upload directly to Wikimedia Commons, which is much stricter in ensuring compliance than is English Wikipedia. (there's an 'Upload file' link in the 'Tools' section on the far left side of every Wikipedia page should you only want to upload here.) The advantage of uploading to Commons is that others can use those images in any of the non-English versions of our encyclopaedia. Once you have uploaded to  Commons, look for the little 'W' icon just above the image, labelled 'Use this file'. Click that and you can copy the text to insert a thumbnail image directly into your article. Let us know if you encounter any difficulties, and well try and help you out further. It would then help to include links to the relevant  article or images so that Teahouse hosts can better see what you're trying to do. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:00, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

WRONG INTERNATIONAL BOUNDRY OF INDIA
File:People%27s_Republic_of_China_(orthographic_projection).svg ON THIS PROJECTION, THE BOUNDRIES OF INDIAN STATE , J&K ARE NOT RIGHT.. HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER THIS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.167.70.10 (talk) 17:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * You'll have to discuss on the discussion page for the image: []. Your note is unclear what's wrong. TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  17:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Your IP address is in India so I guess you are complaining that territory claimed by India but controlled by Pakistan or China is not depicted as part of India. See Line of Control and Q6 at Talk:India/FAQ. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

How to add photographs of physical newspaper articles to references?
Tea is like TeaHouse. Lnaceri000 (talk) 18:08, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi there

How do I add citations which are photographs of newspaper & magazine articles (as they do not exist online)? I have read a number of help articles but cannot find anything on this topic. Thank you. (Tommyvanj (talk) 20:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommyvanj (talk • contribs) 20:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The short answer is that you don’t. You can cite the paper by giving the appropriate information, per WP:CITE, you can use the Cite news template and just fill in the fields. Uploading such photographs is probably not acceptable fair use. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:31, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

What about adding it into a different section like footnotes, or uploading the photograph to a server online and linking to the URL in the citation?Tommyvanj (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that sounds tempting, but it's still not OK in most circumstances. Unless the image - or the newspaper itself - is out of copyright, and thus freely available, it's not an acceptable work-around to link to third party websites in the way you suggest. Your uploading of that image of a newspaper would, itself, be a breach of copyright, and so links to copyright material (text or image) would likely be removed from Wikipedia, or flagged up with a copyvioel template to draw editors' attention to possible infringement by linking. See WP:COPYLINKS for guidance on this, plus External links/Noticeboard where discussion on copyright violations in External Links are discussed. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Bear in mind,, that there is no requirement that sources be available online. Obviously it's convenient if they are, but they don't have to be. What's important is that they have been (reliably) published, so that they are in principle obtainable, eg through a major library; and that enough bibliographic information is given to locate them. If they're already online, fine (as long as they are not breaching copyright) but it's not usually appropriate to put them on the internet somewhere just so that they can be linked from a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:45, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the help guys! - Tommyvanj (talk) 23:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

How to transfer data from sandboxes and where exactly id the Title Name placed in the Sandbox area?
I have to correct two dilemmas I understand I have but am not clear on the procedure. 1. I am apparently in the wrong sandbox which makes no sense since everything I do works well in producing a page. I have no idea how I got there or how to transfer it if necessary. 2. How do I designate the TITLE NAME to the site page using the sandbox? I have no indication on how that is accomplished. There are so many technical guides and rules I become baffled a bit. I have considered experimented with two different Title Names that are similar in purpose but one may lend itself better to Wikipedia than the other. There is too much data to have to add (edit) the pre-existing page on the subject because it nullifies most the information found on the page. This information will change the art world in a major way. I have done my homework. Saint Matthew and the Angel Redux --- or  ---  Resurrection of Saint Matthew and the Angel are two titles considered. Both have the same intent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BARRY BARON (talk • contribs) 16:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello Barry and welcome! Both problems are handled using the "move" function.  See Help:How to move a page.  That will both move the page to the "article space" AND rename it to the proper title.  If you still have questions, please feel free to ask.  -- Jayron 32</b> 16:51, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * You've been at Teahouse on this topic for a while. I foresee two problems: 1) Your draft, as written, has huge sections of text without references. You have incorporated three references, and then added a list of references not tied back to the text. 2) There is an existing article about the painting Saint Matthew and the Angel. Your content disagrees with content on that page, but this does not mean you get your own article. A better way to approach this is change content in the existing article or start a section in the article's Talk, laying out your position - either way, with references. David notMD (talk) 21:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)


 * May I also add to what has said, please? I fear you are completely wasting your time trying to publish the results of your researches on Wikipedia by working on Draft:Saint Matthew and the Angel Redux. This is not - and I  must repeat this, NOT - the place for any original research, as exciting as it might be, nor indeed how momentous that discovery might be to the art world. I need you to understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia which distils, aggregates and reflects what has already been written by other reliable sources.  We aren't the place to do that publishing de novo.  In fact we have a policy on it, so please re-read  No original research which begins with the statement, in bold: Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. Neither should that 'original research' be added into the existing article until such time as it has been published by reputable sources and/or covered in the mainstream media. Perhaps I can tell you a true story? Twenty years ago I discovered something in 'The Orrery' by Joseph Wright of Derby that none of the experts had ever noticed or commented on before. My museum's Director was one of the world's leading specialists on him, and was astonished when I commented on what, to me, was blindingly obvious - that every person in that painting (who were all seated or standing around a central light source representing the sun in the centre of that mechanical orrery) had each of their their faces representing one of the main phases of the moon. Now, had Wikipedia actually existed back then, I probably would not have been permitted to add that simple observation to the painting's article because it was original research (albeit, you can actually see this fact when you look at the painting, unlike in your research!). But luckily our museum subsequently published a leaflet on orreries, in which we reported this new - and to us, exciting - observation. So now, the leaflet that I wrote back then can be used today as a reliable citation to support that statement. Similarly, until such time as you get your work and discoveries taken seriously by a museum, a publisher or a news outlet, I see absolutely no future in you trying to report it here. There are far better ways to get attention to new research, and I urge you to focus here on other areas of art currently under-represented on Wikipedia. I do hope this helps you understand any future difficulties that you are bound to encounter if you ignore this advice and try to persist. I might also suggest you make a copy of what you have drafted here and store it off-wiki to help you prepare a publication in other media. This advice really is well-meant. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:46, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * PS: I should also add that for some reason that I can't quite fathom yet, the content of your sandbox was moved by another editor into what we call 'draftspace', hence your apparent confusion over your being in the wrong sandbox. (Having now enquired, it turns out that the move was made in good faith, but in error.) Nick Moyes (talk) 00:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Copypasta
Is there a policy about copying sections from one Wikipedia article to another? If so, where can I find it? What should one do if material is copied across articles? 32.218.38.106 (talk) 06:34, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello 32.218.38.106 and welcome to the Teahouse.
 * The policy is at WP:COPYWITHIN.
 * When I find such things, I do two things. One is to make an edit to the destination page with an edit summary that says something like copied from page XXXX (unknown rev) without attribution - this edit summary is intended to remedy that omission. The edit can be a dummy edit such as adding a space in a harmless place. The second thing is warn the editor who failed to make the attribution using uw-copying – it wants to be substituted, so  with the source article given as the parameter, without brackets. You place this on the editor's talk page.
 * In principle, this policy should apply whenever something is copied from one page to another, but I've found that the community does not think it is needed when, say, copying from your user talk page to your user page or from any talk page to a noticeboard.
 * There are more elaborate templates available to make the attribution when the copying is more extensive, or for special cases like discussion moved to, but the edit summary method is what seems to be most often used and is deemed sufficient.
 * The most common case for lack of attribution I find is when someone copies a page to their sandbox to do some work on it.  — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 07:05, 18 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello,anonymous, and welcome to the Teahouse. Heck, has just said  it  all extremely well, but here's my similar answer:  Yes, there certainly is. We do have a clear guideline on how to give attribution to content moved from one article to another, or from one article into,say, your personal sandbox so that you can work on it there. All the guidance you need can be found at Copying within Wikipedia, or by using this shortcut: WP:COPYWITHIN. Should you have copied content, but forgotten to attribute it, you can correct the mistake by making a 'dummy edit' which subsequently clarifies the source.
 * Of course, you should never copy large amounts of one article and use it all in another article in such as way that we end up with two very similar pages which then get edited differently. If you're thinking of copying a massive table of data (e.g. a running tally of members of one country's government over many years), you might wish to consider creating one table as a template, and then transcluding it into both articles. Thus the data only ever needs to be updated in one place, whilst its content will appear in both articles in identical form. Helpful Hint: To find any of our policies, guidelines and essays, just go to the Search box at the top of the page and type WP: followed by a likely keyword, such as "copying", and you'll see a drop-down list of matches to that word, including any page shortcuts. This can be a very useful way of looking for help amongst the myriad of guidance pages we have. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 07:11, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * In principle, this policy should apply whenever something is copied from one page to another, but I've found that the community does not think it is needed when, say, copying from your user talk page to your user page or from any talk page to a noticeboard. That policy is actually licensing requirements (to comply with CC-BY-SA). Stuff that you wrote yourself alone (or with no significant outside corrections) is exempt from that (because you are the copyright holder and can unilaterally relicense it somewhere else); so, for instance, you can copy paragraphs you made from scratch across articles without needing to put in the edit summary. Copying other people's TP posts is also fine if done right (i.e. with a mention of who said it) because it falls under the right to quote. Tigraan <span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me 08:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Help Moving my Article Forward
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:World_Wood_Day

I have had three editors look at my article and two have concluded that there is already an article on World Wood Day..you can see the comments on my draft. I am at a lost of what to do next. I feel the article they reference is different from my proposed article. Can someone help me? Thanks much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve at IWCS (talk • contribs) 16:41, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello . My apologies for the long delay in getting a reply to you. Easier-to-answer questions tend to get a much quicker turnaround here than this one which required a somewhat deeper assessment of the topics.
 * Now, I don't actually agree with and  that an identical article already exists at International Day of Forests. Whilst WWD and IDF do seem relatively closely allied in their purpose, they appear to me to be completely different in their origins and activities, albeit staged on the same day, as so often happens with environmental campaigns which try to garner greater public engagement by ensuring major events on a common ecological theme coincide. That said, is World Wood Day -like so many other 'world days of x' actually notable in its own right? Well, that's a little less certain, based on sources, despite non-western news media like  this covering it, and the World Wood Day Fund supporting worldwide activities like this project in Scotland. Personally, I think it is just about notable (see what Wikipedia means by this at WP:EVENTCRITERIA), but two very experienced editors at articles for creation have advised you just to add a 'Related events'  section in the International Day of Forests. Now, unless they change their minds on this, and notwithstanding that these two  topics are indeed separate one, I think this could actually be quite good advice, at least to start with. I would move and save the  content I'd written back into my sandbox to keep it all for later use without risk of deletion, and then add a summary of World Wood Day in the IWF page.  I'd then create a WP:REDIRECT from World Wood Day to take users to the IDoF page. Having done that, and seen responses from any other editors to this content change, and assessed any increase in page views I'd then consider (after quite some time of  bedding in) whether to seek  consensus on that talk page as to whether these are, indeed, two separate notable events and whether to split it off into a separate article at some later date. The advantage of having both events all on one page  - even  if not associated with one another - is that two separate topics benefit from the interest users show in the one or the other. It also stops a potentially marginally notable World Day article being put  up  for a deletion discussion,  and I'm guessing you wouldn't want that. Does that help in any way at all? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:36, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Can't find minor edit button
I can't find the minor edit button.24.205.150.243 (talk) 01:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Greetings User 24.205.150.243 and welcome to the Teahouse. The minor edit checkbox is on line below "Edit summary" line. It is only visible while editing. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 02:15, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi User 24.205.150.243, according to Help:Minor_edit, "Users who are not logged in to Wikipedia are not permitted to mark changes as minor because of the potential for vandalism. The ability to mark changes as minor is one of many reasons to register." rchard2scout (talk) 09:48, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Help
Hello there, can any willing rollbacker help undo the edits on October (soundtrack) to the last version by me because all of edits made on 7 October 2018 are unconstructive and wrong. Ask if you need reasons. Harsh Rathod Poke me!  08:05, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, . Welcome. What are the reasons, please? I'm OK to rollback for you, if you'd prefer not to revert each edit in turn, or to do so manually. But knowing little about music, I don't want to act unfairly if I can't make that assessment of 'unconstructive' myself, and I'm afraid I can't. To my eye these series of small edits appear to have been made in good faith. Whether they're wrong, I can't really tell. I would really prefer you to edit the article and correct any errors yourself (but always leave an edit summary to explain why you're changing something back, please). Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:36, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Here are my reasons:
 * 1. This edit is unconstructive because he did nothing but push the names with wikilinks ahead to the name which don't. I previously put the names in the order as they appear in the tracklisting.
 * 2. What was this for? I can bet the album was never released physically. This is vandalism.
 * 3. Here he vandalised the actual listed name of the track as seen on digital albums.
 * 4. (a) This wasn't necessary at all. No need to cite in the infobox if there is no edit war or controversy over the fact. Moreover, there are sufficient cited sources in the article which give the release date info. This is what I call implicit promotion of a website on Wikipedia.
 * (b) The term soundtrack implies that it is music from a film. Be it featured or whatever. It is the type of an album just like other types. For instance, a studio album. How the heck can it be a genre. This is so wrong to assign the term soundtrack to the genre parameter. Filmi is a true genre. Therefore, this is vandalism.

I hope I was able to explain you. Harsh Rathod Poke me!  12:06, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me • my contributions) 12:09, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * OK - thank you to both editors. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:18, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, sir and Mr. Moyes, but please undo this because when I visit the website on mobile web, it doesn't even show the full release date (just the year) which is the only purpose this link is used for. Harsh Rathod Poke me!  12:24, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ again. Apparently I didn't click into that source. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me • my contributions) 12:33, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, now everything was solved without creating a mess in the history of that article. Harsh Rathod Poke me!  12:38, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

How do I edit my signature?
I figured out how to get to where I can edit my signature but I want it to automatically link my sandbox because I'm working on something there and I want it to be easy for others who need to to access it. Vexthesmol (talk) 14:09, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Vexthesmol. If you change your signature settings under preferences to this:, then your signature will display like this: Vexthesmol (talk) (sandbox), and include a link to your sandbox along with your talk page.   G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  14:48, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed User, However Unable to Move Pages.
Hi! my user was recently auto confirmed! I am excited about this however I am trying to move a page I made in a draft and am having difficulty doing so. Not sure if this is because I am unaware of how to move the page or if there is an issue with my user. If someone can guide me through this, that would be fantastic! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylebhiro (talk • contribs) 14:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Kylebhiro. I'm not seeing anything that should prevent the move. Having said that, it doesn't appear ready for publishing anyway, as it is currently unambiguously promotional in tone, and is likely to be deleted if published. You may want to review our tutorial on writing your first article for tips on how to improve the draft.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  14:52, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Confused by user posting to my talk page
Greetings, At User talk:JoeHebda user User:Plotterof left a message that I do not understand. Since it's short, I'm re-posting here. Wondering if this is a COI situation? I have not had any prior contact with user Plotterof so I don't know any reason for message to be on my talk page. JoeHebda (talk) 14:28, 18 October 2018 (UTC) --- Ajay Bijli

''I have make some change on the said article to fulfill the cleanup process of Wikipedia policy. Please let me know if require any changes. Note i am individual and new in Wikipedia struggling to understand the wiki policies. '' Regards --Plotterof (talk) 11:58, 18 October 2018 (UTC)''


 * Hello, . I can see why you might be confused. If you look at Plotterof's user contributions, you can see that they made some edits to the article Ajay Bijli just before posting on your User Talk page - they mentioned that article in the header to the comment. If you look at the history of that article, you can see that the previous two edits to it before Plotterof's edits were by you. It looks as if PlotterOf thought it would be a good idea to notify "the author of" that article, and didn't notice that your edits were superficial.
 * PlotterOf: I appreciate your trying to notify somebody of the change; but if you look at the history, you can see that JoeHebda's edits were not substantial (one was copy-editing, and one was adding authority control and category sorting) so there is no reason to suppose that JoeHebda has any particular interest in that article. If you look further back through the history, you can see that it was who added the maintenance tags in August, and they are a more useful editor to notify. (Since I have pinged them here, they should see this discussion anyway, so there's no need for you to do anything else). --ColinFine (talk) 14:45, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I got the ping to wrong, so I'm adding it in a separate comment. --ColinFine (talk) 14:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping. The article was created by a user that has been blocked as a spamming account and has had their appeal to be unblocked refused and the subject is probably not notable hence my tag when reviewing the page as a new page in August. The new editor's account was created to edit this article and associated pages and is most probably a WP:COI account. I shall be putting some info on their talk page and check out their edits closely. Thanks for the heads up. --Dom from Paris (talk) 14:57, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Right to use artwork.
As a newbie to the Wikipedia site, I want to be cautious at first until I understand the proper conduct. For additions of artwork to “Butterfield Overland Mail” entry in Wikipedia, I want to make sure that the information for a copy of the original Butterfield Overland Mail Company 1858-time schedule is acceptable for me to add to the site. The image to be used was scanned from the frontispiece published in “The Butterfield Overland Mail by Waterman L. Ormsby,” The Huntington Library, San Marino, California, 1991. According to a footnote in the book, the schedule was copied from “The Frances Lieber papers were purchased in 1927. A survey, by C. R. Robson, of the collection, other than the miscellaneous material, is available in “The Huntington Library Bulletin, No. 3 (Feb., 1933), pp. 135-155.” This information, if acceptable, for the use of the schedule will be included in its entirety. Thank you. Gerald T. Ahnert (talk) 16:16, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Gerald T. Ahnert
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Copyright is a very complex subject but some aspects are simple. Here is what the U.S. Copyright Office says: ". . . all works published in the United States before January 1, 1923, are in the public domain." So, you can use that 1858 schedule as you see fit. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  16:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Getting disambiguation right.
Anyone know how I can add Kate Fox (writer) to a disambiguation page for Kate Fox, so as not to be confused with the anthropologist Kate Fox? And how I can make sure that Kate Fox (writer) comes up in Wiki search results? This is the first time I've made an article for someone who shares the same name with an existing person of note, so I'm not sure - other than distinguishing this Kate Fox as a writer - how to ensure that when a search for Kate Fox is done, the writer comes up in search results alongside the anthropologist. --Daibh (talk) 20:13, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. When you only need to distinguish between two similarly-named articles, a disambiguation page is not necessary. Instead, both articles should have what we call a 'hatnote' added to the top of their pages,  so that readers who realise this isn't actually the article for them,  but can see the alternative. You can read how to set these up by visiting Hatnote. If you get stuck, just come and let us know, and someone will help you out. Before you do that,  I  do think you could really do with finding some unconnected sources that talk about her in some depth in order to avoid having her notability called into question. At the moment, it's looking a bit thin, I'm afraid, and with no independent sources. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , I'm going to have to agree with Nick Moyes. There doesn't seem to be much demonstrating the notability of the Kate Fox standup comedian, poet and writer. A quick google search uncovers almost nothing. To add to the confusion, the anthropologist Kate Fox is also a writer, so this article title doesn't help with the disambiguation. I added a disambiguation hatnote to your article, so you can see how it looks, but I doubt it will survive a deletion review in its present state. <b style="color:#7F007F">TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  01:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, and, thanks for the sage advice. Appreciate it. I have fleshed out the references and detail now. Kate Fox is actually quite prolific as a northern English poet. I had always intended to add more to the page, but it's just about getting the time to do that and to source the appropriate references. I have more to add, but hopefully these latest additions will keep the wolf from the door until I find time to get a bit more added. Daibh (talk) 18:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

How to create a wikipedia
How to create a wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luthfiabd (talk • contribs) 17:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. Creating an article from scratch is not an easy task so if you are new it is usually better to start by working to improve existing articles.  If you want to create a new article, follow the guidance at WP:YFA and there is a wizard there you can use to create a draft and submit for review.  RudolfRed (talk) 18:52, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Moving media within an article for clarity
I have just added my first media "Butterfield's Schedule" to the site "Butterfield Overland Mail." At the top of the site, on the right is a poster for a line that is not for Butterfield's Overland Mail Company. The description at the bottom of the poster is "Advertising poster for a similar but later service between California and Oregon." This is the first media on the site that most see and I have seen it copied and used incorrectly as a reference for Butterfield's Overland Mail Company. Apparently some assume it is for Butterfield without reading the caption. I am apprehensive for moving or removing someone else's contribution to the site, especially since it is properly captioned. In the interest of clarity, I would like to move it to the bottom or remove it all together. Also, it would make room to move the Butterfield Schedule directly under the relevant paragraph that mentions the scheduling. If you allow me to move it to the bottom, instead of removing it, can I just copy the command at the top for the poster and paste it somewhere near the end of the article? Also, I see that in the commands for placing media in an article that it can be either "right" or "left." Can I type in "center" to have it placed in the center? Thank you. Gerald T. Ahnert (talk) 18:47, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Gerald T. Ahnert
 * Hello again, . I am in favor of removing that poster from Butterfield Overland Mail since it is for a different company. Don't be apprehensive. Just do it. Nobody needs to "allow" you to do whatever you want to improve that article. You know more about the topic than any of us, so go ahead and make it better, following policies and guidelines. Please do not try to place an image in the center of a column. It would look terrible on many devices, in my opinion. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328   Let's discuss it  19:12, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Request for Eyes
I'm just going to ask here because I can't seem to remember all the acronyms and the site mapping is a *little* convoluted.

Is there a board or list to request other editors take a look at a discussion or article or something going on to gather a better sample of consensus and drum more opinions?

In question today is this discussion on a page I nominated for deletion after finding non-NPOV statements and advertising. The editing IP responded to my templates on their talk page, added citations, improved those when pointed out the first ones wouldn't be accepted, and is wishing to contest the PROD in a communal fashion. (They appear aware they can remove themselves but don't feel comfortable doing so).

I'm still not comfortable removing the template by myself (as I don't feel the notability of an autodealership is easy to obtain), but in assuming good faith, I've made my recomendations as they've asked and am looking to increase discussion pool.

Thanks for your input, Elfabet (talk) 18:52, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . The Proposed deletion process (often called PROD for short), is for uncontroversial deletions. This conversation shows that the deletion is controversial. Instead, I recommend that you use Articles for Deletion which pulls other editors into the discussion. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  19:19, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . I've put up the corporation notability tag after reviewing the AFD page and someone else has removed the PROD as the article now has a non-singular source. Wiki improved. Elfabet (talk) 19:26, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

watchlist for more than 1 language?
I (occasionally) edit on different language wiki's. For me it would be very useful to see on 1 page if there's something I "need to watch" instead of going to those wiki's individually and clicking the watchlist buttons there. Is there something I can do? Dutchy45 (talk) 21:40, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Dutchy45. This is not possible. See Global, cross-wiki, integrated watchlists. You could enable "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed" at Special:Preferences for selected wikis. You can also enable it for all wikis at Special:GlobalPreferences. It's possible to override the global setting it at individual wikis. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks PrimeHunter, I'll check it out. Dutchy45 (talk) 22:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

How to disable welcome bot
I visited a couple of Burmese articles out of curiously (to see what the language looks like), I did not make any edits, and suddenly I received an email and something on my page from a welcome bot that writes in Burmese. Since I do not know the language, I have no idea what's going on. I think it could become annoying if I receive a welcome bot message every time I look at articles in another language. I hope this is not the wrong place to ask this question but I have no idea where to get help using Wikipedia. Any help is appreciated, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waagr (talk • contribs) 21:33, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * It’s a pretty standard feature of every language’s Wikipedia pages. There are fewer people like yourself who are concerned about it than those editors who benefit from the greeting, so it doesn’t make sense to change anything. <b style="color:#7F007F">TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  21:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not possible to disable it but I actually think automatic welcome messages should be banned if the account has no edits and was not originally created at that wiki. Many users complain about notifications and emails in languages they don't know. If your account was created because the wiki imported the page history of a page you edited at another wiki then you can even get welcomes for wikis you have never visited. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:57, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I once visited this page and now I keep getting phone calls about it! LOL Nick Moyes (talk) 00:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Problem entering my drawing
I have drawn a Butterfield Stage Wagon and would like to add it to the "Butterfield Overland Mail" site, but the Commons site states I need to properly fill in the copyright section. I tick on the circle for "This is my own work" and then type my name "Gerald T. Ahnert" in the section "I, __________, the copyright holder of this work, irrevocably grant anyone the right to use this work under the following license: The top license choice is already chosen and at the bottom it states "Use the site's recommended license." When I pick "Next" and then "Download" it tells me it failed. What am I doing wrong? Thank you. Gerald T. Ahnert (talk) 21:29, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Gerald T. Ahnert
 * Hello again, . I'm just doing a test upload of a file to wikimedia Commons for you. I've repeated what you describe up to the point at which you've entered a licence type and clicked 'Next'. You should then have seen a page where you name the image, add a description, date created and a category or two to place the image in. On that page there's a big blue button labelled 'Publish'. Did you see and click that? I can't imagine where on earth you saw a 'download' link if you didn't click 'publish' as, you're right, you didn't successfully upload it. Here is the list of all (i.e. one) uploaded contribution to Wikimedia Commons. A download or 'use this file' link is normally only available once your image has been uploaded successfully to Commons. Could you try it again and make a note and tell us what steps you followed once you arrived at the page where you enter all the titles and descriptive information, please? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:24, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

How do you change the main photo of a page?
I recently saw a erroneous photo on a page which I would like to change, but when I press on it in view editing it clicks that whole box in the beginning. As you can tell, I’m not experienced at editing Wikipedia... Any help would be appreciated, Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhodamanHD (talk • contribs) 12:10, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Which page are you referring to? I may help you to change it. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me • my contributions) 12:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

The Geisonoceras page has a picture of a Goniatite. I found a picture of Geisonoceras on Wikipedia but I’m not sure how to take one out and put the other in. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhodamanHD (talk • contribs) 02:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

If it's possible to remove my account in Wikipedia
Is it possible to remove my account in Wikipedia? And would that delete the articles or edits I have made? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SharabSalam (talk • contribs) 01:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.
 * No, your account cannot be removed. You can stop using it. Under certain circumstances, you can ask that it DISAPPEAR, which is a mostly a matter of changing to an obscure username. All of your edits will remain in the history of the articles you edited. When you made your edits, you irrevocably licensed them to Wikipedia.  — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 02:30, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Adding to a list of notable people in the city of Altadena California
I would like to add Elizabeth Williams; aka Betty Williams, aka Elizabeth Zorthian. She was the first wife of Jirayr Zorthian who is in the list. She was a shaving cream heiress from Louisiana. Ownedd property in Altadena and donated to the YMCA for the neighborhood children. She later opened a Winery in Solvange called Buttonwood which her children, also also talented. educated people manage and run. Elizabeth valued open space and agriculture within the community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:C850:3300:F4D8:A8F4:653E:2A26 (talk) 04:14, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Please take a look at the list of notable people in the article Altadena, California. You will notice that all of those people have blue links to biographical articles about them. This standard is typical in articles about cities and universities. So, the first step is to write an encyclopedia article about this woman, if she is notable. Then, she can be added to the Altadena article. Please read Your first article <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  04:44, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

can you write about the subrow diet
I don't want to pay 17.00 for the book and I can't find a how-to do it online anywhere — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgroshardt (talk • contribs) 03:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . The Teahouse is generally a place for asking questions about editing Wikipedia, not for finding out how to do things unrelated to Wikipedia. Moreover, if an article were to be written about this particular diet (assuming that it is something considered to be sufficiently Wikipedia notable for such an article to be written), it would only really an article which reflected the coverage the diet has received in reliable sources such as magazines, newspapers, books, medical journals, etc.; it would not be a guidebook on how to follow the diet. So, if that's what you're looking for then you're probably going to either have to buy the book, or borrow it book from someone or somewhere. Now, you can try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk to see if anyone there is familiar with the diet, or at least knows where you can find out more information about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:10, 19 October 2018 (UTC)


 * This one? . It's not getting a lot of hits on google news at the moment, but if that changes, someone may write one. We have several articles on fad diets. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:16, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

I need help with uploading photos.
I am currently trying to add an image logo that I got from a friend, but when uploading it says, "We could not determine whether this file is suitable for Wikimedia Commons. Please only upload photos that you took yourself with your camera, or see what else is acceptable. See the guide to make sure the file is acceptable and learn how to upload it on Wikimedia Commons." Does anybody know how to resolve this issue?Dave Yonn (talk) 02:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . Perhaps you'll find the information in Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 846 helpful. Basically, the part about needing the permission of the original copyright holder applies to all files uploaded to Commons. You should also try looking at the image at the top of c:Commons:Licensing since it pretty much explains what kind of files Commons accepts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

cbronline.com is not a redirect site like t.co
was blocked.

69.181.23.220 (talk) 07:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi IP 69.181.23.220. This sounds like this is something you might want to ask about at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist or MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:45, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand how to communicate with someone via a talk page.
I have been trying to update a page - old information completely wrong and misleading - and my update has been reversed or truncated twice. I have now received a message from one of the people who made the changes, saying I can contact them via their talk page to proofread a draft, but I do not see how to do this. The information on how to use talk pages is very difficult to follow. Please help. Thank you. Emmeliss (talk) 07:52, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Update - I think I have found how to do this. Thank you anyway.Emmeliss (talk) 08:12, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . If you're still stuck, then try taking a look at H:TALK for some general information on how to use a talk page. Generally, the best place to discuss changes to an article is on the article's talk page because it makes it easier for others who might be interested in the subject and who might be watching to article to see that a new discussion about it has been started. You can then post something on the other editor's user talk page just to let them know you've opened a discussion. You can find another editor's user talk page by either clicking on "(talk)" next to their username in their signature, or by clicking on their username and then clicking on the "Talk" tab. Once you've found their user talk page, just click on the "New section" tab and an editing window should open. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:15, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Adding a new word not in a dictionary
Hello, I have been in the aviation industry for 40 odd years, and from my early days in tech training with the RAF, we were taught that the shiny bits on hydraulic actuators are called "fescalised portions". It related to hard chrome coatings that are ground to a smooth finish. It's also used in a lot of other engineering disciplines, including car and motorbike maintenance. Strangely enough, even though everyone I speak to in the trade knows what the word fescalised means, it doesn't appear in dictionaries or Wikipedia. Google-fu leads to a load of blogs with people talking about it, but no hard facts. The nearest I've come to finding it mentioned in reliable documentation is in and obscure EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) document. There is also an oft-quoted bit of rubbish about meaning "without cheese" that seems to be repeated in a lot of places, but appears to be totally made up. So getting to my question. Given that this is a word in very common usage in engineering, but with no actual etymological backup, should/could it be added to Wikipedia, and if so, how? Cloogymax (talk) 08:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not really a dictionary that merely catalogs the definition of words or terms.  There is a project for that, Wikitonary.  To have an article here, you would need to have independent reliable sources that describe the use of this term in depth.  Blogs probably would not be acceptable unless they have some degree of editorial control or review.  A government agency document might work, but more than one would be better.  Sources don't need to be available online, either.  If you found print-only sources that use this term, like a trade magazine not available online, that would work. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 19 October 2018 (UTC)