Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 874

Re: Carl Freer
Dear Sirs,

Further to our earlier communication, we are instructed to inform you that our client, Mr. Joe Marten, ended his association with Carl Freer in or around 2016 and has had no further dealings with Carl Freer since such time.

Further, the words appearing and still remaining in your post below in as far as they falsely and wrongly state that our client was subject to a fraud investigation are libelous of our client and that our client will be taking further steps in this regard. The alleged link supporting this wrongful and malicious allegation of our client being a party to a fraud investigation does not exist and the link presently provided directs to the present front page of the Times.

Quote:-

"Freer's long-standing business partner for Singapore company iQNECT Carl Freer and Joe Marten. Joe Marten was also the Director of Gizmondo Europe Limited with Carl Freer at the helm during one of the biggest company fraud investigations in recent British history, totaling 215 million pounds (UK).

Carl Freer's new businesses are[23] all associated with his partner Joe Marten. "

Unquote

In this regard, all of our client's rights are reserved. We would be grateful if you would put us in touch with your legal department or your outside counsel.

Thank you.

Yours Faithfully

Messrs TITO ISAAC & CO LLP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.7.228.48 (talk) 09:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

We refer to the captioned matter wherein we act for Mr. Joseph Mathew Marten

We are seeking the editing of the post in respect of Carl Freer. We note that it is still pending review.

We want to remove all reference to Mr. Joe Marten in this post.

Kindly confirm when the changes will be accepted.

Thank you.

MESSRS TITO ISAAC & CO LLP SINGAPORE

10 December 2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.7.228.48 (talk) 06:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello IP editor, your edit on 29 November to Carl Freer was rejected on the same day. You can see that in the article history. If you believe that you have valid reasons for removing the sourced information, you can start a discussion on the article talk page, Talk:Carl Freer, but since you claim to represent the person you have a paid conflict of interest, and should not attempt to edit the article directly. More information here. --bonadea contributions talk 06:58, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi IP 121.7.228.48. If there's something in Carl Freer which you think shouldn't be there, you can either be (1) WP:BOLD and remove it yourself, or be (2) WP:CAUTIOUS and try to establish a WP:CONSENSUS for its removal at Talk:Carl Freer. However, since it already appears that you tried to be bold and were subsequently reverted, my suggestion to you is to discuss things on the artilce talk page, unless you're going to claim the content clearly violates Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons as explained in item 2 of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. In that case, you should leave a clearly worded edit summary explaining why your removing the content and then follow up with a more detailed post on the article's talk page further explaining why. Be advised, however, that negative content about the subjects of articles can be included as long as it complies with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and properly sourced content will not simply be removed just because its negative. Please look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more specific details on this. Please also note that relevant Wikipedia policy in this case not only applies to Carl Freer, the subject of the article, but also to any living person mentioned in the article; so, you might wish to seek more specific assistance about this at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard if you have any further questions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That said, the article could use a BLP-check. I'm unsure about if for example realtid.se is a reliable source. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * IP user, you should also be aware of Wikipedia policy on no legal threats. That page also has a link for contact information for the Wikimedia Foundation. You are free to pursue your grievances on Wikipedia or in the courts of your country, but not both. The above posts give very good advice about this situation and I urge you to heed it. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Our article clearly needs updating, but volunteer editors here do not respond to threats of legal action. Companies House shows that Joseph Matthew Rohan Marten was indeed involved with Gizmondo as director but resigned on March 9th 2005.  Mr Freer resigned on October 18th that year.  If Mr Marten would care to withdraw the threat of legal action, then the simplest solution would be to update the article.  I can find no other British company connection between Mr Marten and Mr Freer.  Dbfirs  10:30, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * For what it may be worth, the text in question was introduced in October 2016 with these two edits, the only edits by the user, and was promptly reverted by this edit. It was restored in May 2018 by this mass revert. Although I am not an expert in BLP issues, I am inclined to think the removal was correct. —teb728 t c 12:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Invictus Groups
I am trying to publish a couple of pages on Wikipedia, and I will not lie. Its proven to be messy. How much content to I need in order to have my article approved? I would like to post about 2 business and 1 public figure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papique (talk • contribs) 12:38, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You should read Your First Article to learn what is expected of new articles.  You may also find it helpful to use the new user tutorial which will give you additional information.  As you have found, successfully writing a new article is probably the hardest thing to do on Wikipedia.
 * Based on your deleted pages, I would tell you to remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place to merely tell about a business. Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage states about article subjects that are notable as Wikipedia defines it.  For businesses, that is defined at WP:ORG(please review).  Not every business merits an article here, even within the same field. Independent sources do not include things like press releases, basic business announcements, staff interviews, or any primary source.
 * If you are associated with the businesses you are writing about, you need to review the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. 331dot (talk) 12:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for this response! I truly appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papique (talk • contribs) 13:15, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Reviewing Articles
I have been reviewing a large number of articles at WikiProject Disability. Someone has come on to my user page telling me that I need to review fewer articles. They also said that as a new user, I can only give articles stub,start and C class ratings because I am a new editor. Is this true?

Also, one article John Slessor had already been given GA status by several other wikiprojects, but on the disability project, it showed up as unassessed. I tried to put it into GA status on disability, but this user has told me I'm not allowed to do that. How can it be put into the GA status on the wikiproject:disability catagory if I am not allowed to do it?

CircleGirl (talk) 15:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, Good article help might be a good place to ask. Good articles has a special nomination and review process. An article that is a good article for one WikiProject might not be a good article for another. In the case of John Slessor, I'm not sure it would be considered a good article for WikiProject Disability as there's only the brief mention that he had polio as a child. Between the experts at Good article help and at WP:DISAB, I'm sure they can take a look and determine whether John Slessor meets the criteria for a Project Disability Good Article. Schazjmd (talk) 16:17, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I've restored CircleGirl's edit to John Slessor's talk page and notified Chris troutman (I was working up a reply here and got into an edit conflict). I don't think it's correct that "a good article for one WikiProject might not be a good article for another"; I'm pretty sure that once an article has gone through a formal GA review (this one has), it can be assessed as GA for all WikiProjects. GA reviews are not project-exclusive; they apply in general.-- SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Good to know, I didn't realize GA was for all WikiProjects. Thanks! Schazjmd (talk) 16:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!CircleGirl (talk) 16:36, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

How do I upload a photograph to a page? How do I replace a photograph with an updated photograph?
How do I upload a photograph to a page? How do I replace a photograph with an updated photograph? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eadamico (talk • contribs) 16:40, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse! You can find information on how to upload and use images at Help:Files and Help:Pictures. I hope that helps to answer the basic questions. If you have a specific problem, feel free to ask again. Regards So  Why  16:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

How do I edit well?
Hello it's Malcolm and I would like to know what is the best way to edit? I want to do my best on Wikipedia and help people : ^ ) -Hey breej2 (talk) 18:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello Hey breej2. You may want to start with taking our interactive tutorial at The Wikipedia Adventure which can help you learn a lot of the basics of editing Wikipedia.  G M G  talk  18:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Donations
Would like to donate, but by check only. Give me. An address to mail the check to “Wikipedia Donations”. Or not. David Kline — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:A180:5490:EC86:EA63:AA7A:803 (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * There is an address to mail donations to on this page (clickable link). 331dot (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Plagiarism Question/glitch! Help! Gente De Zona Bio (Spanish)
Hello, I'm from Gente De Zona's management and i'm trying to update the history page on the spanish link so that it matches with our other sites. Unfortunately because of that it states that there is plagiarism so it won't let me update it. How can I get around this? The quote on quote plagiarized sentences were our original content just on a different site. Thank you, Magnus Media — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnusmediallc (talk • contribs)
 * Note: OP already blocked. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:55, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Image upload snag
I have been trying to upload an image today but am receiving a "Something went wrong" message, stating the following: "A file identical to this file (File:BAK_logo_3D.png) has previously been deleted. You should check that file's deletion history before proceeding to re-upload it." When I click on the file in question I am told "No file by this name exists." How can I go about uploading this file, as it won't allow me to do so and I can't find it in existence on the site already. Tolstoy22
 * Hey Tolstoy22. It looks like the file was deleted on our sister project Wikimedia Commons back in July. If the image you are trying to upload is not licensed for free public use, then it cannot be uploaded to Commons. However, in a very limited number of circumstances, it may be allowed as a local file on the English Wikipedia under a claim of fair use, but that largely depends on what the content is, and how you intend to use it.  G M G  talk  18:59, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, . Where did you try to upload it? I see that you have preveiously uploaded that file to Commons, and it has been deleted there. I don't think you should have any difficulty uploading it to English Wikipedia provided you show that it meets all the criteria in the WP:NFCC.
 * I'll explain this a little (because you said on the Commons Help Desk that you didn't understand). The intention of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all material in its projects (including Wikipedia) is freely licensed, so that anybody can reuse it for any purpose, requiring only attribution to the source. This means that permission from the copyright owner is not enough for uploading copyright material: we require that the copyright owner explicitly release it under a license which will allow this (see donating copyright materials. Wikimedia Commons enforces this condition strictly - which is why the file was deleted from Commons.
 * Some Wikipedias, including English Wikipedia, allow copyright materials to be uploaded and used in certain specific conditions. The details of these conditions are in the non-free content criteria. Logos are often used in a way which does meet these criteria, so many articles in English Wikipedia have logos uploaded directly to English Wikipedia in this way. See WP:LOGO.
 * So, if you are sure that it meets all the criteria, you should be able to upload the logo to enwiki, and use it in an article.
 * One more thing: I see you have tried to sign your posts by putting a link to your user page. If you end with four tildes ( ~ ) it will insert this and also the date and time: please do this. --ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, and. Thanks for your help, and I'll remember to sign off correctly in future. The image is a logo for a football club - it wasn't me who tried to upload it in July, when it was initially deleted, but a fellow club director. We commissioned the design of the logo and own the image, but it is not copyrighted or trademarked. We would like to add it to our club's Wiki page, but I'm guessing that won't be possible in this case, as I won't be able to fill a form out with any copyright details. Is that the case? Tolstoy22 (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Tolstoy22. Normally a logo of an organization can be used under a claim of fair use. You can request the image be uploaded at our Files for Upload project and I'll take care of the particulars. I know that page is pretty backlogged at the moment, but I intend to try to clear it out before the end of the week.  G M G  talk  19:16, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks,. I'll try to do that. My account is only a day old, so I've not been autoconfirmed yet - perhaps that is going to be a problem too. I'm learning all these terms and restrictions as I go, so apologies if some of it seems obvious. Another terminology question: Would a logo, owned by the club, be considered a 'free' image? I'm guessing not. Tolstoy22 (talk) 19:25, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Tolstoy22. As a general rule all creative works are automatically copyrighted by the person or entity that created them, and start out by default as a non-free work. In order to be free, works either have to be freely licensed by the owner of the intellectual property rights (which can be verified for Wikipedia by following the instructions at WP:CONSENT) or the work has to have fallen into the public domain, which usually means it is a very old work, or the person who created it died a long time ago. There's lots of caveats and nuances to it, because copyright law is complicated, but that's the basic gist of it.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  19:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks,. I think I'm getting somewhere now! I am looking into filling out a form and there is a lot of head-scratching information to take in, I must say. I see that a low-res image is preferred for non-free logo images to be published under 'fair use'. What size is low-res? Can it be a PNG, or must it be a JPG?Tolstoy22 (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Tolstoy22. As long as you can link to the image, provide evidence that it is the currently used official logo (usually easy to verify via official website) and indicate what article it needs to go on, I can take care of the particulars like image size. Format doesn't really matter all that much.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  20:01, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , For resolution, see Non-free_content. It can be png or jpg. S Philbrick  (Talk)  20:04, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

That's very kind,. I see I need to fill out a license section and there's lots of different suggestions for this, one a logo copyright template license, and another for various fair use instances. I have know idea what to put there, or in the Link to License information section. Come to think of it, should the given copyright owner be an individual or should it be the club? As I said, we created the image but we didn't actively copyright it. Tolstoy22 (talk) 20:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Tolstoy22. You don't have to actively copyright it (in most countries, although you used to a long time ago). It's automatically copyrighted when its created, and owned by whoever created it. If "we" created the image and there was no agreement between "we" and the club that the club would own the intellectual property rights, then "we" own the copyright as a collective work. But so long as Wikipedia is using it under a claim of fair use, either one should suffice, since I'm assuming that "we" were members of the club (and not like a graphic designer who was paid for a service), and so the difference blurs a little bit, but not necessarily in a way that is meaningful to Wikipedia. The important thing there is that it's not owned by someone like Getty Images, who we explicitly cannot use fair use images from, possibly because they've threatened to sue us or something.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk

Hi. Sorry, 'we' is the club, who own the image, so presumably hold the copyright automatically, given what you've just said (assuming that law applies in Hungary). I'll use the club's name as the copyright owner on the form. Could you guide me on what I need to write in the "License" and "Link to License Information" sections of the form as well, please? I really am clueless. Tolstoy22 (talk) 20:21, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Well Tolstoy22, if the club wants to license the work freely, you'll have to send an email following the directions at WP:CONSENT. Note though that doing so will license it freely for anyone to use for any purpose and is irrevocable. If you want to use it just on Wikipedia, then you can just put "Fair use" or whatever is closest.
 * It's been a long time since I actually clicked through the wizard that files these requests, but if it makes you feel any better, probably half the requests there are filled out wrong or only partially filled out, but they usually have enough information to figure it out. If not, I'll ping you there and ask for clarification.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  20:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I've filled in the request and published it, so let's hope there's enough info there! Thanks for all your help and for your patience. Tolstoy22 (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem Tolstoy22. Like I said, I'm gonna try to work through all the requests before the end of the week and if there any issues I'll let you know.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  20:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Citation improvements
Hi. A quick clarification: I am frequently finding very "terse" citations (ie made within the cite template, and lacking some often basic details). Is it worthwhile fleshing out these citations ... on the explicit understanding that I don't mind doing it, since when I am researching, I am going to the source material anyway to read more. Or is this a relatively pointless exercise? (My recent contrib history has examples). Prime Lemur (talk) 07:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe that your fleshing out of references is valuable in helping to improve Wikipedia. It's also unlikely to be controversial. It's great to see a relatively new editor doing things which are clearly improvements. Maproom (talk) 08:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey,, I totally agree with . For anyone wanting to actually understand a subject (and not just skim-read Wikipedia's content), then having good, clear, and comnplete references really is incredibly valuable for checking factual statements and for helping them undertake further research or investigation. If improving these interests you, your contributions will be immensely useful, even if not noticed by most users(!). If good quality citations weren't important, then scientific journals wouldn't place so much store upon their use and formatting, and their content would lose a lot of their academic rigour and value. The same applies here - even if many users aren't aware of it. Have you heard of of WikiProject Citation cleanup? If not, you might find it worth checking out, and perhaps helping work towards some of its key aims. And, although I must confess to rarely using it myself, you might find the Citation Bot tool at WP:UCB well-worth investigating. It's a neat way to tidy up the formatting of some older citations. (And if you weren't aware of it, using Visual Editor to edit an article allows you to enter just a url and to create a basic reference from it. These still need a bit of work to tidy up, but can save on a lot of typing - as well as updating the access date of the reference itself, were you to re-enter it. Oh, and there's also ProveIt are various other user scripts available which you might like to install and experiment with - see User_scripts/List. Hope some of this might be of use. Let us know how you get on. Good luck and regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the feedback and encouragement. I've used an external citation tool for Google Books before, so I'll be sure to check out the scripts ... and the project. Prime Lemur (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The only trap in citation cleanup is WP:CITEVAR, which says that you should not change bare refs to templated refs or the other way around without good reason. (It is absolutely stupid in my opinion (since templated refs are superior in every aspect) but it is policy.) Fixing incomplete information is OK though, and greatly appreciated even if not always noticed. Tigraan <span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me 10:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, there's a policy I have always ignored. Maproom (talk) 17:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey thanks . I have once improved citations that used the Harvard style ... which I almost gave up on through lack of familiarity. But learning something new is its own reward, and thank you for the additional information, which I've now read. And lol @ Maproom. Prime Lemur (talk) 21:33, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

How Should one cite a reference while edit?
How Should one cite a reference while edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:4099:4DFF:1CE8:4C0F:E89:3CAA (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to cite your changes. Check out the tutorials at WP:TUTORIAL and Referencing for Begninners to learn how to add citations.  RudolfRed (talk) 20:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I hope this helps: Help:Referencing_for_beginners S Philbrick  (Talk)  21:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Adding Infobox and image in recently created page
I would appreciate if you could guide me on possible infobox templates for an open water swimming world champion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudio_Plit and also the protocol for uploading an image in the infobox and/or the article, especially considering image rights. I am considering asking for an image of a local swimming association. In this case, do I need a written permision to upload it to wikipedia or just specify who is the author of the picture. I am considering alternatives to improve the article. Thank you very much. Delphinidae9 (talk) 01:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , please see Template:Infobox swimmer.
 * As to the case of image, please ask the author (i.e. the copyright holder) to use this tool to upload the image.
 * I will advice him to upload the image directly to Commons (rather than through mail; w.r.t Step 2) and then, wait for OTRS rubber-stamping. But, please avoid any delay between uploading the image and licensing the image through the tool. Also, place on the image-page, once you've mailed off the license-statement (generated by the tool) to OTRS.  &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 15:51, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Delphinidae9 (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I will advice him to upload the image directly to Commons (rather than through mail; w.r.t Step 2) and then, wait for OTRS rubber-stamping. But, please avoid any delay between uploading the image and licensing the image through the tool. Also, place on the image-page, once you've mailed off the license-statement (generated by the tool) to OTRS.  &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 15:51, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Delphinidae9 (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Is there a style consensus on formatting locations?
For example, should country names follow major subdivisions like U.S. states? (Always or only when the subdivision is not well-known?) Can subdivisions be omitted for well-known cities, and what's the standard for whether they're well-known? I couldn't find any MOS guidance that's not about article titles, rather than use in prose or an infobox. Kim Post (talk) 20:43, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . I don't fully understand your question, but the guidelines for place names can be found at Naming conventions (geographic names). They apply to both article titles and body text. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 22:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Questin
My question is which step should we use to start and article.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nonkah Nommy (talk • contribs) 18:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey Nonkah Nommy. You may want to start by reviewing our tutorial on writing your first article or consider taking our interactive tutorial at The Wikipedia Adventure.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  18:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Many people come to Wikipedia to create an article. Because they have something on their mind and want to share it. That's a hard task, and many fail. Another path is to find existing articles on topics you already know, and see if you can make them better. Also, your User page is for a little bit about you (mostly, what you hope to accomplish at Wikipedia), your Talk page is for others to tell you stuff and you reply, your Sandbox is your practice space. What you write there can be saved by clicking on "Publish" That does not mean published in Wikipedia - it means saving what is in your Sandbox. Welcome to Wikipedia-land. David notMD (talk) 22:45, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Ball Road Anaheim, California
My Great Great grandfather was a Pioneer in Anaheim, Ca his residence was in Aaheim, California previously he was a Waggoner supplying merchandise from Wellington, California to Santa Fe, New Mexico. At his return trip he did what was called, a turnaround bring the merchandise for Santa Fe, New Mexico to Wellington, California. Stopping at merchant's along the way. Travling with many wagons and many armed guards through Indian territories. He established a well for the different tribes for fresh water.

This information was given to me from the Anaheim Historical Society main Librarian Jane Newell who also communicated with a local historian named Orange county kid. My great great grandfather Hezekiah Wright Ball is who Ball Road in Anaheim, California is named after. How would I go about publishing the article on Wikipedia? What type f document's would I need to establish authenticity? 1st time article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballroad (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse. That does sound quite interesting. However, you may have some difficulty introducing it to Wikipedia, because all information in Wikipedia articles must have been previously published in a reliable source. It sounds as though the librarian has given you unpublished information: if so, then I'm afraid it would count as original research, which is not permitted in Wikipedia. The job of an encyclopaedia is to summarise information which has already been researched, edited, and published, not to announce new discoveries. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 23:43, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Your historical records regarding your g-g-grandfather might be better off being uploaded to one of the genalogy websites. Hezekiah Wright Ball was notable in his time and town, but, today, nobody writes much about him. Unless the Historical Society has published material, like newpaper clippings or books relating to him, he won't be appearing soon in Wikipedia.

I want to improve my personal page, any tips?
Any help would be nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PolitiCalder (talk • contribs) 00:49, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You mean your userpage? For god's sake, don't look at mine. It's not exactly conventional . Adam9007 (talk) 00:52, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Check User:EEng, that has the required minimum ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * This user should not be spending time tinkering with their user page, they should be learning how to write an article, and learning how to use Wikipedia in general. To do so, they should be making small, incremental edits to improve existing pages, and not attempting to create articles, as their writing and researching abilities are simply not up to it. They've started to try to run the 100-year dash when they are barely able to walk. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Signing Edit
Is this how you appropriately sign your edit (Celluloid Film Fan (talk) 01:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC))
 * Without the parentheses, yes. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

thank you. Celluloid Film Fan (talk) 02:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

How to get started?
Hi newbie here please tell me how to get started?Dabid7 (talk) 03:27, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * We have a tutorial at WP:The Wikipedia Adventure that may help you. I've also written at guide explaining a variety of things and linking to different parts of the site, which you can find at User:Ian.thomson/Guide.
 * As for finding articles to edit, pick a topic or topics that you would buy books or magazines about even if Wikipedia didn't exist, and look at our articles to see if there's any information missing. Or just read Wikipedia as usual and keep an eye out for small problems that need to be fixed (e.g. grammar or spelling mistakes).  Ian.thomson (talk) 03:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

had article moved to draftspace
Hello, I was working on an article New York City housing crisis. This was an article split from Affordable housing. I wanted to know if I could create some stubs like "los angeles housing crisis" and "vancouver housing crisis" and I decided to go to IRC for help. Some of the users there decided to put the article into draft space. Current location of article is: Draft:New York City housing crisis and some note about this are on: User talk:Seahawk01.

The reason they are saying it needs to be in draft space is primarily because it doesn't have reliable, independent sources. But, my primary sources are:


 * Executive Director, NYC Dept. of City Planning
 * Commmissioner, NYC City Planning Commission
 * Executive Director, New York Housing Conference
 * Office of the New York City Comptroller

All the information on this page are directly from those sources, including such statement that equate to "crushing", "suffering", "burden".

A secondary reason was that I was using those terms in the lead. But, I was following WP:WHENNOTCITE in the lead and assumed those statements would just be adequately defined in the text to follow.

Additionally, I feel it was a bit rash to put the article into draft space when all I really needed to do was either rewrite the lead or add one or two citations. I personally think it is a pretty even handed article although it could use a little rewriting in the lead. And, I was planning on filling in more details and adding more references in the next week. So, comparing it to other articles out there, I don't think it should of been moved to draft space.

Thanks! Seahawk01 (talk) 03:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , welcome to the Teahouse. You've stated your sources above, but all you stated is a list of names. Can you please expand on that? If those people are directly your source (in other words, if you received the information from them via an interview or a conversation conducted by mail or email), then that information cannot be used in the article at all. See WP:OR for further explanation. John from Idegon (talk) 06:30, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Seahawk01. A quick search about your subject matter revealed that there are several authoritative sources (e.g. this article from The New York Times) that cover the crisis. And I suggest you use them instead. As was stated by John from Idegon, using interview/primary data is not allowed. Also, after taking a look at your draft's lead, it reads more like an essay or an opinion piece. To learn more about the acceptable format, you can check this: WP:TONE and WP:IMPARTIAL. Thanks! Darwin Naz (talk) 10:53, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for the reply. The following are my two primary sources:


 * Purnima Kapur, Executive Director, NYC Dept. of City Planning, Michelle De La Uz, Commmissioner, NYC City Planning Commission, and Rachel Fee, Executive Director, New York Housing Conference moderated by Brian Lehrer (May 30, 2018) Brian talks New York - The Housing Squeeze by Numbers (video) cunytv75


 * The Growing Gap: New York City’s Housing Affordability Challenge (2014) Office of the New York City Comptroller, Scott M. Stringer


 * There are other sources used on the page as well. I spent two days at the help desk and they stated that it is allowed to use videos as a source as long as the video is from a reliable source (see WP:CITEVIDEO). The video is from the City College of New York where they produce public interest TV interviewing government officials, etc.
 * In addition, I was going to add additional sources this week. But, I found my treatment in the IRC chat room so depressing that I haven't worked on this page since. In fact, I was really pretty shocked that they couldn't spend 5-10 minutes and help me improve the page. They didn't even read it, just scanning the lead in less than 30 seconds and making a snap decision. Seahawk01 (talk) 03:31, 9 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, I am using reliable sources. Please see above. I am not using interview/primary data. Also, I would say that the sources I'm using are better than newspaper articles. If I wanted more sources, I would probable use a report from the NYU Furman Center, but definately not newspaper articles.
 * In terms of the lead, first of all, let me say that this was an existing article that I was improving (rewriting). I did not pay too much attention to the lead. It is about 50% something I added and 50% existing, but I wasn't focusing on it. Anyway, I am going to remove the lead right now. Seahawk01 (talk) 03:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Please note: I removed the lead, removed the tag "essay like" and placed article back in the main namespace - see New York City housing crisis. Also, I want to file complaints about the people in IRC. Seahawk01 (talk) 03:47, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Chiming in here, I still agree with Drewmutts decision to move the article to draftspace, and I honestly think the article still reads like an essay and that Seahawk should not have moved it back to the mainspace. TheMesquito  buzz  08:18, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , I agree and prod'd the article. You can lead a horse to help, but you can't make him take it. John from Idegon (talk) 21:47, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I have added a new lead section there. Perhaps new contributions could salvage the article. Darwin Naz (talk) 22:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

I am seriously fed up with this situation and am considering leaving Wikipedia. Why don't you all review my other contributions: User:Seahawk01. Anyway, this has become a major time sink for me and I don't want to deal with this article unless other people are willing to help. And, my last thoughts on IRC are here: Village pump (idea lab)/Archive 27 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seahawk01 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You've been editing (at least using this account) for two months. Feeling frustrated over having your efforts criticized or even nominated for deletion is completely understandable, especially for someone as new as you. Perhaps taking a look at WP:HELPAFD will explain what goes on in an AfD. Having an article nominated for deletion doesn't not automatically mean it will be deleted; articles can continue to be improved while the AfD is ongoing and in some cases enough improvements are made so that the consensus ends up being kept. It's also possible that the article can be userfied or draftified to allow it to continue to be worked on and improved. Try and remember that none of this is intended to be taken personally; Wikipedia wants us all to be WP:HERE to help (in whatever way we can) to try and work together improving the encyclopedia, and sometimes this means removing or deleting content, or taking it out of the mainspace to try and improve it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Cutting the word 'Draft'
I wrote an article recently named 'Cingöz Recai(2017)' which is now saved in Wikipedia as 'Draft:Cingöz Recai(2017)'. How can I cut the word 'Draft' from it ? Can I change the article's name if needed ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IfazTheWikipedian (talk • contribs) 16:10, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , I have moved the draft to Draft:Cingöz Recai, removing the "(2017)". Article names are sometimes followed by something in parentheses to distinguish them from another article with the same name, but there's no need for that here. The draft currently cites no sources at all, and so does not meet the standards for articles on English Wikipedia. If someone were to make it into an article by moving it to Cingöz Recai, it would therefore be in danger of being deleted. If you want to improve it, I recommend you to read notability and Help:Referencing for beginners. Maproom (talk) 16:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse! I've moved the draft to Draft:Cingöz Recai (film) to distinguish it from the Cingöz Recai character, and I've added a box to the top of Draft:Cingöz Recai (film) that gives you resources for working on your draft. Please read "Your first article", which has some useful tips. Once the draft is ready to be published, just click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page, and a reviewer will look over it. If the draft passes review, it will be published as an article at Cingöz Recai (film). If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! —  Newslinger  talk   06:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Broken Link For Archive
At this diff a discussion was removed from the page saying it was being archived. However the link it claims it was archived to is a red link. Can anyone please tell me the correct link to this archive? Morgan Leigh | Talk 01:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Try Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests. There was a later edit summary correcting the link. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Morgan Leigh | Talk 09:12, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Albion Rovers F.C. (aka Cairnlea FC)
Hi there,

I changed the title of Cairnlea FC to Albion Rovers F.C. (aka Cairnlea FC). After doing so, I realised there are other clubs with the same name but have their town listed in brackets. To be consistent on wiki, I would like to change the Albion Rovers F.C. (aka Cairnlea FC) to "Albion Rovers F.C (Cairnlea)".

Thank you,

Ayasliyim (talk) 13:10, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅, now at Albion Rovers FC (Cairnlea). A bot will shortly fix any double-redirects. I also added it to the hatnote of the article of the main club by that name. Regards So  Why  13:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Advertisement Infringement
Hi All,

I am trying to publish this article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Home_Made - which has been rejected for advertisement infringement.

Can someone help me understand why?

Thank you

Acolombohm (talk) 13:26, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi and welcome to The Teahouse.  You haven't been rejected for advertisement infringement.  Rather, your article was declined because it simply reads like an ad for the company. Take a look at WP:NOTADVERTISING.  Then take a look at Your first article and Simplified Manual of Style. You might also take a look at WP:GNG regarding general notability requirements and WP:CORPDEPTH regarding corporation notability. Hope this helps.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 13:41, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Changing title of a page
Hi there,

I am new to editing Wiki and made some changes yesterday to a page that had used an incorrect full name for its subject. A more experienced editor mentioned that there might be a case for 'moving' the page, which I understand is a way of changing the title. I can't seem to do it, possibly because I'm a new editor, but I wondered if someone could help me find out how to change the title of the following page from Ernest Erbstein to Ernő Egri Erbstein as this is the person in question's name. Here's the URL for the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Erbstein Tolstoy22


 * Hi . Please see Moving a page. Your account is still too new to move it directly; you can either ask someone else to do it at WP:RM, or what a couple of days until you are autoconfirmed. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 22:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That said, remember that Wikipedia uses the most common recognizable variation of a name - not necessarily the subject's full legal name - for its article titles. Before you perform or request a move, please ensure that "Ernő Egri Erbstein" is indeed the most commonly used variation to refer to this individual. In this case for example, "Ernest Erbstein" seems to be cited as the subject's name more often in books and other reliable sources than "Erno Erbstein" or "Erno Egri Erbstein". Regards So  Why  10:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . That shouldn't be a problem. I'm not sure where you're looking, but Erno Egri Erbstein is certainly the most commonly used name for him. I'm not sure where Ernest came from - an anglicisation probably. In the only English language biography, he is Erno Egri Erbstein, and in most of the major recent news articles about his life - Guardian, BBC, CNN, etc - including the ones footnoted on his Wiki page. So I think it's a straightforward move to "Erno Egri Erbstein." Tolstoy22 (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

What to do with Zipline International Inc.
I would like some help figuring out what to do with Zipline International and Zipline International Inc. I think that the appropriate name for the article should be either Zipline International (per WP:NCCORP) or Zipline (company) (since the "International" is typically omitted in discussions of the company). It looks like two separate articles were created (one of them by Back ache and one by Richierich44), and then Back ache tried to redirect Zipline International to Zipline International Inc. two days ago (but did not remove the article body when doing so). So the article is now at Zipline International Inc., which I think is not the appropriate article title. I think that a histmerge may also be needed, but I'm not sure. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree the "international inc" is useless fluff. BarrelProof is right, the search let me down and I created a dupe Zipline International, so my effort wasn't wasted I have been gutting the good bits of ii and rolling it into the older article with a view to one of them just becoming a pure redir. (I personally agree with BP that the shorter cleaner version should be the main one)

I have also been trying to address the criticism of Zipline International Inc. sounding a bit of advertising-y at times, I don't think the OP was malicious just a bit too much cut n' paste.

What the organisation itself is doing and its historical importance makes it worthy of an decent article so will keep chipping away at it but would appreciate help and I am happy to talk.Back ache (talk) 13:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the response. Based on your description of what happened, this was not a copy-paste move, but rather an accidental creation of a different article on the same topic, followed by a merging, so I think a histmerge may not be needed. I think I'll just submit an RM proposal to move Zipline International Inc. to Zipline (company) or Zipline International. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:43, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Sounds good, I'll see if I can find some time to take a final scan through my article to see if any bots from it can improve the first one. Back ache (talk) 12:23, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I filed the RM request at Talk:Zipline International Inc., and the two people who have commented there so far have expressed support for it. The RM request is a little different from what I had initially planned, because I discovered that there is also another article about a different similarly-named company, Zipline Creative Limited. At this point, I suggest that the further discussion should take place at Talk:Zipline International Inc., rather than here, so that the record of the discussion will be recorded there. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Help inserting links to preexisting article
Hi. I see that a couple of links in the Reference Section for Keith A. Schooley no longer are active. Would someone please insert these alternative links for me? For #12  http://www.worldcat.org/title/robber-barons-of-the-big-board-a-feature-screenplay/oclc/785780441&referer=brief_results and for #13    https://thecostcouldbefatal.com/pdfs/Robber%20Barons%20-%20FuturesMag%20reviews.pdf Thanks so much. I really appreciate the assistance. Hillary Chase Hillary Chase (talk) 01:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, and welcome back to the Teahouse. I've added the link to Worldcat to reference #12. There are already two links to PDFs hosted on thecostcouldbefatal.com in the article, so instead of adding a third, I've added a link to an archived copy of the Futures Magazine review hosted at the Wayback Machine. rchard2scout (talk) 09:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Many, many thanks Richard! Hillary Chase (talk) 16:06, 11 December 2018 (UTC) Hillary

i have a doubt
i mean what type of references are required for approval of an article to be feature in wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordanjenni720 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Teahouse, . Please read Identifying reliable sources and feel free to ask more specific questions. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  16:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Can't add discussion to talk page for semi-protected article
I'm attempting to suggest an edit (error in the link to movie) on a semi-protected celebrity page but when I attempt to add a discussion about it the "save" button on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tom_Holland_(actor)#/talk/new is greyed out and won't allow me to suggest it. I'm not attempting to edit it myself, simply notify the responsible user that there is an error in the lead paragraph.

If anyone is interested it's just the movie link to Edge of Winter on that page should be https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_of_Winter_(film) Kdawnw (talk) 18:22, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, for reporting the error. I've corrected the link. Maproom (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, did you type something in both the subject and text boxes? The save button is disabled if either is blank. —teb728 t c 18:40, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

How do i find my page on wikipedia
Since Friday (although am new here) i have been trying to get my page on wikipedia so that if someone searches for my name (Cherish Chukwu) on Google it will appear just like others do. So please i need help and support in doing this, my name is Cherish Chukwu and thats also the page name. I will be grateful if some can do it urgently. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherish Chukwu (talk • contribs) 15:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hey there, ; welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, Wikipedia isn't the place to write about yourself. All topics must meet certain notability guidelines, which generally requires significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Wikipedia doesn't exist to document every single person; it is an encyclopedia and only covers notable topics that would belong in one. If you would like to learn more about Wikipedia in general, the Wikipedia Adventure would be a great place to start. I hope this helps you out and let me know if you have any further questions.-- SkyGazer 512 <span style="background: linear-gradient(aqua, #d580ff);">Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:33, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, I see you wrote a little about yourself on your userpage. Unfortunately Wikipedia userpages are marked "noindex"; so Google does not look at them. Articles are indexed, but as SkyGazer 512 says, only notable subjects may have an article. —teb728 t c 18:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

No protection please
Administrators: please stop protecting pages on the wiki. This is seen as vandalism. If I become an administrator, I will probably unprotect those pages. Anthony E. Lahmann (talk) 19:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Anthony, not meaning this as an insult, but considering that you have been a registered editor with Wikipedia for less than 24 hours, this is more than a little presumptuous on your part. Please review WP:PP, which explains how and why articles are protected, and WP:ADMIN which explains the process of being considered for the role of admin here (and it is a process). <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  <i style="color: #000666;">Talk </i> 19:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Anthony, we will not stop protecting pages. Protection of pages is not WP:VANDALISM.  If you ever do become an admin you probably wouldn't unprotect all the pages that are protected.  If you did unprotect all the pages you probably wouldn't remain an admin.  ~ GB fan 19:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up to Question
I want to write about baseball but don't know what to write about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddyb9 (talk • contribs) 19:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest you go and look at WP:WikiProject Baseball: if you don't get some ideas from that page, you can ask on the talk page, and you'll find people who will be glad to discuss this with you. --ColinFine (talk) 21:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

How do I add a new description of a word that is already there?
To be "floxed" is to have had an adverse reaction to a fluoroquinolone antibiotic. They almost all end in "...floxacin". I put the disamibiguation page for "flox" below. How do I create a new page for "Flox" and a spot on the disambiguation page? Is there some protocol to follow as far as describing this particular "flox"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark A Girard (talk • contribs) 21:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello,, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a dictionary, it is an encyclopaedia. It has a few articles about words, when they are notable in Wikipedia's sense, that is, there has been significant material published about the word (as a word or a phenomenon; for example irregardless). Normally articles are not about words but about the things that words relate to.
 * My guess is that "floxing" would not merit an article of its own, but may have a section in an existing article, though I confess I'm not sure which: perhaps Adverse drug reaction, but that doesn't seem to have much on particular drugs or families of drugs. I may be wrong in my guess: the crucial thing is how much reliably published material you can find about floxing (see notability). If you would like to try writing a new article, read your first article.
 * In any case, don't put it in the DAB page until there is somewhere to link it to: either an article, or a section of an article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:44, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * May I suggest that you create a section (or add a paragraph to the section on adverse reactions) in the article Fluoroquinolone--Quisqualis (talk) 22:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Thoughts on these photos?
An editor added a photo to an article in my watchlist about a dairy. It is a generic photo of a cow being milked. Looking at their contributions they've added the same image to a lot of articles about dairies. Does it add any value to the articles? Should the changes be reverted? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It's best to discuss this with the editor, either on his talk page or the talk page of the article in question. It's up to you to form a consensus on how the article can best be illustrated. For my part, I would say a generic picture of a readily understood concept does not improve the article about a specific dairy. As MOS:IMAGE says, "Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative." You may find it easier to come to agreement if you can supply a better picture instead of merely reverting the change. Kim Post (talk) 17:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I went to Wikimedia Commons and entered "dairy industry" in the search box. I got 80 images which you may review here. Note that other keywords will pull up a different assortment of images, any of which you may use as replacements for the milking image you find to be overused.Good luck!--Quisqualis (talk) 23:12, 11 December 2018 (UTC)