Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 819

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 815

←

Archive 817

→

Vandalism from user:194.199.4.202

Anonymous user ip is deleting facts from several pages. Claiming falses titles and deleting facts How to prevent him to carry on?

User:194.199.4.202 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heraldique21 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Heraldique21. I see this particular IP was blocked for 31 hours a few hours after you posted this, so unless they start up again when the block expires, this is probably resolved. For the next vandal you encounter, you can find some instructions at Wikipedia:Vandalism § How to respond to vandalism. In a nutshell: undo their changes, warn them on their talk page using the escalating warning templates and if, after a level 4 warning, they persist, report them at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. › Mortee _talk 13:51, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Links that lead to an error 404

I found that the last two links of the little India riot article only lead to an error 404, the page you requested is not found. Does that count as a dead link/should be removed? CharizardX19 (talk) 13:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@CharizardX19: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes they are dead links, you can follow the instructions here to repair it if possible, but remember don't remove it. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:53, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Controversial subject (for some) Communion and Liberation (again!)

Hi everyone, last month I have been involved in a long edit war involving the aformentioned page, which ended in the ban of the other user. This month I had some vacations and, honestly, it wasn't nice as a first experience to be involved in an edit war, so I didn't open my account much.

A new user registered the 9th of August Lawtheagoraphobic (at least that's when he created the wiki page ) and has since then changed the page almost back to what it was before I tried to change things.

I'm inclined to believe it's the same user, as the very same information has been restored, including the same mistakes (on the short initial log the foundation date is correct, but then on the history it cites 1969, which is the same wrong year I saw in the old versions). He also removed the only change I did (added the disputed tag), accusing me of being a one shot user (while in the talk page I referred to the fact that many of the observations that are now in the archive are valid for the "new" version).

How does wiki cope with this? I know there are some controversial subject and it is messy...but in this case there's someone (or more than one) who simply hates Communion and Liberation and shall spend all the time of its life reverting changes. Is it possible to ask for a "perpetual" disputed/controversial tag? I simply don't have the time to fight with every new account opened by this guy... GioA90 (talk) 16:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

I am even more inclined now that I find many articles are the same, even this one https://www.ilgazzettino.it/nordest/padova/comunione_liberazione_padova_condanna_truffa_dieffe-345586.html which is old (it talks about a trial where people were initially found guilty but the final verdict discharged everyone) and in the talk page I posted and argued about this. I call this behaviour mala fides...GioA90 (talk) 16:58, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

The user just removed the disputed tag again, without addressing the talk page...GioA90 (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

After the user broke the 3 times revert rule and for a number of other reasons which make me strongly suspect it is the same use that was banned, Jasmir54 (which was also a socket puppet of Ultimateuserxx), I am trying to open a socket puppet investigation: this is what I wrote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Ultimateuserxx I am new to wiki and I am struggling with understanding how to properly make requests to the admins (such as this one). Could please someone take a look and give me suggestions? WHat would you change? What shall I remove or add? Thank you!GioA90 (talk) 05:55, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi GioA90, welcome to the Teahouse. I think one thing to change in your SPI is to make it briefer, if you can. Anything that makes it easier to read quickly and clearly will make help whoever investigates to see the similarities you're trying to explain. One trivial improvement would be to put your diff and oldid links inline. Here are two ways to do so:

Rename external links: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communion_and_Liberation&oldid=846514316 here] → here
Use templates like {{oldid2}} and {{diff2}}: {{oldid2|846514316|here}} → here; {{diff2|854236983|here}} → here

It might also be a good idea to remove some of the paragraphs that outline how the new account is behaving badly. What matters at SPI is the similarities between the two accounts, so any time you refer to the new account's behavior it should be only to compare it to the old one. A lot of the second half of the SPI doesn't mention the old account. Other tools exist to help with behavioral disputes, separate from SPIs. You've already seen the 3RR noticeboard: so if there are continued breaches of the three revert rule, that's an option. For content disputes there's Wikipedia:Third opinion, where this has been listed. Administrators who come to the page for that reason might well see other issues and take them up. I don't know if that's what led to this warning. For other options, if this continues to be a problem, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I hope this helps, › Mortee _talk 17:29, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I wanted to get deleted items retrieved for donate-books.org

If you need any more information do let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharat1 (talk • contribs) 08:18, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I've looked at your web site, and failed to figure out if you handle electronic books, or dead-tree books, or both. Anyway – this page is for helping new Wikipedia editors, so your posting doesn't really belong here. Maproom (talk) 09:41, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bharat1, welcome to the Teahouse. The article Donate-books.org was deleted in April. The place to ask to get a copy of the deleted version of the page is Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. › Mortee _talk 18:07, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

New-ish to Wikipedia. Thoughts on article? It's 'eh', could use some tips and edits.

I have recently changed my draft of an article to an article. It has't gotten much attention and it could definitely use some edits and new references. It is pretty notable of a company, but I wanted to get some advice from some experienced Wikipedia Editors. Check the article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costa_Vida Thanks, Wyatt850 (talk) 01:42, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Wyatt850 and welcome to the Teahouse.

Your article lacks sufficient notability references at present. It looks like a routine fast food business that would not normally meet the requirements of Wikipedia's notability standards for companies. If nothing better than your existing references can be found, it will likely be nominated for deletion. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:24, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Wyatt850. The best references to add would be in-depth discussions about the restaurant chain from reliable newspapers, books or websites that give some of the history of the company, or talk about its impact, or what makes it distinctive. ("In-depth" and "reliable" are discussed in more depth at WP:ORGCRIT). There are loads of news stories about Costa Vida, but it might be difficult to find the ones that are in-depth enough to show notability because so many of them are about e.g. a new branch opening. Good luck with it! Apart from the notability question, one way to get inspiration for improvements would be to look through some of the other articles in Category:Fast-food franchises. If you have any more specific questions, you're very welcome to come back and ask. › Mortee _talk 18:23, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

university upload

How do i put my university on wiki without getting blocked for promoting or advertising? How do i insert the logo? why is it when i copy and paste my tables it goes into word form? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.170.49.189 (talk) 14:03, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Make sure that you write from a neutral point of view and that everything you write is well-sourced. There's an exception in the conflict of interest guidelines that says employees of academic institutions are free to write about them. Being a student at a university would be less of a conflict of interest than working for one, so I don't see a COI issue, whether you're a student or faculty.
Wikipedia:Uploading images, but first read Wikipedia:Image use policy and make sure you understand. A logo can be used on an article about the university, it just needs a "non-free use" rationale.
It depends where you're writing your tables, but for example if you copy from Excel and then paste into an editor, it comes out as tab-separated values, so Wikipedia doesn't know it's meant to be a table. You might find Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup helpful.

Finally, writing a new article is not an easy thing to do. Wikipedia:Your first article has a lot of good advice. You might want to edit some existing articles first to get used to how things work. There's also the option of requesting that another editor write the article, but it's great that you want to contribute yourself. › Mortee _talk 18:43, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

common.js softwares

Are there any common.js softwares I should know about and install for my Wikipedia account (aside from XFDCloser and EnterpriseyBot)? Redditaddict6 9 19:01, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@Redditaddict69: I'm don't even use those and I'm an admin. I only use Twinkle for page protection and nominating things for XFD. I find that editors who start off with too many tools tend to fuck up things worse/more than users who learn how things work without the tools and then use the tools to speed things up -- but then again anecdotes are always bad samples and I'm a kind of a grognard. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@Redditaddict69: There are lists on Wikipedia:User scripts, but Ian's right that scripts can make it easier to get something wrong, and it's not always easy to know what's going to turn out to be useful. The two I use are DYKCheck (when I'm reviewing DYK nominations), and (passively) statusCheck.js, which shows you on user pages whether they've edited recently enough that you can assume they're online. Not often helpful, but it can be. I have a few others but I don't think I use them. The various gadgets you can enable or disable through 'Preferences' are typically more useful. › Mortee _talk 17:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@Mortee: @Ian.thomson: Alright, thanks! I only use the ones I mentioned because I have a practical use for them since I'm always on AfD and I do use Twinkle as well (nominating AfDs and placing them in discussions manually is just painful). I don't plan on adding anymore given your suggestions, but it is nice to have the list there incase I do find one I desperately need. Redditaddict6 9 19:07, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good. Twinkle is very useful. › Mortee _talk 19:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Is there a list of all wikipedia articles?

Hello,

I want to know if theres is a list with all wikipedia articles on it. I am creating a data base for a bot that would give me the article when I ask for one. I was considering doing it manually going every article on the indice but I am well aware it will take me a long time to go through every single one.

Thanks,

Erick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erick jcr (talk • contribs) 20:37, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Erick, welcome to the Teahouse. Per the front page of Wikipedia, there are 5,696,000 articles on en.wiki, so doing anything manually for every one of them is not going to be practical. Dumps of Wikipedia are available at https://dumps.wikimedia.org/enwiki/ and an old StackOverflow tells me the index you want is the 75MB file at https://dumps.wikimedia.org/enwiki/latest/enwiki-latest-all-titles-in-ns0.gz. I'm not sure I've understand what you're trying to do with it – a bot that will give you the article when you ask for it sounds a lot like the search bar – but I hope this answers your question. › Mortee _talk 21:17, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Made an entry requested by Wikiproject Norway, but how do I publish the draft?

Hi. Im new to wikipedia so bear with me. On the Wikiproject Norway site they requested an article on Torgeir Alvsaker. I wrote a short draft, based on the info I found on his Norwegian wikipedia-article, but it only got stored as a draft and I can't figure out how to actually publish it.

Here is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Torgeir_Alvsaker — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiprojectnorway18 (talk • contribs) 15:12, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Wikiprojectnorway18. The recommended way to move a draft to mainspace is to submit it for review, by adding {{subst:submit}} (including the double curly brackets) at the top. However, please do not do that yet. At present the only references in the draft are about one of his works. This means that most of the content of the draft is unreferenced, and the draft does not establish that he is notable by the standards of the English Wikipedia. (no.wikipedia may have different standards, or the Norwegian article may be like thousands of our older articles, and not actually meet the criteria for no.wiki). Please read your first article and REFB. --ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

How to clean up a category

Hi! I was looking through Category:Featured articles needing translation from Chinese Wikipedia. This is a hidden category containing articles that have featured status on the Chinese Wikipedia. This is nifty because now we know we have a high quality article in Chinese that can be translated into English.

However, I noticed that a lot of these articles have had their featured status removed long ago. Then I looked into other subcategories of Category:Featured articles needing translation from foreign-language Wikipedias and found similar problems. For example, Nationalist Party of Castile and León is in the category Category:Featured articles needing translation from Spanish Wikipedia, even though the corresponding article in Spanish appears to have never been featured.

My question is this. Fixing these categories looks like a problem worth addressing that I would be interested in working on. Editing it by hand seems like a lot of nasty work, but a bot could probably do it quickly by verifying that the corresponding article is indeed featured. However, my only experience editing Wikipedia is the occasional minor edit. I have programming experience, but I am aware of WP:BOTNOTNOW. Would this be a good question for Wikipedia:Bot requests? Or should I direct it to the translation project? Thanks for any help! Flurmbo (talk) 15:57, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Flurmbo, welcome to the Teahouse. That sounds like very worthwhile job for a bot to do, and while I don't have personal experience with bot requests, that does seem like the place to suggest it. Best of luck with it; it would be great if those categories were more accurate. › Mortee _talk 16:54, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Mortee, I will give that a try! Flurmbo (talk) 21:21, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Dancing with the stars season 27

Why pros isn't on dancing with the stars season 27? When is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexagessner1996 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Alexagessner1996 could you try asking that again? I don't understand. This is a forum for asking questions about how to edit Wikipedia. If your question was about Dancing with the Stars itself, you could try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment, but if you do, please rephrase the question so it's more clear. Remember to sign your comments with ~~~~ › Mortee _talk 00:41, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

New page

How can I get help doing a page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Service3 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

If you're asking about how to write a new article, the best page to look at is WP:Your first article. It's not an easy thing to do, though; you might want to start by editing other articles. Remember to sign your messages with ~~~~ › Mortee _talk 04:25, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Christopher Pattinson draft

You invited me to the Teahouse. I guess it’s a place to get advice. Any advice would be appreciated. I wrote this page as I saw a lot of press about this person in the UK press. He appears quite famous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BusinessExpert99 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

You are right in that Draft:Christopher Pattinson will need to be different than the Christopher Pattinson who was a Canadian politician. And I will add that it is very unlikely that what you wrote will be accepted as an article. Most of the references pertain to an incident on an airflight and his subsequent attempt to pursue a lawsuit. David notMD (talk) 21:42, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi BusinessExpert99, welcome to the Teahouse. You asked for general advice on the draft. A few thoughts:

Add inline citations for any paragraph that doesn't have one. So far, there are no inline citations for the sections about his swimming career.
(trivial) move all inline references to the end of a sentence, after the full-stop. Currently ref 1, ref 5, ref 6, ref 9 are out of place
Use full sentences throughout, or use bulletpoint lists (Help:List) with a suitable introduction when you're listing things. The last four paragraphs of "Biography" and all of the "Swimming Honours" (usual style would be to use e.g. "Swimming honours" for section headings) are sentence fragments right now.
Structure the references more fully. It's useful to add dates, authors and access-dates where possible. If you're editing in source mode, the "Cite" button you see just above the editing window is useful, and if you want to dive into the detail see e.g. {{Cite news}} and {{Cite web}}.
Try to find more detail to add about his life in business. Currently the article is dominated by swimming, but if he's a CEO presumably there's more to say on that side.

I hope this is helpful to you. If later you have more specific questions, you're welcome to ask them here. The issue of article naming can be resolved by whoever ultimately accepts the draft. Depending on the focus of the article at that point I'd suggest either "Christopher Pattinson (swimmer)" or "Christopher Pattinson (businessman)". › Mortee _talk 21:59, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

(And yes, as David was alluding to, the point of referencing is twofold: verifiability and notability. Before this is accepted, it will need to be clear from the references that Pattinson is notable in that sense, and if they're currently about one incident (I haven't read them all) then that won't be enough). › Mortee _talk 22:02, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice and I am new to this. I heard Mr Pattinson speak on BBC live and felt he deserved a Wikapedia page. As for the swimming most of the information on his swimming career he taked about was too long ago so I could not find any reference articles. I am sure your right and it will not be published. Angone is welcome to add some information if you want to help. I think it’s a bit beyond my skills to improve it. I guess it will therefore be just deletedBusinessExpert99 (talk) 23:41, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

BusinessExpert99 Where did you hear about the swimming part yourself? If that was a reliable source, you can reference it. If it was a BBC programme it's probably online to be pointed at. (On the other hand, it's true that many first articles don't survive. A decade ago I added an article about a mountaineer I read about on BBC News and was quickly taught about notability. I didn't sign up again until more recently. I wouldn't give up just yet and, equally, if this article doesn't work out, don't let it put you off. There's a lot to be done here, and plenty of people to advise you). If there are wiki-skills you don't have but would like to acquire, I'll help if I can. › Mortee _talk 01:59, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you got the input. I already lifted the BBC radio program in the article with a link to itBusinessExpert99 (talk) 06:43, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Uploading 3D animations to better explain how engineering components and machines work.

Hi,

I am totally new on Wikipedia. I use Wikipedia a lot and wanted to upload some videos here as a way of saying 'thanks'. My company produces 3D animations so I am only really investing the time it takes to edit the videos and then upload them. I wanted to upload videos similar to this:

Pinch Valve - Showing how it works:

https://vimeo.com/286318990

Different Valves:

https://vimeo.com/277098226

https://vimeo.com/277086621

Each video would show clearly how a certain valve works. We have about nine valves in our 3D database and can make the videos from any angle. I just need to know roughly how long they should be? Essentially I just want to show how the valve operates and how they look in real life. There will be no branding in the video or watermarks etc. I have checked through most of the valves on wikipedia and the articles definitely would benefit from a working animation video.

My main question is, if I start uploading videos of valves will they be removed because they are all from me and are attributed to my website? I don't want to get banned before I even start.

If this went well, I would also upload some 3D animations showing an engine working etc. We have about 300 3D model animations in the database and they are all engineering related.

Thanks!

Jon

SaVRee (talk) 06:28, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, SaVRee. Thank you for wanting to give something to Wikipedia. If your videos are suitable (see below) they would be best uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which will make them available to all Wikimedia projects, not just English Wikipedia.

There are really three requirements for uploading them. The most important is the copyright: the copyright holder must explicitly release the videos under a suitable licence such as CC-BY-SA, which allows anybody to reuse them for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as they attribute the source: permission to use them just on Wikipedia is not sufficient, as it goes against one of the guiding principle of the Wikimedia Foundation. If whoever holds the copyright is willing to donate them in this way, see donating copyright materials for how to do it.

The second point is that Commons will probably reject the upload if the material is at all promotional. A video showing how a valve works would be wonderful, but if it appears to be advertising a particular brand of valve, it will be less welcome. The third is that only certain formats are accepted (generally, those that are licence-free). I don't know much about this part, but Help:Upload should give you the information you need. --ColinFine (talk) 09:10, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I have to delete my account within 24 hours because I used the company name as a username. I will delete it, open a new account then try submitting a few videos following the guidance you gave. Thanks again!

Jon

SaVRee (talk) 10:28, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Blocking

If you get blocked from edited, can you appeal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimbobtron2007 (talk • contribs) 11:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@Jimbobtron2007: Hello and welcome. Yes, appeals are usually possible, please read Appealing a Block. 331dot (talk) 11:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Kind request for content creation

OP has been blocked as a WP:SOCK

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hello, I would like to know why I am failing to create any article. Whenever I type in something in search and find that it is not available, I get a create redlink but after clicking to start creating, it directs me to sandbox and article wizard. I don't know why this is so, could it be because I am new and have not made enough edits on Wikipedia. Though, I am not having that problem with Simple English Wikipedia where I created these articles [1] . I was directed to here to find out. Hoping for a response. Kind regards SouthAfrica1994 (talk) 10:43, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@SouthAfrica1994: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Only auto-confirmed accounts can create articles directly in mainspace. Your account is only two days old, and it takes four days and ten edits to become auto-confirmed. You may draft your article first for now. Sorry. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 10:46, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@Abelmoschus Esculentus: does that mean it will only allow me after presumably 4 days? If, i Will just have wait SouthAfrica1994 (talk) 10:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes. You need to wait. Happy editing! ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 10:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@SouthAfrica1994: Even if you will technically be able to create articles directly in mainspace in a couple of days, I strongly recommend that you use the articles for creation process nonetheless, at least for a couple of articles. At a first glance your articles on simple-wp look good and well-referenced, but you might still want to test the waters on en-wp. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Meh. AfC is backlogged, and they are creating ok articles there is no need for AfC to check it. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:17, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the advise @Tigraan: @Abelmoschus Esculentus:. what do you mean @Galobtter: ? I am a little confused SouthAfrica1994 (talk) 11:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

AfC stands for "Articles for Creation" (Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation). There are currently 3233 pending AfC submissions which is a huge backlog. Galobtter says your articles are ok enough, so you can create it directly in mainspace instead of submitting to AfC. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 11:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Create a Wikipedia page

Who can I contact to see if I qualify for a wiki page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyricanfl (talk • contribs) 12:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@Nyricanfl: Hello. There is not one person or authority to contact; notability is determined by the relevant notability guidelines. In the case of a person, those are at WP:BIO in general, though there are some for specific fields like a musician or politician. Please note that writing about yourself is strongly discouraged per the autobiography policy. If you would like more information on if you meet the criteria for a Wikipedia article(not a "wiki page"), please indicate what field you are in. Without knowing that, I can say that you would merit a Wikipedia article if multiple independent reliable sources(sources you have nothing to do with) have given you in depth coverage. 331dot (talk) 12:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Accident notability

what makes an accident suitable for inclution to wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollback95 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@Rollback95: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. An accident, or any article subject, would merit an article on Wikipedia if it received significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Please see the general notability guideline. If you are attempting to write an article for the first time, you may find it helpful to read Your First Article, and use Articles for Creation to submit a draft for review, instead of directly creating an article. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@331dot: I believe this question might have to do with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 Kiryandongo bus accident. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:39, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rollback95, since an accident is an event, the more specific guidelines are Wikipedia:Notability (events) › Mortee _talk 07:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

TEST — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.79.50.89 (talk) 13:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed Article

I wish to publish an article or add edits on Space X Initiatives. I am placing the article below if it is possible. Thank you.

condensing for brevity

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

SpaceX Initiatives

As of May 2018, media companies in the United States reported Billionaire businessman Elon Musk’s SpaceX Company has a valuation of $24 billion. Some projected it at $28 billion. https://nypost.com/2018/04/13/spacex-is-now-worth-24-billion/ https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/22/spacex-leading-the-space-race-to-launch-humans-to-mars.html In February 6 of the same year, SpaceX launched its Falcon Heavy Booster from Florida USA, acknowledged as the most powerful rocket in the world since the Saturn V moon rocket of the National Aeronautics and Safety Administration (NASA). https://www.space.com/39632-spacex-falcon-heavy-launch-whats-next.html https://www.nasa.gov/feature/50-years-ago-the-first-flight-of-the-saturn-v Stakeholders in the space industry described Elon Musk as today’s most disruptive space innovator and prophetic entrepreneur determined to build massive economical reusable spacecraft and rockets for colonization of human beings in the planet Mars. Musk said he wants to help develop the space exploration sector in the USA like the Blue Origin of Jeff Bezos. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/09/new-space-race-billionaires-elon-musk-jeff-bezos Aside from SpaceX, NASA contracted Boeing for the development of commercial crew flights to the International Space Station (ISS) that travels over the planet Earth from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/boeing-nasa-spacecraft-international-space-station-setback-propellant-leak-a8458586.html However, Boeing confirmed a glitch during the test launch of its CST-100 Starliner crew vehicle in July 21, 2018 that can set back its mission for transporting astronauts to the ISS. https://spacenews.com/boeings-starliner-launch-abort-engine-suffers-problem-during-testing/ SpaceX and Boeing have made substantial progress in improving their respective crew transportation systems despites some delays. However, these contractors expressed confidence to achieve certification milestones by 2019. https://bgr.com/2018/07/12/spacex-boeing-nasa-new-space-race/ SpaceX intends to launch Demo-2 (Dragon spacecraft) on top of the Falcon 9 Rocket in April 2019 from the Kennedy Space Center Launch Pad 39-A in Florida State. https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2018/08/03/meet-the-astronauts-flying-spacexs-demo-2/ According to the Wall Street Journal, NASA gave subsidies worth $6.8 billion to both SpaceX and Boeing in September 2014 to develop, build, and test space transport (Space Taxi contracts) for flying US astronauts into trajectory. https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-and-spacex-share-6-8-billion-in-nasa-space-taxi-contracts-1410904245 Elon Musk’s first company that he founded with his brother in 1995 at Palo Alto, California was Zip2, a web pioneer working with newspapers at that time to bring advertisements and local information on the Internet. They sold the company in 1999 to Compaq for $20 million. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/19/how-elon-musk-founded-zip2-with-his-brother-kimbal.html Musk became chief executive officer of PayPal briefly in 2000 before eBay purchased the global online payments system in 2002. Elon Musk put his earnings of around $180 million to SpaceX and Tesla Motors. http://time.com/money/4883868/8-innovative-ways-elon-musk-made-money-before-he-was-a-billionaire/ An article published in Quartz.com cited Musk as borrowing $20 million against his SpaceX assets to finance Tesla one year after NASA funded the $1.6 billion contract with Musk’s SpaceX and receiving a $20 million funding investment from the Founder’s Fund. https://qz.com/1361847/elon-musk-considers-financing-tesla-bid-with-spacex/ SpaceX will have its next rocket launching by September 9, 2018. The Falcon 9 Block 5 craft will carry the 18V geostationary communications satellite of Telstar Telestat. https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-falcon-9-block-5-launch-landing-september-slip/ The Los Angeles Times published an article on August 20, 2018 mentioning the NASA as cautiously agreeing to allow SpaceX to operate its rocket while astronauts have boarded the capsule for the flight to the International Space Station. The NASA wants more demonstrations prior to giving ultimate approval. In 2016, SpaceX employed a similar process with a rocket which burst and destroyed the satellite it carried. NASA personnel performed a thorough assessment of the company’s ground operations, escape platform, and operational history for safety purposes. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-spacex-load-and-go-20180820-story.html LOBOSKYJOJO (talk) 13:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@LOBOSKYJOJO: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for your writing; new articles can be submitted through Articles for Creation; in this case, there is already an article on SpaceX as well as many articles about what they do(many of which are linked to from the SpaceX article). You may want to see if the additions you want to make would be appropriate for an existing article before you attempt to create another. You can discuss this with other editors at Talk:SpaceX. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

search engine issue

I authored the following page. But, probably it is not being indexed in search engines. A google search does not show the page. Please help me how to get it indexed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhirup_Guhathakurta Regards, Seeuhere (talk) 07:24, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Seeuhere

Hi, Seeuhere! How do you think, how long does it take Google to scan the whole WORLD-WIDE Web and notice a new page appeared somewhere...? --CiaPan (talk) 07:54, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Seeuhere Wikipedia puts no index on new articles, so they won't be picked up by search engines e.g. Google for 90 days, or until someone has marked the page as reviewed. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry buddies. The page was already reviewed. The issue is resolved now. Thanks.Seeuhere (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Seeuhere

It has been reviewed. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Much of the content is without references. David notMD (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Create a new wikipedia page and edit an existing one

Hi there,

I would like to create a page for a woman named Beatrice Roberts, the first and only wife of cartoonist Robert Ripley. Beatrice was my great aunt and I've done extensive research on her, which I can share on the page I create. There is a lot of confusion in the media, including IMDb and on Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatrice_Roberts about this woman. In fact, there are two women. I can explain all of the discrepancies but am not sure of the best way to begin. The above-referenced wikipedia page has numerous mistakes and I can fix those but then I'd like to create a page for my aunt whose was a Ziegfeld Follies dancer before her marriage to Ripley. The other Beatrice Roberts on Wikipedia was a Universal Pictures actress in the 30s and 40s, a beauty contest winner in New York and she was also in the Ziegfeld Follies. She was born in Belton, Texas not New York as the Wikipedia page says. Her parents were not Colin and Catherine as those were my great grandparents. A lot of confusion that I'd like to clear up. Perhaps, I should fix the wikipedia page above and then create another page on my aunt - there would then be two separate pages for women named Beatrice Roberts. Any thoughts?

Many Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmuromano (talk • contribs) 2018-08-24T14:49:02 (UTC)

Hello, Jmuromano. While this sounds like a worthwhile project, I'm afraid that Wikipedia is not the right place to publish it: Wikipedia does not accept original research. It only summarises material that has already been published in reliable places (such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers). If you can get your research published elsewhere, then Wikipedia could take note of it.

Having said that, if the existing article contains material that is not referenced to a reliable source, anybody may remove it (we do not regard iMDB as a reliable source). There should not be an article on two different people with the same name: if each of them meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there can be separate articles on them. But if either of them does not meet these criteria, then there should not be an article on that person - and possibly the existing article should be deleted. It all depends on the sources.

I'm afraid that if the confusion you refer to is in existing reliable sources, then you should not remove it even if you think it is wrong: see verifiability. --ColinFine (talk) 14:43, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Page Question

Hello and good morning to who all reads this, My name is RedsoloZack and I'm a new member on here, I currently am trying to develop a page for a local musician but it keeps staying in draft and will not show up when someone searches for it. Is there something that I'm not doing that maybe I should be because I'm far from being code savvy. Thank you for taking the time to read through this.

Sincerely, Zack Collins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redsolozack (talk • contribs) 15:29, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@Redsolozack: You need to re-write the article using the following steps:

1) Make sure a topic's notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.

2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.

3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.

4) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.

5) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.

6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.

7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.

8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I was going to say something similar to the above; but I would add that where you call this person a "local musician" I'm not sure you will find sufficient sources that would merit them a Wikipedia article. You should look at the notability guidelines for musicians at WP:BAND. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Redsolozack. I rather think you are making the very common mistake of supposing that Wikipedia has anything at all to do with somebody's promotion or on-line presence. It does not, and attempts to make it do so usually end in frustration. --ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Edits

Hie guys, thanks for inviting me to Teahouse. My questions is, how do track or know how many edits you have done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff Chakanyuka (talk • contribs) 20:34, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Once you have logged in, at the very top of the screen next to logout, you should see a link Contributions which shows you all the contributions you have made. Alternatively, every unsigned post anybody makes on this page (including yours above) has (talk • contribs) after it, you can click on that too. Looks like you have made 10 edits so far ;-) Hope this helps--Rafflesgluft (talk) 20:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, Jeff Chakanyuka. Welcome to the Teahouse. You can find a list of your edits at Special:Contributions/Jeff_Chakanyuka, or you can get a more detailed breakdown by clicking the 'edit count' link at the bottom of that page (which takes you here). Should you want to see the contributions of another editor, a quick way is to go to their user page, and then look to the far left column on the page, and go to Tools>User contributions. I hope this gives you what you need - it's a very useful way of finding a page you vaguely remember editing, but can't quite recall the correct name. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Page rejected for not being notable

The page in question is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chris_Fussell_(US_Navy_SEAL)

Chris is notable for several reasons. He is a former Navy SEAL who was part of SEAL team 6 (who captured Osama Bin Laden) and who is highly sought after to frequently speak to large association and corporate audiences. He is also the author of two books, one a best-seller. He helped create a program, Operations and Intelligence, which revolutionized communication in the Navy. Lastly, there are 9 reputable sources for him; all which should prove he is notable.

If this still doesn't justify, can someone please help edit it/help add more citations so that it reads to be notable?

Also, what do the 'hidden categories' mean? I'm new to this! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PennyLS61917 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@PennyLS61917: It might be because when you search "Chris Fussell US Navy Seal Osama Bin Laden", no articles about Fussell himself come up. He was a part of a notable team, but it's not like he did a lot of work in the capture that any other seal could've done (he didn't shoot him). All searches that do come up are just passing mentions which don't qualify towards notability on Wikipedia. This article only gives a quote from him. There are notability guidelines on Wikipedia, the most widely recognized being WP:GNG. It states that "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Fussell doesn't have that coverage. Redditaddict6 9 15:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello PennyLS61917 and welcome to the Teahouse.

As for hidden categories, these are tracking categories used to classify pages for the kind of work that is needed to be done on them. They are not displayed as part of the categories at the bottom of the article, since they are not considered useful to the general reader, hence "hidden". — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@PennyLS61917: If seeing loads of 'hidden categories' at the bottom of every article is irritating to you, you can easily stop them showing by changing your 'Preferences' - just go to the 'Appearance' tab and scroll down to 'advanced options' and un-tick the 'Show hidden categories' box. Find it at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. It's right next to the 'Auto-number headings' tick box - which, as a complete aside, is a wonderful way of getting numbers added to article subheadings so that they match the Table of Contents). Nick Moyes (talk) 15:39, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Nick Moyes Oddly enough, the show hidden categories box is not checked. but I did check the 'Auto-number headings' per your suggestions! PennyLS61917 (talk) 15:48, 22 August 2018 (UTC)PennyLS61917

Oh - odd. I expect another editor may be able to shed light on why that is and what to do about it. Sorry I can't! Nick Moyes (talk) 16:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

I would reread the notability guideline on biographies as well as our reliable source guideline. Wikipedia uses the words "notable" and "reliable sources" in a very specific way. I would not call any of the sources provided in your article reliable sources, #1-5 and #9 are just biography pages (presumably the information was provided by Chris himself, so not independent), #6 is an interview so it is not independent, and #7-8 just prove that the books that he wrote exist. What the article needs are multiple, in-depth, independent sources. If those do not exist, then a person is not notable, no matter how famous he is. shoy (reactions) 17:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi PennyLS61917, have you seen the subject-specific notability criteria for military people yet? It might help if you could clearly "state a case" for matching one or more of these criteria, in the lead of the draft article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:28, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

The Iron Warrior question(s)(User talk:The Iron Warrior|talk)

The Iron Warrior 08/24/2018, 6:14 PM
Why does it take such a long for drafts to become pages?

I don't see any drafts from you in progress. Which one are you referring to? In general, draft submissions are reviewed by volunteers, so sometimes there's more review work than bodies to do it. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:28, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

"In general"? Actually, every single bit of adminstration here is done by an army of willing volunteers! Anyone else, trying to write articles for personal benefit, really needs to read WP:PAID and WP:COI.Nick Moyes (talk) 22:48, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

User:The Iron Warrior - If you are asking on behalf of another editor, it would be better for them to ask the question themselves, because too much coordination between editors raises questions of sockpuppetry. So what draft are you asking about? The answer is that we have many more drafts than reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:29, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

discussion? consensus?

After I posted a suggested edit and supporting rationale on an article talk page and waited several days without any response (much less an objection), I went ahead and made the edit with an edit summary saying "See discussion here" linking to the section of the talk page. The edit was reverted; and the following was posted to the talk page, "your edit summaries keep pointing to a 'discussion' here, but there is no such discussion. There is only you presenting an argument and nobody responding. That is not consensus." For my future reference, what is the proper protocol/policy and terminology in such cases? Humanengr (talk) 00:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello again Humanengr and welcome back to the Teahouse.

The usual reference here is WP:BRD. You tried to get a discussion to happen, made a "bold" edit, got "reverted" and now you have some other editors who might be willing to "discuss" your proposed changes. It might have been better to say "discuss on talk under 'Almost universally' " rather than "see discussion" when there had not yet been any sort of interchange. I think the word "unwarranted" is used strangely in that lead sentence, but I'm not going to get into that discussion. Work with your new-found co-editors and figure out what can be done that you can all agree on. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Thx for the pointer and suggested edit summary wording; maybe that should be added to the WP:BRD 2nd para (Bold …), Humanengr (talk) 02:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Edits to Audax Australia page

I have set up a Wikipedia account and made some edits to the Audax Australia page. The edits appeared OK a few days ago but are no longer there. They appear in the View History page. Not sure what the problem is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helicode (talk • contribs) 01:39, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Reversed by a bot (an automated program). Beyond me to understand why. Hoping someone else will step in. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Helicode and welcome to the Teahouse.

There are two problems. External links are not allowed in the body of articles – and this article Audax Australia has more than one. And the XLinkBot is tasked with removing external links to sites that match one of its patterns, in this case, a pattern that is looking for blogs and similar sites considered as unreliable targets for external links. Since anyone can create a blog, there is great reluctance to treat them as suitable places to point WP readers. To add information about these bicycling events, it would be best to find sources in newspaper or magazine articles. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:00, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip about blogs, I also received an automated message. The other issue I have is that my edits that I made on 20th of August successfully were published but are no longer on the Audax Australia Wikipedia page. Some of the edits were updating event dates and adding some names to a list. The edits can be seen in the Revision History but there is no history of the edits reverting back. Not sure what to do next? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helicode (talk • contribs) 09:31, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Add one more : when you comment, creates indent. To your question, looks like the bot did a baby-with-bathwater revert to all of your edits. If you have valid references for the content you want to add, try again. If the information is stuff you know to be true (event dates, names) but you do not have a references, do not add. David notMD (talk) 12:01, 25 August 2018 (UTC)