Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 387

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 380

←

Archive 385

Adminship

Can some1 plz tell me the exact procedure for applying for adminship? I mean how is it done, what kind of article does one need to start to get this status? Mendezes Cousins (talk) 18:22, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Mendezes Cousins, and welcome to the Teahouse. Take a look at Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship and Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates and the various pages linked from those two. No particular kind of article must be started, but it is very rare for anyone to be approved with less than a full year's experience, and or less than several thousand edits covering a variety of areas on Wikipedia. Look at some recent RfA pages to see what kinds of questions are asked of and about candidates. DES ^(talk) 20:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh thanking you! I now see the business. But I wasn't thinking of it just at this precise moment, I wanted to know what to do. So long as everyone knows it is my long-term ambition! Cheers. Mendezes Cousins (talk) 21:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome, Mendezes Cousins. But honestly, making a big point of wanting to be an admin long before you are ready for the position will only hurt your chances when you might be ready. Some people might oppose on that ground alone "So&so wants it too much, s/he must be on a power-trip or hat collecting". Just try to be a good editor and see hoe you feel in 6 months to a year. DES ^(talk) 02:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Let's hope on the day then that this gets buried! I'll take it off my user page. Mendezes Cousins (talk) 05:46, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Trying to cover things up probably won't help either! Remember that everything is contained in page histories. It's best to do as DES suggests and just continue to make valuable contributions to the building of Wikipedia. Adminship may follow with time, but it should follow as part of your natural development as an editor (I say this as a non-admin!). Cordless Larry (talk) 08:30, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

thanks , I wanted to ask the same question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aryan hindustan (talk • contribs) 08:11, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

but can some one tell me how can I apply for one ? -- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 08:22, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

User:Aryan hindustan, the process is explained at Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

First Article: Request for Review and Comments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EggsInMyPockets/Evoland_2

Hello, I have just made an article on my username for a game called Evoland 2. I have pretty much copied and pasted the original source code from the first wiki article called Evoland, and I've changed stuff around so it works with the sequel, Evoland 2. I'm wondering if this article is good enough to publish. I'm not really sure how to get good references on something like a game, since the game itself is the reference. This is my first time asking a question and if I don't receive a notification to a reply on here for some reason, please don't hesitate to post something on my talk page so I can now someone has answered me. Thanks. EggsInMyPockets (talk) 08:53, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, EggsInMyPockets. You say "I'm not really sure how to get good references on something like a game, since the game itself is the reference". I'm afraid that that is a classic definition of "not notable". Until several people with no connection with a subject have thought it worth publishing substantial material about that subject, then Wikipedia is not interested in it, and will not accept an article. (Looking at Evoland, two thirds of the references there are of no value for establishing notability, as they are mere mentions in catalogues, or not independent, or blogts; but the articles from PCGamer and the like are probably enough to do so). --ColinFine (talk) 10:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, EggsInMyPockets, and welcome to the teahouse. In general I agree with ColinFine's commetns just above. But looking at User:EggsInMyPockets/Evoland 2 you have cited several independent reviews. If you expand the receptuion section with quotes from some of those reviews, and lose the blog citation, I think this might actually be notable. In general one uses reviews and similar writing about a game as sources for such an article, just as one uses reviews and other critical comments to source an article about a book or a film or any other creative work. If there are no such independent reviews or commentary published in reliable sources then Wikipedia shouldn't have an article about the work. By the way, please use a wiki-link like User:EggsInMyPockets/Evoland 2 to link to a page here on Wikipedia, not a URL. I hope this helps. DES ^(talk) 15:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

How can i confirm about Administration rights of a user ?

How can i confirm about Administration rights of a user ? HIAS (talk) 14:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Hitch Hicking Across Sahara, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you mean that you want to confirm that a given user is an administrator, go to that user's user page or user talk page and choose the User Groups link under the User menu. That will show the groups (rights) that apply to that user, and it will show "Administrator" after the user's username if the user is an admin. If you mean something else, please explain in more detail. DES ^(talk) 15:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi DES. Could you clarify where the user menu is, as I've just tried to follow those steps and couldn't find it. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:35, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Cordless Larry On my setup it is to the right of the page menu, on the row that starts "User page | Talk | View history" and below the row of menus with "talk|Sandbox|Preferences..." It only appears on a user or user talk page. The same info is available via Special:ListGroupRights but it is more awkward to find a particular user. @Hitch Hicking Across Sahara:. Does that help you find it? DES ^(talk) 15:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

For example my group memberships can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ListUsers?limit=1&username=DESiegel DES ^(talk) 15:53, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

That link works for me, and I've used that page before, but I don't see the user menu on user pages. Is it possible it only appears if you're an admin? Cordless Larry (talk) 15:55, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cordless Larry. DESiegel has those option because he has altered his preferences to allow it. You can do so by going to the gadgets section of your preferences and scrolling down to the Appearance header, then ticking the box beside the text that says "Add Page and User dropdown menus to the toolbar with links to common tasks, analytic tools and logs." (It should be the 7th option on the list). G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 16:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)You are correct, Cordless Larry that menu doesn't appear on this alternate account. However from a user or user talk page you can follow the user contributions link in the left sidebar (on the default skin) and from there click the user rights link (third from the left after <User name> and Subpages on the row near the bottom, just above the row that starts with "Privacy policy | About Wikipedia | Disclaimers...". You can also get the info from http://en.wikichecker.com/user/?t=DESiegel (which can be gotten to via the Page Information link from a user page. I hope that helps. DES-Public (talk) 16:17, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, G S Palmer and DES. I knew about those alternative ways to get to the page, but was mystified by this missing menu. Now I've learned about a feature that seems like it might be helpful in other ways too. Sorry to Hitch Hicking Across Sahara for hijacking this thread! Cordless Larry (talk) 16:44, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Or, which may be easier then messing about navigating submenus, go to Special:ListUsers and type the first few characters of the user's name. ‑ iridescent 16:21, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Is there limits?

Is there any limits here?151.225.135.69 (talk) 06:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

hi @151.225.135.69 and 151.225.135.69: , what do you mean by "limits" ? I know that you are a great editor here , what about creating a account here .
-- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 08:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello 135.69, and welcome to the Teahouse.. There are various limits here, see What wikipedia is not for some of them. What sort of limits are you thinking of? DES ^(talk) 15:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

There is also Wikipedia:Five pillars, which summarises the core principles of Wikipedia. Since you have been blocked for two weeks, 151.225.135.69, you might also want to read and reflect on Wikipedia:Vandalism. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:15, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

i want to create a page with my name sukhraj gakhal how can i do that ?

i want to create a page with my name sukhraj gakhal how can i do that ?Sukhraj gakhal (talk) 21:56, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

@Sukhraj gakhal: Please don't. You have a conflict of interest and are unlikely to be able to edit with the appropriate neutral point of view towards the subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:17, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

If you think you meet the criteria for a stand alone article you can make a request at request an article page to suggest that a third party create the article. Such a request is more likely to be acted upon if you provide information about the reliably published sources that have written about you.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

How do you know if a photo is available for public use?

Why is it Wikipedia refuses to use any picture available elsewhere on the internet?BerryRotors (talk) 21:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

@BerryRotors: We refuse to use them because 1) we follow copyright laws and 2) we wish to create a free encyclopedia that anyone can use and redistribute. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:19, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Also you should be aware that most of what people have put up on the internet, they have NOT made "available" for anything other than viewing on their webpage. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

First edit : Kindly review the edit I intend to make to an already existing page

I am student editor. I am required to make an edit to the polymorphism (computer science) page and add details about unbounded polymorphism vs subtyping. I have added content related to this in my sandbox user:valharmorgulis/sandbox. Can you kindly review it and give suggestions.

--Valharmorgulis (talk) 22:55, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Valharmorgulis. Your draft content is missing one of the most important things: References to the reliable sources that can be used to verify your statements. This is essential. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:03, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply Jim. I totally forgot to add citations and references. I will add them. Can you give suggestions on the layout and content and the wording of the edit ?Valharmorgulis (talk) 23:10, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Since I am not a skilled computer programmer, I will leave it those more qualified than I to comment on the content. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:22, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

valharmorgulis, as an essay the section is not bad, in my view (And I have some knowledge of OOP). As a Wikipedia article (or part of one) there are several points that need attention:

"Ruby" shold be properly wiki-linked;
There should be a parallel example for subtyping, if possible;
The pros & cons discussion in the "Unbounded polymorphism vs subtyping" section is WP:OR and thus not acceptable unless sit can be cited to a source that makes that same comparison.

I hope this is helpful. DES ^(talk) 04:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Weird citation failure

I've been spending time helping get new article drafts ready to pass AfC review. A few times now, I have come across citations like the "Pritchard (2007), p. 326" cite in Draft:Persian Chess, where the surname and year are a link, but the link just goes to the draft itself. Looking in the edit window shows that a template is being used, in this case {{sfnp|Pritchard|2007|p=326|ps=}} — where are novice editors finding this template, and why is it consistently yielding a broken result from different users? I'd like to know so that I can advise the novice editors I work with either to avoid the template entirely, or how to use it correctly. —GrammarFascist (talk) 02:35, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, GrammarFascist. This template is a way to do Parenthetical, sometimes known as Harvard-style, referencing. See the documentation at Template:Sfnp for full details. The intent is that the {{reflist}} will be in a Notes section, and that in a References of Bibliography section full citatiosn will appear. This is particularly useful when multiple different pages from a given source are used in different citations. It avoids repeating the full bibliographic details for each citation. To make it work the separate list of full references must be present, and each must have the proper anchor, If using the Cite xxx templates, the parameter |ref=harv must be set. {{citation}} provides the anchors automatically. Other methods must have the anchor added manually. The link is to the expected anchor, but a link to a missing anchor is simply a link to the page, which is what I suppose you are seeing. It indicates that the full citations are not present, or do not include the proper anchors. Note that exact spelling of author names, and exact matching of dates (normally years) is needed for this to work correctly. That is how the proper full cite is matched with the shortened note. I have no idea where people are picking up on this, but it is mentioned in some of our help pages, I believe. It is a bit more complex to write this stykle, but some editors think it simplifies the resulting article, and it does reduce the clutter in the body text, much as list-defiend refs does. DES ^(talk) 02:57, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed explanation, DES! The big problem with the way I've been seeing novice editors use that template is that they put in only the author's last name, the publication year and the page number(s)... and then don't fill in the rest of the reference. This makes it highly challenging — when it's not impossible — to find the author's full name, the book title and the rest of the info needed for a proper citation. I was hoping to figure out where newbies were coming across the template so that clearer instructions for how to use it could be put in. I guess I'll keep an eye out, and maybe try asking some of the new folks if they're talkative. Thanks again. —GrammarFascist (talk) 07:41, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Is Proselytizing Allowed

I saw on someone's talk page that the user was accused of proselytizing and that the user requested that he be shown in an article how it is not allowed. I don't know if he got his answer or not. I looked in his User:page history and saw what was deleted from his page. It was stuff about what he believes and how to join his faith. Is that considered proselytizing? If so is it allowed? If it isn't, was what he was doing allowed? By the way the user in question here is User:Punk4orchrist. Christian Sirolli (talk) 10:45, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Proselytizing is simply a type of promotion or advertising. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:07, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Note: poster is (now blocked) sock of the account they are asking about. Nthep (talk) 11:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Problem linking between languages

Hello, I read the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outrigger and realized there's no link to Spanish. It turns out that this is the equivalent article in Spanish: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batanga So far so good, I tried "Edit links" in Outrigger and was sent to wikidata.org, specifically https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2562991#sitelinks-wikipedia Here I tried to add a new entry: es Batanga but Wikidata says: The link eswiki:Batanga is already used by item Batanga (Q8244714). You may remove it from Batanga (Q8244714) if it does not belong there or merge the items if they are about the exact same topic. At this point I don't know what do to. The item Batanga exists in English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batanga but it's not the equivalent! Maybe this is the cause of the error? As I said, I want to link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outrigger to https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batanga BTW, I was unable to link the Català article that's named Batanga, to. Thanks. 200.28.199.120 (talk) 03:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Greetings, 200.28.199.120. I've merged the Wikidata batanga page into their outrigger page. The Spanish and Catalan links are now appearing in the English article. Deor (talk) 11:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

new article feedback

Hi, I tried creating my first article and would like your feedback before submitting it for review? It's User:Cityside189/Petunia integrifolia. Before you read it, I need to explain that I was editing another petunia article, Petunia × atkinsiana, that had a species of petunia as a "red link". So I used the formatting and wiki-coding from a similar article (Petunia axillaris) to base my article on. I think I used good citations (perhaps citation overkill?) OK... please take out your red pens and let me have it... (if you have the time) --Cityside (let's talk! - contribs) 00:00, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Cityside. The opening sentence is a bit informal, look at some other flower species articles for comparison. Otherwise, not bad for a start, IMO. An infobox and an image or two would be wanted eventually, and more content if available. DES ^(talk) 01:22, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

You should see the work that user:Fuhghettaboutit did with the article! Amazing results. Thanks for the great feedback and do you think it's nearing ready to ask for a formal review? I wouldn't mind a few more tweaks if you think it would improve it even a little... --Cityside (let's talk! - contribs) 02:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

No need to formally submit it, I think it's ready and I will move it to mainspace now.--ukexpat (talk) 13:09, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Now at Petunia integrifolia.--ukexpat (talk) 13:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

How to add citations?

If suppose I have to create a new article so what are the steps I need to take?Bbmeso (talk) 14:29, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Please take a look at referencing for beginners.--ukexpat (talk) 14:38, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Action for vandalism

Faridabad was recently vandalised by 182.68.112.94. What can be done in this case? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 15:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Capankajsmilyo, and welcome to the Teahouse. If an article is vandalized, the first thing to do would be to revert the vandalism and warn the user not to vandalize the article again. If you have Twinkle, this can be done with a single click, but if you don't, you can save a dummy edit to the version of the article prior to when the vandalism took place, which will essentially revert all edits that have been done since then. If the vandalism continues, the user can be reported to WP:AIV, where they will either be blocked or the page will be protected. However, this doesn't look like a clear case of vandalism to me, so you should hesitate to label it as such. G S Palmer^alt (main • talk) 16:01, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Auto Archive

Should the archive bot not be added to talk pages by default? Its really annoying to see huge length of ancient comments on various talk pages.
Why not include talk header by default as well? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:46, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Spain Roller Hockey‏

Hello, in this article of the under 17 championship, Spain win 16 golds, not 15. Thank you. Good Bye

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERH_European_Roller_Hockey_Juvenile_Championship

91.116.168.63 (talk) 17:55, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Request for Reveiw and Feedback

Hello, I have a drafted version of a page, it has been declined twice due to sounding too much like "advertising." I understand what made it sound like advertising but am unsure where to go from here as I have already made many edits to the phrasing. Some of the phrases come directly from the sources I am using. Any help or editing suggestions are greatly appreciated! Watches1521 (talk) 18:36, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Watches1521 - It does help if you tell us which article you are talking about - is it Draft:Govberg Jewelers ? - Arjayay (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

My apologies Arjayay! I wasn't sure how to link you to it. Yes, it is the Govberg Jewelers draft. Thank you Watches1521 (talk) 18:41, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

adding a name to a list

Hello-- How do I add an artist to the list of Fantasy Artists?? A very important artist has been left off the list!187.250.221.140 (talk) 18:45, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Could you provide us with a link to the list that you want to add the name to? There's no article called List of fantasy artists, so it is difficult to know which one you are referring to. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:51, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

OK, so apparently it's the List of science fiction and fantasy artists. To add a name, you just need to go to that page and click edit, and then type the name into the place where it fits alphabetically. Note, however, that to be included on Wikipedia, an author needs to meet certain guidelines about notability, outlined at WP:AUTHOR. The way to demonstrate this is to include a source demonstrating that the author concerned is regarded as an important figure. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you-- man, this page is really difficult to navigate! :)Crankymezzo (talk) 19:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

I added a wikilink.CV9933 (talk) 20:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

All caps

Previously took this to Wikipedia:Editor assistance, but has now been archived after 2 weeks without a response, quite rightly given that it appeared unlikely to have ever been picked up.

But per my question [1] was just after a bit of clarity on the WP:ALLCAPS manual of style. The arguments for and against have been made on the article's talk page Talk:New South Wales XPLORER and I believe it is a fairly straight forward yes or no question, so was hoping for some guidance here or advice if there is a more appropriate forum for this? Turingway (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

It seems to me that Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks applies, specifically: "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official", as long as this is a style already in widespread use, rather than inventing a new one:

avoid: TIME, KISS, ASUS

instead, use: Time, Kiss, Asus

I've read the talk page in question, and while I agree that the Vodafone and Qantas examples that were given aren't very precise parallels, I see no distinction between ASUS (Asus) and XPLORER (Xplorer). --Ashenai (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Turingway, and welcome to the Teahouse. There were several possible places to go. You could have tried Third Opinion, or the dispute resolution noticeboard or even the help desk. Your could have started an RfC right on the article talk page. But this was a fine choice. I have posted to Talk:New South Wales XPLORER with my views, and I hope the situation will be settled there promptly. (It seems to me that there are two separate but related issues, title format and format in body text. Outside sources should matter for the title format only.) I hope that Ashenai chooses to post there also. DES ^(talk) 21:37, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Length of review process

I submitted a draft that has been awaiting review for over a week: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:James_A._Russell

Is there an average wait time for the review process? ThanksBleuleuleu (talk) 22:24, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello Bleuleuleu, and welcome to the Teahouse. Note that at the top of the "Review waiting" box it says: "This may take a week or more. The Articles for creation process is slightly backlogged. Please be patient. There are 595 submissions waiting for review. (bold added). Note also that the reviewers are all unpaid volunteers, and that they may select drafts for review in any order they please, there is no rule that they take from the longest waiting drafts. Some reviewers only review subjects they are familiar with, for example. Some take more time on each review than others do. So it is really hard to predict how long you might need to wait. I'm sorry if you find this frustrating. DES ^(talk) 22:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Bleuleuleu, I just looked at Draft:James A. Russell and I can tell you that if I were to formally review it, I would reject it. Of the four inline cited sources, the first isn't a source at all, it is a link to a search which might change at any moment. From that the user would need to count and rank to verify the claim that Russell is 6th in citations. That is Original Research and not acceptable. You would need an actual source who has done this analysis and published a result to say that Russell was 6th (or whatever) as of some given moment. In any case such a ranking is of only limited use in establishing notability. The 2nd and 3rd cites are to lists where Russell has a one line entry. This is of no value at all, and might as well be omitted. The forth is again a search, which displays a list of works by Russell. None of these links to an independent reliable source that writes about Russell in some detail, say several paragraphs or more. Get three or four good sources that do so, and things would probably look good, depending on the exact sources. While web searches can be great ways to find sources, a search link should almost never be itself cited, except maybe in an article about web searching, or where the search itself is discussed. So now you have a chance to improve the draft by finding and citing additiuonal sources, without needing to start your wait for a formal review over. DES ^(talk) 22:57, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your insight @ DES Bleuleuleu (talk) 01:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Declined due to lack of notability

Hi, this entry was recently rejected due to "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia."

The reviewer also left this comment: "Notability, if it exists, hinges entirely on primary sources"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:DJ_I-Dee

My question is, which particular primary sources could be removed in order to rework the entry to better meet the secondary source standard? Is there anything else concerning that could prevent it from getting rejected again? Thanks. Isaacdelima (talk) 01:55, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Isaacdelima It isn't so much a matter of removing primary sources, although unreliable sources should generally be removed; it is a matter of adding good secondary sources, if they exist. If you have three or four solid, reliable, independent secondary sources, then you are probably in much better shape. Once you have those, use primary sources only to verify details that don't appear in the secondary sources, and lose any primary sources that aren't needed because secondary sources cover the same facts. The other issue is that this looks like an autobiography. Those always get extra scrutiny, and in borderline cases tend to get less benefit of any doubts. DES ^(talk) 04:54, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

can you take a look at my reference page? looks weird. thank you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Khaki_Jones Asdiprizio (talk) 18:10, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Asdiprizio, and welcome to the Teahouse. I see that in the meantime, you have improved how the references look. However, there is more you can do to fix the references. At the moment, you use bare URLs inside <ref> </ref> tags, and then use citation templates to give full details of each reference in a separate references section. Instead, try putting the citation templates inside the tags (e.g. <ref>{{cite news...}}</ref>) as I have done with the first reference with this edit. Cordless Larry (talk) 04:56, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Why aren't my references being accepted?

Hi there, I've recently submitted an article on my company's CEO, Marc Nohr: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marc_Nohr. I just wanted to get some advice on why it's been rejected three times for not including enough substantial coverage and demonstrating his nobility. If you look at the article you can see whilst some references are just mentions in passing, I've still included a fair few that speak specifically about the individual. Is there a certain number of articles specifically on the individual that need to be included for it to pass?

Also just looking at other profiles of advertising CEOs, some don't seem to include many references discussing the subject and instead link out to several Wiki pages so just want to understand how this works? I'd really appreciate some detailed feedback on how I can improve the article, for example I've referenced this article which directly talks about Marc's hire as Fold7's CEO (http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/nohr-named-fold7-chief-executive/1338786), and also another about him leading an agency 100 poll (http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/article/803761/nohr-heads-power-100-agency-leaders) can you explain why this material isn't valid?

Thanks in advance,

GemmaSuyat (talk) 14:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi GemmaSuyat, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not so much that those sources aren't valid, as a concern about the extent of the coverage, I would imagine. If you take a look at WP:Golden rule, you'll see that what is required to demonstrate notability is "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic". There's not a specific number of sources that is required to meet this, but generally speaking, the more sources the better. As for other articles on advertising CEOs, it may well be the case that they do not establish notability either, but that thus far they have slipped through the net. Because Wikipedia is edited and maintained by volunteers, it sometimes takes a while for non-notable articles to be weeded out once they've been created. Finally, given that you say that the subject of this article is your boss, you sould probably consult Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. It may be the case that making suggestions to other editors is a better approach than trying to write the article yourself, particularly if you have been asked to do so by your employer. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:19, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello GemmaSuyat. I would mostly agree with Cordless Larry, except for the comment that "generally speaking, the more sources the better". This is true for solid reliable sources, but not for poor sources such as press releases or blogs, and not for sources that only mention the subject briefly or in passing, unless such sources are needed to support some particular statement in an article. Otherwise it is often best to leave out such sources altogether, and concentrate on high and fairly high quality sources. DES ^(talk) 21:46, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Good point, DES - quality is at least as important as quantity. Cordless Larry (talk) 04:59, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

How can I update and change the content of W Motors Page?

Hello, I am working at W Motors now and we wanted to change the content of our page since there are some mistakes and it isn't complete. Is there someone that can help me with that? Should I post the new text somewhere? JohnWMotors (talk) 05:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

That's not a good idea -- read WP:COI for more information. In short, you should only stick to the article's talk page, making suggestions based on sources unaffiliated with W Motors. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Editing the page might not be a good idea, but posting the suggested text on the talk page is a good idea. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi JohnWMotors, and welcome to the Teahouse. The best place to post suggestions is the article's discussion page, which is Talk:W Motors. Usually, I would just suggest that you go ahead and edit the article directly, but since you work for them there is a conflict of interest, so it's perhaps best to suggest the changes and let someone else make them. Your suggestions will have a greater chance of being taken if you provide reliable sources for the material you want added to the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:05, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

The official procedure is to use Template:Request edit on the associated talk page. One frustrating thing about editing an article about something you have personal knowledge about is that you need to find a WP:reliable source for statements that you know are obviously true. E.g. company X is headquartered in Whytown. You know that because you drive to work there every day! But your personal experience is not WP:verifiable; you need to find an annual report, corporate filing, press release, or company web page saying so.

By the way, the best way to propose a change is not to describe it, but actually include verbatim replacement text. (This usually starts with copy & pasting the existing article text into the talk page, then editing it there.) 71.41.210.146 (talk) 06:17, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Coordinates

How do editors add latitude longitude and other co ordinates time zone in an article about a small town. Action Hero Shoot! 06:23, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Action Hero. Generally editors use Template:Infobox settlement, which also produces a grey box that appears at the top right of the article and contains whatever information about the town you fill in! If you have specific questions about using the template, feel free to ask. —GrammarFascist (talk) 07:51, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Just to add, {{Infobox settlement}} uses {{Coord}} to display the coordinates in the page header, link them, etc. That link will give more information about coordinates specifically than the infobox documentation will. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 06:28, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Shannon Lamb

Is needing more information about the possible shooter. Softstarrs23 (talk) 22:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Softstarrs23, and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is intended as a friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia, rather than a place to make requests for people to add content to articles. For the latter, you might want to consider posting a request on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject, such as WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:07, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Socotra

Hello again Teahouse, I was looking for the WikiProject for the archipelago administration of Socotra. If anyone knows the link for it, or know it does not exist, I would appreciate it. Thanks, Fritzmann2002 (talk) 18:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Fritzmann2002, and welcome to the Teahouse. I doubt very much that there is a WikiProject specific to Socotra, but there will be some more general ones that could be relevant. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject directory, but I would suggest that WikiProject Islands and WikiProject Yemen are the most suitable general ones (the article is already part of these - see its talk page). Cordless Larry (talk) 07:34, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

literature reference is not converted

In article "thymidine kinase" the last reference in the article does not appear in the text as a reference number and is not included in the reference list. I have checked and to me it seems to correspond to the rules for formulation of references Lave (talk) 07:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Lave. The final reference was lacking the opening <ref> and closing </ref> tags. These opening and closing tags are necessary for an inline reference to display properly. Once I added the tags, the reference displays properly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!! I will be more cautious about that in future, I am updating the article, it was last updated in 2011, much has happened since. Lave (talk) 07:35, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Question about notability

Hello. I recently had an article declined because "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability." I was wondering if anyone can review my draft article and let me know if this person has any possibility of being accepted in Wikipedia with newly formatted or added references-- or whether he truly does not meet the notability requirements. Your help is much appreciated. Here is the draft article for review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Don_Louis_Perceval Thank you kindly. EAS1978 (talk) 01:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC) (talk) 01:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC) EAS1978

Hello, EAS1978. I can't answer your question directly. But none of the four references you currently have is both substantial and independent. Howver, it is possible that the three books you mention do, between them, establish notability: I haven't got access to them, so I can't check (searching in Google Books leaves me unsure whether the references are substantial and indepedent or not). If you can go through your draft and reference every single claim to something in one of those books, then it will probably be an acceptable article; if you can take out claims that you can't source from them, and still leave more than bare bones, it will still be acceptable. Note that references do not have to be online: all that is required is that a reader can get hold of them if they want, eg through a library; and enough information is given for them to do so. Please read Referencing for beginners, and note the section about multiple references to the same source. --ColinFine (talk) 10:03, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

what is pattroling?

hi ,I have the following message on by Notification page. [[ 17 AUGUST

[[[Unknown probably deleted page]]] was patrolled by Sachinvenga 24 days ago 16 MAY }} Can you tell be what is "patrolled""?
Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 05:50, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Aryan hindustan. In this context, "patrolled" means that another editor took a very quick look at the page to verify that it did not contain content clearly inappropriate for Wikipedia. In other words, it was not nonsense or gibberish, was not overt advertising or promotion, was not filled with obscenities, and did not consist of slanderous attacks against other people. That does not mean that patrolling endorses the specific content on the page, but rather that it is not obviously inappropriate. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:18, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Added an all-important 'not' that Cullen328 left out. --ColinFine (talk) 10:12, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

thanks . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aryan hindustan (talk • contribs) 08:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey I just got the same thing for Build wiring (and I do mean these last few minutes). I hope that does not mean someone nominates its deletion now. Mendezes Cousins (talk) 17:23, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Archies

Can some tell what are Archives and hot to Archive? by Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 08:33, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Aryan from Hindustan. A general tip: to find out about some concept in using Wikipedia it often works to search with "WP:" (or "Wikipedia:") before the topic. So, here, WP:ARCHIVE will tell you what you want to know. In short, Archiving is used on talk and project pages (never on articles) to keep them from getting too long to be useful, while retaining older discussions in case somebody should need to refer to them. --ColinFine (talk) 10:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

thanks-- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 10:39, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

I want to create a page, and need some assistance

Hi! I would like to create a page, and a made a draft of it already. Where can I post if to check if it conforms to all Wikipedia rules? DashaG11 (talk) 13:19, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest that you read WP:Your first article, and then use the Articles for creation process. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:46, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi again! I created page but it was deleted a minute after that.

11:57, 15 September 2015 OneLittleMouse (Talk | contribs) deleted page Commander One (С2: : ‎<html> <head> <title>Commander One </title> </head> <body> <h1>Commander One</h1…: (author DashaG11))

What shall I do now? DashaG11 (talk) 12:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Just for documentation, DashaG11 recreated the article and it has apparently been accepted.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Why is my page not getting published?

Hello! I am new to Wikipedia editing and would love to have some simple hints for how to edit and publish a page for my federation (International Federation of Combat Wrestling- FICW). It was created in the beginning of this year and so far we have conducted sevaral national championships and one world championship with quite big names in the grappling world. The federation is registered and we have quite a lot of publicity for a newly formed sport federation. Please let me know what is it that I need to change, in order to have the page listed in Wikipedia. Best regards

Ivaivaylo (talk) 12:01, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

@Ivaivaylo: Thanks for coming to the Teahouse! If you used Articles for Creation to try to get your page created, can you please provide a link to it? Thanks! Phil roc^{My contribs} 12:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

It's Draft:International Federation of Combat Wrestling.--ukexpat (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

@Ivaivaylo: Please note that Wikipedia is not a directory nor advertising platform. You have a conflict of interest and should not be editing directly about such subjects. What needs to happen before there is a Wikipedia article about the subject is that multiple reliably published sources not related to the subject must have discussed the specific topic of the article in a significant manner. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:20, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Commercial use of Wiki articles

Hello , Can we use Wiki articles in our Book -- Aryan hindustan (talk) ,Aryan from Hindustan (talk) 08:26, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Almost certainly yes: Wikipedia is intended to be freely reusable, as long as proper attribution is given. Please see WP:REUSE for more details. --ColinFine (talk) 10:07, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Note that the images may not be available for reuse if they are in Wikipedia under the fair use claim. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:15, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

G.G. Galloway

A page I am creating keeps getting deleted for a person running for U.S. Congress. The person just announced and has multiple big news sources announcing his candidacy. I've cited the sources and keep getting told that the info is of no importance. I don't work for the candidate and the other people running in the race both have Wikipedia pages. Why do you keep deleting G.G. Galloway page? Allevajoseph (talk) 15:17, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

I didn't delete anything, @Allevajoseph:. The person who did, User:DGG, did so because the text of the article contained copyright violations, not because the person is unimportant. When you write a Wikipedia article, you need to create your own, original text, which is cited to (but not copied from) outside sources. Also, please be aware that articles at Wikipedia exist ONLY because there is extensive, reliable source text outside of Wikipedia to use to help us research the contents of the article. It has nothing to do with what a person does for a job, or anything else about their person. --Jayron 32 16:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Allevajoseph, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has a rule about notability in order to determine what subjects should and should not be covered by the encyclopedia. As explained at WP:Golden rule, articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. If the text of the article that has been deleted is the same as that currently on your user page, then it does not demonstrate this sort of significant coverage. The second reference is to a page on the website of Galloway's company, and the first isn't specific enough (it is just the URL of a news website homepage). You need to demonstrate that Galloway has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources in order for there to be a page about him. Note that for politicians, there are some specific notability guidelines at WP:POLITICIAN. Note also that rather than continuously recreating the article and having it deleted, a better approach is to make use of the draft process. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Note that the material in the OP's user page is inappropriate as a user page so I have moved it to a sandbox at User:Allevajoseph/Sandbox.--ukexpat (talk) 16:23, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

@Allevajoseph: i have added a template to the top so that when you are ready for it to be reviewed, just click the green button. However, as it stands, it is clearly not ready for submission. ~~in addition to the links above, please see WP:NPOL.~~ (oops, i missed that this is also already linked above) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:38, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Indefinite articles and initialisms: "A RBR" or "An RBR"?

I was editing redundant binary representation, which was full of a mixture of "a RBR" and "an RBR". The choice seems to depend on how you imagine the reader will read it; it's "a redundant binary representation", but "an Arr-Bee-Arr".

I've been searching through the MOS, especially MOS:ABBR, for any guidance on a preferred form in such situations, and coming up empty. Searching the Teahouse archives is also being frustrating, partly because any reference to the grammatical meaning of "indefinite article" is buried under the other usage of "article".

For now, I standardized on "a RBR", mostly because that was slightly more common in the original, but surely this has come up and discussed to death before. Can someone point me to it?

Thanks for any guidance! 71.41.210.146 (talk) 06:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't know of any Wikipedia guidance on this issue, but if I was writing this myself I would definitely use "an RBR". To use another example, I would say "a Member of Parliament", but "an MP" - I don't think many people would say "a MP". Cordless Larry (talk) 06:58, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice! I'll probably do as you suggest, but "MP" is an abbreviation that is well-known in speech. In this case, the entire problem is I'm not certain how it would be read. For a related case where I know there's a conflict, consider "LED" for light-emitting diode. Some people pronounce it as an initialism "an L.E.D.", and others as an acronym, like the English word "led", so it would be "a LED". Ideally, I'd like to follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Do not invent abbreviations or acronyms and not use the "RBR" abbreviation at all, but it would require a heck of a lot of rewording to bring the number of uses down to something reasonable. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 07:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't know anyone who pronounces L.E.D as "led"...(but it's standard to pronounce "OLED" as "o-led" - ain't language wonderful?!).--ukexpat (talk) 12:57, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Then listen to the first 17 seconds of EEVblog #362 - LED Tube Lighting Install & Theory. Both speakers are Australian electrical engineers, so I presume it's industry standard there. Oh, and here's a Brit: Driving LED matrix displays with an FPGA. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 16:49, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer "An RBR" because when I see an acronym, I'm not going to be reading it as "redundant binary representation." (Who wants to say all of that every time?) I'll just read it as "Arr-Bee-Arr." Also, the LED/"led" thing is not an issue here, as I don't think there is any way to read "RBR" phonetically like that... 2macia22 (talk) 21:01, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, LED is different as it can be an acronym (although personally I don't say it as one, and I don't know anyone else who does), whereas RBR is clearly an initialism. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:35, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

My 1st darft was rejected by Kylie Tastic

I think my 1st question should be "Should I have submitted a different article before this one?" In 1967 I was a founding member of a popular garage band in Owosso, MI entitled "The Flower Company" that played all over the state and in Canada and at one time played at the Grande Ballroom in Detroit, MI. In the Summer of 1968 we recorded a 45 RPM record that was played on a major radio station in Lansing, MI. I believe the band is of notability along with other garage bands all over the USA and as a founding member feel that I am also notable. How should I approach this bump in the road? Masquerado Masquerado (talk) 22:39, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Masquerado. "Notable", in Wikipedia jargon, doesn't mean "famous", or "important", or "significant, or "influential", or "popular". It means just one thing: that several people unconnected with the subject have published substantial material about it. If several people unconnected with your band have published significant material about it (not just listings, and truly independent, not regurgitating press releases or interviews) and published them in reliable places, such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers, then there can be an article about the band, based almost 100% on what those independent sources said about it. (The sources don't have to be online, and from that era they may well not be). If such sources don't exist, then the band is by definition not notable, and nobody should spend any time on such an article.

If the sources do exist, there may be an article - but you are discouraged from writing it, because of your conflict of interest. If you decide to go ahead nevertheless, please also read your first article, and use the article wizard to create your draft in Draft: space, and then submit it for review.

The same points about notability apply to you as to the band; but notability is not inherited: it is possible that the band is notable but you aren't, or even the other way around. It all depends on what people chose to write about. --ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Masquerado. I have confirmed that your band opened at the Grande Ballroom in Detroit on Sunday, March 30, 1969. The headliner was a band called Sweetwater (band), who played at Woodstock a few months later. I was a rock fan living in the Detroit area at that time and saw many of the great Michigan bands of that era perform live. Whether or not your band is notable depends on the coverage in the sources. My hunch based on a few minutes of research is that a single 45 played on a single station and a single concert at the Grande is probably not enough to have generated sufficient significant coverage of your band in reliable sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:46, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Help with WP:RFA?

I have a problem, I have submitted a WP:RFA, But the problem is that is that My RFA is not appearing on the RFA page under ongoing RFA`s.

Note: Here is the link to my rfa: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Happy_Attack_Dog

Thanks,

Happy_Attack_Dog (Throw Me a Bone) 00:48, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Happy Attack Dog. You have not transcluded your Request for Administratorship correctly, and I encourage you not to do so at this time. Your chance of success after one year of editing and 1500 edits is very slim and other editors may well be harshly judgmental. RfA can be a tough, demoralizing process. I suggest that you spend a lot more time learning more about what being an administrator involves, and what other editors expect of a candidate for administrator. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:56, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, you forgot to transclude the RFA onto the page, which I have done here. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 00:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Ace Visibility Day article doesn't exist, how should I go about making it?

Hello! I've heard elsewhere that there had been an article on Ace Visibility Day (see List of LGBT holidays) that used to exist, and I'm not entirely sure what happened to it, but if it wasn't previously deleted or merged with something I'd like to create it. How should I go about this? MadnessEnsues (talk) 05:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, MadnessEnsues. Please read Your first article paying special attention to the importance of references to coverage of the topic in independent, reliable sources. That is probably the area where new article writers run into the greatest difficulty. You may want to use the Wizard for help in formatting the article. I am not an administrator so can't check if a previous version has been deleted. Hopefully, a passing administrator will take a look. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

No, there has never been an article Ace Visibility Day. JohnCD (talk) 09:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! MadnessEnsues (talk) 13:57, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Looks like there's never been an Asexual Visibility Day page either, which is what the page should probably be called, with Ace Visibility Day as a redirect. —GrammarFascist (talk) 10:12, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

please help me to improve page

i created a page Mrs. Universe west asia 2015 Ruby Yadav , please help to improve this page and how to create it effectively . Rubyyadav (talk) 09:45, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

@Rubyyadav: Provide more references as this, but still you don't have that notability yet. I suggest become more popular as now it is WP:TOOSOON. One reliable source is not enough for an article.--Action Hero Shoot! 10:48, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I see you have given that reference and one more reliable reference from ibnlive. Better you create the draft and submit. If you have notability someone else will create your page for sure.--Action Hero Shoot! 10:51, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

RFC

I started an RFC here Talk:The Valiant Little Tailor. Till now no comments. Very few people keep the page under their watchlist. If the RFC becomes a failure then what should i do next? Action Hero Shoot! 10:56, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

@Action Hero: I think an RFC was the wrong way to go here. Your point is a possible move so Wikipedia:Requested moves is probably a better option and more likely to attract attention. As The brave little tailor already exists as a redirect to Brave Little Tailor the film based on the tale, you will need to think about disambiguate between the tale and the film. Nthep (talk) 11:34, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I need assistance concerning Draft:AVS Video Converter

My article was declined due to lack of notability and reliable sources. I have added more sources such as books and articles in scientific journals, please review my article and references on the subject of notability, help me on how the article may be improved. Greatly appreciate your help.NeviRom (talk) 11:59, 16 September 2015 (UTC)