Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 379

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 375

←

Archive 377

→

Photo's

How do I add an image to a page?

I am working on Adriana Trigiani's page and I want to add an image of her, how do I do this?? Mayyah Ibrahim (talk) 19:02, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mayyah Ibrahim. Unless you can find an image of her that is either in the public domain, or that bears a free copyright license that is compatible with Wikipedia's free licenses, no image can be used in her article (I've just looked and could not find one). For some topics, a low resolution copyrighted image may be used under a claim of fair use (in a specific article that is located in the article mainspace, where the picture has been properly provided a copyright license tag and a fair use rationale for use in that article, and where that use meets all of the fair use criteria). Pictures of living persons generally cannot meet Wikipedia's fair use criteria, because they are replaceable ("where no free equivalent is available, or could be created") with a free picture. After all, there's always the possibility of a person taking a snapshot of the person while they are still living, and releasing it. Some rather rare exceptions exist but they are not germane here. This is the reason we so often have no picture in articles even on very famous living people, or the picture we do have is really not a good one at all, but is free and so we use it instead of much better photographs that exist but which we restricted from using because they are non-free. Of course, if you have the opportunity to take a picture of her yourself, you would own the copyright and can then upload it to the Wikimedia Commons for its use here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:33, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mayyah Ibrahim, and thanks for your contributions. One option is to contact the subject directly, explain what you are doing and ask for a suitable photo. It will need to be licensed so we'll need a permission statement from the photographer, but that is often straightforward. I've tried this perhaps 100 times and get a positive response more than half the time.

Here's a link to the desired permission wording.--S Philbrick (Talk) 02:29, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Cropping images

How do I do that? Dunkleosteus77 ^{(push to talk)} 16:29, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Dunkleosteus77. To crop images on Wikimedia Commons, use Cropbot, there are instructions on the page. You could also use Commons:CropTool. ~Liance^{talk/contribs} 00:25, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh, you could also use Wikipedia's built-in CSS image crop. ~Liance^{talk/contribs} 00:30, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Your computer likely has suitable programs included on it, too, if you have the image file. Basically anything that lets you do any kind of image editing also has a way to crop. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 01:32, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Dunkleosteus77 ^{(push to talk)} 05:20, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Is there any page about Fraud NGO in Wiki ?

Found NGO in India are doing Fraud , even seen some sources from Court judgments as well as government authority .

High Court says 99% NGO fraud & money making machine

Women and Child ministry found 90% NGo seeking fund are fraud

Ruproy1972 (talk) 11:23, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

@Ruproy1972: We are not a newspaper so there isnt necessarily anything that we would cover because we do not synthesize individual news items to reach broader analysis, so unless reliably published sources have discussed the general topic of fraud in NGOs and indepth manner its not really appropriate for Wikipedia as an encyclopedia to do so. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

This is the sort of thing that could perhaps be covered in a broad Non-governmental organisations in India or Civil society in India article, but to my knowledge we don't have an article that covers that. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:57, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Cordless Larry thank you very much for your guidance. If two link NGO NGO2 you feel from reliable source guidelines , would request to add in Non-governmental organisations in India for readers knowledge. Ruproy1972 (talk) 04:39, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi again Ruproy1972. In order for the article not to give undue weight to the fraud issue and those two sources, it would need to cover other aspects of and perspectives on Indian civil society. I'm not an expert on that topic and am currently short of time, so I won't create the article myself now, but you can always request it at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:10, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Cordless Larry, thank you for your time. Will try to discuss in forum as you suggested. Wikipedia:Requested articles Ruproy1972 (talk) 05:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Administrator

Is it true that Administrators can't get involved in content disputes? What's wrong? They are active editors, they can help in content disputes. They will not edit war, they will not push POV, they can take a neutral stand. Aero Slicer 07:09, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Aero Slicer: It depends what you mean by "content dispute". If you mean "edit warring", no-one is allowed to do that (when admins use tools to edit war, it's called "wheel warring" and can be particularly dangerous). If you mean "discussing changes to an article on its talk page", everyone is encouraged to do that whenever an edit is challenged. The only relevant policy I can think of is WP:INVOLVED: if, for instance, an administrator takes a strong stance on an issue (e.g. whether a page should be deleted, a "request for comment"), they are not permitted to take administrator actions regarding that issue. If, for instance, someone has expressed a strong opinion that an article should be deleted, but an AfD discussion is controversial and has lots of people supporting both keep and delete stances, it would be unfair for that person to close the discussion and delete the article, as they are clearly biased and may not be able to neutrally assess the situation. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 10:47, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Help with Sandbox

I am writing an article in the Sandbox section of Wikipedia and I added a paragraph to the article in the edit section of Sandbox. I pressed saved changes, but in the Read version of Sandbox, the paragraph doesn't show. When I go back to edit, the new paragraph is there, but it will not show up when I press show preview or when I look at the read section.

Please advise.

Cnsmiami (talk) 13:44, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I think you might be referring to this edit to User:Cnsmiami/sandbox, which added a paragraph of text to your user sandbox. This paragraph was treated as code within a reference rather than normal actual text because the code <ref/> was used at the end of the previous paragraph, which is a mistake and should be </ref>. I have fixed this, so the paragraph should display properly. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 14:15, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

not getting replies

Interesting to note that when I write to permissions-copyright for information I receive a 'form letter' in return and I never hear from them again. (I am still waiting a reply to an email sent in June.) Recently this week I wrote to permissions-copyright and received the same 'form letter'. Today I sent the same message again from a different IP and email and never received a 'form letter' back. Wiki is suppose to be 'neutral' in it's dealings with everyone??? Where may I go to speak with someone on this issue please. Thank you.Imasku (talk) 16:03, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

All of the OTRS responders are volunteers so you will have to patient - at the moment there are 1242 emails in the permissions queue (I just checked). There is no "neutrality" issue here.--ukexpat (talk) 16:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Imasku, welcome back to the Teahouse. As Ukexpat brought up, the people who respond to your emails are volunteers just like you and me—they operate using a system called the "Open-source Ticket Response System" (OTRS). The reason a response to your email may be delayed is because a ton of other people are sending emails just like yours. According to Category:Items pending OTRS confirmation of permission, the current backlog for the English Wikipedia's permissions queue is 68 days, meaning there may still be messages from June 14 that are still open, simply because the team hasn't had time to get to them yet. (If you sent it to the Wikimedia Commons permissions, the backlog there appears to be 15 days.) For this reason, sending more messages for the same issue likely won't expedite the response, rather the opposite. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 16:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Appreciate the response. thank you.Imasku (talk) 16:33, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The good news is that it is not you. The bad news is that the prior responses are on point. I didn't verify the backlog number but it sounds about right. In theory we have over 100 volunteers but in fact a small number of volunteers are active. I just checked, only 107 items are handled in the last seven days. I handled 43 of them. Only four of the volunteers handled more than one ticket in the last week. That's discouraging, but this is not the place to address that. If you tell me the ticket number I'll look at it in the morning.S Philbrick (Talk) 02:39, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello @S.Philbrick:: Thank you for your message. I would gladly drop you a note if I knew how. There are things to do with wiki I do not know how to use. I have checked, there is no ticket # as yet. What I am asking for is the form to fill out for: 1.) photo image and 2.) graphic image for the owner to sign, which will then be sent back into wiki permissions. I also require information on how to proceed with the photo image, at the time it was taken in Canada (1980's) the individual is the first copyright owner, not the photographer those laws would not change until revision of Bill-C11 on 29 June 2012 now as of 7 November 2012 photographers are now included. After the laws changed the photographer has all rights to images (only from the date the law changed) even if it is a paid service. I have attempted to locate the photographer as I assumed wiki would ask for that individual with ads in news print and web and nothing is coming back which I have found in the past as a researcher normally indicates the individual is deceased. How do I proceed with the photo image is the individual that paid for the service the legal owner?? Imasku (talk) 14:03, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello @S.Philbrick: No no reply. Sorry, I went to your page and can not see how to leave a message. I do not even know how to respond back to you even. I hope this is not confusing. I need to know whom the legal copyright holder is at the time the image was taken. If its the person whom paid for it (as the law states at that time) then there is not an issue once I receive the form for the person to fill out and return to wiki then I can load a band image in there article. But if its the photographer - then there is a problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imasku (talk • contribs) 14:30, 24 August 2015‎

@Imasku: you're using the ping template correctly, but entering the wrong username (it is Sphilbrick you want to notify). To leave a user a message, go to their user talk page (i.e. User talk:Sphilbrick) and click the "New section" button at the top of your screen. But by the way, anyone can see what you write on user talk pages so make sure it doesn't contain any confidential information. You can also the email system if the user has enabled it: go to Special:EmailUser/Sphilbrick if you want to do this, but note that your email addressed will be disclosed to the recipient and that it is better to use a talk page unless you're sharing confidential information. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 14:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Thank you much, as S. Philbrick just told me to click on talk. I went there and could not figure out what to do next.T.Heart (talk) 14:38, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

As I mentioned on your talk page I will try to look into it as soon as I can see the ticket. The ticket number should be on the auto generated response. If it isn't tell me the date and something in the subject line and I'll search for it. Unfortunately, it sounds like I'll have to research the copyright laws of Canada, so it won't be an immediate response. Regarding responding, once you get to a talk page, click on "new section" which will bring up a place to enter a subject in a box to enter your text.--S Philbrick (Talk) 14:42, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Template usage stats

Why does template pages doesn't show the count and list of pages on which its used. How to get such a list?-- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 07:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Use the "What links here" option on the Tools menu on the left of the template page. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

thanks-- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 19:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

How To Post Photographs To An Existing Wikipedia Page Without Getting Them Deleted By Wikipedia

Hi. I am assisting rock music drummer and sculptor Dennis Elliott and his wife Iona S. Elliott in updating his Wikipedia page which is located at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Elliott Specifically, they want to post two photographs taken by Iona of Dennis on his Wikipedia page (per Iona's 8/16/15 email formally permitting me to post on their behalf. See below):

Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 8:28 PM To: Quon, Ben (23) x4909 Subject: For Use On Dennis Elliott Wikipedia Page "I Iona Elliott formally allow 'Benito' to use these two photos for posting on Dennis Elliott's Wikipedia page. The photo of Dennis Elliott playing drums was taken approximately in 1977. Photo credit Iona S. Elliott 1977. Photo of Dennis Elliott with Bigleaf Maple Burl sculpture: Antares - Wall Sculpture, Apogee & Perigee by Iona S. Elliott - June 12, 1997. With Sincere Thanks, Iona S. Elliott>

The photo of Dennis on the drums can be found at the following link to Dennis' own website as the second photo from the top of the page: http://www.denniselliott.com/PDFs/aestethx.pdf The photo of Dennis with his sculptures can be found at the following link to the main page of Dennis' own website: www.denniselliott.com

In addition, Mr. Dennis Elliott himself also formally gave approval to his wife's photos being used for his Wikipedia page. See below:

Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:21 AM To: Quon, Ben (23) x4909 Subject: Re: Questions From Wikipedia Editor August 19, 2015 To the Wikipedia Editors Please let me know what the difficulty is in using photos taken by my wife who I married in 1972? She has taken all of the photos on my website including the photo we would like to use on my Wikipedia page as well as the photo of me playing with Foreigner. If you need me to sign or my wife to sign an affidavit, please forward the papers. With Sincere Thanks, Dennis Elliott

In addition, both Dennis and Iona would like to amend the information on Dennis' Wikipedia page per their email below:

Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 2:55 PM To: Quon, Ben (23) x4909 Subject: Please forward to Wikipedia Dear Wikipedia Editors, The following information is all true & correct which we would like to amend to Dennis Wikipedia info. Dennis Elliott played the drums with his family band at age five in shows around London. As a teenager, he joined The Tea Set with his older brother Raymond, who sang and played trumpet. After The Tea Set, he became a member of The Shevelles at age sixteen. At eighteen, he played in the band Ferris Wheel and their album of the same name. When he was 19, Dennis joined the jazz/rock band IF and recorded four LPs and toured Europe and the US with IF through the spring of 1972. Dennis later went on to record four singles with The Roy Young Band.

You also have my permission to use my photos which I sent to Ben yesterday.

With Sincere Thanks, Iona & Dennis Elliott Iona S. Elliott

Please provide me detailed, step by step instructions on how to correctly and legally post these two photographs and amended information onto Dennis Elliott's Wikipedia age without violating copyrights and Wikipedia policies. Thank you for considering my request.

Yours Cordially,

Ben Quon (aka "Benito" and "Jperverto") Jperverto (talk) 23:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Ben. I'm sorry you've found this frustrating; but copyright is a difficult area in Wikipedia. Because Wikipedia is intended to be free for anybody to use, permission to use a photo on Wikipedia is never sufficient. What is required is that the copyright owner specifically release the photo under a licence such as CC-BY-SA, which will allow anybody to use or modify it for any purpose, including commercial purposes, requiring only that they give proper attribution.

From your description, Iona Elliott owns the copyright in the pictures. If she is willing to license them in this way, then you and she should jointly follow the procedure in commons:Commons:Email templates, viz:

You upload the pictures to Wikimedia Commons, using the "Commons Wizard" from Upload Wizard; but adding the tag {{OTRS pending}} to the description. This gives notice that an email is being sent granting the appropriate licence, and will prevent the pictures being deleted while the email is received and processed.
She sends an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, using the language suggested on that page. This will make it explicit that she holds the copyright and is granting a suitable licence. She will need the URL's from the photos you have already uploaded to Wikimedia commons to specify which photos she is granting licences to.
Once they have been uploaded, you can then add them to the article, by [[File:exact name you used for the file upload to Commons, including any extension and getting the case right]].

If she is not willing to release the pictures on those terms, then I'm afraid they cannot be used in Wikipedia.

On the subject of the proposed text: please read about conflict of interest to understand why neither you nor Elliott should be editing the article directly, and [[WP:verifiability|}] and neutral point of view to understand why unreferenced material should not be added to the article, and his preferred text may not be appropriate. If there is material that you or he would like added to the article, you are very welcome to suggest it with citations to reliable sources independent of Elliott on the article's talk page Talk:Dennis Elliott. Any material which cannot be found in a reliable published source will not be added to the article; and only very limited information may be sourced to his own website. --ColinFine (talk) 00:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Not clear why not accepted and what the comments mean re referencing...

we are trying to get this entry approved and am at a loss about the comments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pamela_Ratner The referencing appears to be similar to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Payette and the content is very similar to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_Johnson

your guidance would be much appreciated. cheers, vWest — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vwest (talk • contribs) 00:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Vwest. On a quick look, not one single reference is from a source unconnected with Ratner: they are all from institutions that she is a member of. A Wikipedia article should be based almost 100% on reliable published sources unconnected with the subject - if such sources do not exist (the Wikipedia jargon is "not notable") then it is impossible to write a satisfactory article about the person. Note that "notable" does not mean famous, or important, or popular, or influential: it means only that several people unconnected with the subject have already found them sufficiently noteworthy to write about them.

Ratner may be notable (see WP:PROF for details); but because it lacks independent sources, the draft article does nothing to establish this.

One other thing: who is "we"? Please be aware that shared accounts are not permitted: if several of you are using an account you should each create a personal account and use only your own. Further, if "we" means UBC then you should read conflict of interest to understand why you are discouraged from editing an article on her at all. --ColinFine (talk) 00:53, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

warning about additional citations needed: updates made, now what?

Hi Cullen 328- I posted this question a couple weeks ago and you responded to help me understand the problem, regarding the wikipedia page for Geoffrey Marcy. Hopefully, I have added enough citations to all paragraphs to warrant removing the warning tag at the top of the page ("This biographical article needs additional citations for verification".)? Do you review it and remove the warning if it's sufficiently verified? If not, I'll continue to chase some things down.Bhovers (talk) 01:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Bhovers. I have removed the tag from the article since you have added plenty of references. Please do not think of maintenance tags as warnings. They are an important part of the process of improving articles. We do not issue "warnings" to articles. We give warnings to editors for various types of misconduct, which does not apply to this situation in any way. In the future, feel free to remove maintenance tags yourself whenever you are confident that the issue has been resolved. Any editor can do so. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:18, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for helping to point me in the right direction to improve the page with citations, Cullen 328!67.174.211.114 (talk) 02:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

big "Wikipedia help pages" nav box seems to be missing a certain helpful entry

Sorry if this is a silly question... My question /slash "comment", is at: User talk:Mike Schwartz#big "Wikipedia help pages" nav box seems to be missing a certain helpful entry

Thank you. --Mike Schwartz (talk) 20:16, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mike Schwartz, welcome to the Teahouse! I left a response at the section you linked to on your user talk page. Best, Mz7 (talk) 02:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

how to submit images

I have images that could be added to the page that lists wildflowers of the Canadian Rocky Mountains. I am new to this and somewhat confused by the Wiki environment. Saskatoon Bob (talk) 05:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey Saskatoon Bob. Two questions: 1) Are these images you took yourself, with your own camera? If so 2) are you willing to license them under a highly free copyright license that would allows anyone to take them and use them and modify them even for commercial purposes, with the only requirement being that they give you credit? If the answer is yes to both, that's great. Here's what you can do: go to the Wikimedia Commons (a sister site and free media repository owned by the same charitable foundation that owns Wikipedia; any images there can be used here and on all other Wikimedia projects); once there go to the upload wizard there. Follow the instructions. You will be given a choice of licenses along the way. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt reply. The answer is yes to both questions. I will follow up tomorrow with Wikimedia Commons. Saskatoon Bob (talk) 05:59, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Help Cleaning Up As If's Page

Hello. So, last night I created a page for !!!'s new album As If, so... can I get someone to help clean up and add a few extra things to the page?

Thanks, Beg

Beg217 (talk) 22:13, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Beg217. We're mainly here to answer questions, so I wouldn't count on anyone here cleaning the page up, much less adding content. The best place to try for that kind of help would be WikiProject Alternative music. RockMagnetist(talk) 23:59, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Beg217. I took a look at the article and I am wondering if it might be a little too soon to try and add it to Wikipedia. No reliable sources are provided to support any of the information in the article. Since the album's "expected" release date is October 16, 2015, it probably has not received the significant coverage it needs to establish its notability per Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Recordings. It's kind of hard to write articles about future album releases, especially for non-major bands, because so much is still unknown and reliable sources can be pretty hard to find. Therefore, it might be a good idea for you to ask for someone to userfy the article, so you can continue to look for sources for it and work on it as a draft because it might be easier to find the sources you need to establish the notability you need to show for a stand-alone article about the album once it has been officially released. You might also want to consider merging the article into the main !!! article because article content is only required to be verifiable, not notable.

Please try and understand that the fact that a band is considered notable enough for a stand-alone Wikipedia article does not automatically mean that this notability is transferred to all of their songs/albums to make them notable enough for their own stand-alone articles. Each song/album has to be notable in its own right. Also, we as editors cannot give an article the notability it needs by adding more content to the article. I am afraid that in its current state As If (album) is not notable enough for a stand-alone article per WP:NALBUM and is a likely candidate for deletion per WP:AfD. - Marchjuly (talk) 06:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Waaaaaaay too soon.--ukexpat (talk) 12:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Attaching category to template

There's a template Jainism topics. Now if one place this template on a page then the category Jainism should be added to page automatically. How can it be done? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 19:06, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

The way to achieve this technically is to add <includeonly>[[Category:Jainism]]</includeonly> to Template:Jainism. However, this is not a good idea. Many pages containing {{Jainism}} belong in one of the subcategories within Category:Jainism, such as Category:Jainism in Pakistan, so categories should be added to articles on a case-by-case basis in this situation. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 13:37, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

infobox addition automatic

Every biography page can have a infobox and vice versa. How can they both be linked so they get added automatically? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 19:06, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Capankajsmilyo: I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question. Infoboxes are added manually; there is no way to have them automatically added. Automatic programs like Lsjbot can create infoboxes based on various sources, but on the English Wikipedia there is no consensus among the community for bots to do this, nor for every page to have an infobox, so no scripts like this have been written for the English Wikipedia. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 13:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

While editing I came across many pages about royal personalities which lacked infoboxes. They all had the WP biography tag in the talk page though. The thing I was saying is that if there's a WP biography tag in the talk page, then definitely its about a person. If its about a person then some basic details ought to be there about the person like name dob father mother birthplace etc. These are repetitive tasks and can be done using a bot. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 14:03, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Further if a page has a infobox royalty or infobox player or so, its talk page should be tagged with WP biography with living property stated as yes or no.-- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 14:03, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

These tasks can technically be done with a bot, but there is not a good enough reason for them to be needed to be done with a bot. There has be a lot of long debate on infoboxes, and the conclusion is this: not every page needs an infobox. If the only basic notable information is name, date of birth, birthplace and parents, this can be included in a section of the article (e.g. "Early life"), if not in the lead itself (where dob and/or date of death almost always follows name). In a page that's only a couple of thousand bytes long, nothing needs summarising in an infobox; the entirety of the page already fits neatly on almost all browsers. You are free to create infoboxes manually, but there is no consensus for a bot to do them. (And this bot could potentially change hundreds of thousands of articles – even if there was consensus for it, do you have any idea how hard it is to program a bot with a negligible false positive rate for such a complicated task? Where does this information even come from – the page itself? Wikidata? Reliable databases? External sites? What happens if these pages contain contradictory information? If this bot is making hundreds of thousands of edits, how do you solve the problem of large strains on whatever server is being used? etc.) — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 14:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Article deleted!?

Hi there! I happened to visit a business in Cyprus and met the owners which were really cool people!

I thought of writing on wikipedia about them since they are the first to operate such a business in Cyprus for entertainment! I was informed that it was deleted for some reason! What is wrong with what i wrote? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClueJob_Escape_Rooms_in_Limassol,_Cyprus

What shall i change so that i can enlist it? Below is what i wrote!

ClueJob was the first real life escape room to operate in Limassol, Cyprus.

It started officially operating 1st of January 2015 and has been entertaining people since then.

There approach to the game has left hundreds of people stoked & enjoying the mystery of each of their current rooms: Crazy Granny, Trapped, Chained & Hostages.

Real life escape rooms started off in Japan when a bunch of people had the urge to test games that they were enjoying on pc's, smartphones in real life.

It was given a name Takagism due to 35 year old Takao Tako who firstly developed the REG (Real Escape Game)

It had a great success and people loved it.

Then it started spreading around the world since people embraced & enjoyed trying something different. Piatefixer (talk) 09:01, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Have you read the advice which you have been given on your user talk page? Is there something there which you didn't understand? --David Biddulph (talk) 10:04, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Piatefixer. The article that you created was almost entirely promotional. It read like an advertisement for the place, or at best a favorable traveler's review. It did not cite any sources beyond the web sit of the subject venue. It made value judgements about what was enjoyable and entertaining, without sourcing that judgement to an independent reliable source. It did not clearly indicate why this particular venue was important or significant. Wikipedia articles must be based largely on independent reliable sources, and all opinions and value judgements should be explicitly attributed to a named person or entity, not made in Wikipedia's voice. If you want to try again, i urge using the article wizard and the articles for creation process. But in any case you will need to find and cite independent secondary reliable sources to establish notability. DES ^(talk) 15:20, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Character list pages and actors

There's this one thing that Wikipedia does on character list pages that seems maddeningly redundant to me.

For example, I often edit the page Characters of Casualty. All through that article there are instances where when a character is named on a section that isn't that character's section, the actor for that character is put in brackets afterwards. Every time. For example:

"Upon her arrival, Lily is mentored by Martin Ashford (Patrick Robinson) and makes an impression on Ash; clinical lead, Zoe Hanna (Sunetra Sarker) & senior nurse, Charlie Fairhead (Derek Thompson). Ash becomes annoyed with Lily when she performs a life-threatening operation in the cubicles on a patient (George Sampson). She is warned and told she can't do that."

The characters mentioned have their own sections that can be referred to for the actor, on the same page even, so why is the actor's name included every time they're mentioned? It looked like a redundant thing to do to me, so I checked other pages like List of EastEnders characters (2013) and List of Coronation Street characters (2014), but they do the same thing. When that character has their own section or page with the relevant actor on it, is it really necessary to include the actor's name every.single.time the character is mentioned? Leemorrison (talk) 06:55, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Leemorrison, and welcome to the Teahouse. I personally would think you are correct, but I haven't done much if any editing on this sort of article, and I don't know what conventions may have grown up around it. I would suggest asking about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fictional characters (moderately active) or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television (quite active) or Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction (currently quite active). You might get a better response at one of those pages, and if a change is to be propose, any of those would be a much better place. DES ^(talk) 12:15, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I think you can unlink all but the first one. WP:OVERLINKING says "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead." CypherPunkyBrewster (talk) 14:48, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I think I have also seen it stated that in very long articles you can have the same link maybe once in each section. I'm defining section as a second-level heading if third or fourth levels are used a lot. I added that to the above guideline, but didn't include that much detail. Perhaps I should have discussed it but we will see if it stays.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:28, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

And they reverted it. But I'm sure I've seen it stated that this should probably be done.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I've never seen a policy or guideline suggest it, but I've seen it as common practice. It does seem quite redundant... but then again, I can see how readers would find it helpful. I think if links are being removed from the actor's name, you might as well remove the whole bracket along with it – if the character's name is still linked (and even if it isn't), it won't take most readers very long to find out who the actor is if they want to know, while I think it disrupts the flow of prose. Personally, I'm fairly lenient with repeated links in articles with large amounts of prose, but would only ever use one instance of "character (actor)" per character per page. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 15:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

How to get an article corrected. I am not experienced enough with Wiki to do this.

When reading the article: James H. Doyle, I noticed that the accompanying picture was that of Mr. Doyle's son, who by this time has acquired the same naval rank as his father, but with his own accomplishments that do deserve to be documented also. However, I am sure that others who also have known both of these men would like to see Mr. Doyle senior honored by his own picture on the article outlining his life's accomplishments. I do not have a picture to replace the current one, however, I am sure the US NAVY does have the correct picture that can be inserted here.67.166.72.224 (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for pointing out the error. I have removed the erroneous photo from the article. If anyone finds a photo of the correct admiral they can add it. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Editing contests

I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, and was wondering whether there are any editing contests (preferably novice-friendly ones) that would allow me to hone my editing skills. I saw a notification for the Stub Editing context, but it appears that I've missed most of it (considering that it ends 8/31).

Thanks in advance!

Sapientia42 (talk) 03:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I also agree and looking for such activity as a new user. Always afraid to take edit on fear the same will violate wiki policy. Ruproy1972 (talk) 07:33, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sapientia42 and Ruproy1972 welcome to the Teahouse. I'm really glad and I appreciate your concern to improve Wikipedia. I suggest you check out The Wikipedia Adventure as it's specifically created for new editors. It's not competition but rather a mini-game. Nevertheless, give it a try. And you could always ask for help here on Teahouse. Speaking of Wikipedia policies, don't be intimidated by the vast amount of policies in place. If you can adhere to core content policies and you will go a long way. Cheers! -- Chamith (talk) 09:18, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

P.S: I just noticed that Sapientia42 has already taken Wikipedia Adventure and I'm afraid I don't have any more suggestions regarding "novice-friendly contests". However, you might be able to improve your editing skills by participating in Today's articles for improvement and several other Wikiprojects. -- Chamith (talk) 09:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Chamith! I'll check out the Articles for Improvement section and see what I can help with there :) Sapientia42 (talk) 14:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sapientia42 I would recommend Suggestbot. Drop this code in to your Talk-Page and you'll get plenty of ideas for pages to edit:

I was a two tier Alpha tester for The Wikipedia Adventure and it was a lot of fun to participate in the improvent of that game. Checkingfax (talk) 07:04, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Checkingfax!

On a slightly unrelated note... how do you become an alpha/beta tester for new Wikipedia features? It's definitely something I would like to do if I get the opportunity. Sapientia42 (talk) 14:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Sapientia42:

I do not recall, however you can ask the developer (Ocaasi) what the alpha/beta tester candidate seeking process was.

As an aside, it is my recollection that Ocaasi wrote a paltry grant proposal to the Wikimedia Foundation to offset a portion of the time toward building the Wikipedia Adventure. I'm sure Ocaasi spent a lot of time and had fun building it and Ocaasi continues to support it (check the edit history and talk page). Checkingfax (talk) 17:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit on Vaigai Express

Hi, please check edit at the page Vaigai Express. The user is trying to add a new section, although notable news with reliable published sources, but possibly with conflict of interest. So, I have added a part of the content into "Specialty of the Train" section with reference. But the user is adding the same info again. I have also put a conversation on the talk page of user after editing. I don't want to get into the edit war. Suggestions...Thanks Peppy Paneer (talk) 06:56, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Peppy Paneer. The first place and always the best place to discuss disputes about the content of an article is the talk page for that article. I am surprised to see no discussion whatsoever at Talk:Vaigai Express. I suggest that you explain your view of things there, and ping the three or four most active editors of the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:20, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

@Cullen328: My bad :/ (yes this is not the right place to bring this up)...will use article's talk page.

Thank you Peppy Paneer (talk) 09:04, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Anyone is welcome to ask any good faith question at the Teahouse, Peppy Paneer. I am happy to point you in the right direction. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328, the user realized the edits I did on Vaigai Express. And undid his/her own revisions, plus User:Philg88 did several edits after that. So, here I didn't see a need to bring it up on article's talk page. And

Thank you for letting me know the right procedure in these cases. It will be helpful in future. Cheers :) Peppy Paneer (talk) 18:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Founder Error in Wikipedia Summary in Google Search

When I Google "Mandarin Restaurant" the summary box on the right side of the page says that the founder is "Cecilia Chiang", but when you click on to the Wikipedia page for Mandarin Restaurant, the founders are listed as: James Chiu, George Chiu, Diana Chiu and K.C. Chang (This is correct). How do we fix the Google summary? 99.227.180.6 (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

It's Google's problem, not ours. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:29, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

If you perform the search again on Google, you should see a small "feedback" link below the information box. You can click this to report errors to Google. As Dodger67 says, it's Google's problem, and not something we can control. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:32, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse. We don't, or more eactly we can't. Here is our standard reply to such questions:

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong.

I hope that helps a bit. DES ^(talk) 22:33, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

The core problem is that there are many entities throughout the English speaking world called the "Mandarin Restaurant". My Google search shows about half a dozen within an hour's drive of where I live. Our Wikipedia article Mandarin Restaurant is about a Canadian chain of all-you-can-eat buffets. Cecilia Chiang founded a different "Mandarin Restaurant" in San Francisco in 1960. That restaurant (now closed) was a pioneer of Northern Chinese cuisine in the western hemisphere, as opposed to Americanized Cantonese food.

It seems that Google's algorithm is not smart enough to detect that these are two entirely different restaurants, both discussed here on Wikipedia, and is blending information about both as if they were the same. This is a Google problem, and there is nothing as Wikipedia editors that we can do about it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I have been trying to get Google to fix this, but they bounced me back to Wikipedia, claiming this is a Wiki issue. But what you explained makes sense. I will follow up with Google.

Thank you 99.227.180.6 (talk) 18:50, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Statues?

How can I add a section of the statues of a famous person and add pictures of the statues? Do you think it is worth a separate section about the statues that was bult of a partucular person? Cornelisdewet (talk) 19:53, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Cornelisdewet, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you yourself have taken pictures of such statues, you could upload them to Wikipedia:Wikimedia Commons under a free license. See the commons upload wizard. Otherwise you would need to find images already under a free licenses. Fair use of copyrighted images of existing statues would not be possible under WP:NFCC because they could be replaced by free content. Whether such images would be appropriate in a given article would be a case-by-case judgement call, to be discussed on the article talk page. DES ^(talk) 20:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry to make this more complicated but I think an issue was missed. I agree to the extent that the photograph is replaceable and so properly wouldn't qualify under fair use. But there is a second copyright issue. A statue is not replaceable, so it might be subject to a claim of fair use, but its copyright must also be accounted for. That is, if the statue itself is not in the public domain ("PD") or compatibly freely-licensed (and the statue is located in a country that does not recognize freedom of panorama; the U.S. does not), then taking a picture of it would still be subject to the copyright of the sculptor/person who commissioned the work. (To make this more clear, if person "A" takes a picture of Sculpture "B", there are two nested copyright claims involved: i) the copyright attendant on the statue, and ii) the copyright of the photographer in their photograph of the statue.

So, if you don't own the copyright to the photograph or can't find one that is freely-licensed (nor PD), you can't use any image of the statue at all. Just stop there. However, if the copyright of the photograph is not an issue, but the statue is not freely-licensed (nor PD), then its use would would still need to meet Wikipedia's fair use criteria. A fair use claim for a statue would generally not be acceptable unless it was for use in an article about the statue itself, or was at least the subject of critical commentary in any other use. In other words, use just for the purpose of being a depiction of an article's subject would not qualify.

Boiling this down to a pragmatic level, you can probably skip all of the above if you: tell us the provenance of the photograph; tell us what statue it is exactly (where, what year, name of sculptor); and whether the statue itself will be written about in the article. We can probably then tell you specifics of whether it can be used and what you need to do to upload and use it successfully. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Adding a cover endorsement or "book blurb" as a citation?

The subject of my sandbox article has written several books that have endorsements from other authors, some well known. May I use these endorsements as statements and citations in the article and if so, how would I refer to them? As citations back to my subject's books? C S Chaffee (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey C S Chaffee. There has been some discussion of this in the past. Please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 131#Promotional quotes for Books. The essence is that these should generally not be used. I agree with the sentiment there but the specifics – case-by-case treatment – is always important. I can imagine some scenarios where we might properly vary this. For example, if the blurb contained a statement of fact or historical context from a reliable author that might be important to the article, and was not just sought to be used as "X author said Y about the book". Unless something like that applies, I think you should avoid them. Nevertheless, if you were to cite them, then yes, they would refer back to the book, but you would provide the details on the person writing, where it appeared in the book and so forth so that it was clear it was separate from the book's main content and was not by its author. It might not be a prefect fit but I think Template:Cite book#different authors might give you an idea of how it should appear. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:37, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, User:Fuhghettaboutit . That is a reasonable conclusion and a helpful one.C S Chaffee (talk) 20:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Glad to help.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

To give a concrete example of where a promotional quote on a cover blurb would be a legitimate source, Larry Niven has in the past specifically credited his move from being an obscure niche author to one of the leading names in SF, to Robert Heinlein's "The best novel about first contact with an alien civilization which I have ever read" cover blurb on The Mote in God's Eye. In that case, if the Wikipedia article chose to discuss this, citing the front cover of the book would be legitimate to indicate to readers where the original quote could be found. ‑ iridescent 23:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I can't add the B-Side Information of a single to show.

Im new to wikipedia and i'm a ABBA-Fanatic and i love Frida Lyngstad, There wasn't much "Singles" pages for Frida's page so I've added more to it. I tried editing the B-side onto the single info bit but it doesn't seem to be showing. Can you explain to me why? DalexB (talk) 17:23, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, DalexB. I'm guessing that the specific problem you are asking about is that you are trying to add fields to an infobox that aren't defined. Each infobox (such as {{infobox single}} has a specific list of fields defined, and you can use only those.

However, please read the message that McGeddon has put on your user talk page: most singles do not merit an article in Wikipedia (because there hasn't been sufficient material published about them) and writing such articles is a waste of both your time and of those who come and delete them again. If you are contemplating creating a new article, please read your first article and WP:42, and then use the article wizard to create it. --ColinFine (talk) 00:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Request for a new article

How can we request an article be created? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 16:56, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Capankajsmilyo. You can request an article at requested articles. However, there is a long queue, and Wikipedia editors are volunteers, so there is no guarantee that anybody will choose to take up your request. You can make it more attractive to an editor by finding and citing several independent reliable sources which have been written about the subject.

I am a little concerned about your word 'we'. I may be reading too much into this, but often when people posting here say "we" they are wanting an article about their company, their organisation, or their band. If that is the case, please be aware that Wikipedia only accepts articles about subjects which are notable (which means that they have been written about by people unconnected with the subject) and does not allow any kind of promotion (whether commercial or not). --ColinFine (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Question about correct conduct for posting and conflict and whether my behavior was worthy of a more experienced editor threatening to have me blocked from WP.

So the reason I'm posting here and not at the dispute resolution noticeboard. Is I'm not very familiar with wikipedia and am unsure if what I'm trying to do is wrong/against WP policy. However I have continuously attempted to make an edit to the page to bring it to what a more accurate NPOV article. Including adding a source for the edit once challenged. However another editer continues to revert my edits, and claim's his reasons are lack of consensus, I am misinterpreting and therefore misrepresenting those sources, disruptive editing (and has now threatened me with having me blocked (This was on my talk page).

Once he first brought his thoughts I tried reasoning with him on the talk page, all he would say to my posts was his version was a fact (no source given). I asked him to explain as I understand wikipedia policy to be "Once an editor has provided any source that he or she believes, in good faith, to be sufficient, then any editor who later removes the material has an obligation to articulate specific problems that would justify its exclusion from Wikipedia (e.g., undue emphasis on a minor point, unencyclopedic content, etc.)." No explanation has been given on why my source is incorrect beyond just saying I misinterpreting and therefore misrepresent it.

I even asked for a 3rd opinion to be added however instead of the 3rd opinion addressing the issue under dispute (Who do the members of "Chabad" accept as their current leader today). He brought up a point which I addressed a solution for to which the editor which continues to hound me just writes "In simple words, you do not accept the 3rd opinion, and decided to wear us down with another lengthy post. " and accused me of WP:TE.

I then responded (did not rerevert the edits he kept reverting) and waited 4 days for a response. With zero responses I once again added the edits and asked any discussion to be brought to the talk page so consensus can be reached and once again that editor reverted it and then said "if you make any more such edits, I will ask to have you blocked" If someone could review whats going on and advise me if
A. I've been going about this wrong, what would be the proper procedure originally and from here on?
B. Is my source bad? If yes why?
C. What would be the best way to resolve this situation?
D. If this editor is making statements that you feel are untrue and unsubstantiated claims how do I deal with this if he just keeps threatening me, saying my points invalid (with no explanation or referential source) and threatening to have me blocked?

I apologize about the lengthy request but felt if I needed to fully explain the situation. I know WP:TLDR however the article edit is short, its just my explanations for those edits that may get wordy/long.

Thanks in advance, and I'm looking forward to advice on how I should proceed. Howdy770 (talk) 00:25, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Howdy770. As you know, Chabad leader Menachem Mendel Schneerson died in 1994, 21 years ago. You propose to state, in Wikipedia's voice, that "The current state of affairs lies in the leadership remaining under Rabbi Schneerson's command". You propose to add other similarly non-neutral statements to the article as well. I am well aware that Schneerson is still revered by his followers and that some of them consider him a messianic figure. But I feel confident in saying that there is no way that a lasting consensus will ever be developed to say the sort of things in Wikipedia's voice that you propose to add to the article. Schneerson is dead. He is the leader of nothing and incapable of issuing commands. Continuing to advocate for this type of non-neutral content may very well be considered disruptive and accordingly, I encourage you to reconsider this approach to Wilkipedia articles about Chabad. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:42, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, it would be acceptable to say that the organization still considers him to be its leader; it would however be unacceptable to claim that a dead person is the leader, to imply that he has any kind of active role. It would also be unacceptable to leave the impression that every individual in the organization considers him to be its leader. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 01:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Cullen328: I don’t think this editor’s overarching question has quite been answered: If someone repeatedly reverts and makes accusations and threats, and makes no attempt to explain the problem or truly collaborate (or at least it feels like it), what is one to do? It’s a very frustrating position to be in. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 06:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

If what you said was true, IP editor, then that might be a problem. But the facts are clear: the editor in question, Debresser, has made nine comments at Talk:Chabad about this specific matter, explaining his position. To date, no other editor has agreed with what I consider to be the misguided proposed edits by Howdy770. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:11, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

While I actually agree with Cullen that we cannot state he is alive or imply that in anyway, I do want to note we are not referring to his page about his life, but the groups page and referring to the leadership as a position. Now I dont know that it is so farfetched that, simply because the group considers him their leader, that would make him the leader. While, yes no new directives are being issued, they study his doctrines, live by his principles, his examples, and make decisions today as they feel he would based on what he had said/done. The very fact that no one has stepped up to take over (as was the case in every previous case of their rebbe/leader dying) just goes to show how they still view and hold him as their leader. I dont see how this is anything but neutral. Nobody has more of a right to call someone a leader then the followers themselves. If you think, they think otherwise, please show me where any respected, acknowledged member of the "Chabad" group ever made such a public statement?

While this is definitely not a typical situation, to say anything besides the actual factual truth of the matter would just be wrong. Also I'm not even delving into the hot mess of the Chabad divide over messianism. That is not relevant to who leads them as across the debate on that issue there is a consensus of continuing to revere him as their leader. To this day they still write letters to him, often sent to the gravesite or placed in a "sefer" (holy book) of letters previously answered by him.

Finally regarding the other editor. I dont know if just because he has responded to my posts, means he has given the proper etiquette in at least answering properly. Besides just saying im wrong he brings nothing to show otherwise, I just feel I worked hard at reaching what I feel is a neutral edit with sources and he deletes it without showing why my sources are incorrect or bringing his own to show otherwise. Just saying "There is no leader of Chabad at present. That is a fact." does not mean it's true. It just feels wrong that he just writes basicly, "im right, your wrong, im deleting your post and if you don't stop I'll get you blocked".

Howdy770 (talk) 01:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

The way I see it:

The organization still views him as a leader: True.
He is still their leader: False.

It’s a subtle distinction, perhaps, but an important one. We can report on stated beliefs and opinions, but we can’t report on them as facts. I think that’s what the other editor considered an NPOV issue. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:21, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Let me just restate the questions I listed above:

A. If I've been going about this wrong, what would be the proper procedure originally and from here on?

B. Is my source bad? If yes why?

C. What would be the best way to resolve this situation?

D. If this editor is making statements that you feel are untrue and unsubstantiated claims how do I deal with this if he just keeps threatening me, saying my points invalid (with no explanation or referential source) and threatening to have me blocked?

Howdy770 (talk) 01:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I’ll let someone more knowledgeable answer most of these, but to question D for future reference: So long as you abide by things like WP:BRD, I think it’s generally safe to ignore such bluster; an attempt to have you blocked on such shaky grounds would likely WP:BOOMERANG back on him. In this particular case, however, you have multiple editors disagreeing with your absolute position, and ignoring such counsel may very well result in a block. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:31, 26 August 2015 (UTC)